Eisboch wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq." wrote
in message ...

Thanks, my wife has always been creative, but until you and a few others
talked me into buying my wife a D50 for her birthday, I never had any
desire or artistic leaning. My wife does it naturally, I have to work at
it.



Mrs.E. likes portraits. Horses, grandkids .... anything with a face.

With apologies to Harry on the subject matter ..... (another of my number 3
granddaughter, 3 year old "Sophie"), this copy is actually a Photoshop
captured image of Mrs.E.'s computer desktop wallpaper. I couldn't find
the original file from which this was made.

Anyway, it's not altered or color enhanced or anything. Her eyes are
actually that color. This is one of my favorite pictures of her.

Taken, BTW, by the D70 that Mrs.E. bought from Harry.

http://www.eisboch.com/sophieoncellphone.jpg

Eisboch




Damn, what a ham. Love her curls, I just wonder if she has grandpa
wrapped around her finger.

On Aug 2, 2:59*pm, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq." wrote
in ...



Thanks, my wife has always been creative, but until you and a few others
talked me into buying my wife a D50 for her birthday, I never had any
desire or artistic leaning. *My wife does it naturally, I have to work at
it.

Mrs.E. *likes portraits. *Horses, grandkids .... anything with a face..

With apologies to Harry on the subject matter ..... (another of my number 3
granddaughter, 3 year old "Sophie"), *this copy is actually a Photoshop
captured image of Mrs.E.'s computer desktop wallpaper. * *I couldn't find
the original file from which this was made.

Anyway, *it's not altered or color enhanced or anything. *Her eyes are
actually that color. * This is one of my favorite pictures of her.

Taken, BTW, by the D70 that Mrs.E. bought from Harry.

http://www.eisboch.com/sophieoncellphone.jpg

Eisboch

Here's my cute kid entry! Click on the pic to see it full size.

http://trip-reports.com/coppermine/d...lbum=10&pos=13

he he....

Yup, she rides in a beater

Team Rowdy Mouse, you can bitch all you want...

...after the race...

Eisboch wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq." wrote
in message ...

Thanks, my wife has always been creative, but until you and a few others
talked me into buying my wife a D50 for her birthday, I never had any
desire or artistic leaning. My wife does it naturally, I have to work at
it.



Mrs.E. likes portraits. Horses, grandkids .... anything with a face.

With apologies to Harry on the subject matter ..... (another of my number 3
granddaughter, 3 year old "Sophie"), this copy is actually a Photoshop
captured image of Mrs.E.'s computer desktop wallpaper. I couldn't find
the original file from which this was made.

Anyway, it's not altered or color enhanced or anything. Her eyes are
actually that color. This is one of my favorite pictures of her.

Taken, BTW, by the D70 that Mrs.E. bought from Harry.

http://www.eisboch.com/sophieoncellphone.jpg

Eisboch




What a cutie!

D.Duck wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
"Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq." wrote
in message ...

Thanks, my wife has always been creative, but until you and a few others
talked me into buying my wife a D50 for her birthday, I never had any
desire or artistic leaning. My wife does it naturally, I have to work at
it.


Mrs.E. likes portraits. Horses, grandkids .... anything with a face.

With apologies to Harry on the subject matter ..... (another of my number
3 granddaughter, 3 year old "Sophie"), this copy is actually a Photoshop
captured image of Mrs.E.'s computer desktop wallpaper. I couldn't find
the original file from which this was made.

Anyway, it's not altered or color enhanced or anything. Her eyes are
actually that color. This is one of my favorite pictures of her.

Taken, BTW, by the D70 that Mrs.E. bought from Harry.

http://www.eisboch.com/sophieoncellphone.jpg

Eisboch

No need to Photoshop that one. And the subject doesn't hurt either.




There's no need to "photoshop" most photos, if you spend some time
setting up a digital camera properly and spend even more time in
composition and light evaluation. And by photoshop, I don't mean minor
corrections for exposure, I mean the oh-so-obvious attempts to "improve"
on what the eye sees. Most "art" photos that have been photoshopped that
way are so obvious, they are cliches.

If you want to be a surrealist or impressionist, get some paint and
brushes.

"hk" wrote in message
. ..
D.Duck wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
"Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote in message ...

Thanks, my wife has always been creative, but until you and a few
others talked me into buying my wife a D50 for her birthday, I never
had any desire or artistic leaning. My wife does it naturally, I have
to work at it.


Mrs.E. likes portraits. Horses, grandkids .... anything with a face.

With apologies to Harry on the subject matter ..... (another of my
number 3 granddaughter, 3 year old "Sophie"), this copy is actually a
Photoshop captured image of Mrs.E.'s computer desktop wallpaper. I
couldn't find the original file from which this was made.

Anyway, it's not altered or color enhanced or anything. Her eyes are
actually that color. This is one of my favorite pictures of her.

Taken, BTW, by the D70 that Mrs.E. bought from Harry.

http://www.eisboch.com/sophieoncellphone.jpg

Eisboch

No need to Photoshop that one. And the subject doesn't hurt either.


There's no need to "photoshop" most photos, if you spend some time setting
up a digital camera properly and spend even more time in composition and
light evaluation. And by photoshop, I don't mean minor corrections for
exposure, I mean the oh-so-obvious attempts to "improve" on what the eye
sees. Most "art" photos that have been photoshopped that way are so
obvious, they are cliches.

If you want to be a surrealist or impressionist, get some paint and
brushes.

Probably more pro photographers using Photoshop than you care to admit. And
not just for "surreal" effects.

