* Wednesday C&C "No Theme" Thread #845 / Revived #065 on 2024 06 26 *

That's not what Roel said at all so I struck it out for the sake of accuracy.

It could be even better depending on someone's skill in Ps.

That can be done in Ps without too much effort.

Thanks Mike,

Here's a composite image I posted a year ago along the lines of what we're talking about.

Hello Alan,

Thanks for helping.
To me (and I think to most) it was quite clear that Mike aimed to reply to Dan's message.

But I had replied in the meantime and instead of replying to Dan's last message, Mike hit "quote" on my message and then inserted his reply under the bit he wanted to reply to, which made his message appear "inside" my quote. It's a common enough mistake without threaded view. Confusing, yes, but not intentionally creating a misquote.

The good advice is to always hit "reply" or "quote" ONLY on the actual message you want to reply to
(where that text is "quote level 1" and without additional responses below it),
and NOT on somebody else's message that has the bit you want to reply to, embedded.

No harm done.

The collection looks good and emphasises the unusual framing of just the roof as a style and not just a quirky one-off. I think this is definitely a case where the group of photos is more than the sum of their parts.
I think the pastel colours and bright light with low contrast helps bind them together.
I think seeing them in a single row is quite appropriate, and that I would prefer them this way than in a vertical stack or a multi-rowed block.
Your photo this week would go especially well with the second in this series, with their cut-off trees, which enhance the image in both cases.

Nicely done, Andrew, that is a good idea and really enhances the image.

Mike, an emu is generally recognised by its long neck, body shape and legs, so your chosen angle is excellent, because all these characteristics are hidden or disguised, causing the viewer to stay longer whilst trying to identify the bird. Not only that, but the head seems to sit directly on the shoulders!
Spending extra time on the subject is worth it too, with plenty of detail, texture and subtle colours to enjoy.

Thanks for the comments.
Actually this was taken during a religious festival and the strips of foil were decorations. They weren’t just in the shed either, and the locos were decorated with foil, garlands and leaves too.

Yes, the edit is good. The green itself is not really the problem, but the shape of the leaves distract from the shape of the bird. If the group of leaves were larger, so their edges were not so close to the edge of the bird, they may have helped draw attention to the bird instead. In any case, the bird stands out nicely against the more uniform background.

The most important thing is the photo itself, which is very good. Judging by the rope on which the bird is perched, the depth of sharp focus is very shallow, and perfectly matches the bird‘s body, which is extremely sharp. Not only that, it is a lovely bird too.

The collection looks good and emphasises the unusual framing of just the roof as a style and not just a quirky one-off. I think this is definitely a case where the group of photos is more than the sum of their parts.
I think the pastel colours and bright light with low contrast helps bind them together.
I think seeing them in a single row is quite appropriate, and that I would prefer them this way than in a vertical stack or a multi-rowed block.
Your photo this week would go especially well with the second in this series, with their cut-off trees, which enhance the image in both cases.
[/quote]

Thanks Pete,

I like your comments about the light. Fog is a constant along the California coast. As often happens, it never really cleared the days I made these images right along the water, although less than half a mile inland it was bright and sunny.

The fog was just wispy, almost at the point of disappearing, but never going away. The color of the sky came through very pale blue (especially noticeable in Faux Victorian). But the sky couldn't actually be seen. It was bright everywhere. Like being under an infinite soft box. Marvelous lighting, making everything kind of pastel as you noticed.

The digital exposures look very much like over-exposed color negative film. A very nice look. Delicate. Often used in wedding photography.

Rich

Thank you Pete.

I posted earlier that the edit had greenish and purplish false details in the black feathers. I also posted why I still preferred the green leaves.

Hello Alan,

I had been meaning to lodge a request in the Requests, Help and Bugs thread for a long time. For the moment I will state it here.

The issue is that, when one clicks the Quote button to reply with previous text, there is no flashing cursor insertion point placed at the end of the text. One has to click in the edit box to activate it. What happens is that occasionally we don't scroll all the way to below the last end quote tag. It is, of course, never intentional. We have all made this mistake sometime and in general we all understand what has happened and can understand the result. Generally we will edit our posts when we see what has happened - but maybe we don't always notice.

So I wonder if it is possible for the site devs to place / activate the insertion point cursor below the last end quote tag when the editor is displayed.

Accusing someone in this long running well intentioned thread / forum of deliberately misquoting is of course way off the mark. Pedantry is unhelpful and unnecessary.

Bryan

Just not going to play this game.
What I mean is clear to anyone with half a brain and I am sure you have more than half.
What is clear does not need elucidating or correction, just like “miswuotez” does not need to be corrected for US to understand.
Have a nice evening (or morning, or whatever it is in your timezone).

No problem. If members are happy for members to misquote other members I can go with that as long as they are also happy for me to accidentally misquote members if I take as little care as some appear to in checking the accuracy of their quotes.

It seems members here are OK with members misquoting other members' posts.

I can go along with that as long as what you say applies to everyone and members do not correct my posts when I accidentally misquote someone because I no longer take care, as some here don't, to check the accuracy of my quotes.

Some members here appear to not use the Preview feature to check their quotes and correct any inaccuracies.

I will stop using the Preview feature as well now and start typing from wherever the cursor lands as some members here do.

That's nice and much quicker and easier than printing them out and hanging them on a wall to photograph as Roel suggested.

Doing it digitally gives exponentially more freedom and options to arrange the image how you like with frames, drop shadows and many other effects to create amazing looks.

I agree that no-one should misquote your posts. But there is a slide in meaning here. Misquoting another person suggests someone is trying to deceive. That's considerably different to the use of quote conventions we have been discussing here. It is very unlikely that anyone has, or will confuse your opinions and mine Dan. So if you know what you have written and I know what I have written and we both know what the other person has written and no one else is getting confused.......

I can't do any more than show people how to use quotes correctly, a very simple concept, as I have in a few posts earlier this thread.

It seems members here are OK with members misquoting other members' posts.

I can go along with that as long as what you say applies to everyone and members do not correct my posts when I accidentally misquote someone because I no longer take care, as some here don't, to check the accuracy of my quotes.

Some members here appear to not use the Preview feature to check their quotes and correct any inaccuracies.

I will stop using the Preview feature as well now and start typing from wherever the cursor lands as some members here do.

There are clearly some members here who do not want to put in the minimal effort that is required to check the quotes in their posts and correct them when necessary before submitting their post.

That’s fine as long as no-one else needs to put in the minimal effort to check the accuracy of any quotes in their posts.

Hello all,
Just a quick reminder: this thread is about photos.
Not about quoting, misquoting, mistakes, errors or forum syntax.
Tomorrow we will start a new thread, as usual, and I hope to see you all (yes, all) there.
I also hope we will have many interesting images and many good conversations about those images.
Roel

No problem. I am going with the flow now and not concerned at all anymore about checking the accuracy of any quotes in my posts, as several here don't care about the accuracy of any quotes in their posts either.

See you all in the next thread 😊

Cool.

The fish-eye distortion to the architecture is eye-catching and attractive, however, I am sure Els would have been unimpressed if she had been subject to the same treatment, so you did well to avoid that!
I like the blue light of the scene against the orange light through the central window, and that colour combination is repeated in Els‘ scarf, which is a nice touch.