Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/01/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Not a patch on Nathan's shot, but there's quite a bit of strategically placed water in Berlin - taken last summer in the city centre.Ku-damm and the Ged?chtniskirche http://gallery.leica-users.org/New-Old-Pictures/CRW_0399_edited_3 http://gallery.leica-users.org/New-Old-Pictures/CRW_0398_edited_2 cheers Douglas Nathan Wajsman wrote: > Hi Ted and thanks! > > Regarding theft and so on--that is a risk, yes, but I do want to show > off my pictures to this group and the world in general, so I have to > run that risk. I post the images at 750x500 pixels (horizontal) or > 600x400 pixels (vertical)--unless I crop them, in which case the short > side may end up bigger or smaller. If we take 200 dpi as the minimum > acceptable resolution for printing, then it means that anybody can > download them and make a print of approximately 3.5x2.5 inches if the > image is horizontal, and smaller if it is vertical. So stealing the > images for the purpose of printing them is not likely to be a huge > issue; someone can of course pinch them for web display. But again, > this is a risk that I simply have to accept if I want you to look at > my stuff! > > Thanks for looking. > > Nathan > > Ted Grant wrote: > >> Nathan Wajsman showed: >> Subject: [Leica] Nathan's PAW 2: An evening in Berlin >> >>> here is my PAW for week 2. All these were taken during one evening >>> in Berlin, where I stopped on my way home from Poland: >>> > http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws/?page_id=8 <<<<< >> >> >> >> Hi Nathan, >> What can one say about the reflections but very well done! In both >> colour & B&W. Certainly illustrates the impact of using different films. >> >> Although I have a question about posting such excellent exposures at >> the size they are? I realize these are not jpegs at 72 size for >> transmission. However, given the world of the internet is full of >> SOB's stealing images for their own use and money in they're pockets. >> I have to say something about the size of your photographs. >> >> Each time I'm primed to have a website produced I'm shown how easy it >> is to copy a picture. Particularly, your vertical reflection photo >> then print it 9 X 6 inches. No the photo isn't smashing, but it sure >> could be used for re-production by any number of unscrupulous thieves >> or publications. >> >> I've been told web sight photographs could have water marks on the >> photographs. Yes I understand water marking, but I've also been shown >> how easy it is to copy a photograph with a water mark, re-move it and >> the 9X6 print looked pretty good. >> >> Copying has crossed my mind any number of times while looking at some >> of your photography because it's so dang good! But this is the first >> time I've made a point of it because the Berlin pictures warrant the >> warning. >> >> It's been my understanding if one posts a picture through the >> internet the resolution should never be any greater than 72. In your >> case the size shows 240. So in the future, certainly with some of >> your work looking so professionally acceptable, maybe it's time to >> make 'em 72 from now on. >> >> I trust this is of some use. >> ted >> >> Ted Grant Photography Limited >> 1817 Feltham Road >> Victoria BC V8N 2A4 >> 250-477-2156 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >