Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : NNBM - SI Branch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ron who wrote (101616)	6/7/2020 1:56:36 PM
From: Crocodile	2 Recommendations Recommended By abuelita Ron Respond to of 104216

all i know is that it has a certain Forrest Gump feel to it. :o)

To: Ron who wrote (101616)	6/7/2020 3:25:46 PM
From: elpolvo	2 Recommendations Recommended By abuelita Cautious_Optimist Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 104216

ron, nothing wrong with that. i was just curious about what was done... and who did it... and why. i've done the same after scanning old photos with physical damage. Here's an old one (from over 30 years ago) that was torn and fading... in the upper right, above my head, you can see some crookedness in the seams of the bimini where the original photo was torn. (it was 13 years ago - 2007 - when i converted the original to digital and made the repairs). i consider photoshop a part of the picture taking process. sometimes i'm already thinking of what i'll do in "post production" , i.e., lighten, darken, sharpen, etc., when i'm snapping the shot. i never had the patience for the S L O W process of seeing what the final product was going to look like after getting it back from the developer. that's how you learn to use cameras -- even making notes of exposures, filters, etc. to save and learn from. it was too S L O W for me to learn photography skills without taking formal classes/instructions and reading books about it. i never took a photography class -- part of the reason was the "expense" of the professional equipment, film and developing costs needed for good photography. i had a friend in high school who was pretty good... BUT he had "advantages" most of us don't. his father owned the local newspaper so he had all the cameras, equipment, and even a darkroom at his disposal. he inherited the paper from his dad and has been the publisher/editor of the same local newspaper for the past 40 years NOW. i was thrilled when digital photography came along. NOW you can see what your final shot is going to look like BEFORE you take the shot. AND you can delete it right away if it's not focused, framed, or exposed correctly and take another shot. ...and THEN you can use digital editing software to further adjust things. that technological evolution is what moved me back into becoming a bit more serious about photography. i started shooting more and learning the craft/skill much more quickly. many amateurs turn out finished photos as good as the professionals do NOW. i'd put crocodile in the "professional" photographers category... partly because of all the training and practice she's done and partly because i know she's been PAID for many of her pictures (especially the insect photos for magazines and publications)... and also partly because her photos are so GOOD. i love it when she explains some of this stuff to us here. it's like having a free photography teacher here in the NNBM bar. i don't know whether to buy her a glass of vino or just fork over the... four cents please. -amateur elpie ps- i didn't get the message you were trying to convey with this: ___m__( ", )__m__ what is that supposed to represent? i tried goo-goo but no luck there either.