PossumCorner

It's pretty dreadful, and doesn't seem to change. Living Desert, Natures Half Acre were "old" not an excuse but sort of understandable, ethics weren't discussed let alone understood. But relatively recently whatizname, the Brit doco-maker (Attenborough, David Attenborough??) admitted, or exposed, that most modern wildlife documentaries are still not as wild as claimed. African wildlife in corrals, where big-cat kills are quite often set-up. As he said, how else could you do it, it would take lifetimes to get the shots otherwise. Believe the movie "The Bear" was one of the worst, went through more bear cubs than "Babe" went through piglets (that's not the Polar bear film, - Brown Bear). Most zoo photography leaves me stone cold too: that is taking an animal into a horrible situation where they are in misery of confinement or developing weird 'behaviours' or indefensible breeding (lions and tigers for godz sake, then they give them some twee name, sickening). Not all wildlife photographers are guilty of wrongdoing, the movie-makers are the worst, some of the top stills photographers are very ethical. But can anyone recall the prize winning shot of the leopard killing the baboon quite a few years ago? Set-up was a fairly tame 'pet' leopard set onto captured/released baboons til 'the shot' was achieved. Amazing: google found it - link to that image - it caused a lot of controversy, and admission it was set up was published. http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/50465050 And falling horses in cowboy movies, hasn't that got a history!!

Might be able to use it on two, still trying to work it out. The extended upgrade was $535, you can get a standard upgrade for $307 which I think does almost everything. Ashanali might know what's involved for multiple computers. If you looking at new computers, don't sniff at the PCs Aldis sell. (Their lap-top is the special this coming week. It has mostly similar good specs to the media desktops we bought from Aldis a few months ago), And they have been great, touch-wood, never had less problems with a PC than these. No crashes.

We bought the upgrade this morning, it was about $500 I think, and I think that is only a licence for one computer - which is not convenient. Not sure of the cost for an extra licence, another $500 or less? (Less would be nice). That is for our PCs, and to upgrade on our Mac as well would be another $500 anyways: so will be limiting it to the PC(s) for quite a while. Love to know what people are doing with it that's 'different', how everyone is finding it.

Try this site, no promises, but I think you can print out the manual. http://documentation.apple.com/en/aperture/usermanual/ There should be quite a chit-chat about it on Digital Review that would give users' opinions, advice. I used earlier versions a little bit when we had Macs, but not much.

Thanks Carluke they are looking fab. Keep the weekly fix coming.

Basenjis are extremely intelligent. They cleverly hide this for a purpose - to make training seem too difficult to bother. They're not just the best dogs, they're the smartest.

Yes I think Lowepro rules, good to have some alternatives though for styles and colour. My newest camera bag is an ultimate for me, probably my "last car" so chosen very very carefully. It's a VW Caddy, small enough to park easy, big enough to carry everything and more - like a portable studio - backdrop and light-stands. Okay, total overkill, but I love it. (It could even pull the small covered float behind it if I was desperate).

Cropped to put the ponies at 'thirds' but that lost me the diagonal line at thirds. Will try again with tripod. This hand-held at 400th, I don't pretend I can hand-hold.

Yes "the real thing" does not come cheap. I can't go near Lincraft or Spotlight without checking out the fabric departments. There is always something on special that you think yes-no-maybe and end up taking a few metres home to try out. It doesn't take long to build up a shelf full of okay backdrops for little expense. Steer away from anything too synthetic or shiny/reflective (polar fleece is synthetic but non-reflective, and washes/dries quickly). Cotton linen mixes in soft marbled colours look very "studio" as a change from plain colour. Denim good for an informal look. Two minutes with an iron is quicker than half an hour with Photoshop. Cheap shed tripods from Bunnings are good for makeshift backdrop holders: staple the fabric to a curtain rod or like Helen said PVC pipe. And google strobist for some tips on lighting to make the backdrops work better for you.

What I love is the expression, you've got her absolute focus and attention, and no self-conscious or self-important 'smile for the camera'. But yes, probably too much background, as well as the toy-bucket, the three conflicting patches of the cushion, the chair and the carpet. Just too many background patches/elements so it gives it a hint of wide-angle distortion.

