Re: PESO - jigsaw #3 (nsfw)

[Richard Klein]

Are the models standing or prone?

On Sep 26, 2016 9:26 PM, "Bruce Walker"  wrote:

> The next in my Body Language series.
>
> http://portfolio.brucemwalker.com/index/IHsDA9atyyg0
>
> 645z, dfa645 90mm/2.8 macro, f:13, 1/125th sec, 100 ISO;
>
> 5' silver PLM with diffuser camera right; white reflector camera left.
>
> Comments always welcome.
>
> --
> -bmw
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
> follow the directions.
>
-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - The Nonchalent Wombat

[P.J. Alling]

Wombats are relatively innocuous creatures but they do tend to undermine 
things...


On 9/26/2016 5:44 PM, Brian Walters wrote:

I like wombats.

They're big enough and strong enough to not have to worry about
predators but they're also amiable creatures - they just go about their
business and are not often too concerned about what's happening around
them.

This one was happily munching grass at the side of a road and completely
ignored me as I snapped a few portraits from a couple of metres away.

http://lyons-ryan.org/PESO/slides/_IGP7593-K5-1b-peso.html
  
C & C welcome.



Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/





--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve 
immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - The Nonchalent Wombat

[David Mann]

That's a nice photo.  The only wombats we've seen have been in captivity.  I 
don't remember if we've seen one that was awake at the time.

Cheers,
Dave

> On Sep 27, 2016, at 10:44 AM, Brian Walters  wrote:
> 
> I like wombats.
> 
> They're big enough and strong enough to not have to worry about
> predators but they're also amiable creatures - they just go about their
> business and are not often too concerned about what's happening around
> them.  
> 
> This one was happily munching grass at the side of a road and completely
> ignored me as I snapped a few portraits from a couple of metres away.
> 
> http://lyons-ryan.org/PESO/slides/_IGP7593-K5-1b-peso.html
> 
> C & C welcome.
> 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Brian
> 
> ++
> Brian Walters
> Western Sydney Australia
> http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/
> 
> 
> -- 
> --
> 
> -- 
> http://www.fastmail.com - IMAP accessible web-mail
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

RE: Windows 10 Anniversary and DNG files

[John Coyle]

Thanks Bill - avoided a slow codec by downloading the Anniversary Update on my 
desktop and my
Surface tablet, they both now show DNG files, so I'm good.


John in Brisbane



-Original Message-
From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Bill
Sent: Monday, 26 September 2016 2:38 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List 
Subject: Re: Windows 10 Anniversary and DNG files

On 9/25/2016 6:27 PM, John Coyle wrote:
> Interesting - my W10 desktop, having had the free upgrade and all 
> updates since, does not display a thumbnail for the only new DNG file 
> I have, from the K5II.  W10.2, just installed on an old laptop with an SSD 
> upgrade, does.

There is a codec available from Adobe that will make DNGs viewable as 
thumbnails. It's slow as a
dead beagle though.
>
> John in Brisbane
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Henk Terhell
> Sent: Sunday, 25 September 2016 6:06 PM
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List 
> Subject: Windows 10 Anniversary and DNG files
>
> After this week's anniversary update of my Windows 10 installation I 
> now discover that DNG files are thumbnailed in the Windows Explorer and can 
> also be viewed by
Windows Photo Gallery.
> This is much easier than having first to open Lightroom or FS viewer.
> Is this what they call groundbreaking technical progress or did I miss 
> something?
>
> Henk
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.
>
>


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - jigsaw #3 (nsfw)

[Zos Xavius]

That's the kind of of picture that can get you into trouble Bruce. ;)

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 9:25 PM, Bruce Walker  wrote:
> The next in my Body Language series.
>
> http://portfolio.brucemwalker.com/index/IHsDA9atyyg0
>
> 645z, dfa645 90mm/2.8 macro, f:13, 1/125th sec, 100 ISO;
>
> 5' silver PLM with diffuser camera right; white reflector camera left.
>
> Comments always welcome.
>
> --
> -bmw
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

PESO - jigsaw #3 (nsfw)

[Bruce Walker]

The next in my Body Language series.

http://portfolio.brucemwalker.com/index/IHsDA9atyyg0

645z, dfa645 90mm/2.8 macro, f:13, 1/125th sec, 100 ISO;

5' silver PLM with diffuser camera right; white reflector camera left.

Comments always welcome.

-- 
-bmw

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO: genius hippo-something buckt horny sea

[Igor PDML-StR]

Jostein, Mike and Bob:

In Russia, where the photo was taken, buckthron is cultivated in private 
gardens for the berries. I believe the peak of its popularity was in 
1980s. The oil (aka "Oleum Hippophaes") and to some extent the juice are 
used for very broad medicinal purposes, primarily affecting epithelial 
tissues (cold, selected GI and GYN problems, skin, eyes, ...) so broad 
that one starts wondering if in part it is a placebo effect. :-)


But making that juice or oil takes quite some effort. And it has one of 
the most stable natural "dyes": it takes days to get that orange color

off your hands.

The berries are also used for liquors (I've seen only home-made ones) 
and jams. A few year ago, I bought a jar of Russian-made buckthorn jam at 
an international food store in the US.


Brian and Alan:

Yes, DOF is a good point.
I didn't have much time while taking the photo for stacking. 
But I should've thought about the DOF, as I had room to dial down the 
aperture (it was at f/5.6).



Thanks to all who looked and responded!

Cheers,

Igor


 Brian Walters Mon, 26 Sep 2016 14:53:00 -0700 wrote:


You had me going there for a while - missed the PS initially :-)

Nice contrasting colours there. I agree with alan about DOF.

Cheers

Brian





 Jostein Mon, 26 Sep 2016 13:00:30 -0700 wrote:

The Norwegian name is Tindved. Alledgedly because the particularly hard
wood (ved=wood) was well suited for teeth (tind) in rakes.

The berries are still (locally) popular for flavouring home made liqours
and jams.

Jostein

Den 26.09.2016 21.45, skrev mike wilson:

Major source of vitamin C for our stone age ancestors, apparently.


On 26 September 2016 at 19:54 Bob W-PDML  wrote:


We get a fair bit of that stuff growing alongside the Thames in winter. Keeps
the birds fed.


On 26 Sep 2016, at 18:28, Igor PDML-StR  wrote:


[sic!] ;-)

http://42graphy.org/galleries/2016-08-flowers/_IR34688.html

All comments, critique, suggestions are welcome.
Every several years, I am attempting to photograph this subject, 

always
having difficulties, despite (or may be due to?) the bright and 

contrast

colors. I am still to get the one I am fully satisfied with.

Igor












PS. Sea buckthorn, genus Hippophae. ;-)


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - "We live not to be there, but to be seen to be there."

[Jack Davis]

Hear, Hear!
J

Sent from my iPhone

> On Sep 26, 2016, at 2:41 PM, Brian Walters  wrote:
> 
> Well, I find it odd behaviour - but I'm an old grump, anyway.
> 
> But they're not hurting anyone so, if it makes them happy, let them get
> on with it.
> 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Brian
> 
> ++
> Brian Walters
> Western Sydney Australia
> http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/
> 
>> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016, at 12:08 AM, Igor PDML-StR wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> This morning someone sent me a link to a brief blogpost on Cnet, which 
>> got me (re)evaluating - (re)thinking certain aspects of photography in 
>> our lives. The photo was of a crowd in front of a famous politician
>> waving 
>> at them, while most people turned their backs and taking selfies of 
>> themselves with the famous people being the background.
>>  (The link is below, but first the thoughts.)
>> 
>> Over many years of taking photographs, sometimes as tourist (i.e. in very 
>> touristic places, etc.), - I've been offered by others (friends, 
>> relatives, bystanders) to take a picture of _me_. ... or rather of 
>> _me__being__there_.
>> Not that I was against those (and sometimes I did want some picture, 
>> especially with friends or family), but I was not particularly ego to get 
>> those. I wanted to take some interesting (at least to me) of the views 
>> from that place.
>> One of the repeated questions/comments I had (usually not from close 
>> friends or relatives who already knew what I am after, but from more 
>> distant friends): "Why do you need those? - See there, they sell cards 
>> with this view already printed."
>> 
>> Why was/am I taking those photos?
>> 1. I enjoy _taking_ them and
>> 2. I enjoy looking at them later, as they remind me of good time I had 
>> there. And often, aftre many years, I remember the photos I've taken even 
>> without looking at them: they are a connection for that place, person, 
>> event. ... even though I might not be in those pictures myself.
>> (As an aside, - I appreciate the fact of being in some of those photos 
>> more now, as my daughter is growing up, - so, that she can see her dad in 
>> those photos too.)
>> 
>> Now, getting back to the conclusion quoted in the Subject of this
>> message.
>> Yes, selfie is the fad du jour [is that tautology?].
>> To this date, most of the selfies I've taken are with my SLR (with a 
>> tripod or a mirror help). But I don't want to judge those people who 
>> enjoy selfies: to each of his/her own. And to some extent, those people 
>> aren't that much different from those stranger on the street who are ego 
>> to pose for you even though they are never going to see that photo. (This 
>> was a very frequent situation with kid groups in Japan.)
>> 
>> 
>> My understanding of the said blogpost is that someone is trying to 
>> question of how polite it is to take a selfie with a famous person (and 
>> hence turning one's behind to her/him) as opposed to piercing 
>> with your eyes and listening.
>> 
>> That brought to memories yet another story. Long time ago, one 
>> famous Russian poet wrote a song that was "thinking" about a family 
>> being photographed in front of the monument to the famous Russian 
>> poet Alexandr Pushkin. The idea was based on the juxtaposition of the 
>> timelessness and greatness of someone whose fame survived the test of 
>> centuries, and "todayliness" of the concerns and that-minute problems of 
>> that family. I remember that a friend was thinking that the author was 
>> criticizing the family, and that that type of photo was awkward or even 
>> ridiculous due to the contrast. While I understand that point of view 
>> (and I personally do not like taking photographs of people (and myself) 
>> specifically with someone's _personal_ monument), I never felt 
>> comfortable with that criticism. And I've always thought that the song's 
>> author was just bringing up the contrast as a way to highlight the 
>> simultaneous distance and closeness of the great and small, old and 
>> contemporary, timeless and transient.
>> 
>> But back to today's photo, here is what I am curious to hear from you, 
>> deal PDMLers:
>> As photographers with different preferences, views and reasons to take 
>> photographs, what do you think about what is shown in the photograph 
>> discussed in that blogpost?
>> (Please, let's not digress into a political debate about the specific 
>> politician, so, let's keep the political comments on mute.)
>> 
>> Here is the blogpost in question: https://goo.gl/VC5fU3 .
>> 
>> Thanks in advance to all who will respond.
>> 
>> Igor
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> PDML@pdml.net
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
>> follow the directions.
> 
> 
> -- 
> --
> 
> -- 
> http://www.fastmail.com - Accessible with your email software
>  or over the web
> 
> 
> -- 
> 

Re: Peso-Forgotten Barn

[Jack Davis]

Thanks much, Gonz!
I may try a sunset version.

J

Sent from my iPhone

> On Sep 26, 2016, at 3:03 PM, Gonz  wrote:
> 
> Beautiful, nicely composed.  I agree with Brian that "golden hour"
> version would be amazeballs.
> 
> 
>> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Brian Walters  
>> wrote:
>> What a wonderful old barn - I like decrepit objects!
>> 
>> That's pretty good but I think it would be spectacular in late
>> afternoon.
>> 
>> 
>> Cheers
>> 
>> Brian
>> 
>> ++
>> Brian Walters
>> Western Sydney Australia
>> http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Sun, Sep 25, 2016, at 03:40 AM, Jack Davis wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> This AM on the "other" side of the Buttes.
>>> 
>>> Comments welcome!
>>> 
>>> J
>> 
>> --
>> --
>> 
>> --
>> http://www.fastmail.com - Send your email first class
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> PDML@pdml.net
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
>> follow the directions.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> -- Reduce your Government Footprint
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Peso-Forgotten Barn

[Jack Davis]

Thanks, Brian!
I'm sure you're right and conveniently, this barn is on the west
side of the buttes. H(?)

