Minoltaman rants

System · April 13, 2005

onethumb wrote:

Pros can effectively disable cropping now by simply allowing only proper print sizes on a given smugmug photo. Having no other size options that wouldn't fit, there's no point in cropping.

>>>This is kinda true, but as we mentioned in the feature request thread that if nothing else, we would like a feature to allow pre-cropping by us on the server, so we can do server side cropping on oddball size stuff, not the customer. Thus allowing us all product options still without having to do any further uploads. This is effectively disabling cropping to the customer but leaving it enabled for the pro to use. A server-side precropping option, so-to-speak.

I don't see how we could possibly remove cropping as an option, though, for items which have multiple print sizes that are of different ratios - it's just not fair the consumer of the prints.

>>>>I dunno about this....a pro has control you said a minute ago. Plus if you allow us server-side cropping by pros and not customers, that would also take care of this.

So we leave that in the hands of the Pros to use the custom pricing options to make this happen, should they want it.

>>>see above.

The color correction thing is something we've always wrestled with, and I think we have a solution. There are long threads on the subject here at dgrin, feel free to read them for more information, but the bottom line is this:

- Almost all Pros take gorgeous shots but have poor post-processing skills, and thus, the color correction is way off.

>>>>Then they need to learn, and fast. Please don't punish me because they are a pro and don't know how to make a print....go figure.

- Their customers then order some prints with no auto-color correction and are upset. They assume it's the printer's (ours) fault, and complain to us.

>>>>Once again, don't punish me or my customers because someone else is a dummy on this and you guys have to waste your time helping him.

- We look at the photos, gag at how bad the color correction is, and contact the Pro to show them how to properly color correct their shots, then order re-prints.

>>>>This should not be case, a photographer should know what to do already. The ones that don't should be punished, not the ones that do know...

- Their customer gets new prints and is thrilled. The Pro now knows how to color correct, so their future orders come out looking great.

>>>>This just ain't making sense to me. You seem to be spending a ton of time fixing peoples prints that quite possibly should not even be selling prints!

Our dilemma is clear: Since we have no way of telling whether a Pro is good at color correcting their photos or not (poor color correction is something like 99% of returns and reprints), we can't just remove the "Auto Correct" type color options for all Pros - it would result in way too much pain and anguish for their customers and my customer service department.

>>>Make people take a test when the sign up to smugmug. Please don't fail the rest of us because others are dumb on matters of printing photographs. I don't see how you can possibly say the customer knows better than the pros. If that's the case, your pros are rookies.

The possible solution we're working on now is to have an approval process whereby a Pro "proves" that not only has he/she read our color correction docs, but that he/she has their photos properly color calibrated. Once that approval process is complete, they gain the ability to "ColorLock" their items to force "True Color" to always be on.

>>>>Good, where do we sign up and when can we test???

No promises as to if, when, or how this will work, but that's the current thinking around smugmug HQ. Constructive feedback is definitely welcome.

>>>>Every pro that has ever correctly printed a photo would want to disable that silly color correction tool, I think. Please, please, somehow make it go away! To put server side cropping in the pros hands (not the customers) would also be good.

Don

Possibly you should at least make a visible colorspace mismatch warning indicator show up when an image is uploaded in the wrong colorspace. It would help things a bit, but would not be able to stop any out of gamut troubles.

Cheers

-don

System · April 14, 2005

Baldy wrote:

Hi Mitch,

So one good thing about dealing with smugmug is you often get very honest answers.

My very honest answer is yes, theoretically, a customer could crop the center of a shot and mess it up. But in the last million prints we shipped, no one ever has. If they did, we'd replace it.

In the meantime, we can point to tens of thousands of pro prints that are saved by the crop option, emails by the score saying it's the coolest feature ever, and many high volume pros who came to us from Printroom or elsewhere who depend on this feature.

Color is a very different and critically important issue, and other things like custom watermarks and backprinting are important too. But it's hard for me to internalize that disabling cropping isn't tempest in a teapot, a theoretical more than practical issue.

