|
|
Picking Lice With The 70-200 VR2!!
On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 20:44:04 -0500, LOL! wrote:
On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 20:43:55 -0400, tony cooper wrote: On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 18:54:40 -0500, George Kerby wrote: As I recall, there were extra certificaion needed for cave diving. I must admit, I never had any interest is such things. Hell, I get weird in a MRI machine! I just wanted to blow bubbles and take pictures on pretty reefs. I have been to Flower Gardens in the Texas Gulf and Cozumel. Bonaire, I understand, is a destination that ant diver should add: It's on my 'Bucket List'. How do you like the Pennekamp Park? We're planning a trip to the Keys in January. Depends. If it's a family trip and there are non-divers in the group, Pennekamp is a good destination. Non-divers can swim and snorkel, and divers can shore dive. There's a reconstruction of a Spanish wreck about 100' offshore. For a group of divers, it's too crowded with swimmers and snorklers. It is a good compromise for a family group. The divers will want to go out on one of the many boats based in Key Largo. Many of the boats will take both divers and snorklers if you have family members that do snorkel but don't dive. The better diving and snorkeling is a few miles offshore. I usually go to Islamorada instead of Key Largo. However, there are good dive outfits all down the Keys. A little pre-trip research on dive sites, especially wrecks, is the way to go. January can be cold. Not cold like you have in the north, but uncomfortably cold for snorklers and divers. Skins are a good investment, and trap enough body-heated water to add to your comfort. Not a dive suit, but a Lycra skin like: http://www.scuba.com/scuba-gear-44/1...-Jumpsuit.html About $30 in most dive shops in the area. I wear a full skin on every dive because I get a highly allergic reaction to Fire Coral. I have to get shots after or the wounds swell and fester. I have scars on my hands from Fire Coral when I forgot my dive gloves. My wife, a non-diver, wears a skin when snorkeling to keep her back from being sunburned. Here I am in a skin at Sting Ray City in the Caymans: http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f2...r213/skins.jpg Note the "Dilbert's boss's hair". Oh my. Look at all the basement living trolls pretending like they've actually done something interesting once in their lives! LOL! This particular poster can't be a "basement living troll". Florida houses don't *have* basements. The only way to have a basement in a house in this area is to build the house on fill and have the ground floor several feet higher than street level. Having never been to Florida - despite your tall tales of imaginary trips on week-long treks in the Everglades seeking rare botanical samples - you wouldn't know that. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida |
Picking Lice With The 70-200 VR2!!
On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 00:07:11 -0400, tony cooper
wrote: On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 20:44:04 -0500, LOL! wrote: On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 20:43:55 -0400, tony cooper wrote: On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 18:54:40 -0500, George Kerby wrote: As I recall, there were extra certificaion needed for cave diving. I must admit, I never had any interest is such things. Hell, I get weird in a MRI machine! I just wanted to blow bubbles and take pictures on pretty reefs. I have been to Flower Gardens in the Texas Gulf and Cozumel. Bonaire, I understand, is a destination that ant diver should add: It's on my 'Bucket List'. How do you like the Pennekamp Park? We're planning a trip to the Keys in January. Depends. If it's a family trip and there are non-divers in the group, Pennekamp is a good destination. Non-divers can swim and snorkel, and divers can shore dive. There's a reconstruction of a Spanish wreck about 100' offshore. For a group of divers, it's too crowded with swimmers and snorklers. It is a good compromise for a family group. The divers will want to go out on one of the many boats based in Key Largo. Many of the boats will take both divers and snorklers if you have family members that do snorkel but don't dive. The better diving and snorkeling is a few miles offshore. I usually go to Islamorada instead of Key Largo. However, there are good dive outfits all down the Keys. A little pre-trip research on dive sites, especially wrecks, is the way to go. January can be cold. Not cold like you have in the north, but uncomfortably cold for snorklers and divers. Skins are a good investment, and trap enough body-heated water to add to your comfort. Not a dive suit, but a Lycra skin like: http://www.scuba.com/scuba-gear-44/1...