# A lady bug. Couldn't find anything else. What a menacing creature.



## LightSpeed (Jan 26, 2012)

Taa daaaaa.
lol


----------



## unpopular (Jan 26, 2012)

Hey it's in focus and it's not even pooping!


----------



## TwoRails (Jan 26, 2012)

Nice shot   --  what equipment did you use??


----------



## LightSpeed (Jan 26, 2012)

TwoRails said:


> Nice shot   --  what equipment did you use??


----------



## Ron Evers (Jan 26, 2012)

Very scarey bugs indeed.


----------



## LightSpeed (Jan 26, 2012)

unpopular said:


> Hey it's in focus and it's not even pooping!


----------



## cgipson1 (Jan 26, 2012)

very nice.......  you need some diffusion though.... that highlight on her shell is a bit high. You could probably soften that ringlight up a bit with some silk or something... make it really sweet!


----------



## LightSpeed (Jan 26, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> very nice.......  you need some diffusion though.... that highlight on her shell is a bit high. You could probably soften that ringlight up a bit with some silk or something... make it really sweet!



I know, I saw that shyt.
The light is already diffused.
But apparently not enough at times.
The problem here is the lady bug shell is highly reflective.

I'm gonna have to figure something out as a fix for certain subjects.
I can't get a decent image this week, no matter what I do.
I'm in a slump.

Sincerely,
SlumpSpeed


----------



## cgipson1 (Jan 26, 2012)

dude.. it is a nice image! And what is wrong with is easily fixed... especially if you copy me and get that D4!! lol!


----------



## photog4life (Jan 26, 2012)

what if you put the flash over to the side? or you could probablly edit it out... or even drop the flash completely (if possible)


----------



## LightSpeed (Jan 26, 2012)

Wait a minute?
You're getting a D4 too?

I'm never going to get ahead in this , am I?
Wait a minute.
Who's copying who here?
All of a sudden now Gipson wants a D4 too.


----------



## LightSpeed (Jan 26, 2012)

photog4life said:


> what if you put the flash over to the side? or you could probablly edit it out... or even drop the flash completely (if possible)



I need CS5.


----------



## punch (Jan 26, 2012)

See... in this one you alerted me to the fact that an insect would be in my face if I opened the thread, and that he might be, possibly, menacing.  Thanks.

Also, really nice shot.


----------



## photog4life (Jan 26, 2012)

LightSpeed said:


> photog4life said:
> 
> 
> > what if you put the flash over to the side? or you could probablly edit it out... or even drop the flash completely (if possible)
> ...



have you tryed gimp? would you mind me trying to edit it out? if it doesnt turn out good i obviously wont post it... i think i might be able to do something with it..


----------



## LightSpeed (Jan 26, 2012)

Go right ahead.
Edit away


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Jan 26, 2012)

Lightspeed...can you hear me?

CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW???

You know...its been a while... I am no magician but there are indeed Wizards out there...You have a real love of macro and I would love to see you kick ass with it. BUT, there is IMHO a constant issue with lighting and since I am not a Macro expert I must turn it over to others who should just band together as a mentor group to get you where you need to be. 

Your subjects are not lit to the point where they are crisp and sharp, and I am a stalker...I admit it...and I say this because I believe it to be so.

And this one is clearly burned out.

I am not familair with the equiptment you are shooting with, so again, I am not an expert.

But its time that someone(s) who knows better on this forum tells you what you need to do to make what ever adjustments with equipment or set ups are necesary so that you can really execute your visions in top form.

Fingers crossed that this happens for you soon.


----------



## mishele (Jan 26, 2012)

I've never seen a Ladybug w/ a white stripe like that!! What a lucky find!!!


----------



## cgipson1 (Jan 26, 2012)

LightSpeed said:


> Wait a minute?
> You're getting a D4 too?
> 
> I'm never going to get ahead in this , am I?
> ...



Mine has been on order for nearly a month already! So there!   lol!


----------



## LightSpeed (Jan 26, 2012)

GeorgieGirl said:


> Lightspeed...can you hear me?
> 
> CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW???
> 
> ...



Theres nothing you can teach me. You're not someone I want to learn anything from either.
I been thru the ringer with you already, as a result I was banned, I might add that I may have deserved it. I did my time, came back, and avoided you like the plague.
I was rude to you because you deserved it. I don't want to be rude to you again, but I will if the need be.
Now lets see. I can take criticism, no problem. I laugh and joke it out with quite a few people here.
Yes I even consider some of them friends in a round about kinda way, considering none of us have ever met.
I enjoy their company. I enjoy this forum and when I get a punch in the gut, or in your case, a kick in the nuts, I come back with something.
Just about every time. 