Honestly, I think if you were to press Minoltaman, who is championing this issue, about whether he's saying this from experience in selling prints off smugmug, I think he'd have to say no.

If you were to press Erik Olsen, who sells a lot of prints, about his experience with the feature, I think he'd quote customers who say it's the coolest thing ever.

It would be hard for us to change because the shopping cart is so involved so you'd be delaying improvements that are really important for this one.

BTW, we demoed a streamlined shopping cart last night at a camera user group in the Bay Area. Three of our customers were there and it was cropping that got the most kudos. One guy made a huge point of why he had to bail from Printroom because they don't have this feature.

I hope this helps.

Thanks,
Chris

Ok Baldy, actually someone else initially raised the precropping suggestion in the feature request thread, I only seconded the motion. Same goes for eliminating the crop feature, I only seconded the issue. This was a couple weeks ago. I agree the color is the main item that needs to go first.

Now, I just came to smugmug and have less than 1 percent of my pics uploaded here. I have not even tried to sell a print from smugmugs service.

I have a few reasons for this:

a. pix not uploaded
b. site not completed
c. no hurry
d. have issues with smugmug
e. have pix at many other sites
f. I own dozens of photography related sites and do not need smugmug to sell stock or prints from.
g. I subscribe to many photoshare sites.
h. I can fill automated print orders from my servers commission free (minus a very small fee with a script)

Issues with smugmug
1] Backprinting, I want my name or generic on the back.
2] The cart branding and footer, I don't like it and it will lose me business.
3] The color correction tool, it needs to go.
4] The cropping tool is just in the way for my needs.
5] Low security level on password protected galleries

Now I am a fine art photographer who knows a bit about color and composition. I want both of those controls in my hands and not the customers.

I have used automated print fullfillment sites in the past that did not have a cropping feature and I did not have a problem with this. I came to smugmug to use as a backup service that has automated print fullfillment. But so far I have seen many things that I do not like with the system, some of those issues I have voiced here in the forums.

I don't really care about Eric or Eric's customers as I am worried about what my customers see and do. So yup, you are right, Eric probably has sold many pics here. I am mainly a stock photographer, I sell quite a bit of stock downloads, not prints. I have my stuff in the Butler Museum of Art in Youngstown, Ohio and been published in a few different countries. I do sell prints and I usually like to fill those orders one at a time. I even like to make my own comping images and thumbnails to upload instead using the automated systems that sites like smugmug uses. So yes ,I am a control freak when it comes to my prints.

I can see a value in allowing customer crops in some casesd, but for fine-art and macro photographers I just don't feel this need or see many cases where this would apply. Many of my images can not be cropped, a few can be, and I want to be able to be the one do this on the server, not the customer.

My biggest problem with the crop is that is just a big old clunk in a semi-buttery smooth system, especially when I have 25K images to upload that more than likely have good composition already. That makes a lot of unwanted and unneeded clunky crop options in the checkout process for me and my customers.

My priorties would lie in this order.

1) digital downloads incorporated
2) backprinting issue solved
3) less smugmug branding in the cart
4) smaller footer in cart
5) color tool disable feature
6) stronger password protection
7) server side cropping by the account holder, not the customer
8) if no #7 then I would like an option to disable the crop
9) better stop here

I am a picky guy and it sometimes takes a lot to make me happy. Let me be clear, I like smugmug as it is, but for me to use it in a larger capacity than I have planed now I would like to see some of the changes that I and others have proposed. With 6,ooo,ooo views and thousands of comments and many sales off pbase and my other sites last year, I am pretty sure I could sell a print or two here. You have to understand that I use many sites for many reasons and would use smugmug more if some of these changes were made.

Anyway, I am glad Eric and others like the cropping tool, that's great. I and some others do not, and to be quite honest, I have almost no use for it and neither would my customers. Like I said before it is a clunk in the buttery smooth system if it is unwanted or unneeded.

