All Forum Comments
How much of the reflection, if any, is done in post processing Paul?
Comment by Mannesty posted on A future project... at 23/07/2010 - 12:40
The reflection of the crucifix in the puddle transforms this image from a relatively nothing record shot, into a masterpiece of vision.
I like it . . . a lot.
I like it . . . a lot.
Comment by Mannesty posted on A future project... at 22/07/2010 - 09:37
prsjnb wrote:
Steady on Peter: there's no need to kick a man when he's down - especially when he's getting on a bit
Unless I'm very much mistaken, in which case I'll eat my old Benbo tripod, you worked on the RAW file, whereas all I got was the 'T-shirt' equivalent, or JPEG as it's more commonly known, and a heavily compressed version at that. Additionally, if you study the file sent you will notice that much of the 'paint by numbers' quality is already evident
Now, it is not my intention to suggest that your editing skills are anything other than highly developed, but I just felt the need to try and recover one or two of the shattered fragments of my photographic pride
Unfairly slandered of Wiltshire.
AKA Jon
Steady on Peter: there's no need to kick a man when he's down - especially when he's getting on a bit
Unless I'm very much mistaken, in which case I'll eat my old Benbo tripod, you worked on the RAW file, whereas all I got was the 'T-shirt' equivalent, or JPEG as it's more commonly known, and a heavily compressed version at that. Additionally, if you study the file sent you will notice that much of the 'paint by numbers' quality is already evident
Now, it is not my intention to suggest that your editing skills are anything other than highly developed, but I just felt the need to try and recover one or two of the shattered fragments of my photographic pride
Unfairly slandered of Wiltshire.
AKA Jon
Comment by Mannesty posted on Lightroom 3.0 Noise Reduction. at 22/07/2010 - 08:19
Oggy wrote:
I now join the number of people who regard you as a troll.
Having a bad day Oggy? That really wasn't necessary, was it?I now join the number of people who regard you as a troll.
Comment by Mannesty posted on and after 16-50? at 21/07/2010 - 18:03
If you want only to use top notch glass, and if you don't need the speed ( 1:2.8 ) of the DA* 50-135mm, the DA* 60-250mm 1:4 should be on your shopping list. Add to that the DA* 55mm to cover the gap between the long end of the 16-50mm and the short end of the 60-250mm and you have an excellent starting point, but it won't end there . . .
The DA* 200mm 1:2.8 is an excellent lens but I feel the extra length of the 300mm, albeit slower at 1:4, makes it more useful, especially if you acquire a 60-250mm.
Then of course there is the FA Limited range of superb optics, just in case Pentax ever produce a FF body.
That little lot should drain your bank balance somewhat.
The DA* 200mm 1:2.8 is an excellent lens but I feel the extra length of the 300mm, albeit slower at 1:4, makes it more useful, especially if you acquire a 60-250mm.
Then of course there is the FA Limited range of superb optics, just in case Pentax ever produce a FF body.
That little lot should drain your bank balance somewhat.
Comment by Mannesty posted on and after 16-50? at 21/07/2010 - 18:00
philstaff wrote:
Have contacted Samsung and arranged for it to be looked at under the warranty just my luck wanted it for the air show on Saturday as well.
Ian
Well IQ doesn't look too bad. Use it for the airshow and send it back after Saturday if you haven't got another body.Have contacted Samsung and arranged for it to be looked at under the warranty just my luck wanted it for the air show on Saturday as well.
Ian
Comment by Mannesty posted on Light spot at 21/07/2010 - 17:35
Love the Ladybird pic Mike.
The K7 + Sigma 180mm EX DG Macro is a superb combination, if a little heavy. All you might need to compliment it is an AF160 ring flash.
The K7 + Sigma 180mm EX DG Macro is a superb combination, if a little heavy. All you might need to compliment it is an AF160 ring flash.
Comment by Mannesty posted on A few taken with the K-7 and Sigma 180mm Macro (4) at 21/07/2010 - 17:32
Dodgy shutter button maybe?
Comment by Mannesty posted on Shutter clicks twice at 21/07/2010 - 16:34
Interesting. It could be dirt on the sensor, if the dirt is reflective it might manifest itself in this way, if a little unusual.
Otherwise it might be a 'hot' pixel or maybe a damaged/faulty sensor.
Have you tried cleaning it?
Otherwise it might be a 'hot' pixel or maybe a damaged/faulty sensor.
Have you tried cleaning it?
Comment by Mannesty posted on Light spot at 21/07/2010 - 14:50
pink wrote:
some one must have a old copy of windows xp pro or 64 that they are no longer using as they have upgraded
James
You probably don't need Windows XP Pro, and OEM licences are not transferrable to different hardware anyway.some one must have a old copy of windows xp pro or 64 that they are no longer using as they have upgraded
James
Right click My Computer > Manage > click Disk Management
Check which file system you have on your disk(s). If any normal drives are FAT or FAT32, convert them to NTFS and your file size issue will go away. Any manufacturers diagnostic/recovery partitions should be left alone. Windows XP Pro with FAT/FAT32 file system will have the same file size restrictions as your Home edition.
Your speed issue is insufficient RAM, pure and simple.
Comment by Mannesty posted on Photoshop running slow at 21/07/2010 - 14:42
