Post #483

Comments (24)

Jump down to the comment form ↓

1. Rob Mientjes:

   Did you optimize this? They looks so nice and crisp.

   And it's a good composition, too.

   Posted 21 minutes after the fact

   Inspired: ↓ Dunstan

2. Dunstan:

   A wee bit, Rob. I'm shooting digital and storing them as RAW files, so when I open them in Photoshop I get to apply more or less exposure, sharpening, vignetting, etc, etc.

   It gives a much nicer, _much_ sharper image than shooting and storing as JPEGs (no matter how low the compression rate on the JPEG).

   I'm never storing anything as a JPEG again, if I can help it.

   Posted 52 minutes after the fact

   Inspired by: ↑ Rob Mientjes

   Inspired: ↓ Rob Mientjes, ↓ Marten Veldthuis, ↓ Seth Thomas Rasmussen, ↓ Barry

3. Rob Mientjes:

   That explains a lot. Photoshop loves RAW, and so do I. Reminds me, I need a camera of my own too (just can't take the family camera with me all the time). Any recommendations?

   Posted 56 minutes after the fact

   Inspired by: ↑ Dunstan

4. Marten Veldthuis:

   "I'm never storing anything as a JPEG again, if I can help it."

   *looks at url for image* hmm... ;-)

   Posted 2 hours, 36 minutes after the fact

   Inspired by: ↑ Dunstan

   Inspired: ↓ Bart

5. A Different Rob:

   The ducks are crisp, and 8K less than an equivalent dimension image on my site. Do you use the photoshop "save for web" option or another program? I've found fireworks to be pretty easy to use when optimizing, but I'm always looking for a more efficient way to cut down file size.

   Posted 4 hours, 20 minutes after the fact

   Inspired: ↓ Tony Crockford

6. Tony Crockford:

   I like Ignite for jpg optimisation - your mileage may vary.

   http://www.ignite-it.co.uk

   great pics btw Dunstan!

   Posted 11 hours, 16 minutes after the fact

   Inspired by: ↑ A Different Rob

7. MaThIbUs:

   This one reminds me of a Red Cross event here in Belgium (don't know about other countries): The Duck Race :)

   Posted 17 hours, 12 minutes after the fact

8. Isaac:

   Dunstan, could you recommend a link to get acquainted with "digital developing"? I just got a Canon 300D and would like to get the best possible results now that I can save as RAW.

   Thanks :-)

   Posted 17 hours, 22 minutes after the fact

9. Hans:

   I second the plea for a link. I got a Nikon D70 just a month and a half ago, getting my feet (more like my knees) wet in "advanced" digital photography. Nice duckies, BTW.

   Posted 1 day after the fact

10. Bonnie:

    I love ducks, I know we are talking about the photo rather than the content but I love this photo for its content.

    Posted 1 day, 1 hour after the fact

11. Seth Thomas Rasmussen:

    I don't even think my camera supports RAW. :( I'm not familiar with that, in fact. I thought when people used it, it more or less referred to "uncompressed" and retaining all the EXIF data, but I suppose the persistent capitalization should have pushed me to look into it.

    My camera's highest quality option is TIFF. I had always assumed that meant uncompressed as well, but can TIFFs use compression as well? My graphics knowledge is fading a little more each day since I stopped doing design at work. :-p

    Anyway, I've always opted for the high-quality JPEG setting because it allows me to take about 10 times more pictures per unit of storage available. That and the fact that I've not once, in the couple years I've owned a digital camera, bothered to print anything. It's really rather ridiculous.

    Post-Preview: NICE work on the automatic spellcheck feature. The use of titles, everything... nice work, sir. Very considerate as well! :D

    Posted 1 day, 3 hours after the fact

    Inspired by: ↑ Dunstan

    Inspired: ↓ Matt Southerden

12. John B:

    I think the idea was that the original is to be stored in RAW format, as opposed to JPG, thus allowing the next-generation JPG, optimized for the web, to have one round less data loss.... just my working theory.

    Also, I use PhotoShop's "Save for Web..." option and like it just fine.

    My daughter loves the ducks. Plus she follows her mother around just like one. And she quacks.

    Posted 1 day, 17 hours after the fact

    Inspired: ↓ Seth Thomas Rasmussen

13. Seth Thomas Rasmussen:

    I understand why you'd want RAW, John...

    I was just trying to explain that I thought RAW was something other than a specific format.

    Posted 1 day, 19 hours after the fact

    Inspired by: ↑ John B

    Inspired: ↓ John B

14. John B:

    Sorry -- no offense my man. My comment actually was intended for Marten with his reference to the jpg extension.

    Posted 1 day, 20 hours after the fact

    Inspired by: ↑ Seth Thomas Rasmussen

15. Monkeyinabox:

    Dang! At my county fair they had one of these tanks of ducks for a game. Now I know what I forgot to take a picture of. :) Next year.

    Posted 2 days, 1 hour after the fact

16. Barry:

    Hi Dunstan, just a question about your shooting, what kind of storage are you using in your 10D these days? I previously had only 256mb CF and that made shooting raw a bit out of the question, but I got hold of one of the 2.2GB Microdrives that are around now (and a fraction of the pric e of the IBM/Hitachi versions) so am thinking about doing the same thing with shooting raw

    Posted 3 days, 4 hours after the fact

    Inspired by: ↑ Dunstan

17. Matt Southerden:

    TIFF files can use compression. they generally use the LZW algorithm, which is lossless.

    Actually, TIFF is quite a versatile format. It can contain pretty much any colour-space, supports various types of lossless compression, and because it is such an established standard, most imaging programs can work with it.

    Posted 3 days, 12 hours after the fact

    Inspired by: ↑ Seth Thomas Rasmussen

18. Matt Southerden:

    Dunstan,

    I know you've moved back to Burgerland, but this is just silly!

    http://www.localbubble.com/offsite_images/speelnig.gif

    ;-)

    Posted 3 days, 12 hours after the fact

    Inspired: ↓ Dunstan

19. Dunstan:

    The damn apache spell checker module uses an American-only dictionary!
    I'm working on implementing a full US-UK version though, so just hold your horses.

    That's also one reason why it says: "X _possible_ spelling mistakes..." it's up to you to decide if it's right or not.

    But yeah, sorry, it annoys me as well.

    Posted 3 days, 17 hours after the fact

    Inspired by: ↑ Matt Southerden

20. Seth Thomas Rasmussen:

    Hold the phone... is "Burgerland" a name for the US?

    Posted 3 days, 17 hours after the fact

    Inspired: ↓ Matt Southerden

21. Matt Southerden:

    Yes, 'Burgerland' was meant to mean the US, but it was tongue-in-cheek. :-)

    Posted 5 days, 12 hours after the fact

    Inspired by: ↑ Seth Thomas Rasmussen

22. David Harrison:

    Wow, the colour's are so striking and vibrant. I bet that would make for one real hard jigsaw puzzle. ;)

    Posted 1 week after the fact

23. Alina:

    I love duckies I 4 and a half and duckies are my favroit animal I love duckies from duckie lover ow yah an the picture is pretty.

    Posted 5 months, 3 weeks after the fact

24. Bart:

    hehe

    Posted 8 months, 2 weeks after the fact

    Inspired by: ↑ Marten Veldthuis

Jump up to the start of the post ↑

Add your comment

I'm sorry, but comments can no longer be posted to this blog.