Messages

91

Help and Advice / Re: Net Tonnage Calculation

« on: October 05, 2015, 06:04:36 PM »

Register tons in 2015? Seriously?

92

Consultations and review of site standards / Re: Topic 8: Borders and frames

« on: September 30, 2015, 04:52:41 AM »

Probably better give it as percentage instead of absolute dimensions, for example that the borders or frames must stay outside 95% of the total picture area.

93

Consultations and review of site standards / Re: Topic 1: Size of images and files

« on: September 28, 2015, 12:51:43 PM »

I don't know about you, but I have a 20 MPix camera on my phone. So, how about setting the minimum image size to at least one megapixel...

94

Consultations and review of site standards / Re: Topic 7: Watermarks

« on: September 24, 2015, 01:11:31 PM »

I'm not a fan of watermarks under any circumstances.

Me neither. However, I understand the reasoning why some photographers use them, so we can't just ban them alltogether.

95

Consultations and review of site standards / Re: Topic 8: Borders and frames

« on: September 24, 2015, 11:00:41 AM »

However, I notice that a few members post photos scanned from very old prints, which have a border.

I think borders can be allowed in case of scanned vintage prints. However, digital cameras do not produce any borders.

96

Consultations and review of site standards / Re: Topic 8: Borders and frames

« on: September 24, 2015, 07:31:51 AM »

Why should we allow frames at all?

97

Consultations and review of site standards / Re: Topic 3: Distortion, enhancement and appearance

« on: September 15, 2015, 04:37:55 PM »

Tuomas, if you post photographs here in full size, you are effectively giving them away for free.

Well, I was thinking more in legal sense. If you need a proof of copyright, having the originals complete with EXIF data helps. Of course, just having slightly resized versions on the website is also sufficient.

98

Consultations and review of site standards / Re: Topic 3: Distortion, enhancement and appearance

« on: September 15, 2015, 02:11:04 PM »

Exiv data should not be removed from the posted picture, as it provides others with an option to see how a picture was taken, and possibly to learn from that.

In my opinion, the decision whether or not to include EXIF data in the file should be left to the photographer. If I were not giving out photographs for free, it would be an important tool for me to show that I have the original and own the copyright. Of course, RAW or other digital negative format is just as good for that, equivalent to original film negative.

99

Shipping News and information / Re: What is the longest ship in the world?

« on: September 14, 2015, 04:43:10 AM »

Although Prelude has an IMO number, I recall that even Shell declines to refer to Prelude FLNG as "ship". Thus, in my opinion it's a floating industrial plant, not a ship.

As for container ships, as far as I know, Barzan is the only container ship which is officially declared to be 400 m long. The others (Maersk E, Triple E etc.) are all sub-400-metre ships according to the classification societies.

100

Consultations and review of site standards / Re: Topic 3: Distortion, enhancement and appearance

« on: September 14, 2015, 03:22:36 AM »

Do we really need to allow photographs from consumer-grade drones? I personally have experience from DJI Inspire 1 and in my opinion the 12 Mpix RAW files were not of good enough technical quality for this site.

101

Consultations and review of site standards / Re: Topic 3: Distortion, enhancement and appearance

« on: September 08, 2015, 09:57:17 AM »

I agree with Lappino, there should be no B&W photos if they are taken on a digital camera to gain more attention.

I might be stretching it a bit, but what if the user has a digital camera that can only take black and white photographs? Or, what if the member is taking photographs today using b&w film?

102

Consultations and review of site standards / Re: Topic 1: Size of images and files

« on: September 08, 2015, 09:54:13 AM »

Perhaps the minimum should be set at 768 x 768 (or some other figure).  Views?

The 90s called - they want their 0.5 Mpix image files back

As for aspect ratios, I don't see any point in permitting others than 4:3/3:4 and 3:2/2:3. That's what the cameras produce.

103

Consultations and review of site standards / Re: Topic 2: Focus and exposure

« on: September 08, 2015, 09:52:06 AM »

As for "correct exposure", the photographs should not be clearly over- or underexposed (large white or black areas), and none of the color channels should be clearly "clipped".

Regarding noise, I agree with Phil. If the camera cannot produce a noise-free image at 1:1, the resolution should be reduced before uploading the photograph.

104

Help and Advice / Re: Quadcopter (drone)

« on: August 24, 2015, 05:24:37 AM »

I agree with Owen. Our drone (DJI Inspire 1) has bright red and green lights, but unless you knew exactly where to look (and sometimes even then), it was next to impossible to spot it in daylight if it was a bit further out. We mainly flew it using the video link and while we went somewhat close to other ships as well, no-one ever called us on radio and asked what it was. Also, while the buzzing was pretty loud, you couldn't hear it in the bridge even when we flew just outside the bridge windows.

As for being naked and so on, what's the big freaking deal?

Pieter, we got about 15 minutes of flight time (indicated) in Arctic conditions, but always took the drone down after 10 minutes or so. While the captain was more than willing to stop the ship when we had minor problems with compass etc. (a few times, over open water), it would have been annoying to walk on the ice and fetch the drone after emergency landing, especially since we didn't have rifles...

105

Help and Advice / Re: COPYRIGHT

« on: August 02, 2015, 08:48:31 PM »

Copyright issues can be a pain in the aftship, so I encourage everyone to publish their photographs under a free license such as Creative Commons.