Rappie I'm mainly a Nikon girl, but no prejudices, I've had most camera brands over the years (including a Hassalblad, all hail). I have a good Pentax SLR and often think of getting a DSLR body so that I can use the lens. Pentax lenses are lovely, and many of the oldies can still be used on the DSLRs (unlike many older Nikon/Canon SLR lenses) so they hold their value well and are fairly sought after. I goofed big-time at the weekend, picked up a Nikon SLR lens and put it on a DSLR body: wouldn't auto-focus, and the shutter jammed a couple of times. Luckily had another body/lens packed in the bag and didn't lose much work, but could have been a better day. And a corner of my mind was thinking, bummer, wouldn't have been a problem with a Pentax.

Big congratulations to you both Ash, lovely double result. And thanks for getting "our" Rocco to the starting gates. Sometimes talented people just need a push from their friends to take that extra step.

'MarketPlace' is fairer as it gives people who don't come to ppp often an equal early chance. But no reason not to also start a normal discussion thread here saying "I've spat the dummy with the whatever for a reason and put it in MarketPlace at b dollars, cost me c dollars 2 years ago, RRP is now d dollars". Then someone here can say you can get them brand new at B&H for e dollars, and it can stay in the photos-photos-photos thread as a discussion. But if we took the camera gear right out of MarketPlace, then all the dog beds and dog coats would logically go to the Crafts and Sewing Section and the whippet collars to the Whippets - so MP would be a bit thin if each specialty item withdrew. This morning I was about to list the Panasonic Lumix FZ20 for sale, but just took some 'last' shots with it, and shouldn't have done that. Too handy, does such a nice job in light within its limitations (just noise at higher ISO). Sale deferred. Oh, and does anyone have a monopod gathering dust seeking a new home?

Have a look at www.animoto.com - - it's USA done by membership: you don't need the $250 a year Pro unless you get a bit serious. They do very short ones free, or you can take a $30 membership, or pay $3 per show (longer than the free ones). The music is a bit bland, plenty of choice but not "known" artists, but it's not pirating which is good. I think with Pro you can submit your own music - easier to use theirs til you get the hang of it all.

Chortle. We used to remove ex-spouses from old wedding photos. Now anyone can do it! I've been made redundant by technology Shell, that's not good. Still, at my age as they say, you get used to it. (Computers made my touch typing skills redundant, satellites made my radio communications skills redundant). Ashanali that's a good point about simplifying watermark removal. I've been jumped on a few times lately because our watermark is too big "we can't see if the horse's ears are forward, the bird is in the way". Tough: I was about to reduce our watermark - now the bird can stay there. So at present it is Lyrebird 1, Photoshop Nil. Have to see how it goes.

I'm probably way wrong - I thought Flickr was just hosting, and anything you want done like cards or calendars, you need to link them through to Snapfish. And with snapfish I thought they had a set price structure and "keep the lot" I didn't think they had a selling-for-the-artist system like RedBubble or Smugmug where the artist gets the profit set aside for them. Happy to be wrong though, I hope someone who knows comes in here. Edit to add: Just saw P'seff's post. That would make sense, you couldn't onforward another Flickr person's work to Snapfish.

Yes, that's been the case for a long time though. Even pre-digital and pre-computers. Google some of Frank Hurley's work, my absolute hero, black and white photography of the Antarctic and war-time. And he was maligned in his day for "cheating" and even called "a liar" for his beautiful image management and compilations. It's complex though isn't it, as to the balance of photographic skill, photoshop skill, and integrity or honesty. I welcome technology that makes cleaning up an image quicker, easier and gives a better finished result. I love to credit good photography, and am pretty unimpressed with people who do some arty photoshop fix-ups and try to pass it off as their photography skills. Bleerrrgh. Yet I love to see the good photoshop work that can turn a wonderful image into an art piece: I just like to know that it's been done. We're updating to CS5 the day it is available of course, can't wait. It will be interesting to get everyone's feedback on what they are doing with it that is "different to before", what features are really useful etc. With horse photography, the simple cleaning up the area around a pony is a welcome feature, to be able to remove the patches of horse manure that look distracting at best on a grass field. For people shooting their dogs in back yards, it would be good to be able to remove dog poo on the path, the garden hose lying around, and the dead pot-plant - and without any tell-tale off-colour smudges.

