russell
Oct 26, 08:58 PM
But you can now set it up to check and EXTERNAL POP email account and filter it into a folder - this is invaluable to me - worth every dollar I'm spending on .mac
gmail can't do that right?
gmail can't do that right?
OutThere
May 5, 07:26 PM
I'm no PC hater, but I do find these comparisons to be kind of amusing. I always come back to thinking about the comparison in terms of cars. A Toyota and an Audi are both going to easily put in 100,000 miles of reasonably reliable service, get you to and from work, and cruise comfortably on the highway. They'll both get the job done. The Audi is more expensive, and you can argue over whether spending the extra money is worth it, but there's not much argument to be made over which is the 'nicer' car.
The materials you touch on your average PC laptop feel decidedly cheap, which is understandable if you don't want to spend much money on your computer. For something I use and enjoy using every day, like a car, a computer, a couch, a pair of pants, a cell phone, whatever...I'm willing to pay a little extra for the good stuff. My choice. Show me a non-Apple laptop with a trackpad that will, after 2 or more years, still be just as smooth and easy to use as when it was new. Really, the trackpad is my biggest point of interaction with my laptop on a daily basis...a 3 year old trackpad on almost any PC will have been polished to a shine in the middle and lost its smooth gliding texture. I paid a premium for a premium product, so be it. Yes, I could have saved $500 by buying an HP. I could also save $30 and buy wal-mart jeans.
That said, I use a core2quad tower with windows 7 at work every day, and it gets the job done. The OS is stable, functional and reasonably elegant. It works, it doesn't make me want to break the monitor over my knee like XP used to, and I'm just as productive as I would be on a mac. I do, however, notice a few little things every day that remind me why I use a mac at home.
The materials you touch on your average PC laptop feel decidedly cheap, which is understandable if you don't want to spend much money on your computer. For something I use and enjoy using every day, like a car, a computer, a couch, a pair of pants, a cell phone, whatever...I'm willing to pay a little extra for the good stuff. My choice. Show me a non-Apple laptop with a trackpad that will, after 2 or more years, still be just as smooth and easy to use as when it was new. Really, the trackpad is my biggest point of interaction with my laptop on a daily basis...a 3 year old trackpad on almost any PC will have been polished to a shine in the middle and lost its smooth gliding texture. I paid a premium for a premium product, so be it. Yes, I could have saved $500 by buying an HP. I could also save $30 and buy wal-mart jeans.
That said, I use a core2quad tower with windows 7 at work every day, and it gets the job done. The OS is stable, functional and reasonably elegant. It works, it doesn't make me want to break the monitor over my knee like XP used to, and I'm just as productive as I would be on a mac. I do, however, notice a few little things every day that remind me why I use a mac at home.
jeffreyropp
Feb 18, 11:45 AM
Notice Steve is the only guy without wine?
Why would you say that unless you're trying to get people stirred up? They all appear to be drinking water (which seems odd and rather sobering)!
Why would you say that unless you're trying to get people stirred up? They all appear to be drinking water (which seems odd and rather sobering)!
w0by
Feb 26, 08:36 AM
I'm not sure how you have your ipod set up, but you need to turn off one touch purchasing in iTunes I believe..this will make sure you type in a password to buy/install apps. I'm the only one that uses my ipod/iphone and I still have that turned on just in case it goes missing and someone decides to buy everything in sight.
It isn't all tweens that are doing this. My 3-year old son was playing with my iPod Touch. I installed the free app Touch Zoo, thinking it was something I could keep him occupied with.
Well, within the next 15 minutes he bought 10 bags of stars - something I didn't know about until I received the $10 invoice from Apple the next day. He didn't know what he was doing - he was just randomly pressing buttons.
Now, to be honest, I had a feeling this might happen someday (the boy seems to get into EVERYTHING), and $10 is a small price to pay for a lesson learned for me. So I disabled the ability to install apps on that iPod Touch. Just for good measure, he's been banned from iPod Touch use unless it's a circumstance when he's fidgety and I need to keep him busy (like at the grocery store or a restaurant). Thank goodness he didn't purchase 100 bags of stars.
Still, it would be nice to have an option (in the restrictions menu) to require the password to be entered every time an app is purchased. That would make my life easier.
