Yep... 200 year old heritage listed tree and the heritage listed
lighthouse all in one shot. Was the cover shot for the 2005 Redlands
calendar. A sellout edition. I'm really proud of that one. The proceeds
from it paid for my 5D and it's 70 -200 F2.8, IS lens and the change
went a long way towards buying my second Designjet canvas printer.

Not quite up to your remarkable train shot, is it Tony?... You know the
one? laughing stock of Usenet? The one someone always manages to dig up
whenever you make out you have some sort of photographic ability?

I'll dig up the link and post it if you like. It won't matter if it a
dead link. I liked it so much I followed your example with my pictures
and downloaded it just so I could present it when you tried this sort of
stunt again. Really exemplifies your photographic ability and
demonstrates your clear talent all in one picture. Brilliant stuff mate,
got any more we can get a laugh from?

While I'm here... Tell us about the cover shots you did for that French
Magazine, the Editors of which have no knowledge of you. Your
explanation of that lot of bullshit will justify my cost of finding out
you really are the biggest bullshit artist these groups have spawned.
Right up there with Chrlz@go.com or Mark_thomas as he last called himself.

You remember him, don't you? He's the one who teamed up with you to make
out I'd posted a blurry image of a 98 year old fellow in historic dress
at the re-enactment of Cook's landing in Moreton Bay. Remember? Sort of
made both of you look a bit stupid when I posted the original (very
sharp) pic, didn't it?

You really are a funny man, Tony. Everyone's been laughing at you for
years. Why don't you just keep to subjects you actually have some
knowledge about and leave your critic of composition to people who know
what they are talking about.

You see... You've made an idiot out of yourself again here. When the
text and header is added to the picture you pointed out, the whole cover
comes together. This one:
http://www.weprint2canvas.com/gallery/Public/cover2 looks even odder but
it too became complete when the text was over layed. I'll get permission
to publish the finished covers from the new copyright owner tomorrow.
I'm sure a few readers here will find the subject interesting, even if
you only seek to get entertainment from them in the poorest attempt at
humor you seem so gifted at.

Douglas

Rich, this is why people get into you for some of your posts. You simply
can't judge a photograph when it's a picture on a web page. You've read
2 articles. Great. You can judge even less, a picture by reading about
it. I've taken over 30,000 pictures with 20Ds. I own a wide format
printing business and until last year, owned a camera store as well as
maintain a Pro Studio.

When I read  an article about a camera I have intimate knowledge of, I
expect it be consistent, follow a course of testing and contain
information about everything that comes with the camera. So far, no
mention of how to adjust your camera for the image type you want. You
get the results you program into the camera. Custom functions are just
that... Customizing the way your pictures turn out.

One of my cameras runs tethered and has the contrast and sharpness
cranked up so it can capture in JPEG and print a high contrast picture
directly as it is taken. Another is set with the lowest contrast and
sharpness. I make all the adjustments during development of the RAW
files with this one. One works at events and the other I use for
Weddings... Why do you suppose I use totally different setting on these?

You really have to look at the whole package Canon provide with the
Camera to realize what is going on. Canon give out an application called
"Digital Photo Professional" with their DSLRs. The latest version
(upgradeable off the net) of this application has a facility to use
during development of RAW images which allows you to select the type of
rendering the picture will have. Standard, Portrait, Landscape, Neutral,
faithful or B&W.

The software develops RAW files to these picture types and it alters the
curves of each colour channel and the contrast of the picture to arrive
at the "type" of picture you choose. Expert individuals can do this in
Photoshop with JPEG images but for those who like to shoot, develop and
print, it is essential to use RAW capture and DPP or produce a
customized set of functions in the camera for your desired results.

The way the article you reproduced reads, the guy has no idea of how to
get the results "HE" wants to have. Instead he is criticizing the camera
for not having ISP into his brain. That is probably in next year's model!