Please don't assume I am champion of this issue, I am not. I would like to see the change, but I would consider myself a much, much, stronger advocate of digital downloads, custom backprinting, and the less smug branding issue, and the other items I listed before cropping in the list I posted above.

Feature requests are a tough subject as it is hard to see where a persons top priorities are when a few different subjects are broached. I know this.

Btw, feel like posting the stats of all of your pros???

:poke

:hide :gun2

Cheers

-don

System · April 14, 2005

ezprints gonna flunk this one too?

original%7E51.jpg

wxwax · April 15, 2005

I gotta say, Minoltaman, that you do a great rant. Can't wait for the next one.

System · April 15, 2005

Baldy wrote:

Other services call them digital prints. Been there done that. The customer hasn't a clue why one digital camera's prints should be called digital prints but prints from their Digital Rebel aren't.

The consumer doesn't know for 4:3 ratio prints.

The consumer won't know old/new. I'm not sure I do either. The first digital cameras were 4:3 so are they old?

We're certainly open to suggestions so keep 'em coming.

If the consumer is really that dumb...how about fat prints and skinny prints...only kidding....If the consumer really is confused (which they probably are), put the 4::3 and 3::2 all under one class and just do the old 'keep it simple stupid thing'.

The cutomer does not care what made the print anyway, they only want to find a size that fits the frame or mat and price range they have in mind. So who cares if they can't figure out what came from where. Nobody cares where a custom size or a gift comes from, do they?

The 3:2 ratio is traditional or standard because people have been used to dealing with that size image for years. Thats why many people use digital/traditional or whatever. The 4::3 is not traditional and is a new size created to fit computer screens, basically. Therefore traditional and digital is not so far out of line for a naming scheme. The consumer usually does not care if his image came from film 3::2, digital 3::2, or digital 4::3 or otherwise. He just wants an image that he can put in a frame. Using traditional just means he is gonna see sizes he is used to. Digital means the new 4::3 format and new print sizes. I don't think it's really that far off. I am not saying it is the best naming solution, but was only addressing your statement.

Another idea that is not quite as simple would to make a big prints class and a smal prints class. Mix the two formats, but break them into to groups depending on size. This way would may make things much easier on the consumer...Almost anything works for me as long as it gets rid of what it says now.

-don

System · April 15, 2005

wxwax wrote:

I gotta say, Minoltaman, that you do a great rant. Can't wait for the next one.

Thanks, but I can wait...:nono

-don

ps, Marlof, that little camera line was a good one, cracked me a big ol' smile.:):

System · April 15, 2005

DoctorIt wrote:

this is a tough one. I gotta say that when i ordered prints this morning, I saw that "...small camera" thing and said

so I agree with both sides. small camera's is a weird title, but also, most consumers won't have a clue about the correct ratio. And classic? forget about it! What about all those new Drebel people - they have 3:2 format and would never think they're latest greastest dslr was "classic".

it's probably best the way it is. .

Best the way it is???

I guess those dreb owners never owned or printed anything from a 35mm film camera. The shape of the dreb sensor makes the print sizes classic, not anything else. The consumer also relates to classic prints as print sizes they have dealt with before.

Maybe those dreb guys you refer to should be called rookies....

-don

btw, pros don't pay hard earned money to smugmug to have the prints they upoload here be called "prints from small cameras" that is the bottom line. It has nothing to do with pride and all to do with marketing. This is a terrible marketing snaffu and any pro using a 4::3 standard is getting the shaft. Some people will be more than a bit hesitant to click on something that says "prints from small cameras", wouldn't you be?

Baldy · April 15, 2005

minoltaman wrote:

btw, pros don't pay hard earned money to smugmug to have the prints they upoload here be called "prints from small cameras"

You're correct. Far as I can tell looking through the top 100 print-selling pros, they're all using 3:2 cameras.