J



Sent from my iPhone

> On Sep 26, 2016, at 2:59 PM, Brian Walters  wrote:
> 
> What a wonderful old barn - I like decrepit objects!
> 
> That's pretty good but I think it would be spectacular in late
> afternoon.
> 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Brian
> 
> ++
> Brian Walters
> Western Sydney Australia
> http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/
> 
> 
> 
>> On Sun, Sep 25, 2016, at 03:40 AM, Jack Davis wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> This AM on the "other" side of the Buttes.
>> 
>> Comments welcome!
>> 
>> J
>> 
> 
> -- 
> --
> 
> -- 
> http://www.fastmail.com - Send your email first class
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - Three

[Brian Walters]

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016, at 09:23 AM, Marco Alpert wrote:
> http://www.alpert.com/marco/photo16/peso18.html
> 
> Comments, as always, welcomed.


You've captured some very interesting facial expressions there.  I'd
like to know what Matt is thinking!

I enjoyed that.


Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/



-- 
--

-- 
http://www.fastmail.com - Does exactly what it says on the tin


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Peso-Forgotten Barn

[Gonz]

Beautiful, nicely composed.  I agree with Brian that "golden hour"
version would be amazeballs.


On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Brian Walters  wrote:
> What a wonderful old barn - I like decrepit objects!
>
> That's pretty good but I think it would be spectacular in late
> afternoon.
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Brian
>
> ++
> Brian Walters
> Western Sydney Australia
> http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/
>
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 25, 2016, at 03:40 AM, Jack Davis wrote:
>>
>>
>> This AM on the "other" side of the Buttes.
>>
>> Comments welcome!
>>
>> J
>>
>
> --
> --
>
> --
> http://www.fastmail.com - Send your email first class
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.



-- 
-- Reduce your Government Footprint

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Peso-Forgotten Barn

[Brian Walters]

What a wonderful old barn - I like decrepit objects!

That's pretty good but I think it would be spectacular in late
afternoon.


Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/



On Sun, Sep 25, 2016, at 03:40 AM, Jack Davis wrote:
> 
> 
> This AM on the "other" side of the Buttes.
> 
> Comments welcome!
> 
> J
> 

-- 
--

-- 
http://www.fastmail.com - Send your email first class


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - "We live not to be there, but to be seen to be there."

[Bob W-PDML]

What they need is a professional selfie consultant to advise them, compose the 
picture, arrange the lighting, perhaps a touch of makeup, and maybe push the 
button at just the right moment. That would improve selfies enormously.

Oh, and rather than that dull-looking woman in the pant suit, have someone in 
the background who's orange with candy floss on their head.

B

> On 26 Sep 2016, at 22:48, Daniel J. Matyola  wrote:
> 
> The image is humorous, interesting but quite sad.
> 
> A curse on selfies and all who take them!
> 
> 
> Dan Matyola
> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola
> 
>> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 10:08 AM, Igor PDML-StR  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> This morning someone sent me a link to a brief blogpost on Cnet, which got
>> me (re)evaluating - (re)thinking certain aspects of photography in our
>> lives. The photo was of a crowd in front of a famous politician waving at
>> them, while most people turned their backs and taking selfies of themselves
>> with the famous people being the background.
>> (The link is below, but first the thoughts.)
>> 
>> Over many years of taking photographs, sometimes as tourist (i.e. in very
>> touristic places, etc.), - I've been offered by others (friends, relatives,
>> bystanders) to take a picture of _me_. ... or rather of _me__being__there_.
>> Not that I was against those (and sometimes I did want some picture,
>> especially with friends or family), but I was not particularly ego to get
>> those. I wanted to take some interesting (at least to me) of the views from
>> that place.
>> One of the repeated questions/comments I had (usually not from close
>> friends or relatives who already knew what I am after, but from more
>> distant friends): "Why do you need those? - See there, they sell cards with
>> this view already printed."
>> 
>> Why was/am I taking those photos?
>> 1. I enjoy _taking_ them and
>> 2. I enjoy looking at them later, as they remind me of good time I had
>> there. And often, aftre many years, I remember the photos I've taken even
>> without looking at them: they are a connection for that place, person,
>> event. ... even though I might not be in those pictures myself.
>> (As an aside, - I appreciate the fact of being in some of those photos
>> more now, as my daughter is growing up, - so, that she can see her dad in
>> those photos too.)
>> 
>> Now, getting back to the conclusion quoted in the Subject of this message.
>> Yes, selfie is the fad du jour [is that tautology?].
>> To this date, most of the selfies I've taken are with my SLR (with a
>> tripod or a mirror help). But I don't want to judge those people who enjoy
>> selfies: to each of his/her own. And to some extent, those people aren't
>> that much different from those stranger on the street who are ego to pose
>> for you even though they are never going to see that photo. (This was a
>> very frequent situation with kid groups in Japan.)
>> 
>> 
>> My understanding of the said blogpost is that someone is trying to
>> question of how polite it is to take a selfie with a famous person (and
>> hence turning one's behind to her/him) as opposed to piercing with your
>> eyes and listening.
>> 
>> That brought to memories yet another story. Long time ago, one famous
>> Russian poet wrote a song that was "thinking" about a family being
>> photographed in front of the monument to the famous Russian poet Alexandr
>> Pushkin. The idea was based on the juxtaposition of the timelessness and
>> greatness of someone whose fame survived the test of centuries, and
>> "todayliness" of the concerns and that-minute problems of that family. I
>> remember that a friend was thinking that the author was criticizing the
>> family, and that that type of photo was awkward or even ridiculous due to
>> the contrast. While I understand that point of view (and I personally do
>> not like taking photographs of people (and myself) specifically with
>> someone's _personal_ monument), I never felt comfortable with that
>> criticism. And I've always thought that the song's author was just bringing
>> up the contrast as a way to highlight the simultaneous distance and
>> closeness of the great and small, old and contemporary, timeless and
>> transient.
>> 
>> But back to today's photo, here is what I am curious to hear from you,
>> deal PDMLers:
>> As photographers with different preferences, views and reasons to take
>> photographs, what do you think about what is shown in the photograph
>> discussed in that blogpost?
>> (Please, let's not digress into a political debate about the specific
>> politician, so, let's keep the political comments on mute.)
>> 
>> Here is the blogpost in question: https://goo.gl/VC5fU3 .
>> 
>> Thanks in advance to all who will respond.
>> 
>> Igor
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> PDML@pdml.net
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
>> 

Re: PESO: genius hippo-something buckt horny sea

[Brian Walters]

You had me going there for a while - missed the PS initially :-)

Nice contrasting colours there. I agree with alan about DOF.



Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/


On Tue, Sep 27, 2016, at 03:27 AM, Igor PDML-StR wrote:
> 
> [sic!] ;-)
> 
> http://42graphy.org/galleries/2016-08-flowers/_IR34688.html
> 
> All comments, critique, suggestions are welcome.
> Every several years, I am attempting to photograph this subject, always 
> having difficulties, despite (or may be due to?) the bright and contrast 
> colors. I am still to get the one I am fully satisfied with.
> 
> Igor
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PS. Sea buckthorn, genus Hippophae. ;-)
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
> follow the directions.


-- 
--

-- 
http://www.fastmail.com - Choose from over 50 domains or use your own


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - "We live not to be there, but to be seen to be there."

[Daniel J. Matyola]

The image is humorous, interesting but quite sad.

A curse on selfies and all who take them!


Dan Matyola
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 10:08 AM, Igor PDML-StR  wrote:

>
>
> This morning someone sent me a link to a brief blogpost on Cnet, which got
> me (re)evaluating - (re)thinking certain aspects of photography in our
> lives. The photo was of a crowd in front of a famous politician waving at
> them, while most people turned their backs and taking selfies of themselves
> with the famous people being the background.
>  (The link is below, but first the thoughts.)
>
> Over many years of taking photographs, sometimes as tourist (i.e. in very
> touristic places, etc.), - I've been offered by others (friends, relatives,
> bystanders) to take a picture of _me_. ... or rather of _me__being__there_.
> Not that I was against those (and sometimes I did want some picture,
> especially with friends or family), but I was not particularly ego to get
> those. I wanted to take some interesting (at least to me) of the views from
> that place.
> One of the repeated questions/comments I had (usually not from close
> friends or relatives who already knew what I am after, but from more
> distant friends): "Why do you need those? - See there, they sell cards with
> this view already printed."
>
> Why was/am I taking those photos?
> 1. I enjoy _taking_ them and
> 2. I enjoy looking at them later, as they remind me of good time I had
> there. And often, aftre many years, I remember the photos I've taken even
> without looking at them: they are a connection for that place, person,
> event. ... even though I might not be in those pictures myself.
> (As an aside, - I appreciate the fact of being in some of those photos
> more now, as my daughter is growing up, - so, that she can see her dad in
> those photos too.)
>
> Now, getting back to the conclusion quoted in the Subject of this message.
> Yes, selfie is the fad du jour [is that tautology?].
> To this date, most of the selfies I've taken are with my SLR (with a
> tripod or a mirror help). But I don't want to judge those people who enjoy
> selfies: to each of his/her own. And to some extent, those people aren't
> that much different from those stranger on the street who are ego to pose
> for you even though they are never going to see that photo. (This was a
> very frequent situation with kid groups in Japan.)
>
>
> My understanding of the said blogpost is that someone is trying to
> question of how polite it is to take a selfie with a famous person (and
> hence turning one's behind to her/him) as opposed to piercing with your
> eyes and listening.
>
> That brought to memories yet another story. Long time ago, one famous
> Russian poet wrote a song that was "thinking" about a family being
> photographed in front of the monument to the famous Russian poet Alexandr
> Pushkin. The idea was based on the juxtaposition of the timelessness and
> greatness of someone whose fame survived the test of centuries, and
> "todayliness" of the concerns and that-minute problems of that family. I
> remember that a friend was thinking that the author was criticizing the
> family, and that that type of photo was awkward or even ridiculous due to
> the contrast. While I understand that point of view (and I personally do
> not like taking photographs of people (and myself) specifically with
> someone's _personal_ monument), I never felt comfortable with that
> criticism. And I've always thought that the song's author was just bringing
> up the contrast as a way to highlight the simultaneous distance and
> closeness of the great and small, old and contemporary, timeless and
> transient.
>
> But back to today's photo, here is what I am curious to hear from you,
> deal PDMLers:
> As photographers with different preferences, views and reasons to take
> photographs, what do you think about what is shown in the photograph
> discussed in that blogpost?
> (Please, let's not digress into a political debate about the specific
> politician, so, let's keep the political comments on mute.)
>
> Here is the blogpost in question: https://goo.gl/VC5fU3 .
>
> Thanks in advance to all who will respond.
>
> Igor
>
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
> follow the directions.
>
-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

PESO - The Nonchalent Wombat

[Brian Walters]

I like wombats.

They're big enough and strong enough to not have to worry about
predators but they're also amiable creatures - they just go about their
business and are not often too concerned about what's happening around
them.  

This one was happily munching grass at the side of a road and completely
ignored me as I snapped a few portraits from a couple of metres away.

http://lyons-ryan.org/PESO/slides/_IGP7593-K5-1b-peso.html
 
C & C welcome.


Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/


-- 
--

-- 
http://www.fastmail.com - IMAP accessible web-mail


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - "We live not to be there, but to be seen to be there."

[Brian Walters]

Well, I find it odd behaviour - but I'm an old grump, anyway.