Now here's the thing, I know I'm not a pro. Doesn't stop me tho.
I'm workin on it. Not being a pro, but being better. And here's something else you might not know.
I enjoy making friends. Yes even with beginners. Because I know I'm not above them.
I kick it around with em, make a remark here and there and we all laugh it off and have a good ole time with something that's supposed to be fun.
And as they make their mistakes, I make mine. None of  us have to apologize for it. Just a pat on the back, nice try, and there's gonna be a next time.

You aint the first woman to ever stalk me, I'm certain you won't be the last.
There'll never be a notch in my bedpost for you.
I aint part of your crew. I know who is who here. And I know who I don't want to be like.
So I stay on my side, away from you and yours.

Because you see, I know where I am with this and I know where I want to be.
I wouldn't count me out, because it will happen. When it does, I'll be the last person here to look down anyone's nose thinking they're beneath me.
The LightSpeed promise.

If by chance,  I've offended you, then we're even, M'lady.
And I don't refer to this thread, as you know.
In this world there are the way things are, and the way things should be.
Sometimes things change. But for now, we are where we are.

Be well.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jan 26, 2012)

hmmm.. before my time drama! Oh well!

Here is an edit.. hope you like:


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Jan 26, 2012)

LightSpeed said:


> GeorgieGirl said:
> 
> 
> > Lightspeed...can you hear me?
> ...



No feense taken and it does not change the facts that I pointed out one iota. Stubborn you are, or not.


----------



## LightSpeed (Jan 26, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> hmmm.. before my time drama! Oh well!
> 
> Here is an edit.. hope you like:




*THAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Gipson, thank you.
But umm, I over saturated it.

*


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Jan 26, 2012)

So...Fair Lad...how do you accomplish that In-Camera...before the help of others here PP?


----------



## cgipson1 (Jan 26, 2012)

I can help him do that... soft light is where it is at! Light like a soft downy pillow that just gently wraps your subject with love! 

(but it might be impossible with that ring light)


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Jan 26, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> I can help him do that... soft light is where it is at! Light like a soft downy pillow that just gently wraps your subject with love!
> 
> (but it might be impossible with that ring light)



Crazy Horse...have at it then....


----------



## mishele (Jan 26, 2012)

Where did the stripe go?!!!


----------



## Overread (Jan 26, 2012)

Take the ringflash off the end of the lens - then treat it like a single light source - diffuse the light from the rings (a bit disk for example- should help soften things up. You've send a burning blaze of light over that shiny shell.


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Jan 26, 2012)

...I Think that Charlie helped him...AND got no Thanks....


----------



## Dao (Jan 26, 2012)

Great shot, especially the new edit. !!


BTW, that is a Asian lady beetle.


----------



## 20PlusYears (Jan 26, 2012)

GeorgieGirl said:


> ...I Think that Charlie helped him...AND got no Thanks....



He thanked him.  Did you see the big bold "thank you"?  Geez, this only happened 10 minutes ago...


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Jan 26, 2012)

GeorgieGirl said:


> ...I Think that Charlie helped him...AND got no Thanks....



...and so did Over....


----------



## LightSpeed (Jan 26, 2012)

GeorgieGirl said:


> So...Fair Lad...how do you accomplish that In-Camera...before the help of others here PP?



By diffusing the light, more, M'lady.
There's always CS5, which I don't have.

In super macro, wearing a raynox, sitting on a 100mm macro and a 25mm extension, bouncing is out of the question.
When at f22 or even f32 depth of field becomes a problem.
Light is part of that problem. I just got the ring flash less than a week ago. For the most part, I've been doing this under natural light. Until now.
So what will I do? Why, M'lady, I shall learn. And adapt.

And I will get Gipson to help me.
And I'll read, and practice and learn the lighting system.
And then from there I will incorporate exposure and composition.
What little composition that can be had in Macro, that is.
And then when I have that down, I'll produce an image, another one, and shove it right down your throat.
I should be thanking you right now. Because now I have yet another goal. Thank you.
Without you, this wouldn't be possible. lol
It's this kinda stuff, I just get into.

But really, don't feel like you're unwanted.
You're wanted.

I haven't had time to thank Overread, I've been dealing with your nitpicking. lol
I'm pretty sure overread knows where I am with this. He's also big into macro from what I've gathered.
You must have missed that.
But here it is.
I shouldn;t have to do this but for your sake, and your sake alone........

Overread, you know I appreciate your advice. It goes without saying.
But I don't ever do that. I just didn't have time. lol


----------



## 20PlusYears (Jan 26, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> hmmm.. before my time drama! Oh well!
> 
> Here is an edit.. hope you like:




Nice PP.  I wish that I had started learning about post processing and editing when the tools became available.  But being an old dog, I stayed away from computers.  Now I just try and get it right on the first try (that thought process comes from my film days).


