wedding shoot

"Ken Tough" wrote in message
...
William Graham wrote:

There seem to be people who, like terrorists, want to spend
their short time here on earth tearing down or disrupting the useful
institutions of mankind. I wonder what they will say when St. Peter asks,
"And what did you do with your life, my son?"

Knocked over all the tables of the money-changers?

--
Ken Tough

Anyone can knock over a table....It's building one that takes time and
skill......

"Mr.Bolshoy Huy" writes:

atleast I have one and know how to use it.

only idiots post using their real name on usenet.

Stuff and nonsense. I've been posting with my real name since...oh,
probably 1982 or so. The early Google Groups archives are spotty and
miss most of my first few years.

People posting behind "handles" are widely regarded with suspicion on
Usenet.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/

"Mr.Bolshoy Huy" writes:

atleast I have one and know how to use it.

only idiots post using their real name on usenet.

Stuff and nonsense. I've been posting with my real name since...oh,
probably 1982 or so. The early Google Groups archives are spotty and
miss most of my first few years.

People posting behind "handles" are widely regarded with suspicion on
Usenet.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/

"David Dyer-Bennet" wrote in message
...
"Mr.Bolshoy Huy" writes:

atleast I have one and know how to use it.

only idiots post using their real name on usenet.

Stuff and nonsense. I've been posting with my real name since...oh,
probably 1982 or so. The early Google Groups archives are spotty and
miss most of my first few years.

People posting behind "handles" are widely regarded with suspicion on
Usenet.

I have been posting under my real name and real email address (and real
address and telephone number for what it's worth) for as long as I've been
using a computer, and I have had no bad repercussions yet. I get about 30
emails a day, (not counting news groups) and about 28 of those are spam,
which takes me all of 5 minutes to sort out and delete. My filters don't
eliminate anyone other than a few children, and just filter out filthy words
and expressions in the subject line for the most part. I would hate to miss
anything important like Mr. Magambo of Nigeria sending me 20 million
dollars..........

"David Dyer-Bennet" wrote in message
...
"Mr.Bolshoy Huy" writes:

atleast I have one and know how to use it.

only idiots post using their real name on usenet.

Stuff and nonsense. I've been posting with my real name since...oh,
probably 1982 or so. The early Google Groups archives are spotty and
miss most of my first few years.

People posting behind "handles" are widely regarded with suspicion on
Usenet.

I have been posting under my real name and real email address (and real
address and telephone number for what it's worth) for as long as I've been
using a computer, and I have had no bad repercussions yet. I get about 30
emails a day, (not counting news groups) and about 28 of those are spam,
which takes me all of 5 minutes to sort out and delete. My filters don't
eliminate anyone other than a few children, and just filter out filthy words
and expressions in the subject line for the most part. I would hate to miss
anything important like Mr. Magambo of Nigeria sending me 20 million
dollars..........

"Douglas" wrote in message
...


Nearly every time I get a customer who owns a DSLR, I get a lecture on how
much they know and precisely how to handle their images. 60% of the time
the images I handle exactly as they specify are not acceptable to them for
any number of reasons including focus. It seems I Un-focus their images in
the process of printing them without manipulation! Curious, isn't it?

Douglas

"Sorry sir i can't process images from this"

"Why not?"

"Thats the cameras battery sir."

happened to me personally at least twice.

Here's another one

"excuse me my cameras faulty"

"Let me have a look, ah i see you have been shooting snow. You have
underexposed"

"I can't have i never take it off fully automatic"

you can guess the next few lines

"I don't beleive it! Do you know how much i paid for this, its crap."

"Douglas" wrote in message
...


Nearly every time I get a customer who owns a DSLR, I get a lecture on how
much they know and precisely how to handle their images. 60% of the time
the images I handle exactly as they specify are not acceptable to them for
any number of reasons including focus. It seems I Un-focus their images in
the process of printing them without manipulation! Curious, isn't it?

Douglas

"Sorry sir i can't process images from this"

"Why not?"