But they're not hurting anyone so, if it makes them happy, let them get
on with it.


Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016, at 12:08 AM, Igor PDML-StR wrote:
> 
> 
> This morning someone sent me a link to a brief blogpost on Cnet, which 
> got me (re)evaluating - (re)thinking certain aspects of photography in 
> our lives. The photo was of a crowd in front of a famous politician
> waving 
> at them, while most people turned their backs and taking selfies of 
> themselves with the famous people being the background.
>   (The link is below, but first the thoughts.)
> 
> Over many years of taking photographs, sometimes as tourist (i.e. in very 
> touristic places, etc.), - I've been offered by others (friends, 
> relatives, bystanders) to take a picture of _me_. ... or rather of 
> _me__being__there_.
> Not that I was against those (and sometimes I did want some picture, 
> especially with friends or family), but I was not particularly ego to get 
> those. I wanted to take some interesting (at least to me) of the views 
> from that place.
> One of the repeated questions/comments I had (usually not from close 
> friends or relatives who already knew what I am after, but from more 
> distant friends): "Why do you need those? - See there, they sell cards 
> with this view already printed."
> 
> Why was/am I taking those photos?
> 1. I enjoy _taking_ them and
> 2. I enjoy looking at them later, as they remind me of good time I had 
> there. And often, aftre many years, I remember the photos I've taken even 
> without looking at them: they are a connection for that place, person, 
> event. ... even though I might not be in those pictures myself.
> (As an aside, - I appreciate the fact of being in some of those photos 
> more now, as my daughter is growing up, - so, that she can see her dad in 
> those photos too.)
> 
> Now, getting back to the conclusion quoted in the Subject of this
> message.
> Yes, selfie is the fad du jour [is that tautology?].
> To this date, most of the selfies I've taken are with my SLR (with a 
> tripod or a mirror help). But I don't want to judge those people who 
> enjoy selfies: to each of his/her own. And to some extent, those people 
> aren't that much different from those stranger on the street who are ego 
> to pose for you even though they are never going to see that photo. (This 
> was a very frequent situation with kid groups in Japan.)
> 
> 
> My understanding of the said blogpost is that someone is trying to 
> question of how polite it is to take a selfie with a famous person (and 
> hence turning one's behind to her/him) as opposed to piercing 
> with your eyes and listening.
> 
> That brought to memories yet another story. Long time ago, one 
> famous Russian poet wrote a song that was "thinking" about a family 
> being photographed in front of the monument to the famous Russian 
> poet Alexandr Pushkin. The idea was based on the juxtaposition of the 
> timelessness and greatness of someone whose fame survived the test of 
> centuries, and "todayliness" of the concerns and that-minute problems of 
> that family. I remember that a friend was thinking that the author was 
> criticizing the family, and that that type of photo was awkward or even 
> ridiculous due to the contrast. While I understand that point of view 
> (and I personally do not like taking photographs of people (and myself) 
> specifically with someone's _personal_ monument), I never felt 
> comfortable with that criticism. And I've always thought that the song's 
> author was just bringing up the contrast as a way to highlight the 
> simultaneous distance and closeness of the great and small, old and 
> contemporary, timeless and transient.
> 
> But back to today's photo, here is what I am curious to hear from you, 
> deal PDMLers:
> As photographers with different preferences, views and reasons to take 
> photographs, what do you think about what is shown in the photograph 
> discussed in that blogpost?
> (Please, let's not digress into a political debate about the specific 
> politician, so, let's keep the political comments on mute.)
> 
> Here is the blogpost in question: https://goo.gl/VC5fU3 .
> 
> Thanks in advance to all who will respond.
> 
> Igor
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
> follow the directions.


-- 
--

-- 
http://www.fastmail.com - Accessible with your email software
  or over the web


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT: Ring lights?

[P.J. Alling]

Aside from the Pentax AF160FC which I think is discontinued, the only 
ring flash that I know of that is compatible with Pentax Digital is a 
Sigma, the EM 140 I think.  If you're willing to put up with the power 
limitations of LED ring lights then all of them are compatible, as they 
don't require any special connections for P-TTL to work.


On 9/26/2016 4:38 PM, Doug Brewer wrote:
I am interested, for unknown reasons, to use a ring light for portrait 
work on certain subjects, so I'm appealing to the group mind for 
recommendations for ring lights that work with Pentax cameras.


If you have one an want to get rid of it, talk to me. Or, if you have 
one and don't want to get rid of it, tell me what brand it is and let 
me research.


Thanks much.




--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve 
immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO: A bit of fun

[Gonz]

Very cool.  I can just picture it breathing fire.


On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Alan C  wrote:
> A giant wall lizard, Megasaurus ferrous, about a metre long.
>
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/wisselstroom/29317505873/
>
> K7 with the DA 18-55 WR at sunset.
>
> Alan C
>
>
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
> follow the directions.



-- 
-- Reduce your Government Footprint

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - "We live not to be there, but to be seen to be there."

[Ken Waller]

Especially sad since Andy Warhol predicted we'd all get 15 minutes.


They apparently don't have time for 15 minutes.

Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller

- Original Message - 
From: "John" 

Subject: Re: OT - "We live not to be there, but to be seen to be there."



On 9/26/2016 2:53 PM, Ken Waller wrote:

Igor posed the question -

...what do you think about what is shown in the photograph discussed
in that blogpost?



I think what is shown is the superficial nature of those taking the
'selfie' and the almost total immersion into social media of many of
today's populace.
It also reminds me of the quest for 5 minutes of fame.

Sad, IMO.

Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller



Especially sad since Andy Warhol predicted we'd all get 15 minutes.

--
Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
Religion - Answers we must never question.



--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

OT: Ring lights?

[Doug Brewer]

I am interested, for unknown reasons, to use a ring light for portrait 
work on certain subjects, so I'm appealing to the group mind for 
recommendations for ring lights that work with Pentax cameras.


If you have one an want to get rid of it, talk to me. Or, if you have 
one and don't want to get rid of it, tell me what brand it is and let me 
research.


Thanks much.

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - Three

[ann sanfedele]

love the expressions on the sharp folk, the balance of forms, and the 
reflection of the blurry' guy's hand in Matt's... also, the blurry guy's 
gesture fits with him being off focus..


like it, obviously :-)

ann



On 9/25/2016 7:23 PM, Marco Alpert wrote:

http://www.alpert.com/marco/photo16/peso18.html

Comments, as always, welcomed.

-Marco

---
http://www.alpert.com/marco





--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - "We live not to be there, but to be seen to be there."

[Gonz]

That is correct!


On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 3:13 PM, John  wrote:
> Y'all is the singular. The plural is "all y'all".
>
> On 9/26/2016 12:39 PM, Gonz wrote:
>>
>> And he's misspelling it too.  Its y'all, y'all.  hehe
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Gonz  wrote:
>>>
>>> That is hilarious! And I chide Peter Ng for misappropriating Texan
>>> culture by the use of ya'll.  ;)
>>>
>>>
>
>
> --
> Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
> Religion - Answers we must never question.
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
> follow the directions.



-- 
-- Reduce your Government Footprint

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - "We live not to be there, but to be seen to be there."

[John]

On 9/26/2016 2:53 PM, Ken Waller wrote:

Igor posed the question -

...what do you think about what is shown in the photograph discussed
in that blogpost?



I think what is shown is the superficial nature of those taking the
'selfie' and the almost total immersion into social media of many of
today's populace.
It also reminds me of the quest for 5 minutes of fame.

Sad, IMO.

Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller



Especially sad since Andy Warhol predicted we'd all get 15 minutes.

--
Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
Religion - Answers we must never question.

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - "We live not to be there, but to be seen to be there."

[John]

Y'all is the singular. The plural is "all y'all".

On 9/26/2016 12:39 PM, Gonz wrote:

And he's misspelling it too.  Its y'all, y'all.  hehe


On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Gonz  wrote:

That is hilarious! And I chide Peter Ng for misappropriating Texan
culture by the use of ya'll.  ;)





--
Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
Religion - Answers we must never question.

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO: genius hippo-something buckt horny sea

[Jostein]

The Norwegian name is Tindved. Alledgedly because the particularly hard 
wood (ved=wood) was well suited for teeth (tind) in rakes.


The berries are still (locally) popular for flavouring home made liqours 
and jams.


Jostein

Den 26.09.2016 21.45, skrev mike wilson:

Major source of vitamin C for our stone age ancestors, apparently.


On 26 September 2016 at 19:54 Bob W-PDML  wrote:


We get a fair bit of that stuff growing alongside the Thames in winter. Keeps
the birds fed.


On 26 Sep 2016, at 18:28, Igor PDML-StR  wrote:


[sic!] ;-)

http://42graphy.org/galleries/2016-08-flowers/_IR34688.html

All comments, critique, suggestions are welcome.
Every several years, I am attempting to photograph this subject, always
having difficulties, despite (or may be due to?) the bright and contrast
colors. I am still to get the one I am fully satisfied with.

Igor












PS. Sea buckthorn, genus Hippophae. ;-)

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
follow the directions.


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.




--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO: genius hippo-something buckt horny sea

[mike wilson]

Major source of vitamin C for our stone age ancestors, apparently.

> On 26 September 2016 at 19:54 Bob W-PDML  wrote:
> 
> 
> We get a fair bit of that stuff growing alongside the Thames in winter. Keeps
> the birds fed.
> 
> > On 26 Sep 2016, at 18:28, Igor PDML-StR  wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > [sic!] ;-)
> > 
> > http://42graphy.org/galleries/2016-08-flowers/_IR34688.html
> > 
> > All comments, critique, suggestions are welcome.
> > Every several years, I am attempting to photograph this subject, always
> > having difficulties, despite (or may be due to?) the bright and contrast
> > colors. I am still to get the one I am fully satisfied with.
> > 
> > Igor
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > PS. Sea buckthorn, genus Hippophae. ;-)
> > 
> > -- 
> > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> > PDML@pdml.net
> > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
> > follow the directions.
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
> the directions.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Q: How to force LR to refresh thumbnails?

[Igor PDML-StR]

Jostein,


Yes, I think the combination of the sheer number of the photos and the RAM 
is likely the culprit.

I've seen this with fewer images as well.
When I have just a few photos (screen-full, i.e. screen-wide which is 
~25), they do update if I wait long enough. With 900, only those that are 
visible seem to update. So, I can move them 25 at a time (which is only 
about 36 times), waiting in between...


I was just looking for a more practical way, in case I am missing one.

BTW, a similar "delayed-until-in-view" behavior is observed with the 
previews in the "matrix view", although those seem to update somewhat 
quicker...


Thanks,

Igor

PS. What I am trying to do is to cull a smaller set first by a very rough

 Jostein Mon, 26 Sep 2016 12:27:07 -0700 wrote:

Just tried in LR 5.7.1. The way you describe, but with fewer images. The 
thumbnails updates, but in a seemingly random order. Looks like it takes a 
while too; maybe a second per thumbnail.



900 images is quite a number. Have you checked to see what happens if you 
do eg. five? Could be that you're running out of RAM or patience...



Jostein

Den 26.09.2016 16.25, skrev Igor PDML-StR:
 >


I wonder if someone knows an effective way of forcing LR to update/refresh 
the thumbnail previews at the bottom?


I've got a shoot of a large number of photos (900), all taken in basically 
identical setting, and all them had the same problem: they were all similarly 
underexposed by some 1.5-2 stops.
So, the easy starting point after loading them all in LR was to adjust the 
exposure for one of the photos, and then "Sync" with all others. This would 
allow me to make a quick pre-selection (in the Library module) of the photos 
that are worth taking a further look.


What is annoying is that the thumbnails at the bottom remain dark.
I did "Update DNG previews and metadata". Even once it is done, the 
thumbnails are not updated.
The only thumbnails that are getting updated are those that are withing the 
"viewable" range. So, I am moving that line manually slowly to let them all 
update eventually.