Red-eye tools aren't meant to use on animal eyes in any of the systems, only made for human red-eye. Photo-shop is the 'best' but it is still unsatisfactory as above comments confirm. And with in-camera flash there are always destroyed eyes and other blown-out highlights in the coat that can't be restored. Much better to have a go at controlling your lighting. Try a cheap 'workshop lamp' from Bunnings, change the yellow globe in it for a daylight one. Set it above the subject, maybe off to one side a bit. Put a plain sheet behind the subject so you don't have conflicting lines and reflective junk things spoiling the image. Or get an on-camera flash outfit that you can adjust to point towards a reflector or the ceiling to reflect light down. Or put a fine split from a Kleenex over the flash to diffuse it a bit. All of that is as quick as spending a lot of time in photoshop trying to fix the unfixable, and cheaper than buying Photoshop.

I got a wee bit impatient and googled, but could only find 2009 results. Oh well, just hafta wait. We collectively expect to be the first to know. How lovely you have a support team there. Everything crossed for an amazing result.

I'm a bit conservative too: prefer to change the 2GB cards more often in case of another card fail. Only ever happened to me once, that's once too often. We copy to an Epson2000 throughout the day, and also try not to re-use cards unless necessary til backed onto computer as well. So - lotsa 2 and 4 cards, Sandisk and Lexar mostly. I think memory cards are like dog leads and Shetland Ponies, you can never have too many. Card readers: great. If I hear of anyone plugging a camera into a computer my fingernails go all funny. When is the next PMA in Melbourne? I'm still using a SandDisk cardreader we got at the last PMA, it's outlasted two other readers. For anyone who gets into Dockside, HarbourLights whatever they call it, where the American Costco SuperSupermarket is, they have SanDisk memory cards very low prices in small bulk amounts. Only the Ultra 2, not Ultra 3. But as people have said above, the Ultra 2 is more than adequate for most cameras and purposes.

I've heard the Tokina 90mm is an exceptional macro lens. I couldn't afford the Nikon macro I wanted, it was ++1000s. I didn't want a short lens that would put my nose close to spiders and ants. So I took some advice from PhotoBuff when I was there one day, he let me trial this and that on the spot, gee I miss that business, he was so helpful. Anyways, took home a Sigma 150mm macro. It is as sharp as, and keeps things a respectful distance away at full frame. I think it was around $1000. Ripley, yes you often need to move the camera to get the focus spot where you want it (generally, can't auto-focus macro, and can't fiddle with lens to manual focus, so yes - get it as good as possible then fine-tune by moving camera). Of course the next big allied expense is a lovely ring flash. One day.

I'm forgetting what camera you have redangel. I'm possibly missing something here but the difference is only that the AFS lenses have their own focussing motor. So if you are "only" shooting with a D40, D60, D5000 (entry levels) then you need to use AFS lenses. Because the camera does not have a focussing motor, it just tells the lens motor to get on with it. With those bodies, you'd have to manual focus, (unless you have an AFS lens on the camera). But if you have a D90, D3, D300 or whatever body - then you don't need AFS. So there is no reason to change it, as it's the camera body does the auto focussing. The quality of the glass in the lens is as excellent and won't be improved by having a focus motor in it.

Excellent, these are great, you can see them thinking. How did you go with storm/hail shots, wondered if you were out and about in it. We lost our car windscreen, few dents in the duco, and a half-tree down over back and side fences, marvellous, goats out, chaos. Still managed to get out for some of the good cloud formations yesterday. Yes, share your lens and settings info for the corellas when time.

I know one of their people: she does not take animals at her house: will do one or two visits a day as required to the client's house. Very capable, professional, experienced, trustworthy, all that. Home-visits works wonderfully if dog/s can cope being home alone the rest of the time. The daily visits often provide as much contact time as kennels do. Requirements are a meet and greet visit prior to your absence, check all fencing or containment, all contact details, vet's details, written feed requirements. It's a good system, not "that" much cheaper than kennels, but cheapness is not so much the issue as having the dog remain in its comfort zone.

300 is good - mine cost over 1000, - that was 5 years ago, don't even know the brand, locally made (Melbourne far-East suburbs) by a vacuum cleaner motor manuacturer: they just reverse the suck-action part of the hose so it blows direct out of the tube. Someone clever could probably convert old vacuum cleaners into dog dryers.