<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>odd time signatures - Latest Comments in Wider Angles</title><link>http://drumsnwhistles.disqus.com/</link><description>life in 19/7 time</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Mar 2006 03:28:13 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Wider Angles</title><link>http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2006/03/22/wider-angles/#comment-3777470</link><description>Have you used a screen calibration program yet? I used the Adobe one and now what I see is closer to what prints. I downloaded your first picture and looked at it closer - after lightening it up a little it was great! Hope I get some good pictures in Miss. I think I will use the bracket mode just in case LOL chicken that I am.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">kmilyun</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 24 Mar 2006 03:28:13 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Wider Angles</title><link>http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2006/03/22/wider-angles/#comment-3777469</link><description>Interesting -- the first one is much, much darker on my work screen than it  was on the home computer where I edit photos.  I agree that the bottom one, when viewed on a 'normal' screen seems to be the better one.  I actually like the top one better from the standpoint of the diagonal interest, but you can't see it the way it is right now.  &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;What concerns me is that this non-callibration has an impact on any photo I edit, and since my camera shoots in Nikon RAW format, it has to go through a basic editing process to go from NEF to JPG.  &amp;lt;sigh&amp;gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Thanks for the comments -  they really help.&amp;lt;/sigh&amp;gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">drumsnwhistles</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2006 14:25:44 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Wider Angles</title><link>http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2006/03/22/wider-angles/#comment-3777468</link><description>I second the vote for the second one. The lighting and reflection on the water - the trails in the first shot are interesting. Now if only the trails and the sunset reflection were in the same shot --- ha ha like I could do so well :)</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">kmilyun</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2006 13:59:58 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Wider Angles</title><link>http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2006/03/22/wider-angles/#comment-3777467</link><description>The second one simply because the water shows up better, there's more contrast, etc.  Really nice.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">SwampHag</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2006 13:37:51 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>