----------



## Ballistics (Jan 26, 2012)

Good shot and edit both Light and Gibson. I personally enjoy the post processing part of taking pictures, and sometimes will purposely make work for myself to see what I'm capable of. .


----------



## cgipson1 (Jan 26, 2012)

20PlusYears said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > hmmm.. before my time drama! Oh well!
> ...



Thanks!   I started playing with Photoshop in the late  90's.... I started shooting film in the mid 70's! Of course I caught the  computer bug in late 70's... now it is all sort one big mashed together  mess!    lol!


----------



## LightSpeed (Jan 26, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> 20PlusYears said:
> 
> 
> > cgipson1 said:
> ...



Which I intend to tap.
The photoshop part. I've done all the rest of that stuff.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jan 26, 2012)

LightSpeed said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > 20PlusYears said:
> ...



Hey.. not a photoshop pro.. not at all! I just started seriously  trying to use layers just in the past year or so. When I said playing.. I  meant it! More for fun than anything else. I will help all I can  though!


----------



## tommyboy (Jan 26, 2012)

Nice retouch!


----------



## LightSpeed (Jan 26, 2012)

GeorgieGirl said:


> ...*I Think that Charlie helped him...AND got no Thanks.*...



Really?
Is that what you think?
I don't want to make you feel stupid. I don't want anyone to see me do that after what I've preached here.
I'll let someone else field this.

I've made a few friends here. You're not taking that away from me.
I won't be drawn into your crap, where later, I dissect you and look like the bad guy, for making you look bad, when you've already done it on your own.
You already forgot the part about, the way things are and the way things should be.

Don't be offended.
This has nothing to do with photography. It has to do with life.
One must learn to appreciate it. And I do.


----------



## unpopular (Jan 26, 2012)

Screw gimp. It sucks.

Photoline32 is better, costs only like 60 and does most of the stuff you'd want actually want to use Photoshop, and a few things Photoshop can't.


----------



## MTVision (Jan 26, 2012)

LightSpeed said:
			
		

> Really?
> Is that what you think?
> I don't want to make you feel stupid. I don't want anyone to see me do that after what I've preached here.
> I'll let someone else field this.
> ...



How dare you not thank Charlie! 
And here I was thinking you were the man of my dreams - WTH.


----------



## photog4life (Jan 26, 2012)

unpopular said:


> Screw gimp. It sucks.
> 
> Photoline32 is better, costs only like 60&#8364; and does most of the stuff you'd want actually want to use Photoshop, and a few things Photoshop can't.



not when you come from a graphic design background? and since it open source you can have it do ANYTHING! i decided ot to mess with it i tryed a couple different ways and couldnt get it just right so i left it...


----------



## unpopular (Jan 26, 2012)

Gimp _*REALLY, REALLY*_ sucks for graphic design. At least for print it does. Web I'd imagine it's great, that is what it was designed for initially.

And as far as having it do "anythinng" I'm still waiting on 16 bit and adjutsment layers.

I know, they'll come, and when it does it should be pretty decent.


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Jan 26, 2012)

Your lighting is off and has always been off no matter how many times you post. Your subject has not been dead on from day one. And with all your time on this forum ...Look at Carlos 58 and then become Carlos 59. 

Time to pay attention.


----------



## Ballistics (Jan 26, 2012)

LightSpeed said:


> GeorgieGirl said:
> 
> 
> > ...*I Think that Charlie helped him...AND got no Thanks.*...
> ...



The best advice I can give you is ignore the senile instigators on the board. They bring nothing to the table and are only here to stir **** up because they're bored and nuts.


----------



## unpopular (Jan 26, 2012)

GeorgieGirl said:


> Your lighting is off and has always been off no matter how many times you post. Your subject has not been dead on from day one. And with all your time on this forum ...Look at Carlos 58 and then become Carlos 59.
> 
> Time to pay attention.



Me or Lightspeed?

And what does this have to do with gimp?


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Jan 26, 2012)

Ballistics said:
			
		

> The best advice I can give you is ignore the senile instigators on the board. They bring nothing to the table and are only here to stir **** up because they're bored and nuts.



And you dear nubile cannot begin to share improvement techniques to any one because you are just too uneducated...sorry for ya.


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Jan 26, 2012)

unpopular said:
			
		

> Me or Lightspeed?
> 
> And what does this have to do with gimp?



Not you.


----------



## Ballistics (Jan 26, 2012)

GeorgieGirl said:


> Ballistics said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



See what I mean Lightspeed? First she says I'm sexually attractive and then tells me that I can't do literally the exact same thing she said she couldn't do herself. When will the madness end? She's nuts.


----------



## blackrose89 (Jan 26, 2012)

GeorgieGirl said:


> Your lighting is off and has always been off no matter how many times you post. Your subject has not been dead on from day one. And with all your time on this forum ...Look at Carlos 58 and then become Carlos 59.
> 
> Time to pay attention.