-Jumpsuit.html About $30 in most dive shops in the area. I wear a full skin on every dive because I get a highly allergic reaction to Fire Coral. I have to get shots after or the wounds swell and fester. I have scars on my hands from Fire Coral when I forgot my dive gloves. My wife, a non-diver, wears a skin when snorkeling to keep her back from being sunburned. Here I am in a skin at Sting Ray City in the Caymans: http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f2...r213/skins.jpg Note the "Dilbert's boss's hair". Oh my. Look at all the basement living trolls pretending like they've actually done something interesting once in their lives! LOL! This particular poster can't be a "basement living troll". Florida houses don't *have* basements. The only way to have a basement in a house in this area is to build the house on fill and have the ground floor several feet higher than street level. Having never been to Florida - despite your tall tales of imaginary trips on week-long treks in the Everglades seeking rare botanical samples - you wouldn't know that. No. What you wouldn't know is that I was proving a valuable point. You stupid **** of a dip****. I know all too well about the limerock of Florida. Not only after having kayaked many of the spring-fed streams but having dove in some of them as well. I particularly like the short video I have of a larger than bowling-ball sized rock being upheld in a spring, tumbling and turning on what seems to be solid sand. It amazed me that the sediments in any swamp areas were never more than a few inches thick. Unlike up in Canada where it can be many yards deep. The limerock bed of Florida is quite interesting, after having dug into limerock myself a few times. Like the time I was trying to crack some black-walnuts that I had found and saved while documenting how to find quartz crystals in the Ozarks (got some nice museum quality specimens). By placing the black-walnuts on what I had thought was firm limerock to crack them with a hammer, and the walnuts would become embedded in the rock from one hammer blow. It finally became clear why that airliner that dove headfirst into the 'glades couldn't be retrieved. It became one with the limerock. Or the times I was fishing in some, what I thought were, land-locked quarries. And I noticed my bait was slowly floating south, when there was no wind. The water flowing through what appeared to be perfectly solid "rock". So don't give me this **** I don't know what I'm talking about. Now, did you get the point I was trying to make? Or are you going to act like the perfectly stupid **** of an ass that you have already proved yourself to be? Time and time again. I won't expect anything less than that of you. You've been too consistent in that regard. |
Picking Lice With The 70-200 VR2!!
On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 23:43:03 -0500, LOL! wrote:
On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 00:07:11 -0400, tony cooper wrote: On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 20:44:04 -0500, LOL! wrote: On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 20:43:55 -0400, tony cooper wrote: On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 18:54:40 -0500, George Kerby wrote: As I recall, there were extra certificaion needed for cave diving. I must admit, I never had any interest is such things. Hell, I get weird in a MRI machine! I just wanted to blow bubbles and take pictures on pretty reefs. I have been to Flower Gardens in the Texas Gulf and Cozumel. Bonaire, I understand, is a destination that ant diver should add: It's on my 'Bucket List'. How do you like the Pennekamp Park? We're planning a trip to the Keys in January. Depends. If it's a family trip and there are non-divers in the group, Pennekamp is a good destination. Non-divers can swim and snorkel, and divers can shore dive. There's a reconstruction of a Spanish wreck about 100' offshore. For a group of divers, it's too crowded with swimmers and snorklers. It is a good compromise for a family group. The divers will want to go out on one of the many boats based in Key Largo. Many of the boats will take both divers and snorklers if you have family members that do snorkel but don't dive. The better diving and snorkeling is a few miles offshore. I usually go to Islamorada instead of Key Largo. However, there are good dive outfits all down the Keys. A little pre-trip research on dive sites, especially wrecks, is the way to go. January can be cold. Not cold like you have in the north, but uncomfortably cold for snorklers and divers. Skins are a good investment, and trap enough body-heated water to add to your comfort. Not a dive suit, but a Lycra skin like: http://www.scuba.com/scuba-gear-44/1...-Jumpsuit.html About $30 in most dive shops in the area. I wear a full skin on every dive because I get a highly allergic reaction to Fire Coral. I have to get shots after or the wounds swell and fester. I have scars on my hands from Fire Coral when I forgot my dive gloves. My wife, a non-diver, wears a skin when snorkeling to keep her back from being sunburned. Here I am in a skin at Sting Ray City in the Caymans: http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f2...r213/skins.jpg Note the "Dilbert's boss's hair". Oh my. Look at all the basement living trolls pretending like they've actually done something interesting once in their lives! LOL! This particular poster can't be a "basement living troll". Florida houses don't *have* basements. The only way to have a basement in a house in this area is to build the house on fill and have the ground floor several feet higher than street level. Having never been to Florida - despite your tall tales of imaginary trips on week-long treks in the Everglades seeking rare botanical samples - you wouldn't know that. p.s. It's