System · April 15, 2005

Baldy wrote:

You're correct. Far as I can tell looking through the top 100 print-selling pros, they're all using 3:2 cameras.

You figure, most of those are selling people shots too, perfect format for that. Who freaking cares and what does it have to do with the price of tea in China anyway???

You tring to be funny here? Prints from small cameras is quite a rediculous title. Gosh man, am I on the moon or something?

You think the only people that count here is you beloved top salesman?? Then you tell the rest to get screwed and then start making jokes?

You can not honestly believe that your pros are the only ones selling prints, stock and getting published in this world, can you? Pffft...that is a complete joke....

I guess you are right, just screw anyone at smugmug that posts a 4::3 print...yeah baby!!!

Sorry, but I think your last post was completely pointless and irrelevant. It would be nice if you would address some of the finer points of my posts.

Cheers

-don

System · April 15, 2005

Baldy wrote:

Hi Dragoon,

Certainly for someone whose customers actually end up in the cart, we'd love to have a cart that works for them and hence the call for better wording.

I shoot cars at Pebble Beach Concours each year and sell lots of enlargements, and I tend to pre-crop to a .75 ratio before uploading to smugmug. It wouldn't make things clear for my customers to see prints for small cameras in the drop-down.

For the bulk of our customers, however, it's a much clearer term than what we had before. If someone trumps it, we'll switch.

Thanks,
Baldy

If it stays, "prints from small cameras" I would like the balance of my hundred dollars back please, or a hack to change it. I did not pay you a hundred bucks to sell "prints from small cameras"!!!!!!! I am not kidding here, I have used very little hd space and zilch bandwidth and will invest my money elsewhere.

Holy smokes. Freaking "prints from small cameras" may work for all of your small camera snapshooters and smugmug, but it won't work for me and many others that shoot some stuff in, or crop to a 4::3 format.

Tons of good solutions have been proposed here, you have just overlooked them for now.

You have got to be kidding here, right?????????????????????

Seamus · April 15, 2005

Please

minoltaman wrote:

If it stays, "prints from small cameras" I would like the balance of my hundred dollars back please, or a hack to change it. I did not pay you a hundred bucks to sell "prints from small cameras"!!!!!!! I am not kidding here, I have used very little hd space and zilch bandwidth and will invest my money elsewhere.

Holy smokes. Freaking "prints from small cameras" may work for all of your small camera snapshooters and smugmug, but it won't work for me and many others that shoot some stuff in, or crop to a 4::3 format.

Tons of good solutions have been proposed here, you have just overlooked them for now.

You have got to be kidding here, right?????????????????????

:bigbs

give him his refund... I am sick and tired of listenting to this whinging... send him to Yo Mamma....and ban him. You have thousands of satisfied customers, myself included, put him in the sinbin...... :gun2 .

System · April 15, 2005

shay wrote:

:bigbs

give him his refund... I am sick and tired of listenting to this whinging... send him to Yo Mamma....and ban him. You have thousands of satisfied customers, myself included, put him in the sinbin...... :gun2 .

I figured someone like you might jump on that, shay.

It looks like here comes the flamers and trolls!!!:banned for what? correcting forum regulars posting bs to these forums?? Being honest? Helping smuggers? pffft.

Show me some posts you are talking about, in context, shay. I can show you more bs posted posted in these forums by the dgrin regulars than you can shake a stick at. Please don't run the bs flag up the flagpole on me.

Here, calm down and have a listen.:tough

Thanks

-don

Seamus · April 15, 2005

minoltaman wrote:

I figured someone like you might jump on that, shay.

It looks like here they come the flamers and trolls!!!:banned for what? correcting forum regulars posting bs to these forums?? Being honest? Help smuggers? pffft.

Show me some posts you are talking about, in context, shay. I can show you more bs posted posted in these forums by the dgrin gang than you can shake a stick at. Please don't run the bs flag up the flagpole on me.