Looks pretty dead on to me  

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...ack-you-guessed-zoo-zoo-obviously-not-me.html


----------



## unpopular (Jan 26, 2012)

I prefer the gimp sucks debate... because it does.


----------



## Ballistics (Jan 26, 2012)

unpopular said:


> I prefer the gimp sucks debate... because it does.



I guess you get what you pay for.


----------



## blackrose89 (Jan 26, 2012)

unpopular said:


> I prefer the gimp sucks debate... because it does.



I used gimp and thought it was awesome. I discovered Photoshop last night. Yes. Gimp sucks! But hey you're getting it for me free I guess.


----------



## Ballistics (Jan 26, 2012)

blackrose89 said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > I prefer the gimp sucks debate... because it does.
> ...



Did you happen to DL a trial?


----------



## Carny (Jan 26, 2012)

LightSpeed said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > But being an old dog I just try and get right on the first try.
> ...



LOL, finally you two come out and admit it.  Just pool your resources and share the D4!  LS, please tell Gipson, because I'm an asshole and on his ignore list.


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Jan 26, 2012)

Ballistics said:
			
		

> See what I mean Lightspeed? First she says I'm sexually attractive and then tells me that I can't do literally the exact same thing she said she couldn't do herself. When will the madness end? She's nuts.



Again Balls you desire to flatter yourself. I saw your self portrait and no, Thank You. No thank you at all...

But getting back to meaningful photography... Review any or all of Carlos 58 images and then by virtue of simply looking you will have had the benefit of seeing the high bar and what to strive for. 

If you want mediocre, then you can easily have it. If you want to achieve and execute, then accept the insight to that pathway and build on it. 

If you want a fan club... You have a few groupies for your dead end.


----------



## Carny (Jan 26, 2012)

again, I know these posts make look creepy, but I'm mostly a lurker and just can't help it sometimes.  Besides, I'm "no longer a newbie, moving up!", and have 9 likes.  Someday I'll actually post some pics, then you guys can rip me a new one


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Jan 26, 2012)

blackrose89 said:
			
		

> Looks pretty dead on to me
> 
> http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/photography-beginners-forum-photo-gallery/265595-freshly-back-you-guessed-zoo-zoo-obviously-not-me.html



Get real . Do you ever shoot macro??? I don't think so.


----------



## Carny (Jan 26, 2012)

GeorgieGirl said:


> Ballistics said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I haven't read enough of your posts to come to a conclusion on my own, so I must ask, is it genuine insanity or the sweet sting of methamphetamine?


----------



## blackrose89 (Jan 26, 2012)

GeorgieGirl said:


> blackrose89 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Do my best   done with a P&S




bee feeding by blackrose1981, on Flickr


----------



## Ballistics (Jan 26, 2012)

GeorgieGirl said:


> Ballistics said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You called me a nubile... marriageable, sexually attractive. You've taken latin in high school right(which was probably before I was born)? Funny thing about you, you have no issue tearing apart people's images and in the rarity that you do post an image, it's usually garbage. Mediocre would be a compliment for your work.  You just spew your nonsensical craziness all over people's threads. It's drama where ever you post, because you are a catty old hag with nothing to do with yourself. Get a hobby woman.


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Jan 26, 2012)

Carny said:


> GeorgieGirl said:
> 
> 
> > Ballistics said:
> ...



Coming from you with a queston like that...its definately somehing that you will never be able to ascertain.


----------



## unpopular (Jan 26, 2012)

Ballistics said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > I prefer the gimp sucks debate... because it does.
> ...



I don't know. Blender is good. Ardour is fair (and getting better). Most of the internet runs on Apache and SQL, about 75% of Mac OS is GPL aside from the Finder.

Gimp users are all tangled up in how awesome Gimp is, and how it's a replacement for photoshop - and I think that sentiment has influenced development choices. No Blender user says that Blender is _as good as _Maya or SoftImage, they're constantly trying to make it as good as Maya and SoftImage.


----------



## Ballistics (Jan 26, 2012)

Carny said:


> GeorgieGirl said:
> 
> 
> > Ballistics said:
> ...



I guessed alcohol, but she is rarely coherent when she speaks.


----------



## LightSpeed (Jan 26, 2012)

GeorgieGirl said:


> And you dear nubile cannot begin to share improvement techniques to any one because you are just too uneducated...sorry for ya.




Perhaps you should move on.
Not to be rude, since I'll extend a courtesy to you that you never reciprocate.
Obviously you're here to stir the pot considering you don't know what you're talking about.
And most likely forgot you even said it.
You even admitted you have 0 experience with macro and/or macro equipment.
So now you resort to attacking others on this thread.
You're out of line missy.

