🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <MUOBc.9857$w07.6249@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
 "Seymore" <g_seymore@REMOVEhotmail.com> wrote:

> http://www.macmurph.com/photodb/picture.php?picture_id=20552
> 
> Seymore...
> Owner of an F717/S85... and luvin' it!
> remove "REMOVE" to reply

You have the grainy adaptive sharpening filter.  Now paint some UFOs in 
there.

Yeah, pretty poor shot. Not one I would show others.

"Kevin McMurtrie" <mcmurtri@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
news:mcmurtri-75A9F2.00311322062004@corp-radius.supernews.com...
> In article <MUOBc.9857$w07.6249@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
>  "Seymore" <g_seymore@REMOVEhotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > http://www.macmurph.com/photodb/picture.php?picture_id=20552
> >
> > Seymore...
> > Owner of an F717/S85... and luvin' it!
> > remove "REMOVE" to reply
>
> You have the grainy adaptive sharpening filter.  Now paint some UFOs in
> there.

Pete D  typed:

> Yeah, pretty poor shot. Not one I would show others.
>
> "Kevin McMurtrie" <mcmurtri@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
> news:mcmurtri-75A9F2.00311322062004@corp-radius.supernews.com...
>> In article <MUOBc.9857$w07.6249@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
>>  "Seymore" <g_seymore@REMOVEhotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.macmurph.com/photodb/picture.php?picture_id=20552
>>>
>>> Seymore...
>>> Owner of an F717/S85... and luvin' it!
>>> remove "REMOVE" to reply
>>
>> You have the grainy adaptive sharpening filter.  Now paint some UFOs
>> in there.

How about this one?

http://www.angelfire.com/ex/protoncek/Storm.jpg

(BTW: It's not from me...)

Now that is an awesome picture!

Jeff

"SleeperMan" <SleeperMan@too.sleepy> wrote in message
news:kd_Bc.5500$37.714052@news.siol.net...
> Pete D  typed:
>
> > Yeah, pretty poor shot. Not one I would show others.
> >
> > "Kevin McMurtrie" <mcmurtri@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
> > news:mcmurtri-75A9F2.00311322062004@corp-radius.supernews.com...
> >> In article <MUOBc.9857$w07.6249@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
> >>  "Seymore" <g_seymore@REMOVEhotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> http://www.macmurph.com/photodb/picture.php?picture_id=20552
> >>>
> >>> Seymore...
> >>> Owner of an F717/S85... and luvin' it!
> >>> remove "REMOVE" to reply
> >>
> >> You have the grainy adaptive sharpening filter.  Now paint some UFOs
> >> in there.
>
> How about this one?
>
> http://www.angelfire.com/ex/protoncek/Storm.jpg
>
> (BTW: It's not from me...)
>
>

Jeff Durham  typed:

> Now that is an awesome picture!

Agreed.
Like i said, it's not mine (unfortunately...). I got it from the web
somewhere. I bet that one who shot it waited some time to get it...

>
> Jeff
>
> "SleeperMan" <SleeperMan@too.sleepy> wrote in message
> news:kd_Bc.5500$37.714052@news.siol.net...
>> Pete D  typed:
>>
>>> Yeah, pretty poor shot. Not one I would show others.
>>>
>>> "Kevin McMurtrie" <mcmurtri@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
>>> news:mcmurtri-75A9F2.00311322062004@corp-radius.supernews.com...
>>>> In article <MUOBc.9857$w07.6249@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
>>>>  "Seymore" <g_seymore@REMOVEhotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> http://www.macmurph.com/photodb/picture.php?picture_id=20552
>>>>>
>>>>> Seymore...
>>>>> Owner of an F717/S85... and luvin' it!
>>>>> remove "REMOVE" to reply
>>>>
>>>> You have the grainy adaptive sharpening filter.  Now paint some
>>>> UFOs in there.
>>
>> How about this one?
>>
>> http://www.angelfire.com/ex/protoncek/Storm.jpg
>>
>> (BTW: It's not from me...)