not just "week long" trips into the Everglades. Try 9-month long treks while LIVING in the Everglades to document its many life-forms. You namby-pamby ****wad. Go eat your pablum. No. What you wouldn't know is that I was proving a valuable point. You stupid **** of a dip****. I know all too well about the limerock of Florida. Not only after having kayaked many of the spring-fed streams but having dove in some of them as well. I particularly like the short video I have of a larger than bowling-ball sized rock being upheld in a spring, tumbling and turning on what seems to be solid sand. It amazed me that the sediments in any swamp areas were never more than a few inches thick. Unlike up in Canada where it can be many yards deep. The limerock bed of Florida is quite interesting, after having dug into limerock myself a few times. Like the time I was trying to crack some black-walnuts that I had found and saved while documenting how to find quartz crystals in the Ozarks (got some nice museum quality specimens). By placing the black-walnuts on what I had thought was firm limerock to crack them with a hammer, and the walnuts would become embedded in the rock from one hammer blow. It finally became clear why that airliner that dove headfirst into the 'glades couldn't be retrieved. It became one with the limerock. Or the times I was fishing in some, what I thought were, land-locked quarries. And I noticed my bait was slowly floating south, when there was no wind. The water flowing through what appeared to be perfectly solid "rock". So don't give me this **** I don't know what I'm talking about. Now, did you get the point I was trying to make? Or are you going to act like the perfectly stupid **** of an ass that you have already proved yourself to be? Time and time again. I won't expect anything less than that of you. You've been too consistent in that regard. |
Picking Lice With The 70-200 VR2!!
On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 00:03:58 -0500, LOL! wrote:
Having never been to Florida - despite your tall tales of imaginary trips on week-long treks in the Everglades seeking rare botanical samples - you wouldn't know that. p.s. It's not just "week long" trips into the Everglades. Try 9-month long treks while LIVING in the Everglades to document its many life-forms. You namby-pamby ****wad. Go eat your pablum. Like this more colorful of the many many dozens of species of rare and endangered "Tree Snails" that I documented. Found on many dozens of remote and isolated hammocks scattered throughout the Everglades. Reachable only by kayak or airboat. (Airboats are far too noisy, they scare the wildlife, would never even consider them for photography treks. Leave them for the know-nothing tourists, and idiot hunters, that scare away everything they are trying to find.) http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4078/4861855661_65a5f81b42.jpg Greatly JPG degraded because even a thumbnail of this particular species is highly marketable. You don't even get to see the ones with decent composition. |
Picking Lice With The 70-200 VR2!!
On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 00:03:58 -0500, LOL! wrote:
p.s. It's not just "week long" trips into the Everglades. Try 9-month long treks while LIVING in the Everglades to document its many life-forms. You namby-pamby ****wad. Go eat your pablum. Do you really think that anyone reading your posts, anyone at all, believes these stories? It's probably excellent therapy for you to create these stories about your life-as-you-would-have-liked-to-have-lived-it, but are you so delusional that you think you are actually fooling anyone? Talk about laughing out loud. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida |
Picking Lice With The 70-200 VR2!!
On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 01:56:03 -0400, tony cooper
wrote: On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 00:03:58 -0500, LOL! wrote: p.s. It's not just "week long" trips into the Everglades. Try 9-month long treks while LIVING in the Everglades to document its many life-forms. You namby-pamby ****wad. Go eat your pablum. Do you really think that anyone reading your posts, anyone at all, believes these stories? It's probably excellent therapy for you to create these stories about your life-as-you-would-have-liked-to-have-lived-it, but are you so delusional that you think you are actually fooling anyone? Talk about laughing out loud. Do you think that ANYONE believes your bull**** about your "tourist level" scuba diving in safe and controlled conditions once or twice in your life? Talk about laughing out loud. LOL! Where's YOUR photos of Tree Snails from remote hammocks in Florida? Eh? We're all waiting to prove you even get out of the house. Oh, and thanks, for proving what I previously thought and posted: Now, did you get the point I was trying to make? Or are you going to act like the perfectly stupid **** of an ass that you have already proved yourself to be? Time and time again. I won't expect anything less than that of you. You've been too consistent in that regard. You ARE consistent, if nothing else! This clinches it, you are too ****ing stupid to even figure out the lesson you need to learn from this. What a waste of my valuable time. LOL! |
Picking Lice With The 70-200 VR2!!