While we're at it, the boy almost deleted some videos of himself from my iPhone. I would have been upset, because they were videos from when he was a baby. Can we get another option in the restrictions menu that prevents photos from being deleted?
It isn't all tweens that are doing this. My 3-year old son was playing with my iPod Touch. I installed the free app Touch Zoo, thinking it was something I could keep him occupied with.
Well, within the next 15 minutes he bought 10 bags of stars - something I didn't know about until I received the $10 invoice from Apple the next day. He didn't know what he was doing - he was just randomly pressing buttons.
Now, to be honest, I had a feeling this might happen someday (the boy seems to get into EVERYTHING), and $10 is a small price to pay for a lesson learned for me. So I disabled the ability to install apps on that iPod Touch. Just for good measure, he's been banned from iPod Touch use unless it's a circumstance when he's fidgety and I need to keep him busy (like at the grocery store or a restaurant). Thank goodness he didn't purchase 100 bags of stars.
Still, it would be nice to have an option (in the restrictions menu) to require the password to be entered every time an app is purchased. That would make my life easier.
While we're at it, the boy almost deleted some videos of himself from my iPhone. I would have been upset, because they were videos from when he was a baby. Can we get another option in the restrictions menu that prevents photos from being deleted?
more...
Hellhammer
Jun 14, 02:30 PM
Built-in WiFi seems to be the biggest upgrade. Is it just me or does the case look pretty much the same as some Alienware cases? :p
Tomorrow we'll find out what Sony has in their sleeves
Tomorrow we'll find out what Sony has in their sleeves
.gif "funny sayings and quotes")
MikeTheC
Nov 3, 01:19 AM
I'd like to tackle a few points in the discussion here.
Dirt-Cheap vs. Reasonable Economy (a.k.a. "The Wal-Martization of America"):
Apple has always had the philosophy that their name needs to mean a superior product. They have tended to shy away from producing bargain-basement products because it tends to take away from the "high-quality" reputation they are otherwise known for and desire to continue cultivating.
At direct odds with this is the pervasive and continually-perpetuated attitude in the U.S. (and elsewhere, perhaps) that the universe revolves exclusively around the mantra of "faster, cheaper, better", with emphasis on the latter two: cheaper and better. What I have noticed in my own 34 years on this planet is a considerable change in attitude, most easily summed up as people in general having their tastes almost "anti-cultured". It isn't "... cheaper, better" for them, but rather "cheaper = better". You can see this at all levels. Businesses, despite their claims to the contrary, tend to prioritize the executives specifically and the company generally making money over any other possible consideration. They try and drive their workforce from well-paid, highly competent full-time people, to part-time, no-medical or retirement-benefits-earning, low-experience, low-paid domestic help; and the second prong of their pincer movement is to outsource the rest.
Or, in short, "let's make a lot of money, but don't spend any in the process."
My goal here is not to get into the lengthy and well-trod discussion of corporate exploitation of the masses; rather it is to show the Wal-Mart effect at all levels.
More and more over the years I find that people have no taste. Steve Jobs accuses Microsoft of having no taste (a point I am not trying to argue against); I think however that he's hit a little low of the mark. The attitude out there seems to be one of total self-focus -- and not merely "me first", but rather "me first, me last, and ******* everybody else". They're the "I don't want to know anything", "all I want to do is get out of having to do anything I can, including not using my brain except for pleasure-seeking tasks," and "For God's sake, I surely don't want to have to spend more than the minimum on a computer" bunch.
Now, clearly, not everyone in the U.S. is like this; obviously, if they were, Apple would have no customers at all. But this is a real and fairly large group. Short of Apple practically giving away their computers, it's hard to imagine them being all that specifically attractive to that demographic. Moreover, those people are not merely non-enthusiasts; they want all of the benefits of having this trendy computer thing, but wish to be encumbered by none of the responsibilities.
To my way of thinking, frankly however large this group of people is, I would encourage Apple to avoid appealing to them whenever and wherever possible. If this means continuing the perception mentioned above of being a computer "for yuppies", then so be it.