So here's what I'm gonna do. I'm going to ask the moderators for the benefit of the doubt on this one, in that you're a nutbag.
On top of that, I am going to counter your supporting member status ( the badge that says, so you think,  you can do anything you want and get away with it)
and offer the photo forum 5 memberships for the 5 newbies of my choice.
Starting with Blackrose, unpopular, Ballistics, Scraig and one other. AT my expense of course.
I'll remain a non-supporting - supporting member. We'll do battle, I'll wait for you to post your next uninteresting image and tell you how good you are.
Then we'll all watch in glee as you attack new members and tell them they need to take several weeks off from the forum because they are babbling, and you know everything.
And while we're at it, we'll just laugh at you without reply.
We don't want to make you look bad.

So, this offer is very real. 5 memberships.
That is , if those mentioned don't mind that I offer this to them.

Meanwhile, you mentioned something about an Iota.
I've never eaten or smoked one. I remember my grandmother saying something about an Iota once.
But I never did know what it was. You're probably close to her age. What is an Iota, anyhow?


----------



## Carny (Jan 26, 2012)

GeorgieGirl said:


> Carny said:
> 
> 
> > GeorgieGirl said:
> ...


I guess I'll be condemned to a life of proper grammar and spelling, then.  And not "ascertaining" something still doesn't clarify.  Will I not ascertain because I'm sane, or because I pass on what my buddy up the street calls the "brown recluse" in an effort to make his sub-par, dangerous concoction which may or may not contain meth sound cool?


----------



## Carny (Jan 26, 2012)

I'm not sure if the first sentence in my last reply is technically proper grammar, but it's close enough to make it past her, so let me know in a pm if it is wrong, lol.


----------



## Carny (Jan 26, 2012)

LightSpeed said:


> GeorgieGirl said:
> 
> 
> > And you dear nubile cannot begin to share improvement techniques to any one because you are just too uneducated...sorry for ya.
> ...


OOOHHH! Pick me!  Pick me!


----------



## photog4life (Jan 26, 2012)

unpopular said:


> Gimp _*REALLY, REALLY*_ sucks for graphic design. At least for print it does. Web I'd imagine it's great, that is what it was designed for initially.
> 
> And as far as having it do "anythinng" I'm still waiting on 16 bit and adjutsment layers.
> 
> I know, they'll come, and when it does it should be pretty decent.



hmm mabe that is why it works so great for me? i dont print stuff just web... and i guess  it is all personal preference! i prefer gimp because once you learn the tools it is easy... but hey whatever floats you boat


----------



## LightSpeed (Jan 26, 2012)

The fifth supporting member.

CARNY.

That's five.


----------



## LightSpeed (Jan 26, 2012)

Ballistics said:


> GeorgieGirl said:
> 
> 
> > Ballistics said:
> ...



LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO


----------



## LightSpeed (Jan 26, 2012)

GeorgieGirl said:


> Get real . Do you ever shoot macro??? I don't think so.





blackrose89 said:


> GeorgieGirl said:
> 
> 
> > blackrose89 said:
> ...



LOL
GeorgieGirl, there is always an end to the means. I think you have found yours.
lol


----------



## Carny (Jan 26, 2012)

LightSpeed said:


> The fifth supporting member.
> 
> CARNY.
> 
> That's five.



That almost makes me want to take back the jokes about you and gipson.  Almost.


----------



## unpopular (Jan 26, 2012)

photog4life said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > Gimp _*REALLY, REALLY*_ sucks for graphic design. At least for print it does. Web I'd imagine it's great, that is what it was designed for initially.
> ...



Until gimp can separate a spot color or work in native CMY*K, it's not really an opinion. Gimp is pretty much ill-suited for print.


----------



## unpopular (Jan 26, 2012)

.. wait. you jsut put me in a list with blackrose?!!

:lmao:


----------



## photog4life (Jan 26, 2012)

I'm ussually un biased... But georgie girl is  just stupid... really? what the hell is the point of this? the last 3 pages are a waste! lets see one of your pictures georgie girl... huh? you dont have any good ones?


----------



## blackrose89 (Jan 26, 2012)

unpopular said:


> photog4life said:
> 
> 
> > unpopular said:
> ...


----------



## photog4life (Jan 26, 2012)

unpopular said:


> photog4life said:
> 
> 
> > unpopular said:
> ...



again like i said i dont print anything so i cant say anything about it... i use it for WEB design and editing..


----------



## unpopular (Jan 26, 2012)

photog4life said:


> the last 3 pages are a waste!



Well. Don't let me slow things down ...


----------



## blackrose89 (Jan 26, 2012)

unpopular said:


> .. wait. you jsut put me in a list with blackrose?!!
> 
> :lmao:



Is this a good thing? lol!


----------



## Ballistics (Jan 26, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> I can help him do that... soft light is where it is at! Light like a soft downy pillow that just gently wraps your subject with love!
> 
> (but it might be impossible with that ring light)



What about bouncing a flash off of a reflector?


