Photo of the Day (January 2008)

[ACbc]

@ACBC- What is that rainbow thing in the picture? it looks like a dyed flower or something?
great shot btw

Doylem got it. It's the bird of paradise flower. Proper name is Strelitzia. Here's the wikipedia link.

The one in this particular picture is a new bloom, giving it a cool 3 pronged shape. Once these things go in full bloom, they look awesome. Of course, it being december, the full bloomed ones looked kinda dead so i choose to take some pictures of this young one.

 

[Martin C]

New York City
HDR | D40 | 1/10 at ƒ/4.0 | 18 mm | ISO 200

 

[Shacklebolt]

The Upper East Side
Nikon D80
f/3.5, 2", ISO 100

 

[Crawn2003]

Another in the series of fashion that I had to photograph.

It's a little light on the computer screen because this is one that went to print and had to be lighted for detail in the shadows.

 

[Martin C]

I'd like to thank xUKHCx for editing my post as usual. Even though the image still has to load on MR's servers, I appreciate your attempt to do something beneficial to this photography thread by forcing users to link to other websites. Thank you also for responding to the requests for some sort of policy towards the random post editing. Maybe if you communicated eek with us we would know what size to keep our photos before posting, even though the the photos being edited with TIMG tags are not gargantuan for goodness sakes. Happy New Year.

 

[zioxide]

Even though the image still has to load on MR's servers

The image never loads on MR's servers. Your browser gets it directly from the website it's hosted on (in this case, flickr). TIMG also doesn't load anything to the MR servers, nor does it make a 56k user load a smaller image. Your web browser loads the same image and just resizes it to the specs the HTML says (in this case, TIMG makes all images max 300px wide).

 

[Martin C]

The image never loads on MR's servers. Your browser gets it directly from the website it's hosted on (in this case, flickr). TIMG also doesn't load anything to the MR servers, nor does it make a 56k user load a smaller image. Your web browser loads the same image and just resizes it to the specs the HTML says (in this case, TIMG makes all images max 300px wide).

I see, thanks for the correction. So what's the point in doing this in a photography thread?

 

[pdxflint]

I see, thanks for the correction. So what's the point in doing this in a photography thread?

I'm with you on this one, bro! We went for over a year on a single thread without this babysitting, and it does get somewhat irritating to have to hold your breath to see if your post will be "edited." Now if the mod was actually a participant in this thread we might find some common ground. I did get a PM from xUKHCx, but that doesn't give readers of this thread any feedback, and it's not my place to make his explanation public since he PM'd me. But, I can say it seems more about formatting issues, but if it's not bothering those of us who frequent this thread, then I say let it go...

 

[srf4real]

"Go big or go home"...

Panasonic L1 + ZD 70-300mm
1/1000 sec
f/ 7.1
ISO 250
300mm

 

[pdxflint]

the last nice weekend

Extreme backlit shot before sunset.

Model: NIKON D50
Exposure: 1/1000 sec
Aperture: f/8.0
Focal Length: 200mm

 

[GoCubsGo]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2002/2156301050_3757d298be_b.jpg

New York City
HDR | D40 | 1/10 at ƒ/4.0 | 18 mm | ISO 200

Wow beautiful! That'd make for a great wallpaper..hint hint nudge nudge.

 

[Iamtherealwoody]

One my girlfriend took sunday at Miami Metro Zoo

 

[Martin C]

Now if the mod was actually a participant in this thread we might find some common ground. I did get a PM from xUKHCx, but that doesn't give readers of this thread any feedback, and it's not my place to make his explanation public since he PM'd me. But, I can say it seems more about formatting issues, but if it's not bothering those of us who frequent this thread, then I say let it go...

That's just what I'm waiting for. At least some sort of explanation as to why this thread is being 'degraded' from the way that it has always been way back when iGary started the original thread in May of '06. Now a new moderator is TIMG tagging nearly every image out of the blue with no explanation on what the policy is?

Wow beautiful! That'd make for a great wallpaper..hint hint nudge nudge.

Thanks Jessica, I appreciate it! You can download it here on my flickr account.

 

[GoCubsGo]

Location: Calafia Beach Park
Single RAW HDR (though can't say it did wonders for the image)
Aperture: f/8
Shutter: 1/200
Focal Length: 42mm

 

[LillieDesigns]

 

[Plymouthbreezer]

Yeah... In a PHOTO thread, we're all here dealing with fast connections... I don't see any advantages to using TIMG tags.

Likes others have pointed out, TIMG tags don't make a smaller image load.. So, there's honestly little point.

 

[EricNau]

Yeah... In a PHOTO thread, we're all here dealing with fast connections... I don't see any advantages to using TIMG tags.

Likes others have pointed out, TIMG tags don't make a smaller image load.. So, there's honestly little point.

Having gigantic images in threads degrades the appearance of the site.

Why do people like to post images too large to be viewed without scrolling? It's much nicer aesthetically to have a reasonably sized image.

For this reason, Moderators generally resize very large images to fit properly in a typical browser window. This is nothing new.

 

[CBJammin103]

Here's two shots of my younger brother and his girlfriend at the "Dam Park" in Loudon, TN. They're taken from my first "photoshoot" with my Canon XTi. Hopefully it'll be fine being directly linked from Picasa... I haven't really tried that before.

Shot at 10MP RAW. C&C welcome, of course.

1/200, f5.6, ISO 200

1/2000, f5.6, ISO 800

 

[marclapierre13]

nice ones, they turned out great

 

[Martin C]

Having gigantic images in threads degrades the appearance of the site.

Why do people like to post images too large to be viewed without scrolling? It's much nicer aesthetically to have a reasonably sized image.

For this reason, Moderators generally resize very large images to fit properly in a typical browser window. This is nothing new.

No one has posted a gigantic image. Mine was about 1000 pixels wide; hardly large enough to require a post edit with TIMG tags.

 

[EricNau]

No one has posted a gigantic image. Mine was about 1000 pixels wide; hardly large enough to require a post edit with TIMG tags.

That image would be wider than my iMac's screen, much less my browser window. So yes, it did require an edit to fit within many user's browser windows.

Please be mindful that many users are on computers which may have smaller resolutions.

 

[James L]

 

[schreck]

Quite new to this whole photography thing, so bear with me. Taken just a bit ago in zero degree weather (fahrenheit).

Tripod mounted, 14s, f 4.2, iso 400, 30mm. D40x.

 

[Doylem]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2002/2156301050_3757d298be_b.jpg

New York City
HDR | D40 | 1/10 at ƒ/4.0 | 18 mm | ISO 200

Nice shot... but somehow the picture looks too tightly cropped... like there's a bottom half that's missing (or maybe it's just me ).

 

[6mt15]

Tiger Cub

December 31 at the Toronto Zoo