Market Share Percentage and it's Perception:
Clearly, there is something to be gained by having the perception that "everyone's doing it". It's part of the reason why smoking, drinking, under-age sex, and drugs are so amazingly popular with us human beings the world over. It's part of the reason (maybe even a significant part) that iPods are so incredibly successful. Now, before someone here puts forth the argument that, "Well, you know, Apple's got a better design, and that's what attracts people to it," -- and that's quite true in it's own right -- let's break things down a bit.
Many animals develop and learn through a process called "patterning", and through imitation. Humans are not psychologically exempt from this; we do it all the time, and particularly so when we're younger. It's the fundamental force behind fashion, fads, and trends. There are definitely positive benefits to this. Kids, as they develop their social skills, learn from others the socially approved ways of behaving and interacting. Please note I did not use the term "correct" nor "right", but merely the "approved" (or, one might call it the "accepted") way. We also learn and learn from such things as casualty (actions have consequences), and other factors too numerous to pursue here.
Anyhow, all of these factors are in operation when it comes to buying technology (which is the boiled-down essence of what we're talking about here). Microsoft has learned this game, and has played it well for many years. Regardless of the "technically, we know it's bulls**t" truth, the reality of it is (and has been) when an unsavvy person walks into a store to buy a computer, and they see ten Windows-running computers on the shelf, and only one or two Mac OS-running computers there, they get the prima-facia notion that most computers are Windows computers, and by extension that statistically most people must be running Windows; therefore they should buy a Windows computer, too. There's a whole other subject here about how the ignorant sales people in electronics stores essentially use the same process to unwittingly deceive themselves into thinking the same thing. This is one of the factors which helped catapult Microsoft into the major, successful company they became. In truth, this specific scenario is a bit more 1994 than but it helps to explain why most people today who own a computer have only known life in a Microsoft world. As enough people attained this status, it became the dominant developmental factor in the world at large, which sort of helped to self-perpetuate the effect.
Let's also not lose sight of the fact that these statistics of percentage of platform used by definition leave out one particular group of people -- those who don't use a computer at all. After all, if you don't own a computer, you can't browse the web, send or receive email, or have your computer platform of choice tabulated in any kind of statistical data sample. One might be tempted to think that such a notion is silly, but it isn't. True, once we get to the point that only a statistically insignificant number of people on this planet don't own a computer (which is still far from the reality of today), counting their numbers won't matter for statistical purposes, it does matter. Why? Well, the statistics as presented make it seem like Macs (or Linux, or anything else) are only used by a subset of people on this planet. Not true! They're only used by a subset of a subset, the latter being the number of people on this planet who have a computer to be counted in such statistics in the first place.
Also, statistics vary depending on a variety of factors. It's also easy to write them off as a business or let them drop "below the radar" by various statistical gathering or reporting agencies; or merely through the informal process on the part of business owners of anecdotal evidence. Here's a perfect example of that very factor.
When the Macintosh came on the scene in 1984, and as it continued through it's early incarnations in the mid 1980s, it entered the fray of lots of non-defacto computer platforms. Or, to put it another way, it "came late to the party". So, you had all these computer dealers who were already trying to sell Apple ][s, TRS-80s, Commodore 64s (and later, C128s), Timex Sinclairs, an assortment of other PCs running proprietary OSs, amongst which were those which ran this thing called MS-DOS, and so forth and so on. Also, people who wound up buying Macs didn't exactly fit the same profile as those who had bought the other computers. You had artists -- literary, graphic, musical, etc. -- buying these things. While they didn't mind being technologically self-sufficent, they were not people who were interested in such things as tearing their computer apart and having a go at it's various electronic innards. Anyhow, they formed their own communities, and for various reasons didn't get a lot of support initially from local dealers and computer software stores. However, Apple did get quite a number of companies to write software or build hardware for their Mac platform. These companies started using mail-order as a significant portion of their sales strategy. Consequently, Mac owners used it as their more-and-more-primary computer-stuff purchasing regimen.
Ultimately, fewer and fewer Mac owners were going locally to buy stuff, due to availability and pricing. What then happened largely was this "perception" on the part of shop owners (and later their suppliers, etc.) that nobody out there used a Mac. As a result of their mis-perception, companies began to simply ignore us Mac users (I was around back then), acting as if we didn't exist; or at the least there weren't enough of us to bother supporting us or even trying to make money from us.