Here, calm down and have a listen.:tough

Thanks

-don

Don, practically all of your posts are in smugmug support where you whinge and moan and crib about how bad smugmug is. You seem to think you are gods gift to photography and we are honoured to have to listen to your bs. 6.000,000 pics.... blah, blah,,, I don't work for smugmug so I don't have to be polite to you... if you don't like it here take your refund and go to another forum........ you have not contributed to this forum.... all you do is complain..... :stfu if you don't have anything positive to contribute.

System · April 15, 2005

shay wrote:

Don, practically all of your posts are in smugmug support where you whinge and moan and crib about how bad smugmug is. You seem to think you are gods gift to photography and we are honoured to have to listen to your bs. 6.000,000 pics.... blah, blah,,, I don't work for smugmug so I don't have to be polite to you... if you don't like it here take your refund and go to another forum........ you have not contributed to this forum.... all you do is complain..... :stfu if you don't have anything positive to contribute.

Complete bs, shay.:bigbsYou seem to be full of that stuff today.

You take care of your business and I will take care of mine. I would appreciate if you would be more accurate when describing the content of my posts as well. If you are having a problem finding all of my posts here, pm me and I will try to help you out.

Thanks

-don

Ps Please so not hijak my threads with completely bs flame posts. Contribute something or make your own thread.

Pss As you see by his recent post, even people like Nik are not happy about this situation.

Seamus · April 15, 2005

minoltaman wrote:

I figured someone like you might jump on that, shay.

It looks like here comes the flamers and trolls!!!:banned for what? correcting forum regulars posting bs to these forums?? Being honest? Helping smuggers? pffft.

Show me some posts you are talking about, in context, shay. I can show you more bs posted posted in these forums by the dgrin regulars than you can shake a stick at. Please don't run the bs flag up the flagpole on me.

Here, calm down and have a listen.:tough

Thanks

-don

Don,

there are two groups of people.... the silent majority and the vocal minority... you belong to the latter.... stop complaining ..... take some photos and post them... lets see how good you are....

System · April 15, 2005

shay wrote:

Don,

there are two groups of people.... the silent majority and the vocal minority... you belong to the latter.... stop complaining ..... take some photos and post them... lets see how good you are....

blah, blah, blah

http://www.pbase.com/minoltaman/raindrops
http://www.pbase.com/minoltaman/painting_autumns_colours

And one for you, shay.

Seamus · April 15, 2005

minoltaman wrote:

Complete bs, shay.:bigbsYou seem to be full of that stuff today.

You take care of your business and I will take care of mine. I would appreciate if you would be more accurate when describing the content of my posts as well. If you are having a problem finding all of my posts here, pm me and I will try to help you out.

Thanks

-don

Ps Please so not hijak my threads with completely bs flame posts. Contribute something or make your own thread.

Pss As you see by his recent post, even people like Nik are not happy about this situation.

Don't look to nik for support... i'm not a moderator.. I'm not a smugmug employee.... I wll continue to hijack your whinging,complaining, boring threads... . baldy & co can't tell you to get off you:soapbox because you are talking :bigbs and to :stfu , I can and will...... post a pic... contribute to this forum.... start a thread with a photo you have taken... all you are doing atm is wasting bandwith.....

System · April 15, 2005

Bandwidth did you say, shay?

Please go away now and stop flaming.

Thanks

-don

btw, if you can's see the images I will move them to my servers in a bit.

Seamus · April 15, 2005

minoltaman wrote:

Bandwidth did you say, shay?

Please go away now and stop flaming.

Thanks

-don

btw, if you can's see the images I will move them to my servers in a bit.

Threads started by you

http://www.dgrin.com/search.php?searchid=106448

Threads you have posted in:

http://www.dgrin.com/search.php?searchid=106451&pp=25&page=2

If you have a contribution to make to this forum then stop complaining Don. Check out the links...

This is a friendly forum not an instrument to attack smugmug and it's employees.... maybe you don't realise it but al you have done to date is complain.... try posting in some of the other threads..... make a meaningful comtribution..... I have checked out your home page.. you can use your camera... show us.....