Keith said:

This is photography.  If you find out where you got it I would want to seek
permission to add it to my personal philosophical newsletter.  I use a lot
of photos, as a point getter, and to stop boredom.

Keith


"SleeperMan" <SleeperMan@too.sleepy> wrote in message
news:kd_Bc.5500$37.714052@news.siol.net...
> Pete D  typed:
>
> > Yeah, pretty poor shot. Not one I would show others.
> >
> > "Kevin McMurtrie" <mcmurtri@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
> > news:mcmurtri-75A9F2.00311322062004@corp-radius.supernews.com...
> >> In article <MUOBc.9857$w07.6249@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
> >>  "Seymore" <g_seymore@REMOVEhotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> http://www.macmurph.com/photodb/picture.php?picture_id=20552
> >>>
> >>> Seymore...
> >>> Owner of an F717/S85... and luvin' it!
> >>> remove "REMOVE" to reply
> >>
> >> You have the grainy adaptive sharpening filter.  Now paint some UFOs
> >> in there.
>
> How about this one?
>
> http://www.angelfire.com/ex/protoncek/Storm.jpg
>
> (BTW: It's not from me...)
>
>

kreb  typed:

> Keith said:
>
> This is photography.  If you find out where you got it I would want
> to seek permission to add it to my personal philosophical newsletter.
> I use a lot of photos, as a point getter, and to stop boredom.
>
> Keith
>
>
It seems that my niece got it from her friend over chat... I'll ask her to
get him in touch and i'll let you know. It's a question, though, if pic is
his or he got it elsewhere... :-) I hope it's not one of those stories: i
got it from the one who got it from a guy, who got it from another
guy...etc---

SleeperMan  typed:

> kreb  typed:
>
>> Keith said:
>>
>> This is photography.  If you find out where you got it I would want
>> to seek permission to add it to my personal philosophical newsletter.
>> I use a lot of photos, as a point getter, and to stop boredom.
>>
>> Keith
>>
>>
> It seems that my niece got it from her friend over chat... I'll ask
> her to get him in touch and i'll let you know. It's a question,
> though, if pic is his or he got it elsewhere... :-) I hope it's not
> one of those stories: i got it from the one who got it from a guy,
> who got it from another guy...etc---

Sooo...
It is one of those stories...
her friend got it from Internet somewhere, so, i don't have a clue, who
actually shot it or owe it. Sorry... but i guess you can use it, and write
unknown author or similar below it.

In article <tvjpd0l2alu68grc7o9pcbep917ir8tdbb@4ax.com>, chasm@texas.net 
says...
> this is awesome!! do you know -- oh yeah, this is one from an unknown source.
> 
> what are the best settings, etc to take a photo like this??
> 
> 1/30 on a tripod?  
> 
> thanks for the treat!

Composite shot.

schuetzen - RKBA!  typed:

> SleeperMan wrote:
>
>> Pete D  typed:
>>
>>> Yeah, pretty poor shot. Not one I would show others.
>>>
>>> http://www.macmurph.com/photodb/picture.php?picture_id=20552
>>> Seymore...
>>> Owner of an F717/S85... and luvin' it!
>>>> You have the grainy adaptive sharpening filter.  Now paint some
>>>> UFOs in there.
>>
>
>> How about this one?
>> http://www.angelfire.com/ex/protoncek/Storm.jpg
>> (BTW: It's not from me...)
>
> this is awesome!! do you know -- oh yeah, this is one from an unknown
> source.
>
> what are the best settings, etc to take a photo like this??
>
> 1/30 on a tripod?
>
> thanks for the treat!

Good question - i think that tripod is a must. Then, a looot of luck and
some knowledge and you're there.