Now, at this point there's no denying there's more Windows boxen out there than Mac boxen, but this is still a valid factor and should not be discounted.
Besides, what number you hear quoted still, as it has for many, many years, depends on what your source is. I've heard numbers within the past month that range from 4.1 percent to 6 percent. Which one is correct? Does anyone even really know?
Since we can run Windows, why run Mac OS? (paranoia of market erosion):
I've been hearing this since before Apple ever disclosed their plans to switch to x86. It was actually one of the topics frequently -- and rather hotly, as I recall -- debated in these forums. However, I think the fear is greatly unjustified, and here's why.
First, let's look at it from an economic standpoint: Buying a Mac to run Windows is hardly the most cost-effective approach.
Second, let's look at it from a socio-economic standpoint: People don't buy a Mac to run Windows so much as they buy it to either try something different, or to escape Windows and the onslaught of problems that, in more recent years, it has brought to them.
Third, and while this really applies more to tech-savvy people: Windows represents a security and stability liability which most other operating systems do not.
In other words, by and large, people out there who are switching to a Mac are doing more than merely switching hardware: they're switching OS platforms. The fact that they can run Windows on a Mac is only slightly more of interest to them than is running an x86-based distro of GNU/Linux.
Bottom Line: Apple will appeal to and convert those that they can, and those are the hearts and minds which are the most vital and important anyhow. Let's not forget the relative merits of dummy-dropping. Sometimes, Darwin's theories of Evolution are more satisfyingly applied sociologically than biologically.
Dirt-Cheap vs. Reasonable Economy (a.k.a. "The Wal-Martization of America"):
Apple has always had the philosophy that their name needs to mean a superior product. They have tended to shy away from producing bargain-basement products because it tends to take away from the "high-quality" reputation they are otherwise known for and desire to continue cultivating.
At direct odds with this is the pervasive and continually-perpetuated attitude in the U.S. (and elsewhere, perhaps) that the universe revolves exclusively around the mantra of "faster, cheaper, better", with emphasis on the latter two: cheaper and better. What I have noticed in my own 34 years on this planet is a considerable change in attitude, most easily summed up as people in general having their tastes almost "anti-cultured". It isn't "... cheaper, better" for them, but rather "cheaper = better". You can see this at all levels. Businesses, despite their claims to the contrary, tend to prioritize the executives specifically and the company generally making money over any other possible consideration. They try and drive their workforce from well-paid, highly competent full-time people, to part-time, no-medical or retirement-benefits-earning, low-experience, low-paid domestic help; and the second prong of their pincer movement is to outsource the rest.
Or, in short, "let's make a lot of money, but don't spend any in the process."
My goal here is not to get into the lengthy and well-trod discussion of corporate exploitation of the masses; rather it is to show the Wal-Mart effect at all levels.
More and more over the years I find that people have no taste. Steve Jobs accuses Microsoft of having no taste (a point I am not trying to argue against); I think however that he's hit a little low of the mark. The attitude out there seems to be one of total self-focus -- and not merely "me first", but rather "me first, me last, and ******* everybody else". They're the "I don't want to know anything", "all I want to do is get out of having to do anything I can, including not using my brain except for pleasure-seeking tasks," and "For God's sake, I surely don't want to have to spend more than the minimum on a computer" bunch.
Now, clearly, not everyone in the U.S. is like this; obviously, if they were, Apple would have no customers at all. But this is a real and fairly large group. Short of Apple practically giving away their computers, it's hard to imagine them being all that specifically attractive to that demographic. Moreover, those people are not merely non-enthusiasts; they want all of the benefits of having this trendy computer thing, but wish to be encumbered by none of the responsibilities.
To my way of thinking, frankly however large this group of people is, I would encourage Apple to avoid appealing to them whenever and wherever possible. If this means continuing the perception mentioned above of being a computer "for yuppies", then so be it.