"hk" wrote in message
. ..

http://www.eisboch.com/sophieoncellphone.jpg

Eisboch




What a cutie!


And the personality to match. Reggie nailed it. She's a ham.

Eisboch

wrote in message
...
On Aug 2, 3:52 pm, hk wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote
in ...

Thanks, my wife has always been creative, but until you and a few
others
talked me into buying my wife a D50 for her birthday, I never had any
desire or artistic leaning. My wife does it naturally, I have to work
at
it.

Mrs.E. likes portraits. Horses, grandkids .... anything with a face.

With apologies to Harry on the subject matter ..... (another of my
number 3
granddaughter, 3 year old "Sophie"), this copy is actually a Photoshop
captured image of Mrs.E.'s computer desktop wallpaper. I couldn't find
the original file from which this was made.

Anyway, it's not altered or color enhanced or anything. Her eyes are
actually that color. This is one of my favorite pictures of her.

Taken, BTW, by the D70 that Mrs.E. bought from Harry.

http://www.eisboch.com/sophieoncellphone.jpg

Eisboch

What a cutie!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Cell phones are WAY too dangerous for children.......
Are you going to call child protective services in Eisboch, too?


Hold it! No child abuse here.
It's her personal "cellphone", an old, retired model with the battery
removed that her mother lets her play with.
Then again ..... she seems to instinctively know how to use it.
Women.

Eisboch

D.Duck wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..
D.Duck wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
"Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote in message ...

Thanks, my wife has always been creative, but until you and a few
others talked me into buying my wife a D50 for her birthday, I never
had any desire or artistic leaning. My wife does it naturally, I have
to work at it.

Mrs.E. likes portraits. Horses, grandkids .... anything with a face.

With apologies to Harry on the subject matter ..... (another of my
number 3 granddaughter, 3 year old "Sophie"), this copy is actually a
Photoshop captured image of Mrs.E.'s computer desktop wallpaper. I
couldn't find the original file from which this was made.

Anyway, it's not altered or color enhanced or anything. Her eyes are
actually that color. This is one of my favorite pictures of her.

Taken, BTW, by the D70 that Mrs.E. bought from Harry.

http://www.eisboch.com/sophieoncellphone.jpg

Eisboch
No need to Photoshop that one. And the subject doesn't hurt either.

There's no need to "photoshop" most photos, if you spend some time setting
up a digital camera properly and spend even more time in composition and
light evaluation. And by photoshop, I don't mean minor corrections for
exposure, I mean the oh-so-obvious attempts to "improve" on what the eye
sees. Most "art" photos that have been photoshopped that way are so
obvious, they are cliches.

If you want to be a surrealist or impressionist, get some paint and
brushes.

Probably more pro photographers using Photoshop than you care to admit. And
not just for "surreal" effects.



You're being too literal. I didn't say pros didn't use photoshop. I said
they typically used it make minor corrections, just as they would do in
a darkroom with prints made from color negs, or in working with an AD to
correct progressive proofs. I'm also not saying some pros don't use
photoshop and other such programs to produce wild-looking photos. The
difference is, they know how to take very good photos without having to
resort to photoshop to produce "art."

On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 17:17:10 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

Hold it! No child abuse here.
It's her personal "cellphone", an old, retired model with the battery
removed that her mother lets her play with.
Then again ..... she seems to instinctively know how to use it.
Women.

My youngest niece has one she plays with - same deal, no battery.

And you are right - she knows how to use it already. :)

Love those green eyes - a real cutie.

On Sat, 02 Aug 2008 17:32:51 -0400, hk wrote:

D.Duck wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..
D.Duck wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
"Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote in message ...

Thanks, my wife has always been creative, but until you and a few
others talked me into buying my wife a D50 for her birthday, I never
had any desire or artistic leaning. My wife does it naturally, I have
to work at it.

Mrs.E. likes portraits. Horses, grandkids .... anything with a face.

With apologies to Harry on the subject matter ..... (another of my
number 3 granddaughter, 3 year old "Sophie"), this copy is actually a
Photoshop captured image of Mrs.E.'s computer desktop wallpaper. I
couldn't find the original file from which this was made.

Anyway, it's not altered or color enhanced or anything. Her eyes are
actually that color. This is one of my favorite pictures of her.

Taken, BTW, by the D70 that Mrs.E. bought from Harry.

http://www.eisboch.com/sophieoncellphone.jpg

Eisboch
No need to Photoshop that one. And the subject doesn't hurt either.

There's no need to "photoshop" most photos, if you spend some time setting
up a digital camera properly and spend even more time in composition and
light evaluation. And by photoshop, I don't mean minor corrections for
exposure, I mean the oh-so-obvious attempts to "improve" on what the eye
sees. Most "art" photos that have been photoshopped that way are so
obvious, they are cliches.

If you want to be a surrealist or impressionist, get some paint and
brushes.

Probably more pro photographers using Photoshop than you care to admit. And
not just for "surreal" effects.



You're being too literal. I didn't say pros didn't use photoshop. I said
they typically used it make minor corrections, just as they would do in
a darkroom with prints made from color negs, or in working with an AD to
correct progressive proofs. I'm also not saying some pros don't use
photoshop and other such programs to produce wild-looking photos. The
difference is, they know how to take very good photos without having to
resort to photoshop to produce "art."

You know - sometimes I have to really wonder about you.

That is so freakin' wrong in this digital age, it's down right scary.

Photoshop is the digital age's dark room. That's a fact.