Is there a way to force LR refreshing those thumbnails (short of re-importing 
those photos)?


Thank you,

Igor




--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - "We live not to be there, but to be seen to be there."

[P.J. Alling]

Could you say that again, I didn't quite Ketch that...

On 9/26/2016 1:13 PM, Igor PDML-StR wrote:



It's y'all's y'all, y'all! ;-)


 Gonz Mon, 26 Sep 2016 09:40:32 -0700 wrote:

And he's misspelling it too.  Its y'all, y'all.  hehe


On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Gonz  wrote:

That is hilarious! And I chide Peter Ng for misappropriating Texan
culture by the use of ya'll.  ;)





--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve 
immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Q: How to force LR to refresh thumbnails?

[Jostein]

Just tried in LR 5.7.1. The way you describe, but with fewer images. The 
thumbnails updates, but in a seemingly random order. Looks like it takes 
a while too; maybe a second per thumbnail.


900 images is quite a number. Have you checked to see what happens if 
you do eg. five? Could be that you're running out of RAM or patience...


Jostein

Den 26.09.2016 16.25, skrev Igor PDML-StR:



I wonder if someone knows an effective way of forcing LR to
update/refresh the thumbnail previews at the bottom?

I've got a shoot of a large number of photos (900), all taken in
basically identical setting, and all them had the same problem: they
were all similarly underexposed by some 1.5-2 stops.
So, the easy starting point after loading them all in LR was to adjust
the exposure for one of the photos, and then "Sync" with all others.
This would allow me to make a quick pre-selection (in the Library
module) of the photos that are worth taking a further look.

What is annoying is that the thumbnails at the bottom remain dark.
I did "Update DNG previews and metadata". Even once it is done, the
thumbnails are not updated.
The only thumbnails that are getting updated are those that are withing
the "viewable" range. So, I am moving that line manually slowly to let
them all update eventually.

Is there a way to force LR refreshing those thumbnails (short of
re-importing those photos)?

Thank you,

Igor




--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - "We live not to be there, but to be seen to be there."

[Jack Davis]

It is sad, I agreebut one MUST keep up or suffer the indignity of
a technology deficit and social
isolation. 
Poor devils!
J

Sent from my iPhone

> On Sep 26, 2016, at 11:53 AM, Ken Waller  wrote:
> 
> Igor posed the question -
>> ...what do you think about what is shown in the photograph discussed in that 
>> blogpost?
> 
> 
> I think what is shown is the superficial nature of those taking the 'selfie' 
> and the almost total immersion into social media of many of today's populace.
> It also reminds me of the quest for 5 minutes of fame.
> 
> Sad, IMO.
> 
> Kenneth Waller
> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
> 
> - Original Message - From: "Igor PDML-StR" 
> Subject: OT - "We live not to be there, but to be seen to be there."
> 
> 
>> 
>> 
>> This morning someone sent me a link to a brief blogpost on Cnet, which got 
>> me (re)evaluating - (re)thinking certain aspects of photography in our 
>> lives. The photo was of a crowd in front of a famous politician waving at 
>> them, while most people turned their backs and taking selfies of themselves 
>> with the famous people being the background.
>> (The link is below, but first the thoughts.)
>> 
>> Over many years of taking photographs, sometimes as tourist (i.e. in very 
>> touristic places, etc.), - I've been offered by others (friends, relatives, 
>> bystanders) to take a picture of _me_. ... or rather of _me__being__there_.
>> Not that I was against those (and sometimes I did want some picture, 
>> especially with friends or family), but I was not particularly ego to get 
>> those. I wanted to take some interesting (at least to me) of the views from 
>> that place.
>> One of the repeated questions/comments I had (usually not from close friends 
>> or relatives who already knew what I am after, but from more distant 
>> friends): "Why do you need those? - See there, they sell cards with this 
>> view already printed."
>> 
>> Why was/am I taking those photos?
>> 1. I enjoy _taking_ them and
>> 2. I enjoy looking at them later, as they remind me of good time I had 
>> there. And often, aftre many years, I remember the photos I've taken even 
>> without looking at them: they are a connection for that place, person, 
>> event. ... even though I might not be in those pictures myself.
>> (As an aside, - I appreciate the fact of being in some of those photos more 
>> now, as my daughter is growing up, - so, that she can see her dad in those 
>> photos too.)
>> 
>> Now, getting back to the conclusion quoted in the Subject of this message.
>> Yes, selfie is the fad du jour [is that tautology?].
>> To this date, most of the selfies I've taken are with my SLR (with a tripod 
>> or a mirror help). But I don't want to judge those people who enjoy selfies: 
>> to each of his/her own. And to some extent, those people aren't that much 
>> different from those stranger on the street who are ego to pose for you even 
>> though they are never going to see that photo. (This was a very frequent 
>> situation with kid groups in Japan.)
>> 
>> 
>> My understanding of the said blogpost is that someone is trying to question 
>> of how polite it is to take a selfie with a famous person (and hence turning 
>> one's behind to her/him) as opposed to piercing with your eyes and listening.
>> 
>> That brought to memories yet another story. Long time ago, one famous 
>> Russian poet wrote a song that was "thinking" about a family being 
>> photographed in front of the monument to the famous Russian poet Alexandr 
>> Pushkin. The idea was based on the juxtaposition of the timelessness and 
>> greatness of someone whose fame survived the test of centuries, and 
>> "todayliness" of the concerns and that-minute problems of that family. I 
>> remember that a friend was thinking that the author was criticizing the 
>> family, and that that type of photo was awkward or even ridiculous due to 
>> the contrast. While I understand that point of view (and I personally do not 
>> like taking photographs of people (and myself) specifically with someone's 
>> _personal_ monument), I never felt comfortable with that criticism. And I've 
>> always thought that the song's author was just bringing up the contrast as a 
>> way to highlight the simultaneous distance and closeness of the great and 
>> small, old and contemporary, timeless and tr
 ansient.
>> 
>> But back to today's photo, here is what I am curious to hear from you, deal 
>> PDMLers:
>> As photographers with different preferences, views and reasons to take 
>> photographs, what do you think about what is shown in the photograph 
>> discussed in that blogpost?
>> (Please, let's not digress into a political debate about the specific 
>> politician, so, let's keep the political comments on mute.)
>> 
>> Here is the blogpost in question: https://goo.gl/VC5fU3 .
>> 
>> Thanks in advance to all who will respond.
>> 
>> Igor
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> 

Re: PESO: genius hippo-something buckt horny sea

[Bob W-PDML]

We get a fair bit of that stuff growing alongside the Thames in winter. Keeps 
the birds fed.

> On 26 Sep 2016, at 18:28, Igor PDML-StR  wrote:
> 
> 
> [sic!] ;-)
> 
> http://42graphy.org/galleries/2016-08-flowers/_IR34688.html
> 
> All comments, critique, suggestions are welcome.
> Every several years, I am attempting to photograph this subject, always 
> having difficulties, despite (or may be due to?) the bright and contrast 
> colors. I am still to get the one I am fully satisfied with.
> 
> Igor
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PS. Sea buckthorn, genus Hippophae. ;-)
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - "We live not to be there, but to be seen to be there."

[Ken Waller]

Igor posed the question -
...what do you think about what is shown in the photograph discussed in 
that blogpost?



I think what is shown is the superficial nature of those taking the 'selfie' 
and the almost total immersion into social media of many of today's 
populace.

It also reminds me of the quest for 5 minutes of fame.

Sad, IMO.

Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller

- Original Message - 
From: "Igor PDML-StR" 

Subject: OT - "We live not to be there, but to be seen to be there."





This morning someone sent me a link to a brief blogpost on Cnet, which got 
me (re)evaluating - (re)thinking certain aspects of photography in our 
lives. The photo was of a crowd in front of a famous politician waving at 
them, while most people turned their backs and taking selfies of 
themselves with the famous people being the background.

 (The link is below, but first the thoughts.)

Over many years of taking photographs, sometimes as tourist (i.e. in very 
touristic places, etc.), - I've been offered by others (friends, 
relatives, bystanders) to take a picture of _me_. ... or rather of 
_me__being__there_.
Not that I was against those (and sometimes I did want some picture, 
especially with friends or family), but I was not particularly ego to get 
those. I wanted to take some interesting (at least to me) of the views 
from that place.
One of the repeated questions/comments I had (usually not from close 
friends or relatives who already knew what I am after, but from more 
distant friends): "Why do you need those? - See there, they sell cards 
with this view already printed."


Why was/am I taking those photos?
1. I enjoy _taking_ them and
2. I enjoy looking at them later, as they remind me of good time I had 
there. And often, aftre many years, I remember the photos I've taken even 
without looking at them: they are a connection for that place, person, 
event. ... even though I might not be in those pictures myself.
(As an aside, - I appreciate the fact of being in some of those photos 
more now, as my daughter is growing up, - so, that she can see her dad in 
those photos too.)


Now, getting back to the conclusion quoted in the Subject of this message.
Yes, selfie is the fad du jour [is that tautology?].
To this date, most of the selfies I've taken are with my SLR (with a 
tripod or a mirror help). But I don't want to judge those people who enjoy 
selfies: to each of his/her own. And to some extent, those people aren't 
that much different from those stranger on the street who are ego to pose 
for you even though they are never going to see that photo. (This was a 
very frequent situation with kid groups in Japan.)



My understanding of the said blogpost is that someone is trying to 
question of how polite it is to take a selfie with a famous person (and 
hence turning one's behind to her/him) as opposed to piercing with your 
eyes and listening.


That brought to memories yet another story. Long time ago, one famous 
Russian poet wrote a song that was "thinking" about a family being 
photographed in front of the monument to the famous Russian poet Alexandr 
Pushkin. The idea was based on the juxtaposition of the timelessness and 
greatness of someone whose fame survived the test of centuries, and 
"todayliness" of the concerns and that-minute problems of that family. I 
remember that a friend was thinking that the author was criticizing the 
family, and that that type of photo was awkward or even ridiculous due to 
the contrast. While I understand that point of view (and I personally do 
not like taking photographs of people (and myself) specifically with 
someone's _personal_ monument), I never felt comfortable with that 
criticism. And I've always thought that the song's author was just 
bringing up the contrast as a way to highlight the simultaneous distance 
and closeness of the great and small, old and contemporary, timeless and 
transient.


But back to today's photo, here is what I am curious to hear from you, 
deal PDMLers:
As photographers with different preferences, views and reasons to take 
photographs, what do you think about what is shown in the photograph 
discussed in that blogpost?
(Please, let's not digress into a political debate about the specific 
politician, so, let's keep the political comments on mute.)


Here is the blogpost in question: https://goo.gl/VC5fU3 .

Thanks in advance to all who will respond.

Igor



--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO: genius hippo-something buckt horny sea

[Alan C]

Presumably "Hippophae rhamnoides" (common sea-buckthorn)?

Nothing wrong with the colours - quite striking actually. DOF could be 
improved. Maybe it's time to join Mark & Jostein in the realm of focus 
stacking?


Alan C


-Original Message- 
From: Igor PDML-StR

Sent: Monday, September 26, 2016 7:27 PM
To: PDML@pdml.net
Subject: PESO: genius hippo-something buckt horny sea


[sic!] ;-)

http://42graphy.org/galleries/2016-08-flowers/_IR34688.html

All comments, critique, suggestions are welcome.
Every several years, I am attempting to photograph this subject, always
having difficulties, despite (or may be due to?) the bright and contrast
colors. I am still to get the one I am fully satisfied with.

Igor












PS. Sea buckthorn, genus Hippophae. ;-)

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
follow the directions. 



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Demand letter from Getty for use of image

[Gonz]

That artlawjournal.com website is very cool.  Thanks for that link.