J. A. Mc.  typed:

> On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 17:28:41 +0200, "SleeperMan"
> <SleeperMan@too.sleepy> found these unused words floating about:
>
>> SleeperMan  typed:
>>
>>> kreb  typed:
>>>
>>>> Keith said:
>>>>
>>>> This is photography.  If you find out where you got it I would want
>>>> to seek permission to add it to my personal philosophical
>>>> newsletter. I use a lot of photos, as a point getter, and to stop
>>>> boredom.
>>>>
>>>> Keith
>>>>
>>>>
>>> It seems that my niece got it from her friend over chat... I'll ask
>>> her to get him in touch and i'll let you know. It's a question,
>>> though, if pic is his or he got it elsewhere... :-) I hope it's not
>>> one of those stories: i got it from the one who got it from a guy,
>>> who got it from another guy...etc---
>>
>> Sooo...
>> It is one of those stories...
>> her friend got it from Internet somewhere, so, i don't have a clue,
>> who actually shot it or owe it. Sorry... but i guess you can use it,
>> and write unknown author or similar below it.
>>
> NO ... you can't -legally- use it!
>
> Depending upon the level of protection and registration the imager
> made for this, you could face serious fines IF caught ... it's up to
> you to estimate the risk.

It's strange though...i looked some pics of storm (found with google) and
almost all have copyright or owner name on the pic. Too shame that this one
haven't...

J. A. Mc.  typed:

> On Sat, 26 Jun 2004 08:47:19 +0200, "SleeperMan"
> <SleeperMan@too.sleepy> found these unused words floating about:
>
>> J. A. Mc.  typed:
>>
>>> On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 17:28:41 +0200, "SleeperMan"
>>> <SleeperMan@too.sleepy> found these unused words floating about:
>>>
>>>> SleeperMan  typed:
>>>>
>>>>> kreb  typed:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Keith said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is photography.  If you find out where you got it I would
>>>>>> want to seek permission to add it to my personal philosophical
>>>>>> newsletter. I use a lot of photos, as a point getter, and to stop
>>>>>> boredom.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Keith
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> It seems that my niece got it from her friend over chat... I'll
>>>>> ask her to get him in touch and i'll let you know. It's a
>>>>> question, though, if pic is his or he got it elsewhere... :-) I
>>>>> hope it's not one of those stories: i got it from the one who got
>>>>> it from a guy, who got it from another guy...etc---
>>>>
>>>> Sooo...
>>>> It is one of those stories...
>>>> her friend got it from Internet somewhere, so, i don't have a clue,
>>>> who actually shot it or owe it. Sorry... but i guess you can use
>>>> it, and write unknown author or similar below it.
>>>>
>>> NO ... you can't -legally- use it!
>>>
>>> Depending upon the level of protection and registration the imager
>>> made for this, you could face serious fines IF caught ... it's up to
>>> you to estimate the risk.
>>
>> It's strange though...i looked some pics of storm (found with
>> google) and almost all have copyright or owner name on the pic. Too
>> shame that this one haven't...
>>
> I understand, as I often posted to a binaries group. ALL of my images
> have a copyright, usually small and fairly unobtrusive. I've pretty
> much stopped posting since a few began vociferously complaining about
> 'defacing' the image.
>
> Many don't think to put copyrights ON their own websites ... !

I guess you're right...if pic would have at least some EXIF info...

J. A. Mc.  typed:

> On Sat, 26 Jun 2004 08:46:15 +0200, "SleeperMan"
> <SleeperMan@too.sleepy> found these unused words floating about:
>
>> schuetzen - RKBA!  typed:
>>
>>> SleeperMan wrote:
>>>
>>>> Pete D  typed:
>>>>
>>>>> Yeah, pretty poor shot. Not one I would show others.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.macmurph.com/photodb/picture.php?picture_id=20552
>>>>> Seymore...
>>>>> Owner of an F717/S85... and luvin' it!
>>>>>> You have the grainy adaptive sharpening filter.  Now paint some
>>>>>> UFOs in there.
>>>>
>>>
>>>> How about this one?
>>>> http://www.angelfire.com/ex/protoncek/Storm.jpg
>>>> (BTW: It's not from me...)
>>>
>>> this is awesome!! do you know -- oh yeah, this is one from an
>>> unknown source.
>>>
>>> what are the best settings, etc to take a photo like this??
>>>
>>> 1/30 on a tripod?
>>>
>>> thanks for the treat!
>>
>> Good question - i think that tripod is a must. Then, a looot of luck
>> and some knowledge and you're there.
>>
> Smallest aperature, possibly with an ND over the lens, then the
> commensurate exposure value for the 'normal' scene. HOPE the strike
> comes while the shutter's 'open'.

