TOTALLY TRIPPIN WITH THE D60!

On Dec 8, 3:56 pm, "William Graham" wrote:
"That Rich" wrote in message Not exactly. To

do multiple exposures in camera on would actually need

photographic skills to be able to properly compensate exposure...
unlike a digitally stitched panorama where one selects 5 photos and
presses the go button.

Is it that easy? What is the best software for this?

It really has gotten very easy to do stitching and it really is like
taking of photograph as much as Noons would have you believe
otherwise.

I use PTGui, there are others out there that also work well.

Some programs will do the stitching but not give you any control on
the output, avoid these.
I have posted three different views, all stitched from the same source
images, this is very easy to do with a program like PTGui.
http://www.pbase.com/konascott/3_views

The program is pretty much automatic and gives you its best guess as
to the view you would like.

Scott

On Dec 9, 12:03 am, Annika1980 wrote:


and no, a multiple exposure is a photo. Something
you wouldn't know anyway, because Canon's simply
can't do them. ;-)

You can't have it both ways. A multiple exposure is adding images just
like stacking or stitching.

except it's done on a the same light sensitive surface.
A pentium has never been one. Simple as that.
No amount of semantics is going to alter
a simple fact.

On Dec 11, 6:25 am, Noons wrote:

You can't have it both ways. A multiple exposure is adding images just
like stacking or stitching.

except it's done on a the same light sensitive surface.
A pentium has never been one. Simple as that.
No amount of semantics is going to alter
a simple fact.

That "fact" has nothing to do with whether it is a photo or not.
That's simply your definition, not mine.

In article
,
Annika1980 wrote:

We delve even deeper into the Artsy-Fartsy category with this infrared
shot.
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/89911233/original

Let this be a lesson for you kids out there...
One should never do drugs while driving or shooting with the Totally
Digital D60!

Brett, that's a fabulous shot. That's art, not artsy-fartsy. Congrats.

Reminds me of Steichen's "The Pond -- Moonlight" (Lots of poor quality
low-res images of this famous shot... Here's one:

http://digitalthink.fr/wordpress/wp-.../2006/04/1.jpg

-=- Rick

--
Richard Karash
Richard "at" Karash "dot" com

On Dec 11, 11:50 pm, Annika1980 wrote:


except it's done on a the same light sensitive surface.
A pentium has never been one. Simple as that.
No amount of semantics is going to alter
a simple fact.

That "fact" has nothing to do with whether it is a photo or not.
That's simply your definition, not mine.

That a Pentium is not a light sensitive surface?
No, it's the accepted definition from wikipedia,
that YOU brought in.

On Dec 12, 5:00 am, Noons wrote:
On Dec 11, 11:50 pm, Annika1980 wrote:



except it's done on a the same light sensitive surface.
A pentium has never been one. Simple as that.
No amount of semantics is going to alter
a simple fact.

That "fact" has nothing to do with whether it is a photo or not.
That's simply your definition, not mine.

That a Pentium is not a light sensitive surface?
No, it's the accepted definition from wikipedia,
that YOU brought in.

You don't capture photos on a pentium. You capture them on a digital
sensor. So I guess my pic is a photo after all. Your argument makes
as much sense as saying that no film shots are photos since you have
to develop them afterwards.

Annika1980 wrote:


You don't capture photos on a pentium. You capture them on a digital
sensor.

or any light sensitive device. including film.

So I guess my pic is a photo after all.

No, it's the product of a manipulation of various images.
It could NEVER be produced by a light sensitive device.

Your argument makes
as much sense as saying that no film shots are photos since you have
to develop them afterwards.

It's not my argument, it's yours: YOU brought the
wikipedia definition in. Not me. YOU.

On Dec 12, 11:28 pm, Noons wrote:

Your argument makes
as much sense as saying that no film shots are photos since you have
to develop them afterwards.

It's not my argument, it's yours: YOU brought the
wikipedia definition in. Not me. YOU.

Yep, and my digital photos meet that definition.


From Wiki:
========================
Photography is the process of recording pictures by means of capturing
light on a light-sensitive medium, such as a film or electronic
sensor.

On Dec 13, 4:01 pm, Annika1980 wrote:


Yep, and my digital photos meet that definition.

From Wiki:
========================
Photography is the process of recording pictures by means of capturing
light on a light-sensitive medium, such as a film or electronic
sensor.


Absolutely. Well stated: your digital photos.
Not the crappy, over-manipulated crud images you insist
on posting.

On Dec 16, 10:20 pm, Rita Ä Berkowitz ritaberk2O04 @aol.com wrote:

Did you actually see one that wasn't over manipulated and crappy. **** me
with a pogo stick! Post a link to it!

Rita


I'll accept your kind offer.
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/87464985/original
Now bend over.