System · April 15, 2005

shay wrote:

Threads started by you

http://www.dgrin.com/search.php?searchid=106448

Threads you have posted in:

http://www.dgrin.com/search.php?searchid=106451&pp=25&page=2

If you have a contribution to make to this forum then stop complaining Don. Check out the links...

This is a friendly forum not an instrument to attack smugmug and it's employees.... maybe you don't realise it but al you have done to date is complain.... try posting in some of the other threads..... make a meaningful comtribution..... I have checked out your home page.. you can use your camera... show us.....

You a dork. I don't start many threads but have helped others in tons of them.

Go away before I start posting them all over your butt. Your lucky I have to mail my taxes, or you would be getting them now. You sure are offering up some low quality posts lately, eh?

-don

Thanks

dragon300zx · April 15, 2005

Ok both of you calm down. This thread wasn't started to create a fight. It was started to solve a valid issue. A resolution has been posted. Lets let the smug crew (baldy, and so on) have a chance to read it and see if it is acceptable to them. Fighting with each other isn't going to solve anything.

Seamus · April 15, 2005

minoltaman wrote:

You a dork. I don't start many threads but have helped others in tons of them.

Go away before I start posting them all over your butt. Your lucky I have to mail my taxes, or you would be getting them now. You sure are offering up some low quality posts lately, eh?

-don

Thanks

"sauce for the goose"

if you can't take a little friendly critisism don't be so agressive when you post here.... and post what you want about me.... and if you ever meet me face to face I seriously doubt if you could post anything on me. do us a favour and go to another forum....

Andy · April 15, 2005

ok enough

this thread is closed, cool down and carry on another day if you like.

thank you very much.

System · April 15, 2005

Baldy wrote:

It's a people business and just like the like certain poses and smiles which you quickly learn from experience, they have tastes in how they should look in print.

The normal tastes are undersharpened skin but sharp eyes and lips, possibly hair. Undersaturated skin.

More than you wanted to know? It's intersting to me, anyway, to check out pro galleries that do a high volume of print sales without returns. They tend to look like this:

http://erikolsenphotography.smugmug.com/gallery/124050/2/5217155/Large

http://erikolsenphotography.smugmug.com/gallery/124050/1/4409374/Large
http://erikolsenphotography.smugmug.com/gallery/124050/1/5241193/Large
http://erikolsenphotography.smugmug.com/gallery/124050/1/5051729/Large

Same pro photographer and gallery and even page of the gallery of the pic you used as an example here, Baldy. What do you have to say about the skin tones offered up by that very same highly regarded pro on these 3 pix??

-don

Andy · April 15, 2005

minoltaman wrote:

http://erikolsenphotography.smugmug.com/gallery/124050/1/4409374/Large
http://erikolsenphotography.smugmug.com/gallery/124050/1/5241193/Large
http://erikolsenphotography.smugmug.com/gallery/124050/1/5051729/Large

Same pro photographer and gallery and even page of the gallery of the pic you used as an example here, Baldy. What do you have to say about the skin tones offered up by that very same highly regarded pro on these 3 pix??

-don

and, what's your point minoltaman? i see a pair of girls that have sunburn, a guy with a tan face, late in the day, likely, so it's even more exaggerated. in any case, why are you trying to make a point out of a guy's work, who's very successful, has happy clients? who cares if you don't like them, his clients do. this is all so highly subjective. all you're doing at this point is continuing to harp.

you appear to be a smart guy, a good photographer, and you know a lot about color and you have definite wishes and desires for your hosting service and how things should be done. you've made this abundantly clear.

i and many others are tiring of this. and your subtle bashing needs to stop - you try to be cute about it but we're not buying it.

