Monday, March 10, 2008

Evening clouds

Shot on the way up to Port Arthur, TX.

Tuesday, February 26, 2008

Choosing your web site host

Below I'm copying my article from a forum. I'm hearing about people experiencing problems with hosting providers. While the overwhelming choice isn't helping, you need to employ patience in the search, so once you upload your web site, you're not going to start loosing sleep over it soon after. And always DO READ the fine print. If you don't see one, ask for it.

I have a couple of hosts that I highly recommend. Each is somewhat different. First is great for a single site, second for multiple sites.

First is: Webstrike Solutions. This is a high quality host for not much money, although the cost is somewhat higher than you may be used to seeing. I used to host with them and was nothing but extremely happy with overall service, support, server up-time and site accessibility. They have recently updated their site and packages, but did leave ONE major advantage intact: you pay $30 set up fee and you have your site hosted for 12 months with no other charges. This is especially great for the uncertain ones, who are contemplating their own site, but cannot decide. If you cancel by the end of the 12-month period, you pay nothing more. Check their packages, it's worth a few minutes of your time.

I left Webstrike for unrelated reasons and am currently hosting with Host Gator. I simply needed a reseller package and the flexibility of setting up unlimited domains, something Webstrike did not have (and still doesn't I believe). Host Gator has been very good and I have no plans looking for a change at this time.

This is, of course, only a couple of good hosts. There is more, but there is far more bad ones.

So the word of caution for those who fall for the cheap $5 per month / 50gB storage packages. It never works that way. It sounds too good and IT IS. If you're not sure what to choose, log on to Web Hosting Talk. There is enough to keep you busy for days. In fact, it might get a bit overwhelming at first, but read on and you'll finally see through all the scams. Remember also, that many will "supply" good care in the early stages of your agreement. That's especially true, if you signed up long term and have a 30-day "leave-for-no-reason" guarantee.

Friday, February 22, 2008

The "American Queen"

"American Queen" - one of the few remaining river boats on the Mississippi. Here cought on a misty morning alongside in New Orleans, LA.

Thursday, February 21, 2008

Foggy riverside

Yet another foggy day in the Mississippi river. Mornings are usually best. As the sun rises things change fast, although if the sky has "holes", it may bring along very interesting lighting.

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

Small web site about skansens in Poland

I have put together a small web site about open air museums (skansens) in southeastern Poland. I will add more images in a near future, as well as more info, directions, maps etc. Worth a trip, if you're headed that way.

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

Tank farm

Light (thus time of the day) plays big part in the way tank farms get rendered. It's like a never ending game of highlights and shadows going at each other.

Tuesday, February 05, 2008

Exposing for RAW?

There is an interesting article in 2007 November issue of Digital Photo Pro magazine (which I frequently enjoy) about exposing for RAW. It brings up an unknown to many (including myself) issue of using camera LCD preview and histogram as means of correcting exposure WHILE shooting RAW. What's the problem, one might ask?

Assuming the author is correct (as I have no way of checking that out, but have no reason to believe otherwise), the histogram and LCD preview on ALL digital cameras are based on processed JPEG file, EVEN if you only shoot RAW. This means that one is looking at a (vastly) different data that RAW records. In extreme cases, your RAW will horribly disappoint later on. You may get to thinking: what did I do wrong? everything looked great on the histogram?

One: keep above in mind in such situations

Two: try to adjust your camera JPEG settings to see if you can get preview match RAW more closely (useless if you shoot JPEG also and unlikely to give you exact match)

Three: learn correct exposure techniques so you rely on the technique rather than the preview/histogram

The mentioned article (titled: Exposing for RAW by Andrew Rodney) is about a so called ETTR technique, that's Expose To The Right, or expose for highlights and develop for such. Film shooters may remember the EFSDFH (expose for shadows develop for highlights), which in most cases gave us the most printable negative. However, the bottom line is only one:

expose to ensure detail where it counts most, yet don't lose the highlights (unless this is your wish, of course)

I can't copy the whole article here (obviously), but I do recommend reading it. It might just fix some of your shooting techniques. The whole article is available HERE. You can even print it.

Digital Photo Pro is a bimonthly magazine targeting the digital photographer. It is (in my opinion) a high quality publication, although somewhat uneven issue to issue. It goes at newsstand for $5.99 and can be subscribed to for much less.

Sunday, February 03, 2008

Sailing in the "dust"

Foggy Mississippi river.

This ooold house

Shot in skansen in Sanok, southeastern Poland.

Preserving planet Earth

Can we really live without this?

Monday, January 21, 2008

Love the chimneys

Chalmette, LA

Sunday, January 20, 2008

More options from Picasa

This image had a "graduated filter" applied, followed by "filtered B&W" and cropped. I'm working on a set of effects for Picasa feature comparison.

Nostalgic New Orleans

It's 17:45 on January 20th, 2008. The sun has set, but life continues.

Another photo adjusted in Picasa

This photo has been adjusted in Picasa using "focal B&W" and several levels of "sharpenning". Adjustments can be "stacked" or effects are cumulative. Some will get cancelled out, for example if you use "focused B&W" and other B&W modes, the first one will loose color.