MDM

Verified
  • Content count

    2,189
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

786 Forum reputation = excellent

About MDM

  • Rank
    Forum regular

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    England

Alamy

  • Alamy URL
    https://www.alamy.com/contrib-browse.asp?cid={EB02977F-FF09-40CC-90CD-0895911A7F63}&name=Michael+Murphy
  • Images
    3275
  • Joined Alamy
    29 Apr 2009

Recent Profile Visitors

3,710 profile views
  1. No doubt it is. And same here. A lot of my pics were taken on a D700 and it has a big place in my heart. A fine machine.
  2. I wonder has anyone who is dismissing the D300x series actually tried one. Well I have and it is an exceptional camera for the price. The sensor is amazing - for a DX camera it is up there for dynamic range and high ISO noise with some of the big boys. It also has excellent AF. I think Nikon are pitching it cheap to get people into the system. I agree that the 18-55 is not the greatest lens ever made but it has very good centre sharpness and is a decent starter lens. As well there are excellent 35 and 50 used Nikkor primes to be had very cheap. It also has high quality HD video and various other things that might be attractive to a beginner. The D700 is a wonderful machine but it is dated. And a lot of women like light cameras as is evident from this forum.
  3. I am pretty sure that would not be permissible as the owners are using them for publicity and sales which is clearly a commercial use even if your contract says personal use only which contradicts what you are saying anyway. So what happens when somebody licenses an exclusive image and finds one of your clients using it already? That is not what I would consider exclusive. There was somebody on here a few years ago asking about opinions when one of those companies that look out for illicit usage of images on the internet was threatening to sue him for using his own images on his own website - he had the same images as exclusive on another agency. I don't know the outcome.
  4. Why a full frame? You can get an entry level Nikon DX format (D3400 or 3500) with kit lens for well within your budget. These are excellent cameras and excellent value, designed for beginners but fully controllable manually. I bought one for my wife recently and for my son a few years ago do talking from experience.
  5. Actually for my WD portables, slow blinking indicates that the disk is mounted but having a snooze. There is a non-blinking light initially which starts blinking when the disk sleeps. Fast blinking occurs when it is caching or other active reading or writing.
  6. It may be they that the OS or Lightroom is caching data on the disks. I don’t know anything about Windows but Lightroom can cause behaviour like this although it should not be permanent. I should say I recall that you started using Lightroom recently. Or maybe it is backup software running in the background. Or it could be they are all going on the blink simultaneously even if not in unison so be sure you have backups.
  7. If you are spending time adding your address and details as you say then you are really wasting time as this is something that can be done automatically and in bulk - Lightroom can do it completely automatically on import and Adobe Bridge can do it with metadata templates which require very little effort once set up. If you are spending time on it then it is a good idea to learn how to do it efficiently. It is a waste of time for Alamy anyway as the info is discarded but it is a good idea to add a copyright notice and some contact details (email, website) at an early stage in post-processing.
  8. The file size on disk is not relevant, only the pixel dimensions. Years ago there used to be mention of a 25MB disk size but that is ancient and certainly had not been the case for a long time. Max file size (pixel dimensions) was 200MB. I’ve hit that limit with some panoramas. I am not sure if it still applies. The files got rejected by the system but no QC failure. I have been using high MP cameras since the D800 and there is no problem at full size as long as the lens is up to the job. The D850 is about 136 MB (approx before Keith takes issue with the calculation 😎) so well below that limit and there would be no reason to downsize if using good lenses but there is an awful lot of crop space in these images which is a massive advantage in certain circumstances.
  9. Of course you are correct and I was aware of that when posting but I didn’t want to make it any more complicated and for almost all practical purposes it will make no difference.
  10. True. I think Jill knows what she means but has not expressed it very well. Fundamentally the important parameter is the number of pixels in the image which is not directly proportional to the file size on disk as this can vary widely for compressed file formats depending on the content of the image. This includes raw files, JPEGs and even TIFFs if compressed. The number of pixels in the raw image is the same as in the converted image unless it has been cropped. For uncompressed file formats there is a direct proportionality between the number of pixels in the image and the file size on disk but that is a diversion here. The problem here really lies in terminology and Alamy's use of the term uncompressed file size does not help. For Photoshop users the Image Size dialog gives the exact size as required by Alamy if the image is already 8 bit or as Mike has said the little box on the bottom left gives the same. Lightroom shows the same in MB in the metadaa tab iin the Library module if set to show IPTC and can more conveniently show the size in MP in the view options. The conversion from MP to MB is a trivial x3 for 8 bit files. This has been going on for years and nobody at Alamy has ever done anything to properly resolve it by writing some clear and consistent guidance relating to the major image editing programs.
  11. I'm thinking people here and any image could be editorial so I am talking generally. As Joe says, flash draws attention and makes people self-conscious. It is also easy to overdo it where the subject looks like a cutout. A reflector can look a lot more natural as the colour of the fill and ambient light should be the same. However, I find that the radial filter in Lightroom/ACR can work magic on adding light back into shadowy faces if shooting backlit. This allows me to avoid using fill flash in a lot of cases and is very quick in post-processing even sometimes on multiple images. I have become quite adept with this in fact. However, it doesn't add catchlights in the eyes which would mean a Photoshop job so ok for one or two pics but not for a big batch if catchlights are important.
  12. I know what this feels like. My father had 3 years of very bad health before he died at the age of 91 and to be honest it was a relief for the family when he did die. There comes a point where quality of life is so poor that it is no longer really worth living. Modern medicine can extend lives way beyond what can be considered natural and can place terrible burdens on relatives. Of course there is a lot of grief but there is also a definite relief and it is not wrong to admit this I feel. It is easier to come to terms with in my experience than a sudden death which happened with my mother who died very unexpectedly. The shock was powerful with but I moved on as I had no choice but to do so. Anyway I wish you the best. It will ultimately be a rebirth for you I'm sure and you can move forwards. Lifelong learning is a philosophy for me that just comes naturally and it really keeps me going. Best of luck with it all then Betty.
  13. No problem Sung. I am keeping the perpetual license versions but I hope I never have to use them and it is very hard to imagine going back or using other software. It would take a very radical change in policy and price from Adobe to make me do so.
  14. Sorry to hear that Betty but it may signal the end of a very difficult time in your life as I recall you saying how ill your husband was and how hard it was for you to cope. In any case best wishes for the future and hopefully the light at the end of the tunnel will fill your life. Unlike many mistakes we make in life and even in Photoshop, it is possible to go back very easily in Lightroom so here is a little tip. At the bottom left corner of the Develop Module, there is a panel labelled History similar to the History panel in Photoshop. This allows you to go back to the previous step or way back to when you started working on the image if you want. Unlike Photoshop, this remains even when you shut down Lightroom and you can go back years later as long as you don't clear it. You can also make snapshots along the way using the Snapshots panel so you can save different states of the image. So you can have say a colour version and a totally different black and white version as snapshots (different noise reduction settings for example). I find these really useful and it is very simple to do it. I also still use Photoshop a lot - spotting and healing definitely way better than Lightroom as well as other things. PS I learn best from books as well. I like the streucture of a book but nowadays I prefer electronic books on a second screen or on my iPad. Scott Kelby is very good for tutorial style learning. Never stop learning whatever the method. Learning keeps one young - I really believe that.