"tony cooper" wrote in message
... On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 00:03:58 -0500, LOL! wrote: p.s. It's not just "week long" trips into the Everglades. Try 9-month long treks while LIVING in the Everglades to document its many life-forms. You namby-pamby ****wad. Go eat your pablum. Do you really think that anyone reading your posts, anyone at all, believes these stories? It's probably excellent therapy for you to create these stories about your life-as-you-would-have-liked-to-have-lived-it, but are you so delusional that you think you are actually fooling anyone? Talk about laughing out loud. I too occasionally feed Walter Mitty. -- Peter |
Picking Lice With The 70-200 VR2!!
On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 01:21:22 -0500, LOL! wrote:
On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 01:56:03 -0400, tony cooper wrote: On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 00:03:58 -0500, LOL! wrote: p.s. It's not just "week long" trips into the Everglades. Try 9-month long treks while LIVING in the Everglades to document its many life-forms. You namby-pamby ****wad. Go eat your pablum. Do you really think that anyone reading your posts, anyone at all, believes these stories? It's probably excellent therapy for you to create these stories about your life-as-you-would-have-liked-to-have-lived-it, but are you so delusional that you think you are actually fooling anyone? Talk about laughing out loud. Do you think that ANYONE believes your bull**** about your "tourist level" scuba diving in safe and controlled conditions once or twice in your life? Yeah, I think people do believe what I write. I don't spin fantasy yarns about things-that-never-happened. The scuba diving I've done *has* been done in safe and controlled conditions. As it should be. If I ever post an image of a rare tree snail, it will an image that *I* took and an image that is presented without false claims of being deliberately degraded. If it has been altered (as my recent violinist photo was), that fact will be stated as full disclosure. I'm not trying to fool anyone. Talk about laughing out loud. LOL! Where's YOUR photos of Tree Snails from remote hammocks in Florida? Eh? We're all waiting to prove you even get out of the house. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida |
Picking Lice With The 70-200 VR2!!
"tony cooper" wrote in message
... If I ever post an image of a rare tree snail, it will an image that *I* took and an image that is presented without false claims of being deliberately degraded. If it has been altered (as my recent violinist photo was), that fact will be stated as full disclosure. I'm not trying to fool anyone. Tony, If an image is presented as a pictorial, why do you feel disclosure of things like a background change is necessary. I think that if you are presenting a PJ shot, where background is a part of the scene, or a pure nature shot, no alteration other than normal adjustments should be made. for purposes of my comment I define "normal adjustments" as one which enhances the image without changing its essential message. IOW the reason the shot was taken, should not be altered. If I am presenting a pictorial, I think anything goes. That of course, is just my opinion. I can understand if you are -- Peter |
Picking Lice With The 70-200 VR2!!
