Malwarebytes, which someone else has already suggested, is free, safe and easy to use. It's the best of the anti-malware programs, and it is free. Both my brother, who works with computers for a living, and a friend of mine who is an uber-geek who writes software code, swear by it. I have used it successfully myself. It works. If it does not find anything, then there is most likely something else wrong with your computer. Try using a different browser, like Firefox, if Google Chrome keeps crashing after running malwarebytes.

I am guessing from the complete lack of reference to my post on here (apart from a brief mention by Thoughton) that either my opinion is not deemed worthy of comment, or I have perhaps over-stepped some line in etiquette. If so, I apologise. I was merely expressing an opinion. My comments were in no way meant as a slight on the skill of the photographer, who has posted some wonderful work on here. However I can't help wondering why some of the photgraphs in this set received so much praise without apparent justification. I don't think they are up to his normal standard. If he was a newbie I would have been far less critical, but he's an accomplished photographer and should be open to criticism.

Perhaps I have mis-read the point of this section of the forum? I thought the idea was to improve our photography, and I am of the opinion that to do so we should be open to criticism. I find it a bit hard to believe that the majority of people here would look twice at By The Seaside or the The Shallow End if they stumbled across them on the web.

Perhaps I should have explained my reasons for picking on these photographs.

By The Seaside has the roof of the building cut off and the left side of the picture bisects the cage of balls. These are two compositional faults that, together with the flat lighting and the dis-interested and detached-from-the-scene chap in the background just don't scream out to me "good photograph."

The Shallow End could have been a very different shot taken from a lower angle. The cut-off hills at the top of the frame, do not to me show good composition. I think the picture would have worked much better focusing more on the boat and the foreground. The light on the main subject also looks very flat.

Apologies if I have offended anyon by being so blunt. I really like some of Andrews pictures, but I do not see why obvious flaws in some of this set have been glossed over if, indeed, the point of this section is for constructive criticism. I think we are all here in order to omprove our photography.

I would also be interested to know what people think of my comments, rather than just ignoring them. Feel free to have a go at me if you think it justified.

Perhaps I have been a bit brutal, but I would hate to see this forum become another mutual back-slapping society like so many on the web.

Full frame seems to be some kind of holy grail in photography. It's time to move on. There is no reason whatsoever to continue with it, as new technology means the camera can be designed to suit the photgrapher, not the format. Medium format is another kettle of fish, with it's massive resolution and pixel count. However, I think that eventually, it too will become obsolete.

I think Pentax will succeed more by developing it's existing camera and lens base than by venturing into the full-frame market, where Canikon already has supremacy, whether by good design or reputation. There's a market for another revolutionary camera like the Spotmatic or OM1 that Pentax is in the right place at the right time with the right ethos to exploit.

Looks very much like it might be Topaz....

I have no desire to stick my head above the parapet, neither do I want to upset anyone, but I do have to say that I agree with Mike on this.

While I think a lot of Andrews pictures (eg the ones from Mallorca) are very good, I don't find anything in this set, with the possible exception of Becalmed, that warrants the praise they have received. Apart from the two mentioned by Mike, in my opinion The Shallow End looks like a casual snapshot with no regard to composition, and I don't see anything interesting in Footpath. This is not a criticism of the photographer but a criticism of the pictures that have been put here for us to comment on.

I thought the whole purpose of the Your Photos Forum on this site was to receive constructive criticism? I don't believe it is fair to a photographer to have their work praised when what it needs is constructive comments. If I take a good picture, it's nice to have that recognised. Similarly, but more importantly to the continued development of my photography, I want to be told where I am going wrong and how I could improve. I certainly don't want to be told that an average photograph is good.

I notice that a number of members who regularly comment on pictures have not commented on this set. Are some photographers on here beyond criticism? If so, could someone explain why?

Praise where praise due, but most of us are here to improve our skills, not to be made to think we have nothing further to learn.

I hope, Andrew, you will take my comments in the spirit in which they were meant. I have admired a lot of your photographs, and my comments have reflected this. I hope you will not take offence, none is intended.

Best Regards,
Jon

I had the 50-200 WR fall out of the camera bag, which I hadn't closed properly, onto a concrete path, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with it. Doubt I'd be able to sell it on here now though!

With a previous camera, I'd set up for a sea/sunset shot when the tripod tipped over just as a wave came in and submerged my Sigma 10-20 in the water. No water got inside it and I used it for another 10 months, had it inspected at a camera shop and then sold it on ebay.

Nice set! I like the first and fourth shots the best. I also prefer the original version of the last one, even though I agree the sky looks a bit overdone.

Funny that...when I first looked at the last pic I liked it but thought it was nothing special so was not sure why I liked it either.

The tall tower (a torch built for the Asian Games) I think needs a lens about 10mm to get a shot with enough foreground detail to make it interesting. I'm getting a new Sigma 10-20 soon with the proceeds of a payout from the bank, and can't wait to get it! Should have everything from 10-400mm covered then. Must get out with the Tammy....

Yes , that looks much better, great picture!

I got out with my camera (and Jackie with her camera) the other day for the first time in ages, been studying too much to get out. These were all taken in the Aspire Zone, a new area of Doha.

C&C most welcome.