Market Share Percentage and it's Perception:
Clearly, there is something to be gained by having the perception that "everyone's doing it". It's part of the reason why smoking, drinking, under-age sex, and drugs are so amazingly popular with us human beings the world over. It's part of the reason (maybe even a significant part) that iPods are so incredibly successful. Now, before someone here puts forth the argument that, "Well, you know, Apple's got a better design, and that's what attracts people to it," -- and that's quite true in it's own right -- let's break things down a bit.
Many animals develop and learn through a process called "patterning", and through imitation. Humans are not psychologically exempt from this; we do it all the time, and particularly so when we're younger. It's the fundamental force behind fashion, fads, and trends. There are definitely positive benefits to this. Kids, as they develop their social skills, learn from others the socially approved ways of behaving and interacting. Please note I did not use the term "correct" nor "right", but merely the "approved" (or, one might call it the "accepted") way. We also learn and learn from such things as casualty (actions have consequences), and other factors too numerous to pursue here.
Anyhow, all of these factors are in operation when it comes to buying technology (which is the boiled-down essence of what we're talking about here). Microsoft has learned this game, and has played it well for many years. Regardless of the "technically, we know it's bulls**t" truth, the reality of it is (and has been) when an unsavvy person walks into a store to buy a computer, and they see ten Windows-running computers on the shelf, and only one or two Mac OS-running computers there, they get the prima-facia notion that most computers are Windows computers, and by extension that statistically most people must be running Windows; therefore they should buy a Windows computer, too. There's a whole other subject here about how the ignorant sales people in electronics stores essentially use the same process to unwittingly deceive themselves into thinking the same thing. This is one of the factors which helped catapult Microsoft into the major, successful company they became. In truth, this specific scenario is a bit more 1994 than but it helps to explain why most people today who own a computer have only known life in a Microsoft world. As enough people attained this status, it became the dominant developmental factor in the world at large, which sort of helped to self-perpetuate the effect.
Let's also not lose sight of the fact that these statistics of percentage of platform used by definition leave out one particular group of people -- those who don't use a computer at all. After all, if you don't own a computer, you can't browse the web, send or receive email, or have your computer platform of choice tabulated in any kind of statistical data sample. One might be tempted to think that such a notion is silly, but it isn't. True, once we get to the point that only a statistically insignificant number of people on this planet don't own a computer (which is still far from the reality of today), counting their numbers won't matter for statistical purposes, it does matter. Why? Well, the statistics as presented make it seem like Macs (or Linux, or anything else) are only used by a subset of people on this planet. Not true! They're only used by a subset of a subset, the latter being the number of people on this planet who have a computer to be counted in such statistics in the first place.
Also, statistics vary depending on a variety of factors. It's also easy to write them off as a business or let them drop "below the radar" by various statistical gathering or reporting agencies; or merely through the informal process on the part of business owners of anecdotal evidence. Here's a perfect example of that very factor.
When the Macintosh came on the scene in 1984, and as it continued through it's early incarnations in the mid 1980s, it entered the fray of lots of non-defacto computer platforms. Or, to put it another way, it "came late to the party". So, you had all these computer dealers who were already trying to sell Apple ][s, TRS-80s, Commodore 64s (and later, C128s), Timex Sinclairs, an assortment of other PCs running proprietary OSs, amongst which were those which ran this thing called MS-DOS, and so forth and so on. Also, people who wound up buying Macs didn't exactly fit the same profile as those who had bought the other computers. You had artists -- literary, graphic, musical, etc. -- buying these things. While they didn't mind being technologically self-sufficent, they were not people who were interested in such things as tearing their computer apart and having a go at it's various electronic innards. Anyhow, they formed their own communities, and for various reasons didn't get a lot of support initially from local dealers and computer software stores. However, Apple did get quite a number of companies to write software or build hardware for their Mac platform. These companies started using mail-order as a significant portion of their sales strategy. Consequently, Mac owners used it as their more-and-more-primary computer-stuff purchasing regimen.
Ultimately, fewer and fewer Mac owners were going locally to buy stuff, due to availability and pricing. What then happened largely was this "perception" on the part of shop owners (and later their suppliers, etc.) that nobody out there used a Mac. As a result of their mis-perception, companies began to simply ignore us Mac users (I was around back then), acting as if we didn't exist; or at the least there weren't enough of us to bother supporting us or even trying to make money from us.
