Linda K

once all the hobby breeders have been closed down thanks to the draconian legislation being forced on us, and councils refusing to renew multiple animal permits, believe me, rescues will be the very next targets on the agenda - as afterall, they are attempting to sell animals too, no matter how much it is dressed up as an adoption fee, not a sale price, and since PeTA and similar bodies do not want animals even being kept at all. Since their legislation is way under what a breeder has to comply with, and so many of these "no kill" shelters may end up with animals being kept there for many years, there certainly should be a lot tougher restrictions on them on how they are kept, socialisation and training prior to rehoming, long term care etc - surely if the rescue groups feel so strongly that the conditions they have demanded be the minimum that breeders house multiple animals under, and the minimum requirement of care and nutritional food provided, then they should have no issues at all with complying with the same - at the moment ow in Vic, breeders have over 50 pages of gov law to comply with, they have 10

best tip for photographing water - wait for a lovely overcast day - bright sunlight is your worst enemy, as you will never get the shutter speed down slow enough to have the blurry water (even with filters), whereas an overcast day, best days as you can really get a low shutter speed - to have the cotton candy water look you want to be at least 1/20th or slower. And obviously a tripod is a must. Even better - also use either the timer or a cable release to pres the shutter, as that will prevent any movement vibration from you pressing the shutter

The main difference between the 2 is in the quality of the build - the 1.8 is all plastic, and there is a higher tolerance for the glass having faults in it, so may not be uniform thickness all the way across it. The 1.4 is metal fittings, not plastic, so more robust, and has a lower tolerance within the factory for faults in the glass, so it is thus more likely you will get a better copy of the lens than with the 1,8 (which can be very hit or miss), and the lens is more robust (have heard of people who have taken a 1.8 off the cameras to have i fall apart in their hands. Having tried each of the lens on both the Canon and the Nikon, yes I can tell the difference, and no I do not shoot at 1.4 or 1.8 - a lens is generally at its sweet spot a couple of stops down from its widest - so I generally shoot my 1.4 at 2, 2.2 or 2.4, depending on what I am shooting.

and also what to leave out of the shot, which can be just as important as what to include

actually you were only allowed to visit 2 times a week - having just had a cat in quarantine last year, know the drill. You are right about the for free bit though. Why the longer time though just because the hair is longer???

not in the least surprised - our cat lets my austistic son do anything to her, and in return, she is rewarded with much love and affection from him - they are twin souls at times.

The sunshine cat http://www.amazon.com/The-Sunshine-Cat-Miriam-Moss/dp/1841215678

DSLR would be my only suggestion, you get used to the weight quite quickly, and in fact it will help give you better stability and avoid shutter shake. To understand why your dog is photographing either as a blol or probaly also too light, you need to understand that cameras are based on exposing everything at 18% grey - that means whites look underexposed, and blacks tend to look overexposed. What shooting in manual allows you to do is take control and adjust the exposure compensation, so that you are in fact capturing things the way you want. Post processing (ie on the computer), also allows you (so long as the data is there), to adjust exposure in different parts of an image so you can bring up details in dark areas, or darken areas that are too light. Bryan Petersons book Understanding Exposure, and Scott Kelbys books on Photoshop are invaluable tools to help you understand shooting, and explain it all in simple to understand terms

ah, the old full frame vs crop frame - consider that the mounts for a full frame camera may be different to some of the mounts on crop frame, so bear that in mind. I would always shoot wider open in a way to add light well before I start adjusting ISO< and finding ways to add natural light - I will do portrait shots indoors, but set up a room so that natural light is coming in. As far as I am concerned the ugly pin prick catchlights that one gets from a flash are not worth adding a flash to the equation. I use the 5D II and love its low light capabilities. To me, you need way wider open lens than an f4 and must admit had and sold the 24-105 F4 lens - it was just not a fast enough lens for me - I love shooting at F2 or wider. I would also go full frame very time - full frame is how cameras were designed, and how most lens were designed to work

sorry, in what world do you get to go and ask for a refund but say I want to keep the item too, and end up with both? If she intended to keep the dog, then no refund. If she wanted a refund because the dog was not what she wanted, then she does not get to keep it too. Judge got it spot on.