----------



## blackrose89 (Jan 27, 2012)

unpopular said:


> photog4life said:
> 
> 
> > the last 3 pages are a waste!
> ...



What was that thread you tried your damndist to derail? You even question why was it so hard?


----------



## Ballistics (Jan 27, 2012)

photog4life said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > photog4life said:
> ...



You should without a doubt optimize your images for print, even if you don't print. Down the road, that may change.


----------



## unpopular (Jan 27, 2012)

well. I wouldn't optimize for CMYK unless it's going to press.


----------



## unpopular (Jan 27, 2012)

blackrose89 said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > photog4life said:
> ...



I think it was that stupid a77 thread ... was it recent?


----------



## photog4life (Jan 27, 2012)

Ballistics said:


> photog4life said:
> 
> 
> > unpopular said:
> ...



screens are based off of ryg or whatever it is i dont mess with it...     i want my graphics to be true to color not a mixture of a bunch of colors..


----------



## blackrose89 (Jan 27, 2012)

unpopular said:


> blackrose89 said:
> 
> 
> > unpopular said:
> ...


----------



## unpopular (Jan 27, 2012)

blackrose89 said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > photog4life said:
> ...


----------



## Ballistics (Jan 27, 2012)

unpopular said:


> well. I wouldn't optimize for CMYK unless it's going to press.



We use that at school for our prints.


----------



## unpopular (Jan 27, 2012)

blackrose89 said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > blackrose89 said:
> ...


----------



## unpopular (Jan 27, 2012)

Ballistics said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > well. I wouldn't optimize for CMYK unless it's going to press.
> ...



Why?! What are you printing to?


----------



## photog4life (Jan 27, 2012)

unpopular said:


> Ballistics said:
> 
> 
> > unpopular said:
> ...



my desktop publishing teacher made us do everything in cmyk until i did an assignment on gimp instead of photoshop because i was late on it... it was the only project i got 100 on haha


----------



## Ballistics (Jan 27, 2012)

unpopular said:


> Ballistics said:
> 
> 
> > unpopular said:
> ...



epson 7900


----------



## unpopular (Jan 27, 2012)

For desktop publishing you'd want everything to be in CMYK, unless you're going to a six or eight color process press, which are pretty unusual and have their own workflow.

Like hex/oct presses, most photo printers have unique color spaces to CMYK and do all the conversion in the print driver to utilize the whole of the inkset effectively. If you send it a CMYK file, you're only limiting your gamut - and significantly so.


----------



## unpopular (Jan 27, 2012)

Ballistics said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > Ballistics said:
> ...



Is this photography, or graphic design?


----------



## photog4life (Jan 27, 2012)

unpopular said:


> For desktop publishing you'd want everything to be in CMYK, unless you're going to a six or eight color process press, which are pretty unusual and have their own workflow.
> 
> Like CMYK presses, most photo printers have unique color spaces to CMYK and do all the conversion in the print driver. If you send it a CMYK file, you're only limiting your gamut - and significantly so.



for print! i didnt print it... i just sent it in an email to her...


----------



## Ballistics (Jan 27, 2012)

unpopular said:


> For desktop publishing you'd want everything to be in CMYK, unless you're going to a six or eight color process press, which are pretty unusual and have their own workflow.
> 
> Like CMYK presses, most photo printers have unique color spaces to CMYK and do all the conversion in the print driver. If you send it a CMYK file, you're only limiting your gamut - and significantly so.



You know more about it than I do, but my prints come out pretty nice.


----------



## LightSpeed (Jan 27, 2012)

Ballistics said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > Ballistics said:
> ...



I have one of those.


----------



## unpopular (Jan 27, 2012)

Ballistics said:


> You know more about it than I do, but my prints come out pretty nice.



I am sure they do, definitely. There is a lot of space in CMYK, just not as much as the full 10-color inkset of a 7900.


----------



## unpopular (Jan 27, 2012)

photog4life said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > For desktop publishing you'd want everything to be in CMYK, unless you're going to a six or eight color process press, which are pretty unusual and have their own workflow.
> ...



Just be glad you didn't send it to a print shop. They'd charge you an arm and a leg to preflight all those RGB images.


----------



## photog4life (Jan 27, 2012)

Unpopular- you just went into the future to post that   my computer said the time was 12 16 but you posted it at 12 17!


----------



## LightSpeed (Jan 27, 2012)

unpopular said:


> I am sure they do, definitely. There is a lot of space in CMYK, just not as much as the full 10-color inkset of a 7900.



11 colors.


----------



## photog4life (Jan 27, 2012)

unpopular said:


> photog4life said:
> 
> 
> > unpopular said:
> ...


