Thanks Tedz! The wive-to-be says that aerial images from the Mother Ship aren't suitable though. -shrugs- I'm with you on the Vermouth though. -Taltos

I use a pretty simple system for my original images. Generally, I can remember where a shot was taken, so I have my photos organized in folders by place name ("MontpelierVT" for example). I then have subfolders that are named with the event/location and the date of the shoot ("Cemetary-06-05-03"). Sometimes I use another layer of folders for each subject ("ManchesterVT -> Home -> Studio -> Candles"). This system works pretty well for me. I can't do any searching, but it doesn't really take long to find an image as long as I remembered where it was taken. Postworked images generally get put into a single directory, where I use the Windows XP thumbnail view to find what I need. -Taltos

I'm leaning toward the 2nd one, although I'm not sure why. Some sort of gut feeling if that makes any sense. If anyone watched Six Feet Under a couple of weeks ago, there was an artist that said something along the lines of "good art is something that makes you want to throw up". While I didn't quite have that reaction, the 2nd one does make me feel something, while the first one just made me think, "Hm. Neat shot." -Taltos

I take a lot of shots in cemetaries. I don't generally post anything where a name can be seen, but that's because I'm generally more interested in the statues I find. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with posting something with a name, as long as it was photographed in a public cemetary. -Taltos

Thanks for the link! This program works amazingly well! -Taltos

Very cool. This reminds me of something that I was going to try, but never did since I don't have access to a darkroom.

Here's my thought process:

Take a digital image and invert the colors. Print the result to a transparency. Take the transparency into a darkroom and make prints from it as if it were a piece of film negative.

My thinking was that I could print digital prints to "traditional" paper for those people who insist on silver gelatin prints instead of "giclee" prints.

Anyone ever try anything like that?

-Taltos (who is now thinking this probably belongs in another post so as not to steal Michelle's thunder)

That actually reminds me of the time I spent a weekend filming a stop-motion animation of a snail pushing a ball. I spent a day setting up the shot, then starting filming...

Position snail puppet, position ball... Film one frame...
Re-position snail puppet, re-position ball... Film next frame...
Re-position snail again, re-position ball again... Next frame...

And so on and so on....

Everything was going well for a few hours, then suddenly, out of nowhere, my four-year old walked by and snatched my ball. -sigh-

-Taltos

Erm.... True? There is always another dream. Or is that, "There is no spoon"? -Taltos

This bit from the TOS seems to explain any images in the galleries that might be questionable: "Conversely there may be some images which, whilst in apparent violation of the rules, will be permitted to stay in the interests of free speech and religious tolerance." Basically, the way I read the TOS, the moderators and admins keep or dismiss whatever images they want to. My assumption, which I think is probably a fair one, is that they don't do this without some discussion first. Personally, I'm not big on censorship. When it comes down to it though, we all censor in some form or another. I won't allow my seven year-old daughter to watch horror movies. Is that censorship? She knows all the words to Rocky Horror Picture Show though (okay, it might not be a horror movie, but Meatloaf does get chopped up and eaten). I guess it's a fine line. Remember that the moderators are human. They make decisions based on what they know and believe at the time, just as we all do. Sometimes they are right, and sometimes they are wrong. Also remember that by being members, we all in theory agreed to the TOS. We shouldn't make a huge fuss when the moderators apply it. They are just applying it the way that they read it at the time. By the way (since I'm too lazy to search for it right now) what are the steps for becoming a moderator? Maybe more of us should volunteer so that there is a larger group of people to discuss the merits of questionable images? -Taltos

Also keep an eye on if you're using the right type of ink with the right type of paper. The 2200 uses two seperate blacks. One for glossy paper, and one for matte. I've found that using the wrong paper/ink combination definately throws off the tones. -Taltos

This definately gives me a hesitant feeling, like the man doesn't really believe what he is preaching. On that level, I think it works, just because it gave me a gut reaction when I first saw it. I also like the darkness of the shot. It gives it a nice spooky aspect. -Taltos

I like the first shot, though the background seems a bit grainy to me. It's actually funny that you posted this shot. I was trying to do some shots of a mask this weekend. One of my multitude of hobbies of mask-making, and I was trying to find a good way to photograph them for potential sales (which reminds me, if anyone wants a hand-made mask, let me know and we might be able to set something up. :) ). -Taltos

Ooh! Pick me! Pick me! I'm a new talent!

Actually, I'm not, but I can give you a perspective from a relative outsider.

Of the images that I have posted, the best responses are to the ones that I post in the forum, and not the gallery. I think that's because people know that I am looking for feedback when I post to the forum, where in the gallery, I'm just one of a large crowd.

I admit that the last photo I posted, I was hoping would do better than it did, as far as comments at least, but I was excited to get the comments that I did (I tend to judge my photos more on the number and type of comments it gets than on rankings). What really bummed me out was the number of people who actually looked at it. After a week of being up, very few people had actually looked at it. This led to a number of thoughts running through my mind.

The first was annoyance that I had posted the photo just before I went to bed, and by the next morning it was already buried three pages deep into the gallery. Not much exposure time there.

The second thought, of course, was that it wasn't good enough for people to pay any attention to. I think this runs through the brain of any artist who displays a work though. This led to the thought of, "Yeah, but if they could see the print instead of a JPG, they'd understand." Well, nothing to be done for that unless someone actually decides that they want a print. Then, depending on my mood, I'd waffle back over to the "maybe my work just sucks" thought.

On the other hand, every time I see that the photo has another hit, I get really excited. Especially after it's been up for awhile. That, in my mind, means that someone took the time to go way back through the gallery, and that something about my thumbnail caught their eye, causing them to look at the finished work. This thought negates the feeling that it's an inferior work.

Now, from the standpoint of someone who browses through the galleries, I agree, there is just too much to look at sometimes (thus my annoyance of being bumped back so quickly). I generally scan though the thumbnails, and check out the ones that catch my eye. The lesson here, at least to me, is to make sure the thumbnail is interesting.

Sometimes I just pop on here and check out the gallery of some of my favorite artists (Michelle being one of them). This really isn't any different than what I would do anywhere else. In a bookstore, for example, I usually scan through the titles, but I alway focus in on my favorite authors. What I have noticed, however, is that I don't really comment much on anyone's work myself. I chalk this up as me being a generally shy person, but I think I need to work on changing that. My new resolution is to start commenting on works, even if it's just to say "Wow. I really like that", which is pretty much all I know about art anyway (which really annoys the owners of the local galleries when I go in to look at their $30,000 paintings).

Okay. I think I've lost my train of thought, and I think I'm rambling, so I guess I'll stop now.

The general summary of my ranting is that, yeah, I'd like to see more feedback, but yeah, I totally understand how hard it is to do.

-Taltos