the bit about no refund if the dog was not handed back was exactly the point in the recent DEPI Viuc legislation too - refund only if animal surrendered back, a buyer was not entitled to keep an animal plus claim a refund. Could not really see her point if she still wanted the dog anyway - was she trying to claim for loss of income from bitsa puppies FFS?. She i a tool, but no real surprise to see this in the Murdoch press, of late have noticed a distinct increase in the number of anti breeder / anti pet shop / anti anything but "reputable" rescues (put that in commas, because some of the ones they have highlighted are certainly not ones I consider in any way reputable or responsible at ALL

totally agree with what the article says, and how the word is being used, I think, mostly to further the breeder bashing that is the flavour of the month by some of the rescue groups out there - along with the other terms such as "greeder" being used to turn people against breeders in any shape or form, and even how rescue groups will say that you go and adopt a pet from them and pay an "adoption fee" that is oh so different from selecting and adopting the animal from a breeder = no there is no difference in terms of the transaction - in both cases, money is being paid in exchange for the animal, and in both cases, the money will not cover the costs of what has been used to raise and care for the animal and its vet work. But the breeders are of course only in it for the $$$$ .

beautiful. Agree about the hole depth - here we would hit the water table before getting that deep, but a lovely tribute

heat lamps for kittens - I don;t think so, will be sticking with my thermostat heating pad thanks. And I will not be raising my newborn pen to a ridicuolous dangerous height of 1.8m, because some nincompoop has forgotten that even if I make the shelves so kittens can;t access them, um, mother cats can carry kittens in their mouths......... Just plain dumb, and no real improvements to anything except for the lining of vet pockets, with queens now needing to go to the vet within 4 weeks of mating, and then also within 8 weeks after delivery. Very pointless.

hmmm. This bit was interesting from that link wonder if they actually did that or not. Additionally, since to report seemed to suggest that Eastern Creek would be the first, and others would be closed as their leases ended, wonder how much it cost to get out of the lease vs doing the work.

having heard the rumours that even Sydney is slated to be closed, and that Spotswood will be moving within a couple of years out to Kalkallo, in much larger quarters, and will be the sole place for animal quarantine, this news does not surprise me at all.

just wonder if all of those people who have no problems with AR zealots breaking and entering (and potentially also bringing god knows what diseases in with them), would be of the same opinion if it was their own property and a neighbour had dobbed them in on the grounds there was something suspicious going on at their place in their opinion, and so people had broken and entered your place in your absence, gone through all your stuff, taken images any old way they wished, and set you up for charges - these people can and do make something out of nothing at all if it suits them, as their track record has shown. Would you still be, oh its OK, as this is the only way to catch people breaking the law, and I do not mind my own personal rights being able to be invaded by people who have absolutely no rights under law to do so - they are not police, they are not inspectors, they do not have warrants, they are people who are breaking a law that they believe does not apply to them, as they are operating under a "higher imperative". That kind of thinking is so very dangerous, and allowing it to gain acceptance is a true insight into just how far they have swung such acceptance NO IT IS NOT OK - THE END DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE MEANS Enforcing the law that there is is the only way by those people actually empowered under low to do so - actively encouraging vigilantes to trespass, break and enter, and get away with it scott free is only fanning that flame, and making it that no one is safe in their home, it is more and more Orwellian instead. And sorry, I am also not about to give any support to a group whose end game aim to is turn everyone vegan, I am not going to be dictated to by some AR zealots that I cannot eat meat, wear wool, and put leather on my feet.

it is the place. But yet again, nothing said also about the fact that the footage handed over to TT was taken by activists trespassing - apparently the end justifies the means, and since they did not know for sure according to them it was a puppy farm, and breaking in and filming gave them the evidence, this also apparently suggests they have the implicit OK from the RSPCA to break into any place they think is doing anything they may not approve of. The RSPCA has admitted that even if the new laws come into place, there is nothing different that they would be charging them under anyway, since they are charging them against POCTA offences, then clearly the local councils and DPI are the ones that have been left caught out by this, since this place does look like, from the footage, that many of the areas in which the animals are filmed are less than the current standards allow, let alone the proposed new standards. But vigilante action being OK to obtain evidence is something that should never be approved.

well, that is where you then look at what setting s the camera used, and know that if you wanted to duplicate the shot, that is what you cvould start with, assuming light conditions were the same. But the composition of the frame is just as imprtant too - the ideas of 1/3's, and filling the frame with interest to make the eye move around but return to the subjectmand not have distractions in the image that make the eye want to leave the frame are equally as important as correct exposure and focus - it can be a perfectly exposed and focused image, but if it is also boring or has too many distracting elements that just do not belong, then it will not engage the eye.