"Thats the cameras battery sir."

happened to me personally at least twice.

Here's another one

"excuse me my cameras faulty"

"Let me have a look, ah i see you have been shooting snow. You have
underexposed"

"I can't have i never take it off fully automatic"

you can guess the next few lines

"I don't beleive it! Do you know how much i paid for this, its crap."

Douglas wrote:

Interesting bias there Ken,
I get a lot of people in my shop asking for prints from their digital
cameras. Many don't know the camera has a flash card. All they want is to
have a camera which takes photos they get prints from. Occasionally I get
people sent by mini labs for recovery of lost or damaged data on their
cards. All are return customers and all are happy with the prints.

Nearly every time I get a customer who owns a DSLR, I get a lecture on how
much they know and precisely how to handle their images. 60% of the time the
images I handle exactly as they specify are not acceptable to them for any
number of reasons including focus. It seems I Un-focus their images in the
process of printing them without manipulation! Curious, isn't it?

I wouldn't say that's a case of dSLR owners having too high
expectations or being a bunch of complainers, more likely that they
simply notice the lack of sharpness on print as opposed to on-screen.
[As you would]. You could suggest to them that they apply a little
sharpening [USM] before printing. I'm sure printers of negatives
get just as many proportional gripes from SLR 35mm as opposed to
p&s 35mm.

The P&S digital people are happy with their prints, because there is
less chance of major failure than with film. Digital is a better
"catchall" because it can up the ISO or adjust contrast to meet
the shot automatically. P&S shooters would only notice that there
are less crap shots than normal. dSLR shooters would notice that
they weren't as good as they were led to believe by looking at
them on the screen.

That's my take on it, anyway.

--
Ken Tough

Douglas wrote:

Interesting bias there Ken,
I get a lot of people in my shop asking for prints from their digital
cameras. Many don't know the camera has a flash card. All they want is to
have a camera which takes photos they get prints from. Occasionally I get
people sent by mini labs for recovery of lost or damaged data on their
cards. All are return customers and all are happy with the prints.

Nearly every time I get a customer who owns a DSLR, I get a lecture on how
much they know and precisely how to handle their images. 60% of the time the
images I handle exactly as they specify are not acceptable to them for any
number of reasons including focus. It seems I Un-focus their images in the
process of printing them without manipulation! Curious, isn't it?

I wouldn't say that's a case of dSLR owners having too high
expectations or being a bunch of complainers, more likely that they
simply notice the lack of sharpness on print as opposed to on-screen.
[As you would]. You could suggest to them that they apply a little
sharpening [USM] before printing. I'm sure printers of negatives
get just as many proportional gripes from SLR 35mm as opposed to
p&s 35mm.

The P&S digital people are happy with their prints, because there is
less chance of major failure than with film. Digital is a better
"catchall" because it can up the ISO or adjust contrast to meet
the shot automatically. P&S shooters would only notice that there
are less crap shots than normal. dSLR shooters would notice that
they weren't as good as they were led to believe by looking at
them on the screen.

That's my take on it, anyway.

--
Ken Tough

Douglas wrote:

Nearly every time I get a customer who owns a DSLR, I get a lecture on how
much they know and precisely how to handle their images. 60% of the time the
images I handle exactly as they specify are not acceptable to them for any
number of reasons including focus. It seems I Un-focus their images in the
process of printing them without manipulation! Curious, isn't it?

I send in my DSLR images via the web to two stores. They've been edited
by me for the printer at the photo store (except printer/paper color
profile, but to date that has not been a problem with printer #1).
They've been USM'd for the print size as well. My instructions are
always: "Don't change anything/print as is". For printer #1, no problem
at all. For printer #2 (a different store), there is a slight magenta cast.

As to sharpness, no problem, but again I spend time with the USM to get
it right at each print size. I get the impression that many people have
not spent the time to learn to use USM properly and/or they use the
simple "sharpen" filter which is a hit or miss proposition.




--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- slr-systems FAQ project: http://tinyurl.com/6m9aw
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.