HOPE is the magic word...
But, i wonder - how do you make the lightning to STAY STILL while the
shutter is open? So that pic is not blurred...
I saw some pics on the web and they are shot  with F8 and shutter open for 6
seconds - and perfectly sharp, too - like this one:

http://www.angelfire.com/ex/protoncek/lightning.jpg

SleeperMan wrote:

> 
> 
> HOPE is the magic word...
> But, i wonder - how do you make the lightning to STAY STILL while the
> shutter is open? So that pic is not blurred...
> I saw some pics on the web and they are shot  with F8 and shutter open for 6
> seconds - and perfectly sharp, too - like this one:
> 
> http://www.angelfire.com/ex/protoncek/lightning.jpg
> 
> 

Because the lightning flash is so short lived and/or it's not moving in 
relation to the camera?

Greg
-- 
Destroy your safe and happy lives
Before it is too late
The battles we fought were long and hard
Just not to be consumed by rock'n'roll

G.T.  typed:

> SleeperMan wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> HOPE is the magic word...
>> But, i wonder - how do you make the lightning to STAY STILL while the
>> shutter is open? So that pic is not blurred...
>> I saw some pics on the web and they are shot  with F8 and shutter
>> open for 6 seconds - and perfectly sharp, too - like this one:
>>
>> http://www.angelfire.com/ex/protoncek/lightning.jpg
>>
>>
>
> Because the lightning flash is so short lived and/or it's not moving
> in relation to the camera?
>
> Greg

I guess this is it... at least it must be, as there's no other explanation.
Maybe i should try out one day

In article <19mrd0p0gac2ntokf0uqnel7njqpkiagev@4ax.com>, chasm@texas.net 
says...
> that would certainly account for the striking impact of this really beautiful
> sunset and the totally unexpected lightning.
> 
> is there anyway to actually point at this and that to know that this was a
> composite??
> 
> thanks

Well, besides the complete absurdity of the weather conditions present, 
there are some harsh, "too perfect" gradients along the lightening path 
and especially at the "impact point" on the ground.  If you've tried 
making composite images look real, you can notice the flaws pretty 
quickly.

In article <ejtrd099ud23sb3sa0cctulof9g2p80fpo@4ax.com>, 
jaSPAMc@gbr.online.com says...
> And just HOW do you KNOW this is a composite?

Look at the shot, doofus.

Brian C. Baird  typed:

> In article <19mrd0p0gac2ntokf0uqnel7njqpkiagev@4ax.com>,
> chasm@texas.net says...
>> that would certainly account for the striking impact of this really
>> beautiful sunset and the totally unexpected lightning.
>>
>> is there anyway to actually point at this and that to know that this
>> was a composite??
>>
>> thanks
>
> Well, besides the complete absurdity of the weather conditions
> present, there are some harsh, "too perfect" gradients along the
> lightening path and especially at the "impact point" on the ground.
> If you've tried making composite images look real, you can notice the
> flaws pretty quickly.

Coosite or not, it's beafutiful shot. Period.

schuetzen - RKBA!  typed:

> SleeperMan wrote:
>
>>
>>> Well, besides the complete absurdity of the weather conditions
>>> present, there are some harsh, "too perfect" gradients along the
>>> lightening path and especially at the "impact point" on the ground.
>>> If you've tried making composite images look real, you can notice
>>> the flaws pretty quickly.
>>
>> Coosite or not, it's beafutiful shot. Period.
>
> a damned men!   but take out the lightning and  it is a superb sunset
> shot.
> am trying to identify it from the trees around it...  kinda like
> Africa it seems to me. but hell, that could be Texas too for that
> matter.
>
> anyway, thanks again for a super photo for my pc wallpaper.
>

anytime