Grr ill talk to you tomorrow about this! im screwing easy things up like RGB because im tired..


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Jan 27, 2012)

photog4life said:


> I'm ussually un biased... But georgie girl is  just stupid... really? what the hell is the point of this? the last 3 pages are a waste! lets see one of your pictures georgie girl... huh? you dont have any good ones?



I post my photos often. They are around. Just look for them.


----------



## photog4life (Jan 27, 2012)

GeorgieGirl said:


> photog4life said:
> 
> 
> > I'm ussually un biased... But georgie girl is  just stupid... really? what the hell is the point of this? the last 3 pages are a waste! lets see one of your pictures georgie girl... huh? you dont have any good ones?
> ...


show us... post one today.. if you dont then shut up and mind your own business...


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Jan 27, 2012)

Fact of the matter is that I provided insight to the OP that there is some element that I cannot identify for him that is preventing him from crystallizing his shots. 

Rather than the oohs and ahhs that are preferable to many, and despite what ever occurred in the past, I thought it was important to convey this in order for this guy to improve more. Simple as that, no malice was intended when I posted my message to him. 

In my closing comments to you, if think you are going to bully me into posting photos to accommodate your demands you are certainly expecting too much as your demand is unreasonable in my opinion. 

Today is a new day. Time to put the past in the past and move on. I do hope that the OP is able to step back and take a deeper look at what I said and either contemplate it or discard it but do that with an open mind. 

Another macro photographer on this site who does incredible work that one might want evaluate and to emulate is Orionsbyte. I think I have that spelled right. He also posts his work and galleries  on Photo Radar.


----------



## o hey tyler (Jan 27, 2012)

wat


----------



## photog4life (Jan 27, 2012)

GeorgieGirl said:


> Fact of the matter is that I provided insight to the OP that there is some element that I cannot identify for him that is preventing him from crystallizing his shots.
> 
> Rather than the oohs and ahhs that are preferable to many, and despite what ever occurred in the past, I thought it was important to convey this in order for this guy to improve more. Simple as that, no malice was intended when I posted my message to him.
> 
> ...



how is putting new people down helping ANYBODY? The only thing worth paying any attention too is lighting...  other than that you just put people down


----------



## Nikon_Josh (Jan 27, 2012)

Jeez, this thread really did turn from a molehill to a mountain! I've noticed alot of the posts on the beginner forums seem to turn in too complete circuses.


----------



## Ballistics (Jan 27, 2012)

o hey tyler said:


> wat



Again... you always say what I'm thinking, so I don't have to.


----------



## Ballistics (Jan 27, 2012)

unpopular said:


> Ballistics said:
> 
> 
> > unpopular said:
> ...



It's for photography. What profile would you recommend?


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Jan 27, 2012)

photog4life said:
			
		

> how is putting new people down helping ANYBODY? The only thing worth paying any attention too is lighting...  other than that you just put people down



Let's get something straight. I posted a well intended message and then the sh!t storm started. 

You want to attack me then I have no problem dirty fighting. Others want to come out of shadows and make personal attacks and bellyache every chance they get, I have no problem going right back at them either. It's not my favorite thing to do, and I don't like to, but I will do it.


----------



## mishele (Jan 27, 2012)

You kids need to go to bed earlier.....lol


----------



## kundalini (Jan 27, 2012)

In before the Lock......


Gene Simmons of the Lady Bug World.








.


----------



## punch (Jan 27, 2012)

How do you know if it's a lady bug or a soy beetle?


----------



## Dao (Jan 27, 2012)

kundalini said:


> In before the Lock......
> 
> 
> Gene Simmons of the Lady Bug World.
> ...





How can you find a lady bug?   I have not seen one for long long time.  All I can find were asian lady beetle!!


----------



## LightSpeed (Jan 27, 2012)

GeorgieGirl said:


> *Fact of the matter is that I provided insight to the OP that there is some element that I cannot identify for him that is preventing him from crystallizing his shots.
> *
> Rather than the oohs and ahhs that are preferable to many, and despite what ever occurred in the past,* I thought it was important to convey this in order for this guy to improve more.* *Simple as that, no malice was intended when I posted my message to him. *
> 
> ...



The OP ( me) is not offended by you.
I've taken your advice into consideration. Do not think that I haven't.

It's the other stuff about you. For instance, how you'll get dirty when attacked.
You usually attack first in the event you haven't noticed.
I've noticed it. I wanted to tell you off not long ago when you told a new member she was blabbing, and to leave the forum for several weeks.
This was after she wrote an apology.