On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 5:57 AM, John  wrote:
> Unless Getty has screwed up again ...
>
> http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-getty-copyright-20160729-snap-story.html
>
> I wrote "again" because it's not the first time Getty has been sued for
> attempting to claim copyright infringement on images they don't own (or
> infringed the copyrights of other people).
>
> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/08/getty-images-sued-again-over-alleged-misuse-of-over-47000-photos/
>
> http://www.reuters.com/article/us-media-copyright-twitter-idUSBRE9AL16F20131122
>
> http://artlawjournal.com/getty-images-sued-deceptive-practices/
>
> In answer to Dan's original question (IANAL, but):
>
> http://artlawjournal.com/tips-responding-getty-images-demand-letter/
>
> And finally, don't forget all the controversy Getty caused on Flickr by
> taking images from Flickr & selling them without necessarily obtaining
> permission from the person who posted them beforehand.
>
> On 9/25/2016 4:43 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
>>
>> Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but: In short, your client is screwed
>> for using an image they simply took off of the internet. As any lawyer
>> (and
>> particularly a lawyer who is a photographer) knows, U.S. Copyright exists
>> at the moment of image creation. Getty uses sophisticated software to
>> search for images being used. They have more resources than your client to
>> keep this going and make their life hell. The truth is that companies like
>> Getty make far more money off of infringement than they do from legal
>> licensing, these days. The only thing (probably) left to negotiate is the
>> AMOUNT of the infringement. If the image was NOT actually registered with
>> the U.S. Copyright office, your liability is less. If your client (or
>> whoever they got the image from) cropped OFF a watermark or copyright
>> area,
>> their liability under law is far higher. The only thing you are doing now
>> is trying to negotiate for the lowest possible settlement without going to
>> court (which would not be in your client's best interests because they
>> would LOSE). They are probably looking at 4 figures.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 1:19 PM, John  wrote:
>>
>>> I agree.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/23/2016 11:25 PM, P.J. Alling wrote:
>>>
 I believe that goes beyond copyright infringement, that's actual fraud.

 On 9/23/2016 11:21 PM, John wrote:

> Getty has a bad habit of claiming public domain images and demanding
> payment for their use.
>
> On 9/23/2016 2:36 PM, Daniel J. Matyola wrote:
>
>> Travel agent client maintains a website and newsletter featuring
>> vacation
>> travel venues.  Client makes every effort to use only public domain
>> images.
>> Client received a letter from Getty Images, claiming a particular
>> image
>> used by client was a rights managed image controlled by Getty.
>>
>> The image in question was no longer on the website,, but still
>> appeared on
>> a FaceBook account.  Client immediately removed it.
>>
>> The Getty letter states that removal of the image will not resolve the
>> matter, and demands a monetary settlement for past usage.
>>
>> Has anyone handled this sort of claim, with Getty or another stock
>> agency?
>> Will they accepts an apology and an agreement to take reasonable
>> steps to
>> prevent future inadvertent infringement in lieu of payment?
>>
>> Dan Matyola
>> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola
>>
>>
>


>>> --
>>> Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
>>> Religion - Answers we must never question.
>>>
>>> --
>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> PDML@pdml.net
>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
>>> follow the directions.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
> Religion - Answers we must never question.
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
> follow the directions.



-- 
-- Reduce your Government Footprint

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

PESO: genius hippo-something buckt horny sea

[Igor PDML-StR]

[sic!] ;-)

http://42graphy.org/galleries/2016-08-flowers/_IR34688.html

All comments, critique, suggestions are welcome.
Every several years, I am attempting to photograph this subject, always 
having difficulties, despite (or may be due to?) the bright and contrast 
colors. I am still to get the one I am fully satisfied with.


Igor












PS. Sea buckthorn, genus Hippophae. ;-)

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - "We live not to be there, but to be seen to be there."

[Igor PDML-StR]

It's y'all's y'all, y'all! ;-)


 Gonz Mon, 26 Sep 2016 09:40:32 -0700 wrote:

And he's misspelling it too.  Its y'all, y'all.  hehe


On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Gonz  wrote:

That is hilarious! And I chide Peter Ng for misappropriating Texan
culture by the use of ya'll.  ;)


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - "We live not to be there, but to be seen to be there."

[Gonz]

And he's misspelling it too.  Its y'all, y'all.  hehe


On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Gonz  wrote:
> That is hilarious! And I chide Peter Ng for misappropriating Texan
> culture by the use of ya'll.  ;)
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 9:08 AM, Igor PDML-StR  wrote:
>>
>>
>> This morning someone sent me a link to a brief blogpost on Cnet, which got
>> me (re)evaluating - (re)thinking certain aspects of photography in our
>> lives. The photo was of a crowd in front of a famous politician waving at
>> them, while most people turned their backs and taking selfies of themselves
>> with the famous people being the background.
>>  (The link is below, but first the thoughts.)
>>
>> Over many years of taking photographs, sometimes as tourist (i.e. in very
>> touristic places, etc.), - I've been offered by others (friends, relatives,
>> bystanders) to take a picture of _me_. ... or rather of _me__being__there_.
>> Not that I was against those (and sometimes I did want some picture,
>> especially with friends or family), but I was not particularly ego to get
>> those. I wanted to take some interesting (at least to me) of the views from
>> that place.
>> One of the repeated questions/comments I had (usually not from close friends
>> or relatives who already knew what I am after, but from more distant
>> friends): "Why do you need those? - See there, they sell cards with this
>> view already printed."
>>
>> Why was/am I taking those photos?
>> 1. I enjoy _taking_ them and
>> 2. I enjoy looking at them later, as they remind me of good time I had
>> there. And often, aftre many years, I remember the photos I've taken even
>> without looking at them: they are a connection for that place, person,
>> event. ... even though I might not be in those pictures myself.
>> (As an aside, - I appreciate the fact of being in some of those photos more
>> now, as my daughter is growing up, - so, that she can see her dad in those
>> photos too.)
>>
>> Now, getting back to the conclusion quoted in the Subject of this message.
>> Yes, selfie is the fad du jour [is that tautology?].
>> To this date, most of the selfies I've taken are with my SLR (with a tripod
>> or a mirror help). But I don't want to judge those people who enjoy selfies:
>> to each of his/her own. And to some extent, those people aren't that much
>> different from those stranger on the street who are ego to pose for you even
>> though they are never going to see that photo. (This was a very frequent
>> situation with kid groups in Japan.)
>>
>>
>> My understanding of the said blogpost is that someone is trying to question
>> of how polite it is to take a selfie with a famous person (and hence turning
>> one's behind to her/him) as opposed to piercing with your eyes and
>> listening.
>>
>> That brought to memories yet another story. Long time ago, one famous
>> Russian poet wrote a song that was "thinking" about a family being
>> photographed in front of the monument to the famous Russian poet Alexandr
>> Pushkin. The idea was based on the juxtaposition of the timelessness and
>> greatness of someone whose fame survived the test of centuries, and
>> "todayliness" of the concerns and that-minute problems of that family. I
>> remember that a friend was thinking that the author was criticizing the
>> family, and that that type of photo was awkward or even ridiculous due to
>> the contrast. While I understand that point of view (and I personally do not
>> like taking photographs of people (and myself) specifically with someone's
>> _personal_ monument), I never felt comfortable with that criticism. And I've
>> always thought that the song's author was just bringing up the contrast as a
>> way to highlight the simultaneous distance and closeness of the great and
>> small, old and contemporary, timeless and transient.
>>
>> But back to today's photo, here is what I am curious to hear from you, deal
>> PDMLers:
>> As photographers with different preferences, views and reasons to take
>> photographs, what do you think about what is shown in the photograph
>> discussed in that blogpost?
>> (Please, let's not digress into a political debate about the specific
>> politician, so, let's keep the political comments on mute.)
>>
>> Here is the blogpost in question: https://goo.gl/VC5fU3 .
>>
>> Thanks in advance to all who will respond.
>>
>> Igor
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> PDML@pdml.net
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
>> follow the directions.
>
>
>
> --
> -- Reduce your Government Footprint



-- 
-- Reduce your Government Footprint

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - "We live not to be there, but to be seen to be there."

[Gonz]

That is hilarious! And I chide Peter Ng for misappropriating Texan
culture by the use of ya'll.  ;)


On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 9:08 AM, Igor PDML-StR  wrote:
>
>
> This morning someone sent me a link to a brief blogpost on Cnet, which got
> me (re)evaluating - (re)thinking certain aspects of photography in our
> lives. The photo was of a crowd in front of a famous politician waving at
> them, while most people turned their backs and taking selfies of themselves
> with the famous people being the background.
>  (The link is below, but first the thoughts.)
>
> Over many years of taking photographs, sometimes as tourist (i.e. in very
> touristic places, etc.), - I've been offered by others (friends, relatives,
> bystanders) to take a picture of _me_. ... or rather of _me__being__there_.
> Not that I was against those (and sometimes I did want some picture,
> especially with friends or family), but I was not particularly ego to get
> those. I wanted to take some interesting (at least to me) of the views from
> that place.
> One of the repeated questions/comments I had (usually not from close friends
> or relatives who already knew what I am after, but from more distant
> friends): "Why do you need those? - See there, they sell cards with this
> view already printed."
>
> Why was/am I taking those photos?
> 1. I enjoy _taking_ them and
> 2. I enjoy looking at them later, as they remind me of good time I had
> there. And often, aftre many years, I remember the photos I've taken even
> without looking at them: they are a connection for that place, person,
> event. ... even though I might not be in those pictures myself.
> (As an aside, - I appreciate the fact of being in some of those photos more
> now, as my daughter is growing up, - so, that she can see her dad in those
> photos too.)
>
> Now, getting back to the conclusion quoted in the Subject of this message.
> Yes, selfie is the fad du jour [is that tautology?].
> To this date, most of the selfies I've taken are with my SLR (with a tripod
> or a mirror help). But I don't want to judge those people who enjoy selfies:
> to each of his/her own. And to some extent, those people aren't that much
> different from those stranger on the street who are ego to pose for you even
> though they are never going to see that photo. (This was a very frequent
> situation with kid groups in Japan.)
>
>
> My understanding of the said blogpost is that someone is trying to question
> of how polite it is to take a selfie with a famous person (and hence turning
> one's behind to her/him) as opposed to piercing with your eyes and
> listening.
>
> That brought to memories yet another story. Long time ago, one famous
> Russian poet wrote a song that was "thinking" about a family being
> photographed in front of the monument to the famous Russian poet Alexandr
> Pushkin. The idea was based on the juxtaposition of the timelessness and
> greatness of someone whose fame survived the test of centuries, and
> "todayliness" of the concerns and that-minute problems of that family. I
> remember that a friend was thinking that the author was criticizing the
> family, and that that type of photo was awkward or even ridiculous due to
> the contrast. While I understand that point of view (and I personally do not
> like taking photographs of people (and myself) specifically with someone's
> _personal_ monument), I never felt comfortable with that criticism. And I've
> always thought that the song's author was just bringing up the contrast as a
> way to highlight the simultaneous distance and closeness of the great and
> small, old and contemporary, timeless and transient.
>
> But back to today's photo, here is what I am curious to hear from you, deal
> PDMLers:
> As photographers with different preferences, views and reasons to take
> photographs, what do you think about what is shown in the photograph
> discussed in that blogpost?
> (Please, let's not digress into a political debate about the specific
> politician, so, let's keep the political comments on mute.)
>
> Here is the blogpost in question: https://goo.gl/VC5fU3 .
>
> Thanks in advance to all who will respond.
>
> Igor
>
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
> follow the directions.



-- 
-- Reduce your Government Footprint

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - "We live not to be there, but to be seen to be there."

[Jack Davis]

Most of these "photographers" probably survived 
to display their treasures.

