Jump to content

Hi to all our members ... We  would just like to draw your attention to the latest post on the following link... Thank you for your attention .If you have already responded to my note  on Chatbox  about this please ignore this sticky note ... Thanks  folks ....

http://www.tipf.co.uk/forums/topic/46369-important~-the-forum-its-future-and-finances/

Clicker and Ryewolf   ADMIN TEAM 

Regretfully we have to once again ask members for  some financial support in order to  keep TIPF  running till December 2023. The more pledges we have to become  FRIEND OF THE FORUM  the less the individual cost will be so  if you want this Forum to continue  please follow the link below  and decide  if you are able to  support us . Thank you all for your support in the past ... it has been appreciated  a great deal ...

https://www.tipf.co.uk/forums/topic/57184-202223-forum-finances-update-important-notice/

 Clicker and Ryewolf  ...  Admin Team 

Hi TIPFers 

I AM HERE AGAIN WITH THE  BEGGING BOWL TO ENSURE THE FORUM CAN KEEP GOING ... Please follow  below if you want to  support the continuation  of this Forum and  this  small but friendly community. 

As always your support is  both vital and appreciated ...

 Clicker and Ryewolf ...

https://www.tipf.co.uk/forums/topic/57184-202223-forum-finances-update-4th-july-2023/

 

Craftysnapper

Member
  • Posts

    1,926
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    30

Everything posted by Craftysnapper

  1. I could not agree more Phil and of course it also depends on the viewing distance of the print and if you are one of these that has to press his nose up to the print or alway view them on a screen at 100% then your more likely a gear geek than someone appreciates images, after all no one views bill board poster from a few feet and they usaully put them where you can only view them from the correct distance. For example this was taken with a 3.2 Mp Kodak zoom compact and when the original would break up viewed at 100% but as a 12x8 mounted print it won me first place in the advanced section of my then camera club.
  2. Congrats and like BP I have been back to this one few times.
  3. Thank you everyone and thank you Dee for choosing my pic.
  4. Congratulation to Jason, I bet you are proud of him.
  5. You would have to take that on honour as it is to easy to alter the date on a jpeg so it proves nothing, just one click in something like ACDSee does it. This was taken in 2008 check the date with your exif viewer. The only sure proof of date is a raw file which cannot be altered, you can change the date on the xmp file but not the raw file itself.
  6. I'd take that with a pinch of salt JH until verified by another source. Searching the site using there search box reveals nothing about model releases, just copyright, care to point me to this article. Any blowback if they are wrong will be on the photographer and not them.
  7. This American advert for Olympus made me laugh. http://www.getolympus.com/dslarm
  8. Craftysnapper

    Help

    Leon you have little chance of getting detail out of a dark shadow area like that in a jpeg without it being grainy and I'm pretty sure it was dark with little detail in the grass as you probably exposed for the sky. In situations like this it is best to shoot raw and expose to the right as far as you can then pull back detail in the shadow and highlight areas in your raw converter. It is surprising what you can do with a correctly exposed raw image. Before and after in LR6
  9. Congratulation Martyn it's always nice to be published.
  10. Very well deserved indeed.
  11. Thank you BP not expected as there have been a lot of robins images lately. And thank you everyone for all the kind comments.
  12. Necessity is the mother of invention Bill and as long as it works.
  13. Elena Shumilova is one of my favourite photographers on Flickr, seeing has she only has her own children as subjects and the odd friend I'm amazed at what she produces, though her location on a farm in Russia and the weather does help, https://www.flickr.com/photos/75571860@N06/
  14. Good for a chuckle. http://newcameranews.com/2014/02/17/royal-society-of-pixel-peepers-mulling-1000-crop/
  15. Great news Dee and as someone who knows first hand a positive attitude is a great weapon in the fight.
  16. Congrats on the sale Cathy. For prints I usually charge treble the cost of printing, but as it is mainly portraits this includes the sitting fee. But for a print that size I would be charging at least £50. If it were for advertising/commercial use that is a different matter,some I have given away for good causes others I have charged for. For example this one was seen on my website by a New Zealand University five years ago looking for a spring lamb image (it's a Welsh lamb) for a advert in a Japanese Magazine for the university,the director of the university told me none of the New Zealand lamb stock photos came near this(,go figure) so I sold it for a once only use for £100.
  17. Congrats Paul and well deserved.
  18. Fuji it would probably be better with a before and after image so we can see how it makes a difference.
  19. Hi Cathy that is a beautiful image and the warmth of the house lights really works in this instance. Getting your subject further away from the background can some times be a problem in tight spaces so here is a tip. In this case with side lighting use a board or anything make shift (like a clothes horse with a blanket over it) and place it to block the light spilling onto your background. This is a overhead view of what I mean.
  20. Congrats Kev,well deserved.
  21. In all my years I only ever had one problem photographing graves.
×
×
  • Create New...