I wanted to rip you apart, and I'm very capable, but I didn't do it.
I did , however, sit back and think what a jackass you can be.
I wasn't about to be banned again, because of you. So I kept my trap shut.
It's not that your advice isn't on the mark. I knew that before I posted this image.
It's that you're mean, nasty, and low down to a lot of people, and a lot of people don't like you for that very reason.
That may be hard for you to accept, but it's true.
And I'm not saying it to hurt your feelings or to be mean and nasty........because I certainly don't ever want to take your outlook on things.
Personally, I like when critique is hard on me. It inspires me to be better. But everyone's not like me. Some of them don't take it as well as I.
Especially the beginners who feel defeated before they ever get going.
So it's not your critique. I'll also go so far as to admit, I have a bitterness toward you for some of your past actions. And then pretending to be victimized.
This of course was after you labeled me a Dope head, on a public forum which was way off base, and not even close to truth.
I'm over it, and It didn't hurt me because I knew it wasn't true. I did , however, feel slandered.
The bitterness toward you remains because of it.
I write this, rather than attacking your photography, which I could easily do, in attempt that you might see yourself one of these days.
Yes I may not live long enough, and the stars may fall from the skies as the heavens and earth collide, before this happens. But I have faith in you.
Nobody else does. But I do.
You're only goin around once Georgie. It might not be a bad idea to make a new friend or two while you can. Maybe more than one or two.
Try it. You might like it. You'd be surprised what you can learn from someone who doesn't have your knowledge base in photography.
Really.

Anyway, it's time for my afternoon mirror break. Gotta hit the weights after that. Then I'm gonna try to go shoot something with the camera.


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Jan 27, 2012)

With a personality like mine, I expect conflict.  It's a simple as that. My feelings are not hurt, I am not angry and I am not sad. You have said your peace and that is fine with me. 

I am however growing really wary of the complaints and references about newbies though. You did your fair share of getting yourself in trouble when you first started here for some odd reason, and that had nothing at all to do with me. It had everything to do with you. To your comment,  you wrote you were on dope, you made it a central point in a post of yours. 

This event last night would not have happened if the chief troublemaker and pot stirrer kept his distance and didn't go out of his way to provoke an incident. The stalking really needs to stop. 

So now that all the cards are on the table and some clarifications have been made, Let's see what happens from here.


----------



## Dao (Jan 27, 2012)

Life is short.  Just enjoy your life guys.


----------



## unpopular (Jan 27, 2012)

"Life is short? False. It's the longest thing we do."

Dwight K. Schrute, III


----------



## Ballistics (Jan 27, 2012)

GeorgieGirl said:


> With a personality like mine, I expect conflict.
> 
> It's a simple as that. My feelings are not hurt, I am not angry and I am not sad. You have said your peace and that is fine with me.
> 
> ...



You are nuts. Plain and simple. You post nothing positive, ever. When you do post it's mayhem and chaos in the form of words. You make zero sense, and you use words that you don't fully understand and contradict everything that you say on a sentence to sentence basis. You are crazier than cat sh*t and you seem to not understand that your posts are 9 times out of 10 confrontational,mean spirited and irrelevant.



> With a personality like mine, I expect conflict.



This translates to: I am a real asshole and I don't have a brain to mouth filter. I'm not mature enough to conduct myself like an adult and therefore expect a fight every time I post.

You are damn well old enough to know that the way you are is why you always have an issue with people.

Funny you mention stalking. I have a handful of threads that you come into just for the sake of starting trouble with me, or just start trouble for the hell of it. One of the best threads would have to be the one where your signature comes from. You know the one, where you take my image without permission and edit it, and then someone edits as well and you flip your lid because you think that they took your edit and edited on top of it lmfao. You are out of your bird, lady.


----------



## unpopular (Jan 27, 2012)

Ballistics said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > Ballistics said:
> ...



The output device profile should be ideally be a custom profile for that printer. If that is not available, then a generic profile. Epson profiles are always RGB profiles, not CMYK profiles.

Your working profile should be a wide-gamut profile, like AdobeRGB. You pretty much just turn on soft proofing with the device profile and leave it on. The reason why the working profile is wide gamut so that you have a larger pallet to choose from to reach the closest color.

Really the same technique is also true for handing photographs in CMYK profiles. No matter, it's best to work in something like AdobeRGB and soft proof in the device color space, and convert only at the very end.


----------



## Demers18 (Jan 27, 2012)

GeorgieGirl said:


> Ballistics said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm one to get involved with pissing contests but you seriously need to get a grip. You are constantly trying to stir the pot here with no good rhyme or reason. Either you really love drama or you seriously need to get laid...


----------



## photog4life (Jan 27, 2012)

:lmao:





Demers18 said:


> GeorgieGirl said:
> 
> 
> > Ballistics said:
> ...


:lmao:
or Both!


----------



## APHPHOTO (Jan 27, 2012)

Light on shell to distracting.


----------



## unpopular (Jan 27, 2012)

APHPHOTO said:


> Light on shell to distracting.



BAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHHAHAHHA

lmao. that's classic.


----------

