davidc wrote:Without delving into the depths of your 365 days project to find the Farley Quote (tm), I thought that "posting technical details of a shot were of no use without knowing the lighting environment and post-processing that had been applied"
I wondered if that was going to come up. There is a major difference between posting an image for aesthetic appreciation* and in a camera review where the reader wants to know how the equipment performed.
If you want a genuine Farley Quote (tm), "The camera used is the least important aspect of any photograph" is a good one to be be getting on with.
davidc wrote:
What info would you find useful for each image as a starter?
The big three exposure variables, of course, i.e. aperture, shutter speed and ISO. Then there is focal length for zoom lenses and the lens used for an ILC. If you are illustrating bokeh, then focussing distance would be useful as well.
davidc wrote:
Many thanks about the info about the site links too, I'm still finding and fixing problems like that. I had to get the site and reviews ported over first so I can promote the results and get more kit in to review, given deadlines and such like. Any other site hiccups you alert me to are very much appreciated, I've had to take the articles & projects sections offline completely while I smooth out the kinks.
The strange thing is that I am pretty sure that the blog links were working immediately after you had migrated to squarespace.
davidc wrote:
Just back from Bali where I was going to review the shockproof and waterproof Canon D30 compact. Water resistant to 25 metres meant it was better qualified for scuba diving than I am! Except - it died completely about 2m underwater
I hope it was a review model which you can return. You must have taken it into the wrong type of water.
* Probably not the correct word for many of my shots.