System · April 15, 2005

andy wrote:

and, what's your point minoltaman? i see a pair of girls that have sunburn, a guy with a tan face, late in the day, likely, so it's even more exaggerated. in any case, why are you trying to make a point out of a guy's work, who's very successful, has happy clients? who cares if you don't like them, his clients do. this is all so highly subjective. all you're doing at this point is continuing to harp.

you appear to be a smart guy, a good photographer, and you know a lot about color and you have definite wishes and desires for your hosting service and how things should be done. you've made this abundantly clear.

i and many others are tiring of this. and your subtle bashing needs to stop - you try to be cute about it but we're not buying it.

Skin tone is the focal point of this discussion. Many different peoples images have been posted and discussed here. This is a very important topic and we should be allowed to discuss it. There is no bashing or being cute going on here. To have a constructive discussion on this subject we need to refer to specific work. For this discussion we seem to be using yours, mine and eric's work and I don't see a problem with it. Baldy is trying to correct the nicely sun kissed images I have posted and I am very curious to see what his opinion is, and what he will do to these more dramatic instances of real reddish skin tones.

Baldy has been referring to Eric as "the man" quite frequently and it is perfectly appropriate to study "the man's" images when we discuss appropriate skin color, out of range skin color, and color adjustments. Especially when eric's work has already been identified multiple times as the standard here at smugmug.

I would think everyone would like to learn and study more on this subject and to do this we need to have known reference points to work with. Thats all anyone is doing in this thread here by referring to yours, mine or eric's work. I for one always enjoy learning and we can't do that here if we can not make honest posts, or ask the important questions.

-don

System · April 15, 2005

andy wrote:

you're wrong - "the man" isn't who you think he is. i should know, i took the image that was "not even presentable as terrible as it is"

I am referring to eric o as the man, as has Baldy reffered to him in many recent threads.

I was not referring to you or your snapshots of Baldy.

-don

System · April 16, 2005

ian408 wrote:

Minoltaman, I'm surprised your computer equipment isn't up to snuff
calibration wise as well as from an OS perspective (I say this as
more modern versions of Windows are generally better at dealing with
color profiles and because you say you are a pro doing edit work, etc.
and I would imagine you'd want your edits to be as close to the final
print as possible.).

Ian

Are you saying you see a problem with the color on my own images that I have posted to this thread? The only problem I have is a main monitor that forgets what it is doing when I am not paying attention to it once in a while.

As far as using an old operating system I like it because I know exactly what it is going to do. I have accessed files through dos and I like that when needed. My stuff is running stable so I don't like to change. Plus I have thousands and thousands of dollars of software I have purchased that runs on 98. I have tons of freeware and shareware programs that run on 98. All of my systems run on 98 and I don't have to worry about any jacking around when I swap drives etc. I have the same platform on all of my systems. My network and firewall is like I want it so I keep it like that. I understand my system as it is and I think I want to keep it that way.

I have been dealing with color all of my life, as an electronic technician, television business, video camera business, satellite business, and the photography business. I have learned to trust my eyes to some degree as I have feel for color balance, hue, saturation, brightness, black levels, and contrast that some may have a hard time easily understanding. My camera makes excellent color shots so adjustments on color is something I very rarely have to do.

Again, which of my own photos that I have posted here do you have a color problem with anyway? Now I am just a small time hack here but if you are in the Youngstown, Ohio you can stop by the Butler Museum of Art-Beecher Center and check my work on one of the video screens there. If you are in college you may cross a picture of mine in a textbook. I did get 6 million page views at one of my galleries last year, so a few people must think I do ok. Please point out some some specific problems you see with the color on my work and show me what you would do differently please.

And to conclude, I have no clue why you are attacking my operating system, but oh well. Now if you want to send me about 15 grand to upgrade my hardware and software to something newer, reinstall it all and debug it for me, come right on over, I won't stop you. But I certainly don't want to do a piecemeal upgrade. And yes, I do want my edits to look like my prints. That's why I am the colorfreak that I am. It's what this thread has been all about. Geesh

BTW, my camera is suppposedly not up to snuff either...I just dunno

-don

Minoltaman rants

Comments