For the past day or so the site has been very slow. Sometimes a minute or more to load a page. Today I'm even getting timeout and "page unavailable" errors.

Just trying to determine if this is something I should report or if it is something on my end. I'm seeing on three different computers at home so it could, of course, be the ISP or somewhere in between.

Oddly, ePhotozine.com is working just fine for me.

Anyone else getting slow behavior on this site?

I don't want to gang up on Stephen but I have to agree as well. But I would not go so far as tell someone not to enter if they're not willing or able to add more.

Stephen, perhaps you could fill in some blanks with your C&Cs?

It can be hard to start if you haven't done so before. I'm not great at C&C either, but it is a great way to learn about your own photography as well.
Just in case you don't know where to begin, take mine...

"Kid in a Gelato store;
Love the colors! The lone child staring at the window, you can just imagine his mouth wide open awaiting the delights inside.
Although I feel the entire scene is a bit busy and cluttered which distracts a bit from the central idea. Perhaps cropping in to remove some of the clutter, or a different angle might help."

I reported this as a problem. Whether the database "lost" the comments or if the OP removed them, I would say it is a bug.
I would assume only the admins should be allowed to remove a post once it has had replies. Otherwise it leaves issues like this with hanging responses that don't mean much on their own.

he, he, I swear there was actual text to which I responded. I think someone even replied. Hmmm, must just have been talking to myself again.

Database glitch? Or did the original poster remove all of his comments?

Oh, I trust ya. There has been enough talk about lens being an issue.
But how?
I just see the camera adjusting the lens to focus until a single point becomes sharp regardless of how long it takes for the lens to shift and settle into a good spot where the edge contrast is acceptable.

There is obviously something I'm missing?
Probably more hypothetical than anything else, but I just have trouble sleeping at night not knowing these important details.

I didn't want to hijack other similar threads yet hesitant to start another, but I'm curious as to how the lens can cause front or back focusing?

I have adjusted my camera in debug mode and it seems to have solved most of my issues. Now I'm looking to get the 55-300 lens but read about some of them possibly having focusing issues.

My confusion comes in how the lens might play a role. As I understand things, the camera is looking for edge contrast to determine where to focus. It makes sense that if the camera is off a bit that the area you're focusing at will not necessarily match precisely with the camera.

But if the lens is off, won't the camera still try its best to attain sharp focus on the specified area? The camera may have to go further forward or backward than with another otherwise identical lens, but still the same spot has only one point at which the edge contrast will be "correct".

Does my question make sense?
What am I missing?

Since the K20D has several auto focus adjustment slots, I would assume there is actually a need but I cannot think of how the lens would make much difference.

Thanks a lot Stephen. Personally, I really expected the hot chocolate to come out on top. But all of the entries were pretty darned good and it could not have been easy to make a final decision.

I'll add a new competition as soon as I can in the morning. Guess that would be afternoon for most.

Well, got back from vacation with my home made monopod. Worked great!
No way I could have had a tripod there.

A few dorky images from one evening, but you get the idea.
One was at 2 seconds, the other at 1.5 seconds, both at f2.8.
I was quite pleased wit the results. Some camera movement visible, but quite a feat for my hands at two seconds even with a monopod.

I was also fairly amazed at the number of people who wanted to know more about my walking stick/monopod. I suspect I'll be seeing some for sale next year.

http://moringello-east.no-ip.com:8080/start/public/monopod.jpg

http://moringello-east.no-ip.com:8080/start/public/monopod1.jpg

http://moringello-east.no-ip.com:8080/start/public/monopod2.jpg

I have CS3 and use Select Color Range to highlight all the purple.
Then desaturate or use Hue/Saturation to desaturate or change hue to what looks best.

If PaintShop Pro X2 has something similar, give that a whirl.
Its not always the best, but it is a quick method that works adequately on a great deal of cases for me.

Don't know how things are in the UK, but although in the US we have implicit copyright, unless you actually register the images at the Copyright Office and can show proof of registration, almost no court will hear your case. It sounds a bit better for the copyright holder in the UK than in the US.

People are up in arms about the Orphaned Works bill going through the US government but few realize it is technically already here in the US.
Amongst other articles I've read, Photoshop User TV had a couple of interesting interviews with copyright lawyers recently and it sounds nearly hopeless as an individual if someone infringes your work. Either way, it all comes down somewhat to a matter of who can afford the most in legal fees.
Although I am thinking I might spend the fee and register a DVD full of my stuff that I have anywhere out on the web. Still not much chance, but at least I would be allowed to step into a court and fight my case.

One nice thing is that you have 90 days from infringement to register your work and submit a case. But you have to be awfully vigilant to catch someone, register your work, and then submit a case within that 90 days.

The words are great, but in practice the copyright holder doesn't seem to get much protection if the offender doesn't want to agree to your plea to remove the images.