On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 09:20:33 -0400, "Peter"
wrote: "tony cooper" wrote in message .. . If I ever post an image of a rare tree snail, it will an image that *I* took and an image that is presented without false claims of being deliberately degraded. If it has been altered (as my recent violinist photo was), that fact will be stated as full disclosure. I'm not trying to fool anyone. Tony, If an image is presented as a pictorial, why do you feel disclosure of things like a background change is necessary. It depends on the forum and where the image is displayed. I don't participate in Flickr, but I might put the image up there without the disclosure. This forum, though, is different. There's an issue of credibility here thanks to our participant-of-many-names. On careful examination of the violinist photo, you'll see some careless masking around the violin strings. If I don't tell you the photo has been significantly altered, you might start doubting my credibility on other photos. This particular image was a project photo anyway. I thought it was a good project for practicing using a layer mask to drop the background. There are so many little areas (mostly around the violin) where the original background showed through that the detail work was extensive. Here's the original taken straight from RAW to .jpg. http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/photos...3_BHGFw-XL.jpg That area around the hands and violin strings was a bitch to mask. I had to use a shot of the same trees so the masking around the girl's hair wouldn't show. I think that if you are presenting a PJ shot, where background is a part of the scene, or a pure nature shot, no alteration other than normal adjustments should be made. for purposes of my comment I define "normal adjustments" as one which enhances the image without changing its essential message. IOW the reason the shot was taken, should not be altered. If I am presenting a pictorial, I think anything goes. That of course, is just my opinion. When I link to photos in the "Street" photography forum I participate in, I leave them as-shot as far as intrusive background. In that group, background stuff is quite acceptable that would be criticized here. We are expected to shoot scenes as we see them and not to go for posed shots. We can edit for contrast (most shots are in black and white) and other "normal" adjustments. This shot was well-received in that forum, but would be roundly panned he http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/...7_W7ACa-XL.jpg -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida |
Picking Lice With The 70-200 VR2!!
On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 08:59:59 -0400, tony cooper
wrote: Yeah, I think people do believe what I write. I don't spin fantasy yarns about things-that-never-happened. The scuba diving I've done *has* been done in safe and controlled conditions. WHAT? You mean like that crapshot some tourist took of a guest appearance of Bozo the Clown cleaning the glass in a ray feeding-tank at the Monterey Bay Aquarium? The one you stole from someone's album on the net? You mean THAT ONE??? The color in that wet-suit says that whoever that was wasn't more than 3-4 feet under water, if even that much. Don't give use this song and dance BULL**** about you being some scuba diver. You're as transparent as they come! LOL! Credibility my ASS! LOL! |
Picking Lice With The 70-200 VR2!!
"tony cooper" wrote in message
... On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 09:20:33 -0400, "Peter" wrote: Tony, If an image is presented as a pictorial, why do you feel disclosure of things like a background change is necessary. It depends on the forum and where the image is displayed. I don't participate in Flickr, but I might put the image up there without the disclosure. This forum, though, is different. There's an issue of credibility here thanks to our participant-of-many-names. On careful examination of the violinist photo, you'll see some careless masking around the violin strings. If I don't tell you the photo has been significantly altered, you might start doubting my credibility on other photos. This particular image was a project photo anyway. I thought it was a good project for practicing using a layer mask to drop the background. There are so many little areas (mostly around the violin) where the original background showed through that the detail work was extensive. Here's the original taken straight from RAW to .jpg. http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/photos...3_BHGFw-XL.jpg That area around the hands and violin strings was a bitch to mask. I had to use a shot of the same trees so the masking around the girl's hair wouldn't show. I think that if you are presenting a PJ shot, where background is a part of the scene, or a pure nature shot, no alteration other than normal adjustments should be made. for purposes of my comment I define "normal adjustments" as one which enhances the image without changing its essential message. IOW the reason the shot was taken, should not be altered. If I am presenting a pictorial, I think anything goes. That of course, is just my opinion. When I link to photos in the "Street" photography forum I participate in, I leave them as-shot as far as intrusive background. In that group, background stuff is quite acceptable that would be criticized here. We are expected to shoot scenes as we see them and not to go for posed shots. We can edit for contrast (most shots are in black and white) and other "normal" adjustments. This shot was well-received in that forum, but would be roundly panned he http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/...7_W7ACa-XL.jpg Funny! this morning while picking up my camera after a needed repair, I was talking with a photographer from a major area newspaper. He clearly stated that any manipulation, other than some minor dodging, burning and contrast adjustment would be unethical. Since he strictly does PJ, I can easily understand where he was coming from. -- Peter |
Picking Lice With The 70-200 VR2!!
On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 11:06:32 -0500, LOL! wrote:
On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 08:59:59 -0400, tony cooper wrote: Yeah, I think people do believe what I write. I don't spin fantasy yarns about things-that-never-happened. The scuba diving I've done *has* been done in safe and controlled conditions. WHAT? You mean like that crapshot some tourist took of a guest appearance of Bozo the Clown cleaning the glass in a ray feeding-tank at the Monterey Bay Aquarium? The one you stole from someone's album on the net? You mean THAT ONE??? The color in that wet-suit says that whoever that was wasn't more than 3-4 feet under water, if even that much. Don't give use this song and dance BULL**** about you being some scuba diver. You're as transparent as they come! LOL! Credibility my ASS! Up to your usual level of knowledge. The bottom at Sting Ray City is about 33 feet. I was probably down about 20 feet when my daughter snapped this. It's a scan of a print commercially made from a slide. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida |
Picking Lice With The 70-200 VR2!!