J

- Original Message -
From: "Alan C" 
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2016 8:41:39 AM
Subject: Re: OT - "We live not to be there, but to be seen to be there."

Well at least she knows what the herd have become. Rude perhaps but at least 
no-one was injured. Iv'e seen people get out of their cars in Kruger to take 
selfies with dangerous animals. Some haven't lived to tell the tale.

Alan C

-Original Message- 
From: Igor PDML-StR
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2016 4:08 PM
To: PDML@pdml.net
Subject: OT - "We live not to be there, but to be seen to be there."



This morning someone sent me a link to a brief blogpost on Cnet, which
got me (re)evaluating - (re)thinking certain aspects of photography in
our lives. The photo was of a crowd in front of a famous politician waving
at them, while most people turned their backs and taking selfies of
themselves with the famous people being the background.
  (The link is below, but first the thoughts.)

Over many years of taking photographs, sometimes as tourist (i.e. in very
touristic places, etc.), - I've been offered by others (friends,
relatives, bystanders) to take a picture of _me_. ... or rather of
_me__being__there_.
Not that I was against those (and sometimes I did want some picture,
especially with friends or family), but I was not particularly ego to get
those. I wanted to take some interesting (at least to me) of the views
from that place.
One of the repeated questions/comments I had (usually not from close
friends or relatives who already knew what I am after, but from more
distant friends): "Why do you need those? - See there, they sell cards
with this view already printed."

Why was/am I taking those photos?
1. I enjoy _taking_ them and
2. I enjoy looking at them later, as they remind me of good time I had
there. And often, aftre many years, I remember the photos I've taken even
without looking at them: they are a connection for that place, person,
event. ... even though I might not be in those pictures myself.
(As an aside, - I appreciate the fact of being in some of those photos
more now, as my daughter is growing up, - so, that she can see her dad in
those photos too.)

Now, getting back to the conclusion quoted in the Subject of this message.
Yes, selfie is the fad du jour [is that tautology?].
To this date, most of the selfies I've taken are with my SLR (with a
tripod or a mirror help). But I don't want to judge those people who
enjoy selfies: to each of his/her own. And to some extent, those people
aren't that much different from those stranger on the street who are ego
to pose for you even though they are never going to see that photo. (This
was a very frequent situation with kid groups in Japan.)


My understanding of the said blogpost is that someone is trying to
question of how polite it is to take a selfie with a famous person (and
hence turning one's behind to her/him) as opposed to piercing
with your eyes and listening.

That brought to memories yet another story. Long time ago, one
famous Russian poet wrote a song that was "thinking" about a family
being photographed in front of the monument to the famous Russian
poet Alexandr Pushkin. The idea was based on the juxtaposition of the
timelessness and greatness of someone whose fame survived the test of
centuries, and "todayliness" of the concerns and that-minute problems of
that family. I remember that a friend was thinking that the author was
criticizing the family, and that that type of photo was awkward or even
ridiculous due to the contrast. While I understand that point of view
(and I personally do not like taking photographs of people (and myself)
specifically with someone's _personal_ monument), I never felt
comfortable with that criticism. And I've always thought that the song's
author was just bringing up the contrast as a way to highlight the
simultaneous distance and closeness of the great and small, old and
contemporary, timeless and transient.

But back to today's photo, here is what I am curious to hear from you,
deal PDMLers:
As photographers with different preferences, views and reasons to take
photographs, what do you think about what is shown in the photograph
discussed in that blogpost?
(Please, let's not digress into a political debate about the specific
politician, so, let's keep the political comments on mute.)

Here is the blogpost in question: https://goo.gl/VC5fU3 .

Thanks in advance to all who will respond.

Igor



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
follow the directions. 


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to 

Re: Demand letter from Getty for use of image

[Gonz]

Yes, for sure its worth searching for the copyright.  Then its
probably best to follow some of the other advice and negotiate it down
if you can.  What's interesting about the thread is that there are not
a whole lot of images that Getty has actually bothered to copyright
and register.  They depend more on the simple fact that when people or
businesses are faced with a lawsuit, fear of losing a lot of money
and/or their business is a very strong motivator to give in.  This
happened to a company I worked for while in Pittsburgh.  Our company
name was very similar to another company in another state, who's
business was not even related.  They sent a nastygram through a
copyright trolling attorney in Texas demanding name change and/or a
settlement fee.  My boss went back and forth with them, eventually
they settled for a case of 18yr Macallan Scotch.

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Mark Roberts
 wrote:
> Gonz wrote:
>
>>Its an extortion scheme pure and simple.  Just ignore the letters.
>>
>>http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/getty-images-letter-forum/attorney-advises-to-just-ignore-the-getty-mccormack-letters/
>
> Note that in the thread linked above Getty did NOT have a registered
> copyright on the image in question. If they do indeed own the
> copyright it's a whole different kettle of fish. As I mentioned
> before, find out first if Getty really owns the copyright.
>
>
>
>>On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 9:02 AM, Mark Roberts
>> wrote:
>>> Darren Addy wrote:
>>>
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but: In short, your client is screwed
for using an image they simply took off of the internet. As any lawyer (and
particularly a lawyer who is a photographer) knows, U.S. Copyright exists
at the moment of image creation. Getty uses sophisticated software to
search for images being used. They have more resources than your client to
keep this going and make their life hell. The truth is that companies like
Getty make far more money off of infringement than they do from legal
licensing, these days.
>>>
>>> Pretty much on the money here. I don't know if Getty actually makes
>>> *more* money from infringements than from stock licensing (I don't
>>> have access to their books!) but they do make a lot.
>>>
The only thing (probably) left to negotiate is the AMOUNT of the 
infringement.
>>>
>>> Not negotiable. Not with Getty. They just bill what they would have
>>> changed for the usage in question.
>>>
If the image was NOT actually registered with the U.S. Copyright office,
your liability is less.
>>>
>>> If it's Getty there's about a 0% chance of the image not being
>>> registered.
>>>
If your client (or whoever they got the image from) cropped OFF a watermark
or copyright area, their liability under law is far higher. The only thing
you are doing now is trying to negotiate for the lowest possible settlement
without going to court (which would not be in your client's best interests
because they would LOSE). They are probably looking at 4 figures.
>>>
>>> I had Getty come after me for an image on my web site (long story but
>>> it turned out to be a mistake and they were good about dropping the
>>> whole thing when I talked to them on the phone). The payment they
>>> wanted was around $650.00. Going to court would have cost well into
>>> the 5 figures. And as I understand it, in copyright cases the loser
>>> pays all the legal fees of the winner, so Getty has *nothing* to lose
>>> by going to court if it's really their image.
>>>
>>> Your only hope is that it's one of the Public Domain images Getty has
>>> been selling as their own. But I wouldn't get my hopes up over that:
>>> Not only do those images represent just a tiny fraction of Getty's
>>> catalogue, Getty's currently being sued over that practice so I very
>>> much doubt they're pursuing payments over any of the images in
>>> question at this time — they'll be hoping to keep the matter quiet
>>> until the suits are settled.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia
>>> www.robertstech.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> PDML@pdml.net
>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
>>> follow the directions.
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>-- Reduce your Government Footprint
>
> --
> Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia
> www.robertstech.com
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.



-- 
-- Reduce your Government Footprint

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO: A bit of fun

[Igor PDML-StR]

Wow! What an interesting Dragon! ;) The shape of the head and the 
"sawed-off" spikes look rather unusual.
Also, the apparent smoothness of the skin is contrasted by the wall 
porosity.


It looks like the camera focused on the wall. Fortunately, the DoF saved 
the shot.


Thanks for sharing,

Igor






Alan C Mon, 26 Sep 2016 08:27:29 -0700 wrote:

A giant wall lizard, Megasaurus ferrous, about a metre long.


https://www.flickr.com/photos/wisselstroom/29317505873/

K7 with the DA 18-55 WR at sunset.

Alan C

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - "We live not to be there, but to be seen to be there."

[Alan C]

Well at least she knows what the herd have become. Rude perhaps but at least 
no-one was injured. Iv'e seen people get out of their cars in Kruger to take 
selfies with dangerous animals. Some haven't lived to tell the tale.


Alan C

-Original Message- 
From: Igor PDML-StR

Sent: Monday, September 26, 2016 4:08 PM
To: PDML@pdml.net
Subject: OT - "We live not to be there, but to be seen to be there."



This morning someone sent me a link to a brief blogpost on Cnet, which
got me (re)evaluating - (re)thinking certain aspects of photography in
our lives. The photo was of a crowd in front of a famous politician waving
at them, while most people turned their backs and taking selfies of
themselves with the famous people being the background.
 (The link is below, but first the thoughts.)

Over many years of taking photographs, sometimes as tourist (i.e. in very
touristic places, etc.), - I've been offered by others (friends,
relatives, bystanders) to take a picture of _me_. ... or rather of
_me__being__there_.
Not that I was against those (and sometimes I did want some picture,
especially with friends or family), but I was not particularly ego to get
those. I wanted to take some interesting (at least to me) of the views
from that place.
One of the repeated questions/comments I had (usually not from close
friends or relatives who already knew what I am after, but from more
distant friends): "Why do you need those? - See there, they sell cards
with this view already printed."

Why was/am I taking those photos?
1. I enjoy _taking_ them and
2. I enjoy looking at them later, as they remind me of good time I had
there. And often, aftre many years, I remember the photos I've taken even
without looking at them: they are a connection for that place, person,
event. ... even though I might not be in those pictures myself.
(As an aside, - I appreciate the fact of being in some of those photos
more now, as my daughter is growing up, - so, that she can see her dad in
those photos too.)

Now, getting back to the conclusion quoted in the Subject of this message.
Yes, selfie is the fad du jour [is that tautology?].
To this date, most of the selfies I've taken are with my SLR (with a
tripod or a mirror help). But I don't want to judge those people who
enjoy selfies: to each of his/her own. And to some extent, those people
aren't that much different from those stranger on the street who are ego
to pose for you even though they are never going to see that photo. (This
was a very frequent situation with kid groups in Japan.)


My understanding of the said blogpost is that someone is trying to
question of how polite it is to take a selfie with a famous person (and
hence turning one's behind to her/him) as opposed to piercing
with your eyes and listening.

That brought to memories yet another story. Long time ago, one
famous Russian poet wrote a song that was "thinking" about a family
being photographed in front of the monument to the famous Russian
poet Alexandr Pushkin. The idea was based on the juxtaposition of the
timelessness and greatness of someone whose fame survived the test of
centuries, and "todayliness" of the concerns and that-minute problems of
that family. I remember that a friend was thinking that the author was
criticizing the family, and that that type of photo was awkward or even
ridiculous due to the contrast. While I understand that point of view
(and I personally do not like taking photographs of people (and myself)
specifically with someone's _personal_ monument), I never felt
comfortable with that criticism. And I've always thought that the song's
author was just bringing up the contrast as a way to highlight the
simultaneous distance and closeness of the great and small, old and
contemporary, timeless and transient.

But back to today's photo, here is what I am curious to hear from you,
deal PDMLers:
As photographers with different preferences, views and reasons to take
photographs, what do you think about what is shown in the photograph
discussed in that blogpost?
(Please, let's not digress into a political debate about the specific
politician, so, let's keep the political comments on mute.)

Here is the blogpost in question: https://goo.gl/VC5fU3 .

Thanks in advance to all who will respond.

Igor



--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
follow the directions. 



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

PESO: A bit of fun

[Alan C]

A giant wall lizard, Megasaurus ferrous, about a metre long.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/wisselstroom/29317505873/

K7 with the DA 18-55 WR at sunset.

