So today I went and got batteries for my camera, took a bunch of pics of different projects, then realized, I still dont have a cable to connect the cam to my computer, so I’m going to go get that cable, THEN, retake the pictrues in my new home, because the ones I took tonight sucked…3 more projects comming down the pipe…not nearly as nice as some of the other work on here, but I hope to improve as I go.
-- Cheers
9 comments so far
Don
home | projects | blog
2603 posts in 5630 days
#1 posted 01-27-2007 08:41 AM
Looking forward to it, Shawn. I found it better to use a USB adapter that accepts my photo card from the camera. And in my recently purchased computer, I made sure that they installed a port that would take my card directly.
-- CanuckDon "I just love small wooden boxes!" http://www.dpb-photos.com/
Shawn
home | projects | blog
225 posts in 5607 days
#2 posted 01-27-2007 08:43 AM
my camera is old…built in memory. my cell phone has almost as good of a camera in it, and I could get the adapter and card for that, but I think it’ll be cheaper to just get the cable for my camera. well I’m off for a nice graveyard shift, have a great one Don, go make some sawdust
-- Cheers
MsDebbieP
home | projects | blog
18619 posts in 5614 days
#3 posted 01-27-2007 03:04 PM
looking forward to seeing the photos..
Isn’t technology wonderful—- phone cameras overtaking handheld cameras (not that a cell phone isn’t hand-held, but you know what i mean)
-- ~ Debbie, Canada (https://www.facebook.com/DebbiePribele, Young Living Wellness )
Shawn
home | projects | blog
225 posts in 5607 days
#4 posted 01-28-2007 07:39 AM
lol ya, but then it isnt overtakeing, my cam is 3.2, which, is rather poor quality when compared to the standards of today
-- Cheers
MsDebbieP
home | projects | blog
18619 posts in 5614 days
#5 posted 01-28-2007 01:58 PM
3.2 poor??
oh how picky we become…
-- ~ Debbie, Canada (https://www.facebook.com/DebbiePribele, Young Living Wellness )
Shawn
home | projects | blog
225 posts in 5607 days
#6 posted 02-05-2007 08:43 AM
lol, well what can I say, it’s also very featurless, 5.0 is really all anyone needs, unless you go professional and want to blow up your pictures ect, but then you should be getting into the digital SLR mode.
-- Cheers
Don
home | projects | blog
2603 posts in 5630 days
#7 posted 02-05-2007 08:54 AM
Actually, Shawn, 3.2 is as good as you need to take photo’s for Internet posting. Anything larger you have to size down for sure, and you might have to do so with 3.2. So you will be able to post us progress pictures of you modified entertainment unit.
-- CanuckDon "I just love small wooden boxes!" http://www.dpb-photos.com/
Shawn
home | projects | blog
225 posts in 5607 days
#8 posted 02-05-2007 09:06 AM
for internet posting, true Don, I actually take my images smaller and at the highest quality so that I can get more on my card, and so that I dont have to down size, BUT taht said, if you want to print and use a camera as your main cam, 5.0 is the way to go, as close to 35 mm as you can get on standard sized photo’s, at least to most eyes.
-- Cheers
Dick, & Barb Cain
home | projects | blog
8693 posts in 5753 days
#9 posted 02-05-2007 02:01 PM
Since I bought a PC, I hardly ever make prints, I enjoy looking at them on the PC. I also also have a program called MemoriesOnTV that makes nice slide shows on DVD. Then I can watch them on my large screen TV. Or mail them as gifts.
I had all my old slides put on disc’s, because my slide projector broke. I also made a jig that I use to take images of all my old black & white negatives with my digital camera. I converted a bunch of old negatives that were my Dad’s, taken in the 1920’s
Now every picture I own is digital.
-- -** You are never to old to set another goal or to dream a new dream ****************** Dick, & Barb Cain, Hibbing, MN. http://www.woodcarvingillustrated.com/gallery/member.php?uid=3627&protype=1
Have your say...