Now, at this point there's no denying there's more Windows boxen out there than Mac boxen, but this is still a valid factor and should not be discounted.
Besides, what number you hear quoted still, as it has for many, many years, depends on what your source is. I've heard numbers within the past month that range from 4.1 percent to 6 percent. Which one is correct? Does anyone even really know?
Since we can run Windows, why run Mac OS? (paranoia of market erosion):
I've been hearing this since before Apple ever disclosed their plans to switch to x86. It was actually one of the topics frequently -- and rather hotly, as I recall -- debated in these forums. However, I think the fear is greatly unjustified, and here's why.
First, let's look at it from an economic standpoint: Buying a Mac to run Windows is hardly the most cost-effective approach.
Second, let's look at it from a socio-economic standpoint: People don't buy a Mac to run Windows so much as they buy it to either try something different, or to escape Windows and the onslaught of problems that, in more recent years, it has brought to them.
Third, and while this really applies more to tech-savvy people: Windows represents a security and stability liability which most other operating systems do not.
In other words, by and large, people out there who are switching to a Mac are doing more than merely switching hardware: they're switching OS platforms. The fact that they can run Windows on a Mac is only slightly more of interest to them than is running an x86-based distro of GNU/Linux.
Bottom Line: Apple will appeal to and convert those that they can, and those are the hearts and minds which are the most vital and important anyhow. Let's not forget the relative merits of dummy-dropping. Sometimes, Darwin's theories of Evolution are more satisfyingly applied sociologically than biologically.
more...
citizenzen
Apr 12, 03:26 PM
The difference with intelligence and charisma is that they can affect your ability to do the job, whereas being black doesn't.
I work for a state university, have been trained in non-discriminitory practices, have sat on numerous hiring committees and can state without a shadow of doubt that intelligence and charisma are absolutely qualities we look for in a candidate.
Like, no duh. :rolleyes:
I work for a state university, have been trained in non-discriminitory practices, have sat on numerous hiring committees and can state without a shadow of doubt that intelligence and charisma are absolutely qualities we look for in a candidate.
Like, no duh. :rolleyes:
countrydweller
Aug 19, 09:49 AM
There will be a way to turn it off(better be), it's not working yet either.
more...
sk58781111
Oct 7, 10:47 AM
3.5" was great in 2007 but not anymore. Apple needs to make a 4.2" iPhone ;)
rasmasyean
May 1, 09:40 AM
IDC talks about revenues and number of boxes. I'm talking about actual environnements. ;)
One day, when you work in IT, you'll understand what the real workhorse of the industry is.
Hey...get with the times man, "unix god complex" has been out of style for over a decade! :D
One day, when you work in IT, you'll understand what the real workhorse of the industry is.
Hey...get with the times man, "unix god complex" has been out of style for over a decade! :D
more...
mr.fancypants
Nov 6, 10:57 AM
Seems reasonable that a big reason to do this is so that Apple Store employees can scan items with their new iPhone checkout systems... right?
TehReaper
Mar 11, 07:46 AM
Surprisingly is only two of us still in northpark mall.
more...
leekohler
Mar 11, 07:01 PM
Then you may want to buy a Toyota Camry. Ironic, I know. :rolleyes:
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/06/23/cars-com-american-made-index-ranks-toyota-camry-1-again/
Ok now- let's just make one thing clear. :D
I'm single. I need a sexy car, not a four door. :)
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/06/23/cars-com-american-made-index-ranks-toyota-camry-1-again/
Ok now- let's just make one thing clear. :D
I'm single. I need a sexy car, not a four door. :)
tomiiino
Oct 7, 08:02 PM
Apple needs to do something about his supplies of iPhone 4 ... still in a lot of markets waiting time for an iPhone 4 is 3 or more weeks! Supplier can't keep up. It would be very logical to cut share of the iPhone 4 sales.
There are some rumours that Apple bought out whole stock of AMOLED displays from Samsung? What for???
look at twitter post from Eldar Murtazin who has incredible valuable information before hand - http://i.idnes.cz/10/101/gal/ADA363fce_eldarmurtazin_twitter.jpg
There are some rumours that Apple bought out whole stock of AMOLED displays from Samsung? What for???
look at twitter post from Eldar Murtazin who has incredible valuable information before hand - http://i.idnes.cz/10/101/gal/ADA363fce_eldarmurtazin_twitter.jpg
more...
greendragon
Oct 9, 03:08 PM
Ah shut up you bastards...
walmart, target, YOU SUCK!!!
walmart, target, YOU SUCK!!!
iMacZealot
Oct 16, 08:27 PM
*cough*cough*Firewire*cough*cough**cough
The treo doesn't have Firewire, and neither does the 5G iPod.
The treo doesn't have Firewire, and neither does the 5G iPod.
more...
Bonte
Mar 25, 10:36 AM
Greedy or not, if Apple and RIM are part of some patent infringement they have to pay up.
for this? "a method of previewing pictures" :confused:
for this? "a method of previewing pictures" :confused:
lordonuthin
Jun 1, 02:17 PM
I have noticed that a lot of the new folders (including myself) are folding a lot of points for the team, great to see :)
I have now hit the 6k red colour for folding :cool: Need some more competition now on the lower score table :p (no point trying to chase the others ;)
I have noticed there are quite a few new folders on our team "go team" glad to see them and congrats to you for reaching the red zone.
I have now hit the 6k red colour for folding :cool: Need some more competition now on the lower score table :p (no point trying to chase the others ;)
I have noticed there are quite a few new folders on our team "go team" glad to see them and congrats to you for reaching the red zone.
Mac-Addict
Oct 27, 03:27 PM
Who got the sweets and cakes they passed around xD Nice of Apple. Shame they couldnt put barriers up :(
amols
Sep 27, 12:15 PM
This is going to be the most rockin' update eva!!1
Do you know something we don't ??
Do you know something we don't ??
Laird Knox
Mar 5, 04:11 PM
I know I must be overtired ... I actually reached out and touched my screen to see if this was really 3-dimensional!
That made me chuckle, I've done that before myself. :)
Love it! My only qualm is how dark it is. If it had some more "pop" and was brightened up a bit I would be even more in love! Did you have lights inside that place?
Thanks! I find monitor gama really makes or breaks this one. Small changes in the can really darken it up quickly. I have printed it out at 20x30 and it really worked well in my opinion. I'm just finishing up some web site programing before I can get back into my photography. Once I do I plan on revisiting this one. I want to try printing it on both regular paper and metallic.
As for the lighthing I'm lucky I didn't break my neck that night. It was extreamly dark - no Moon and the cottages are wedged between some steep hills. I set the camera up on a tripod and took a couple of test shots for the framing. I just looked at the original images and there are only a couple of blurry images and one only lit from inside before this shot. I was using an old manual lens and must not have focused for the first couple but they were so dark it was hard to see on the LCD. (Still better than waiting for the film to develop.)
Once I had the angle I thought I wanted -- it was still hard to tell on the preview -- I set the camera for remote trigger with a three second delay. I triggered the cammera and when the shutter opened up I held a deep blue Rosco gel over a five watt LED flashlight and swept it across the front of the building a few times.
I then turned off the flashlight and dashed over the uneven ground into the room on the left. There I switched to a red gel and waved the light around the room for a couple of seconds. Then in the dark I ran around to the door and the room on the right. Here I again waved the flashlight around trying to give it an uneven wash. Then I stuck my head out the door and triggered the camera. The whole exposure was about 67 seconds.
In this shot you can see how uneven the ground was. ;)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhM3QvPV8C_BZl3HElb5voqvW3e3Wn7U1z_vEnz6f6WE2Hs5kvEfrBYOvrWpOMfJS37CG17W3KgjnHYyEECddG-QsD7ATDSll8zRsbIfzVBX6P2i-gWZ0zn9RiYaOJBRxQ_NIlcxdFJ6k4/s500/paint2.jpg
In this and another shot from that night I used way too much light. I like the uneven texture of the red and blue image. The other two are just too flat. I do like the texture of the bricks in this one but overall I ruined the shot in my opinion. In the one above you can also see that I didn't have the flashlight fully covered. There is a bit of white light spilling in the foreground.