Alkhe - love that Meercat shot, you have a lovely depth of field there that has isolated him nicely, and see how just getting that light in his eyes makes him look so lively (and just adds that bit of personality into the shot. tdierikx - love that eagle swooping, again, the catchlights in the eye, the background seperation by the aperture choice, and the movement of the subject even within the frame is wonderful. Good capture!!!

one thing with animal shots - when you are getting a face, the first thing someone will look at is the eyes. If they are out of focus, or "dead", then it makes the subject less interesting. The way to avoid this is to get cathlights in the eyes - the little bit of light that helps add a sparkle to the eye. SO before you start shooting, look for the direction of light, and you can do this easiest if you are unsure by having the model sit, then see where they need to be for the light to be hitting their eyes. One you know the direction, makes sure they are running at you from that direction. There is no substitute for practice, and one thing I would suggest to make it easier in learning the camera is to start with a static object - play around with that under different settings, shoot the same thing at different times of day, with the different lens etc - you will very soon come back to learning the ISO / shutter speed / aperture relationship. And the practice means you are not fiddling for settings or only using presets Tikira - a lot of "photographers" may indeed use presets, however I and any professionals I know certainly do not, except perhaps presets I have set up myself - why would I use the cameras presets which are calculated to turn the image into 18% grey - not what I want if shooting a black cat or a white cat, when I want my black objects black, and my white ones white, not grey. The camera will only do what it is programmed to do. I instead rely on my knowledge (and practice), at knowing exactly what settings will achieve the look I want, know how to read the light to know what ISO I am going to need to use to get that look under almost any conditions, and also know how to work out what I need to base my settings on to get the correct exposure (plus know how to use the compensation settings, and also read the histogram. Why on earth would I let my camera determine all of that for me - I may as well then not even use an SLR if that was what I wanted How do you read the light you may ask - easy - you know bright sunny means ISO 100. Overcast is generally going to mean ISO 400 or maybe 800, indoors no flash may even need to be up to ISO 3200. I will check by putting the camera onto the ISO I have chosen, and check it using the shutter I want, and seeing whether the camera can cope with that. If a test shot shows underexposure or overexposure, I will then adjust as necessary

not all about the megapixels - you also need to consider the sensor size and how much the data is being compressed to fit on a smaller sensor. What you need to look at with your current images is where you consider that the camera is letting you down - you mention graininess - what settings are you using for those? If you choose a lower ISO, do you still have the graininess. Is it there all the time, but only in low light settings? Are you confidently shooting in manual, or are you letting the camera choose all the settings you use by shooting in auto? Certainly the first thing I would always suggest is a better lens - and for a good cheap start, you cannot go past the 50 1.4 lens, which gives a nice wide aperture at probably the lowest price you will get on any prime lens. Next learn to shoot in RAW and process your own images yourself - this will give you way more control over what is going on, as shooting in JPEG ,means the camera decides what data to keep and what to throw (in order to have smaller size files), RAW means all data is there, and you make those decisions in post processing. Do not use the "made up" ISO's when shooting - your camera is only shooting at 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600 etc - the numbers in between are actually the camera basing the data on algorithms from capturing it at say 100, and then reinterpreting it to ISO 160 or whatever in between figure you have selected. You will get cleaner and better results using the traditional ISO levels Determine the exposure settings you wish to use based on the effect you are after in the image - as Bryan Peterson explains in his book, Understanding Exposure (a bible for anyone who wants to learn how to drive their camera), there are many settings that can be used to all expose an image properly, but each one will give a different effect - eg a longer shutter exposure of a waterfall will give the "candyfloss" water effect, a short exposure will freeze the water in motion. A nice wide aperture and placing a subject a good few metres in front of a background will allow you to blur the background, a narrower aperture will through everything into sharpness and not seperate it out. If you still want a new camera, determine what you want in the way of a camera - do you want one that can handle low light well, do you want one that is capable of rapid fire bursts and can quickly write data to card, do you want large megapixel capacity with a large sensor, does it need video capacity etc? A great place to then check out cameras is the website dpreview.com - they review ALL digital cameras, you can see sample images taken with them, and they do a pretty thorough job listing pros and cons too. Better than going to a camera shop and taking the advice of someone who is paid to get the latest model out the door, and sell you on the idea of upgrading in order to make sales commissions And last of all, when you do get your camera and new lens, take good care of them. That includes cleaning camera and lens. If you find that your camera is limited by

think the only way out of it is if the animals are FTGH or they are a Domestic Animal Business and quote their DAB no in the add instead

yep, will not show shots that show breeds in a less than desirable pose

woohoo, that is the best bit of news out of the election - actually the only bit of good news out of the election