On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 12:57:32 -0400, tony cooper
wrote: On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 11:06:32 -0500, LOL! wrote: On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 08:59:59 -0400, tony cooper wrote: Yeah, I think people do believe what I write. I don't spin fantasy yarns about things-that-never-happened. The scuba diving I've done *has* been done in safe and controlled conditions. WHAT? You mean like that crapshot some tourist took of a guest appearance of Bozo the Clown cleaning the glass in a ray feeding-tank at the Monterey Bay Aquarium? The one you stole from someone's album on the net? You mean THAT ONE??? The color in that wet-suit says that whoever that was wasn't more than 3-4 feet under water, if even that much. Don't give use this song and dance BULL**** about you being some scuba diver. You're as transparent as they come! LOL! Credibility my ASS! Up to your usual level of knowledge. The bottom at Sting Ray City is about 33 feet. I was probably down about 20 feet when my daughter snapped this. It's a scan of a print commercially made from a slide. RIIIIiiiiiiiight, sure you were. That's why there's reflections in the tank glass all down the right side. Even a completely vertical edge down the whole right side, top to bottom, probably from a tank-glass divider. LOL!!!!! Credibility my ASS! LOL! |
Picking Lice With The 70-200 VR2!!
|
Picking Lice With The 70-200 VR2!!
"LOL!" wrote in message
... On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 12:57:32 -0400, tony cooper wrote: On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 11:06:32 -0500, LOL! wrote: On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 08:59:59 -0400, tony cooper wrote: Yeah, I think people do believe what I write. I don't spin fantasy yarns about things-that-never-happened. The scuba diving I've done *has* been done in safe and controlled conditions. WHAT? You mean like that crapshot some tourist took of a guest appearance of Bozo the Clown cleaning the glass in a ray feeding-tank at the Monterey Bay Aquarium? The one you stole from someone's album on the net? You mean THAT ONE??? The color in that wet-suit says that whoever that was wasn't more than 3-4 feet under water, if even that much. Don't give use this song and dance BULL**** about you being some scuba diver. You're as transparent as they come! LOL! Credibility my ASS! Up to your usual level of knowledge. The bottom at Sting Ray City is about 33 feet. I was probably down about 20 feet when my daughter snapped this. It's a scan of a print commercially made from a slide. RIIIIiiiiiiiight, sure you were. That's why there's reflections in the tank glass all down the right side. Even a completely vertical edge down the whole right side, top to bottom, probably from a tank-glass divider. There are several of us who have done UW photography, including me. I can't speak for others but it is obvious to me that you don't know WTF you are talking about. What you may be referring to is normal underwater particle dispersion. How about doing a test. If you are certified, which I doubt, I will escort you on a local wreck dive. Here's your choices. Cruiser San Diego; The Tea wreck U215; U 853. I need an excuse to get wet again. But, bring your own dive buddy. I simply want to be an observer, not a nursemaid. I will bring my own buddy. If you want something tamer, let me know. I am flexible. Remember, before I will make any arrangements, I want to see your "C" card. -- Peter |
Picking Lice With The 70-200 VR2!!