If I were to do it again I would try putting a strobe in each room. I would need to find something to breakup the flash to get the uneven wash -- maybe some bottle partially filled with water. Then I could use the flashlight for the front lighting and maybe another strobe or two set very low for some side fill.
Overall it was a fun exercise. I had wanted to do some light painting for a long time and I got really lucky for a first try at it.
That made me chuckle, I've done that before myself. :)
Love it! My only qualm is how dark it is. If it had some more "pop" and was brightened up a bit I would be even more in love! Did you have lights inside that place?
Thanks! I find monitor gama really makes or breaks this one. Small changes in the can really darken it up quickly. I have printed it out at 20x30 and it really worked well in my opinion. I'm just finishing up some web site programing before I can get back into my photography. Once I do I plan on revisiting this one. I want to try printing it on both regular paper and metallic.
As for the lighthing I'm lucky I didn't break my neck that night. It was extreamly dark - no Moon and the cottages are wedged between some steep hills. I set the camera up on a tripod and took a couple of test shots for the framing. I just looked at the original images and there are only a couple of blurry images and one only lit from inside before this shot. I was using an old manual lens and must not have focused for the first couple but they were so dark it was hard to see on the LCD. (Still better than waiting for the film to develop.)
Once I had the angle I thought I wanted -- it was still hard to tell on the preview -- I set the camera for remote trigger with a three second delay. I triggered the cammera and when the shutter opened up I held a deep blue Rosco gel over a five watt LED flashlight and swept it across the front of the building a few times.
I then turned off the flashlight and dashed over the uneven ground into the room on the left. There I switched to a red gel and waved the light around the room for a couple of seconds. Then in the dark I ran around to the door and the room on the right. Here I again waved the flashlight around trying to give it an uneven wash. Then I stuck my head out the door and triggered the camera. The whole exposure was about 67 seconds.
In this shot you can see how uneven the ground was. ;)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhM3QvPV8C_BZl3HElb5voqvW3e3Wn7U1z_vEnz6f6WE2Hs5kvEfrBYOvrWpOMfJS37CG17W3KgjnHYyEECddG-QsD7ATDSll8zRsbIfzVBX6P2i-gWZ0zn9RiYaOJBRxQ_NIlcxdFJ6k4/s500/paint2.jpg
In this and another shot from that night I used way too much light. I like the uneven texture of the red and blue image. The other two are just too flat. I do like the texture of the bricks in this one but overall I ruined the shot in my opinion. In the one above you can also see that I didn't have the flashlight fully covered. There is a bit of white light spilling in the foreground.
If I were to do it again I would try putting a strobe in each room. I would need to find something to breakup the flash to get the uneven wash -- maybe some bottle partially filled with water. Then I could use the flashlight for the front lighting and maybe another strobe or two set very low for some side fill.
Overall it was a fun exercise. I had wanted to do some light painting for a long time and I got really lucky for a first try at it.
efoto
Oct 5, 02:30 PM
Thank you for all your work on the widget, especially the last fix ;)
Lovely thing that always reminds me of my status and the teams. Thanks again for the efforts, best of skill with work and school. Hopefully we will continue to see you around.
Lovely thing that always reminds me of my status and the teams. Thanks again for the efforts, best of skill with work and school. Hopefully we will continue to see you around.
fireshot91
Apr 11, 05:43 PM
Around here, I'm fairly certain it's around $4/Gal.
The cheapest gas station in the area is a good 3-4 miles down, and I still drive there to get gas.
The other day I saw it for $3.60/Gal, and filled it up. Honda Civics FTW.
The cheapest gas station in the area is a good 3-4 miles down, and I still drive there to get gas.
The other day I saw it for $3.60/Gal, and filled it up. Honda Civics FTW.
mad jew
Sep 17, 11:04 PM
I'm laughing at this, but I don't know why... can you explain? (Seriously, if there was a joke in there, it went straight over my head...)
I was referring to the pic of you when you were working for The Architect on The Matrix plus the fact that, as you rightly said, I only have a nano and not a mini. :(
I was referring to the pic of you when you were working for The Architect on The Matrix plus the fact that, as you rightly said, I only have a nano and not a mini. :(
No comments:
Post a Comment