Alan C




---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Demand letter from Getty for use of image

[Mark Roberts]

Gonz wrote:

>Its an extortion scheme pure and simple.  Just ignore the letters.
>
>http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/getty-images-letter-forum/attorney-advises-to-just-ignore-the-getty-mccormack-letters/

Note that in the thread linked above Getty did NOT have a registered
copyright on the image in question. If they do indeed own the
copyright it's a whole different kettle of fish. As I mentioned
before, find out first if Getty really owns the copyright.



>On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 9:02 AM, Mark Roberts
> wrote:
>> Darren Addy wrote:
>>
>>>Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but: In short, your client is screwed
>>>for using an image they simply took off of the internet. As any lawyer (and
>>>particularly a lawyer who is a photographer) knows, U.S. Copyright exists
>>>at the moment of image creation. Getty uses sophisticated software to
>>>search for images being used. They have more resources than your client to
>>>keep this going and make their life hell. The truth is that companies like
>>>Getty make far more money off of infringement than they do from legal
>>>licensing, these days.
>>
>> Pretty much on the money here. I don't know if Getty actually makes
>> *more* money from infringements than from stock licensing (I don't
>> have access to their books!) but they do make a lot.
>>
>>>The only thing (probably) left to negotiate is the AMOUNT of the 
>>>infringement.
>>
>> Not negotiable. Not with Getty. They just bill what they would have
>> changed for the usage in question.
>>
>>>If the image was NOT actually registered with the U.S. Copyright office,
>>>your liability is less.
>>
>> If it's Getty there's about a 0% chance of the image not being
>> registered.
>>
>>>If your client (or whoever they got the image from) cropped OFF a watermark
>>>or copyright area, their liability under law is far higher. The only thing
>>>you are doing now is trying to negotiate for the lowest possible settlement
>>>without going to court (which would not be in your client's best interests
>>>because they would LOSE). They are probably looking at 4 figures.
>>
>> I had Getty come after me for an image on my web site (long story but
>> it turned out to be a mistake and they were good about dropping the
>> whole thing when I talked to them on the phone). The payment they
>> wanted was around $650.00. Going to court would have cost well into
>> the 5 figures. And as I understand it, in copyright cases the loser
>> pays all the legal fees of the winner, so Getty has *nothing* to lose
>> by going to court if it's really their image.
>>
>> Your only hope is that it's one of the Public Domain images Getty has
>> been selling as their own. But I wouldn't get my hopes up over that:
>> Not only do those images represent just a tiny fraction of Getty's
>> catalogue, Getty's currently being sued over that practice so I very
>> much doubt they're pursuing payments over any of the images in
>> question at this time — they'll be hoping to keep the matter quiet
>> until the suits are settled.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia
>> www.robertstech.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> PDML@pdml.net
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
>> follow the directions.
>
>
>
>-- 
>-- Reduce your Government Footprint
 
-- 
Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia
www.robertstech.com





-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - "We live not to be there, but to be seen to be there."

[Jack Davis]

A timely spectacle!

J

Sent from my iPhone

> On Sep 26, 2016, at 7:08 AM, Igor PDML-StR  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> This morning someone sent me a link to a brief blogpost on Cnet, which got me 
> (re)evaluating - (re)thinking certain aspects of photography in our lives. 
> The photo was of a crowd in front of a famous politician waving at them, 
> while most people turned their backs and taking selfies of themselves with 
> the famous people being the background.
> (The link is below, but first the thoughts.)
> 
> Over many years of taking photographs, sometimes as tourist (i.e. in very 
> touristic places, etc.), - I've been offered by others (friends, relatives, 
> bystanders) to take a picture of _me_. ... or rather of _me__being__there_.
> Not that I was against those (and sometimes I did want some picture, 
> especially with friends or family), but I was not particularly ego to get 
> those. I wanted to take some interesting (at least to me) of the views from 
> that place.
> One of the repeated questions/comments I had (usually not from close friends 
> or relatives who already knew what I am after, but from more distant 
> friends): "Why do you need those? - See there, they sell cards with this view 
> already printed."
> 
> Why was/am I taking those photos?
> 1. I enjoy _taking_ them and
> 2. I enjoy looking at them later, as they remind me of good time I had there. 
> And often, aftre many years, I remember the photos I've taken even without 
> looking at them: they are a connection for that place, person, event. ... 
> even though I might not be in those pictures myself.
> (As an aside, - I appreciate the fact of being in some of those photos more 
> now, as my daughter is growing up, - so, that she can see her dad in those 
> photos too.)
> 
> Now, getting back to the conclusion quoted in the Subject of this message.
> Yes, selfie is the fad du jour [is that tautology?].
> To this date, most of the selfies I've taken are with my SLR (with a tripod 
> or a mirror help). But I don't want to judge those people who enjoy selfies: 
> to each of his/her own. And to some extent, those people aren't that much 
> different from those stranger on the street who are ego to pose for you even 
> though they are never going to see that photo. (This was a very frequent 
> situation with kid groups in Japan.)
> 
> 
> My understanding of the said blogpost is that someone is trying to question 
> of how polite it is to take a selfie with a famous person (and hence turning 
> one's behind to her/him) as opposed to piercing with your eyes and listening.
> 
> That brought to memories yet another story. Long time ago, one famous Russian 
> poet wrote a song that was "thinking" about a family being photographed in 
> front of the monument to the famous Russian poet Alexandr Pushkin. The idea 
> was based on the juxtaposition of the timelessness and greatness of someone 
> whose fame survived the test of centuries, and "todayliness" of the concerns 
> and that-minute problems of that family. I remember that a friend was 
> thinking that the author was criticizing the family, and that that type of 
> photo was awkward or even ridiculous due to the contrast. While I understand 
> that point of view (and I personally do not like taking photographs of people 
> (and myself) specifically with someone's _personal_ monument), I never felt 
> comfortable with that criticism. And I've always thought that the song's 
> author was just bringing up the contrast as a way to highlight the 
> simultaneous distance and closeness of the great and small, old and 
> contemporary, timeless and tra
 nsient.
> 
> But back to today's photo, here is what I am curious to hear from you, deal 
> PDMLers:
> As photographers with different preferences, views and reasons to take 
> photographs, what do you think about what is shown in the photograph 
> discussed in that blogpost?
> (Please, let's not digress into a political debate about the specific 
> politician, so, let's keep the political comments on mute.)
> 
> Here is the blogpost in question: https://goo.gl/VC5fU3 .
> 
> Thanks in advance to all who will respond.
> 
> Igor
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Demand letter from Getty for use of image

[Gonz]

Its an extortion scheme pure and simple.  Just ignore the letters.

http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/getty-images-letter-forum/attorney-advises-to-just-ignore-the-getty-mccormack-letters/



On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 9:02 AM, Mark Roberts
 wrote:
> Darren Addy wrote:
>
>>Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but: In short, your client is screwed
>>for using an image they simply took off of the internet. As any lawyer (and
>>particularly a lawyer who is a photographer) knows, U.S. Copyright exists
>>at the moment of image creation. Getty uses sophisticated software to
>>search for images being used. They have more resources than your client to
>>keep this going and make their life hell. The truth is that companies like
>>Getty make far more money off of infringement than they do from legal
>>licensing, these days.
>
> Pretty much on the money here. I don't know if Getty actually makes
> *more* money from infringements than from stock licensing (I don't
> have access to their books!) but they do make a lot.
>
>>The only thing (probably) left to negotiate is the AMOUNT of the infringement.
>
> Not negotiable. Not with Getty. They just bill what they would have
> changed for the usage in question.
>
>>If the image was NOT actually registered with the U.S. Copyright office,
>>your liability is less.
>
> If it's Getty there's about a 0% chance of the image not being
> registered.
>
>>If your client (or whoever they got the image from) cropped OFF a watermark
>>or copyright area, their liability under law is far higher. The only thing
>>you are doing now is trying to negotiate for the lowest possible settlement
>>without going to court (which would not be in your client's best interests
>>because they would LOSE). They are probably looking at 4 figures.
>
> I had Getty come after me for an image on my web site (long story but
> it turned out to be a mistake and they were good about dropping the
> whole thing when I talked to them on the phone). The payment they
> wanted was around $650.00. Going to court would have cost well into
> the 5 figures. And as I understand it, in copyright cases the loser
> pays all the legal fees of the winner, so Getty has *nothing* to lose
> by going to court if it's really their image.
>
> Your only hope is that it's one of the Public Domain images Getty has
> been selling as their own. But I wouldn't get my hopes up over that:
> Not only do those images represent just a tiny fraction of Getty's
> catalogue, Getty's currently being sued over that practice so I very
> much doubt they're pursuing payments over any of the images in
> question at this time — they'll be hoping to keep the matter quiet
> until the suits are settled.
>
>
> --
> Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia
> www.robertstech.com
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.



-- 
-- Reduce your Government Footprint

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Q: How to force LR to refresh thumbnails?

[Igor PDML-StR]

I wonder if someone knows an effective way of forcing LR to update/refresh 
the thumbnail previews at the bottom?


I've got a shoot of a large number of photos (900), all taken in basically 
identical setting, and all them had the same problem: they were all 
similarly underexposed by some 1.5-2 stops.
So, the easy starting point after loading them all in LR was to adjust the 
exposure for one of the photos, and then "Sync" with all others. This 
would allow me to make a quick pre-selection (in the Library module) of 
the photos that are worth taking a further look.


What is annoying is that the thumbnails at the bottom remain dark.
I did "Update DNG previews and metadata". Even once it is done, the 
thumbnails are not updated.
The only thumbnails that are getting updated are those that are withing 
the "viewable" range. So, I am moving that line manually slowly to let 
them all update eventually.


Is there a way to force LR refreshing those thumbnails (short of 
re-importing those photos)?


Thank you,

Igor


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT: Yahoo got hacked

[Jostein Øksne]

It's almost amazing how unamazed I am, Mark :-) 
Jostein 


Den 25. september 2016 21.45.16 CEST, skrev Mark Roberts 
:
>Jostein Øksne wrote:
>
>>Den 25. september 2016 15.33.48 CEST, skrev Mark Roberts
>:
>>>John wrote:
>>>
Saw the news story a few minutes ago.

Apparently it happened in 2014, "state sponsored hackers", but Yahoo
didn't find it until August this year. I can't tell if they got any
>of
my information or not, but I went ahead and changed my password. The
only thing I used it for was a backup of PDML in case Roadrunner
>went
down again. And now that I'm using Earthlink for email, I probably
>>>don't
need it for that.

Anyway, I went ahead and changed my password.
>>>
>>>I'm a little late on this but it's probably worth mentioning: Yahoo
>IS
>>>Flickr! If you have a Flickr account you should change its password
>>>immediately.
>>> 
>>So... Two years without changing passwords? Hmmm... ;-) 
>
>You'd be amazed how many people don't. (Wait. No, you wouldn't.)
>
>You'd also be amazed how many people use the same password on multiple
>sites. (No, you wouldn't be amazed at that either.)
> 

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

OT - "We live not to be there, but to be seen to be there."

[Igor PDML-StR]

This morning someone sent me a link to a brief blogpost on Cnet, which 
got me (re)evaluating - (re)thinking certain aspects of photography in 
our lives. The photo was of a crowd in front of a famous politician waving 
at them, while most people turned their backs and taking selfies of 
themselves with the famous people being the background.

 (The link is below, but first the thoughts.)

Over many years of taking photographs, sometimes as tourist (i.e. in very 
touristic places, etc.), - I've been offered by others (friends, 
relatives, bystanders) to take a picture of _me_. ... or rather of 
_me__being__there_.
Not that I was against those (and sometimes I did want some picture, 
especially with friends or family), but I was not particularly ego to get 
those. I wanted to take some interesting (at least to me) of the views 
from that place.
One of the repeated questions/comments I had (usually not from close 
friends or relatives who already knew what I am after, but from more 
distant friends): "Why do you need those? - See there, they sell cards 
with this view already printed."