On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 15:07:52 -0400, "Peter"
wrote: "LOL!" wrote in message .. . On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 12:57:32 -0400, tony cooper wrote: On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 11:06:32 -0500, LOL! wrote: On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 08:59:59 -0400, tony cooper wrote: Yeah, I think people do believe what I write. I don't spin fantasy yarns about things-that-never-happened. The scuba diving I've done *has* been done in safe and controlled conditions. WHAT? You mean like that crapshot some tourist took of a guest appearance of Bozo the Clown cleaning the glass in a ray feeding-tank at the Monterey Bay Aquarium? The one you stole from someone's album on the net? You mean THAT ONE??? The color in that wet-suit says that whoever that was wasn't more than 3-4 feet under water, if even that much. Don't give use this song and dance BULL**** about you being some scuba diver. You're as transparent as they come! LOL! Credibility my ASS! Up to your usual level of knowledge. The bottom at Sting Ray City is about 33 feet. I was probably down about 20 feet when my daughter snapped this. It's a scan of a print commercially made from a slide. RIIIIiiiiiiiight, sure you were. That's why there's reflections in the tank glass all down the right side. Even a completely vertical edge down the whole right side, top to bottom, probably from a tank-glass divider. There are several of us who have done UW photography, including me. I can't speak for others but it is obvious to me that you don't know WTF you are talking about. What you may be referring to is normal underwater particle dispersion. How about doing a test. If you are certified, which I doubt, I will escort you on a local wreck dive. Here's your choices. Cruiser San Diego; The Tea wreck U215; U 853. That photograph of mine was taken on slide film with a Canon AS-6 underwater camera. The AS-6 was truly a "point-and-shoot". There were no settings. The only choice was what ASA film to load. It had an onboard flash, but it was for fill and not illumination. The link was to a scan that I made from a print from a slide. That "reflection" what's-his-name thinks he sees is some anomaly created somewhere in those conversions. I got some good shots with that camera in water up to 30 feet or so, and in some deeper water in very clear conditions, but the deeper I'd shoot the more blue the image would be. Photo labs, though, could push those very blue images and bring in some very decent color. You had to ask. The bottom at Sting Ray City is white sand with very little coral, so on a sunny day shooting at 30 feet was like shooting at 15 feet. I still have the camera, but it doesn't work. I left the batteries in it and got some corrosion. I just keep the camera as a souvenir. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida |
Picking Lice With The 70-200 VR2!!
"tony cooper" wrote in message
... That photograph of mine was taken on slide film with a Canon AS-6 underwater camera. The AS-6 was truly a "point-and-shoot". There were no settings. The only choice was what ASA film to load. It had an onboard flash, but it was for fill and not illumination. I standardized on Ektachrome for all my underwater work. It emphasized the blue background and the colors brought out by the storbe would really pop. I used a Nikkormat in an Ikelight housing, usually with a 20 or w28mm lens. Athought the strobe and its housing are gone, the housing needs only new "O" ring seals. The Nikkormat is curently in the posession of my daughter. The link was to a scan that I made from a print from a slide. That "reflection" what's-his-name thinks he sees is some anomaly created somewhere in those conversions. Those artifacts look very much like particle dispersion. It just may have been emplasized in the conversion process. I got some good shots with that camera in water up to 30 feet or so, and in some deeper water in very clear conditions, but the deeper I'd shoot the more blue the image would be. Photo labs, though, could push those very blue images and bring in some very decent color. You had to ask. The bottom at Sting Ray City is white sand with very little coral, so on a sunny day shooting at 30 feet was like shooting at 15 feet. -- Peter |
Picking Lice With The 70-200 VR2!!
On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 16:33:28 -0500, Larry Thong
wrote: On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 10:37:49 -0400, tony cooper wrote: It depends on the forum and where the image is displayed. I don't participate in Flickr, but I might put the image up there without the disclosure. This forum, though, is different. There's an issue of credibility here thanks to our participant-of-many-names. On careful examination of the violinist photo, you'll see some careless masking around the violin strings. If I don't tell you the photo has been significantly altered, you might start doubting my credibility on other photos. This particular image was a project photo anyway. I thought it was a good project for practicing using a layer mask to drop the background. There are so many little areas (mostly around the violin) where the original background showed through that the detail work was extensive. Here's the original taken straight from RAW to .jpg. http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/photos...3_BHGFw-XL.jpg Tony, my feeling on this is it would have been perfect right out of the camera had you stopped down a lot more. It would have blown out the background into the realm of total creamery while adding the depth you need to give it a more 3D feel by blurring the hand, which should be blurred since it is only a minute part of the theme you're trying to convey. The first Photoshopped one simply doesn't work. even on a perfect and seamless integration, the background is just too busy and distracting. I particularly like tighter DoF on these types of shots. And no, the hand being out of focus won't distract from your theme. I still can, you know. The background is a layer, and the file is a ..psd, I can blur, blow-out, fade, lighten, or otherwise manipulate that background any way I want. I've lost interest, though. It was a project piece to practice layer masking. The finished product doesn't interest me that much now. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida |
Picking Lice With The 70-200 VR2!!
In article ,
"Peter" wrote: "tony cooper" wrote in message ... On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 09:20:33 -0400, "Peter" wrote: good stuff snipped When I link to photos in the "Street" photography forum I participate in, I leave them as-shot as far as intrusive background. In that group, background stuff is quite acceptable that would be criticized here. We are expected to shoot scenes as we see them and not to go for posed shots. We can edit for contrast (most shots are in black and white) and other "normal" adjustments. This shot was well-received in that forum, but would be roundly panned he http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/...5398187_W7ACa- XL.jpg Tony, that shot is hilarious. I love the fact that almost everything in the mage has a brand name or logo written on it (Chanel sunglasses, Macanudo cigars, etc.) It reminds me of the documentary on R. Crumb, where he says that San Francisco is still pretty much like it was way back in the "Mr. Natural" days, except that "Everyone is walking around wearing tee shirts with corporate logos on them. And no one besides me thinks that's weird!" The other thing about your image is that although the woman on the right is over exposed, that's one of the reasons I love black & white -- huge density differences can work just fine. Atget's photo of Notre Dame de Paris, 1925, has a very dark foreground and the cathedral in the background almost luminous in its translucence. http://www.masters-of-photography.co...dame_full.html |
Picking Lice With The 70-200 VR2!!
In article
, Shiva Das wrote: Atget's photo of Notre Dame de Paris, 1925, has a very dark foreground and the cathedral in the background almost luminous in its translucence. http://www.masters-of-photography.co...dame_full.html As with most of his photos taken while employed by the Commune de Paris, this one exhibits technical issues that didn't bother him. SPecufically, the front standard of his camera was raised higher than it was "supposed" to, yielding the strong vignetting in the two upper corners. Also he wrote the photo serial number directly on the glass plate (lower right in photo). These are the things that would drive many people nuts and try to address with retouching. Different years, different equipment, different expectations. Atget clearly and on more than one occasion said that he believed strongly that photography had nothing to do with art. And yet he produced such a great body of art... |
Picking Lice With The 70-200 VR2!!
On Fri, 06 Aug 2010 00:49:48 -0400, Shiva Das
wrote: In article , "Peter" wrote: "tony cooper" wrote in message ... On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 09:20:33 -0400, "Peter" wrote: good stuff snipped When I link to photos in the "Street" photography forum I participate in, I leave them as-shot as far as intrusive background. In that group, background stuff is quite acceptable that would be criticized here. We are expected to shoot scenes as we see them and not to go for posed shots. We can edit for contrast (most shots are in black and white) and other "normal" adjustments. This shot was well-received in that forum, but would be roundly panned he http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/...7_W7ACa-XL.jpg Tony, that shot is hilarious. I love the fact that almost everything in the mage has a brand name or logo written on it (Chanel sunglasses, Macanudo cigars, etc.) It reminds me of the documentary on R. Crumb, where he says that San Francisco is still pretty much like it was way back in the "Mr. Natural" days, except that "Everyone is walking around wearing tee shirts with corporate logos on them. And no one besides me thinks that's weird!" Thank you. That's Park Avenue in Winter Park, Florida...where the rich and stylish go in this area to sit at an outside table and be noticed. The other thing about your image is that although the woman on the right is over exposed, that's one of the reasons I love black & white -- huge density differences can work just fine. Here's another Park Avenue shot of two people all caught up in each other. Not. http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/...4_FrHte-XL.jpg -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida |
Picking Lice With The 70-200 VR2!!
In article ,
tony cooper wrote: Here's another Park Avenue shot of two people all caught up in each other. Not. http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/...79284_FrHte-XL. jpg I bet they're texting each other. And Ms. Nosey on the far right is trying to read the guy's phone... |
Picking Lice With The 70-200 VR2!!
"tony cooper" wrote in message
... Here's another Park Avenue shot of two people all caught up in each other. Not. http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/...4_FrHte-XL.jpg I can think of two titles: "Young love after the blush" "A text in time" -- Peter |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:36 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
PhotoBanter.com