Why was/am I taking those photos?
1. I enjoy _taking_ them and
2. I enjoy looking at them later, as they remind me of good time I had 
there. And often, aftre many years, I remember the photos I've taken even 
without looking at them: they are a connection for that place, person, 
event. ... even though I might not be in those pictures myself.
(As an aside, - I appreciate the fact of being in some of those photos 
more now, as my daughter is growing up, - so, that she can see her dad in 
those photos too.)


Now, getting back to the conclusion quoted in the Subject of this message.
Yes, selfie is the fad du jour [is that tautology?].
To this date, most of the selfies I've taken are with my SLR (with a 
tripod or a mirror help). But I don't want to judge those people who 
enjoy selfies: to each of his/her own. And to some extent, those people 
aren't that much different from those stranger on the street who are ego 
to pose for you even though they are never going to see that photo. (This 
was a very frequent situation with kid groups in Japan.)



My understanding of the said blogpost is that someone is trying to 
question of how polite it is to take a selfie with a famous person (and 
hence turning one's behind to her/him) as opposed to piercing 
with your eyes and listening.


That brought to memories yet another story. Long time ago, one 
famous Russian poet wrote a song that was "thinking" about a family 
being photographed in front of the monument to the famous Russian 
poet Alexandr Pushkin. The idea was based on the juxtaposition of the 
timelessness and greatness of someone whose fame survived the test of 
centuries, and "todayliness" of the concerns and that-minute problems of 
that family. I remember that a friend was thinking that the author was 
criticizing the family, and that that type of photo was awkward or even 
ridiculous due to the contrast. While I understand that point of view 
(and I personally do not like taking photographs of people (and myself) 
specifically with someone's _personal_ monument), I never felt 
comfortable with that criticism. And I've always thought that the song's 
author was just bringing up the contrast as a way to highlight the 
simultaneous distance and closeness of the great and small, old and 
contemporary, timeless and transient.


But back to today's photo, here is what I am curious to hear from you, 
deal PDMLers:
As photographers with different preferences, views and reasons to take 
photographs, what do you think about what is shown in the photograph 
discussed in that blogpost?
(Please, let's not digress into a political debate about the specific 
politician, so, let's keep the political comments on mute.)


Here is the blogpost in question: https://goo.gl/VC5fU3 .

Thanks in advance to all who will respond.

Igor



--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Demand letter from Getty for use of image

[Mark Roberts]

Darren Addy wrote:

>Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but: In short, your client is screwed
>for using an image they simply took off of the internet. As any lawyer (and
>particularly a lawyer who is a photographer) knows, U.S. Copyright exists
>at the moment of image creation. Getty uses sophisticated software to
>search for images being used. They have more resources than your client to
>keep this going and make their life hell. The truth is that companies like
>Getty make far more money off of infringement than they do from legal
>licensing, these days. 

Pretty much on the money here. I don't know if Getty actually makes
*more* money from infringements than from stock licensing (I don't
have access to their books!) but they do make a lot.

>The only thing (probably) left to negotiate is the AMOUNT of the infringement.

Not negotiable. Not with Getty. They just bill what they would have
changed for the usage in question.

>If the image was NOT actually registered with the U.S. Copyright office, 
>your liability is less. 

If it's Getty there's about a 0% chance of the image not being
registered.

>If your client (or whoever they got the image from) cropped OFF a watermark 
>or copyright area, their liability under law is far higher. The only thing 
>you are doing now is trying to negotiate for the lowest possible settlement 
>without going to court (which would not be in your client's best interests 
>because they would LOSE). They are probably looking at 4 figures.

I had Getty come after me for an image on my web site (long story but
it turned out to be a mistake and they were good about dropping the
whole thing when I talked to them on the phone). The payment they
wanted was around $650.00. Going to court would have cost well into
the 5 figures. And as I understand it, in copyright cases the loser
pays all the legal fees of the winner, so Getty has *nothing* to lose
by going to court if it's really their image.

Your only hope is that it's one of the Public Domain images Getty has
been selling as their own. But I wouldn't get my hopes up over that:
Not only do those images represent just a tiny fraction of Getty's
catalogue, Getty's currently being sued over that practice so I very
much doubt they're pursuing payments over any of the images in
question at this time — they'll be hoping to keep the matter quiet
until the suits are settled.

 
-- 
Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia
www.robertstech.com





-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Geso Motorfest car show

[Steve Cottrell]

On 26/9/16, David J Brooks, discombobulated, unleashed:

>sorry Cotty.:-)
g

-- 


Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__Broadcast, Corporate,
||  (O)  |Web Video Production
--
_



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT Ziegfeld follies photos

[Bruce Walker]

This project I did was inspired by Berlin cabaret but it's in the same period.

http://nifmagazine.com/cabaret-by-bruce-walker/


On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Bruce Walker  wrote:
> Yes! :)
>
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 3:32 AM, Larry Colen  wrote:
>>
>> Some naked boobage, but of both historical and artistic interest to at least
>> a few people on this list.  I bet Bruce could have fun recreating some of
>> these.
>>
>> http://all-that-is-interesting.com/ziegfeld-follies-photos
>>
>> --
>> Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc
>>
>>
>> --
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> PDML@pdml.net
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
>> follow the directions.
>
>
>
> --
> -bmw



-- 
-bmw

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT Ziegfeld follies photos

[Bruce Walker]

Yes! :)

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 3:32 AM, Larry Colen  wrote:
>
> Some naked boobage, but of both historical and artistic interest to at least
> a few people on this list.  I bet Bruce could have fun recreating some of
> these.
>
> http://all-that-is-interesting.com/ziegfeld-follies-photos
>
> --
> Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
> follow the directions.



-- 
-bmw

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Geso Motorfest car show

[David J Brooks]

The year end fanally of 1000+ cars. Gallery is about 120 photos, the
organizers wanted to see what i had to pick a few for their website,
sorry Cotty.:-)

http://www.caughtinmotion.com/2016-motorfest/album/index.html

K-5, Sigma 17-70 with CPOL and also the X30

Dave

-- 
Documenting Life in Rural Ontario.
www.caughtinmotion.com
http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/
York Region, Ontario, Canada

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Demand letter from Getty for use of image

[John]

Unless Getty has screwed up again ...

http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-getty-copyright-20160729-snap-story.html

I wrote "again" because it's not the first time Getty has been sued for
attempting to claim copyright infringement on images they don't own (or
infringed the copyrights of other people).

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/08/getty-images-sued-again-over-alleged-misuse-of-over-47000-photos/

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-media-copyright-twitter-idUSBRE9AL16F20131122

http://artlawjournal.com/getty-images-sued-deceptive-practices/

In answer to Dan's original question (IANAL, but):

http://artlawjournal.com/tips-responding-getty-images-demand-letter/

And finally, don't forget all the controversy Getty caused on Flickr by
taking images from Flickr & selling them without necessarily obtaining
permission from the person who posted them beforehand.

On 9/25/2016 4:43 PM, Darren Addy wrote:

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but: In short, your client is screwed
for using an image they simply took off of the internet. As any lawyer (and
particularly a lawyer who is a photographer) knows, U.S. Copyright exists
at the moment of image creation. Getty uses sophisticated software to
search for images being used. They have more resources than your client to
keep this going and make their life hell. The truth is that companies like
Getty make far more money off of infringement than they do from legal
licensing, these days. The only thing (probably) left to negotiate is the
AMOUNT of the infringement. If the image was NOT actually registered with
the U.S. Copyright office, your liability is less. If your client (or
whoever they got the image from) cropped OFF a watermark or copyright area,
their liability under law is far higher. The only thing you are doing now
is trying to negotiate for the lowest possible settlement without going to
court (which would not be in your client's best interests because they
would LOSE). They are probably looking at 4 figures.



On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 1:19 PM, John  wrote:


I agree.


On 9/23/2016 11:25 PM, P.J. Alling wrote:


I believe that goes beyond copyright infringement, that's actual fraud.

On 9/23/2016 11:21 PM, John wrote:


Getty has a bad habit of claiming public domain images and demanding
payment for their use.

On 9/23/2016 2:36 PM, Daniel J. Matyola wrote:


Travel agent client maintains a website and newsletter featuring
vacation
travel venues.  Client makes every effort to use only public domain
images.
Client received a letter from Getty Images, claiming a particular image
used by client was a rights managed image controlled by Getty.

The image in question was no longer on the website,, but still
appeared on
a FaceBook account.  Client immediately removed it.

The Getty letter states that removal of the image will not resolve the
matter, and demands a monetary settlement for past usage.

Has anyone handled this sort of claim, with Getty or another stock
agency?
Will they accepts an apology and an agreement to take reasonable
steps to
prevent future inadvertent infringement in lieu of payment?

Dan Matyola
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola








--
Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
Religion - Answers we must never question.

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
follow the directions.







--
Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
Religion - Answers we must never question.

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO 2016 - 179, 180, 185, 188 - GDG

[Paul Stenquist]

Nice car, nice light. A polarizer and clean, distant background would make it 
all perfect, 

Paul via phone

> On Sep 26, 2016, at 12:01 AM, Alan C  wrote:
> 
> Very smart. A black car hey! Hard to believe it's 10 years old.
> 
> Alan C
> 
> -Original Message- From: Godfrey DiGiorgi
> Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2016 6:50 PM
> To: PDML List ; PAW Picture-A-Week project ; SeePhoto Talk ; BAPhotoShooters 
> BAPA
> Subject: PESO 2016 - 179, 180, 185, 188 - GDG
> 
> Hi!
> 
> I haven't posted many photos in the past two weeks. Part of the reason is 
> that I've had a lot going on, not least of which was that my car was 
> rear-ended and a total loss. It's been replaced with a six years newer model 
> of the same thing.
> 
> The light was nice this morning, so I pulled out the camera and put the new 
> car into the church parking lot for some beauty snaps right about dawn.
> 
> https://flic.kr/p/LCCTiz
> https://flic.kr/p/LCCSZD
> https://flic.kr/p/MwVoHA
> https://flic.kr/p/LCCQn4
> 
> A larger gallery of ten images is located on Flickr: 
> https://flic.kr/s/aHskHyUUuv
> 
> enjoy!
> G
> —
> The trouble with being punctual is that nobody's there to appreciate it.
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions. 
> 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.
-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESOs: Biking with Bob

[Steve Cottrell]

On 26/9/16, Chris Mitchell, discombobulated, unleashed:

>And, of course, we had to stop off at a pub:
>https://www.dropbox.com/s/cwi2onh2qcd1hxx/DSX21495.jpg?dl=0

Is Bob saying 'Nice velos baby'

-- 


Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__Broadcast, Corporate,
||  (O)  |Web Video Production
--
_



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO 2016 - 179, 180, 185, 188 - GDG

[Steve Cottrell]

On 25/9/16, Godfrey DiGiorgi, discombobulated, unleashed:

>Yup. I sold the Prius when I got over my mid-life crisis in 2012. Went
>back to what I'd always had ... a proper two-seat sports car. ;-)

Attaboy ;-)

-- 


Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__Broadcast, Corporate,
||  (O)  |Web Video Production
--
_



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

OT Ziegfeld follies photos

[Larry Colen]

Some naked boobage, but of both historical and artistic interest to at 
least a few people on this list.  I bet Bruce could have fun recreating 
some of these.


http://all-that-is-interesting.com/ziegfeld-follies-photos

--
Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

PESOs: Biking with Bob

[Chris Mitchell]

Bob W that is. We had a lovely day in the Chilterns (a hilly bit of
southern UK).

Which way? Flaunden or Latimer? (Karin was right)
https://www.dropbox.com/s/r97lba5pby15h6i/DSX21491.jpg?dl=0

And, of course, we had to stop off at a pub:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/cwi2onh2qcd1hxx/DSX21495.jpg?dl=0

Chris

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.