Google Plus

A few of us (at least three from the photo-groups) have been exploring
the potential of "Google Plus" or "G+" and it appears that it has an
expanding community of pros, photoshop pros, & talented hobbyists.
I am more impressed than I thought I would be, particularly with regard
to privacy issues and restrictions and limiting sharing of images. It
is simple to share an image, or an album with a limited select few in a
"circle" of friends, family, or photogeeks, or have them exposed to the
public. Downloading can be restricted to individual images in an album
or not at all.
It is also easy to exclude, or ignore the obvious pain in the ass.

There is much here to be inspired by and to learn from. Given some of
what I have seen so far has me truly humbled with regard to my ability
as a photographer.
I feel secure enough that I have come out from under the covers on G+
and I am not using my Usenet nom de Guerre, Savageduck there.

So check it out.
http://www.google.com/intl/en/+/learnmore/

http://www.colbybrownphotography.com...hers-paradise/



--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2011-09-30 15:05:35 -0700, Savageduck said:

A few of us (at least three from the photo-groups) have been exploring
the potential of "Google Plus" or "G+" and it appears that it has an
expanding community of pros, photoshop pros, & talented hobbyists.
I am more impressed than I thought I would be, particularly with regard
to privacy issues and restrictions and limiting sharing of images. It
is simple to share an image, or an album with a limited select few in a
"circle" of friends, family, or photogeeks, or have them exposed to the
public. Downloading can be restricted to individual images in an album
or not at all.
It is also easy to exclude, or ignore the obvious pain in the ass.

There is much here to be inspired by and to learn from. Given some of
what I have seen so far has me truly humbled with regard to my ability
as a photographer.
I feel secure enough that I have come out from under the covers on G+
and I am not using my Usenet nom de Guerre, Savageduck there.

So check it out.
http://www.google.com/intl/en/+/learnmore/

http://www.colbybrownphotography.com...hers-paradise/

To

add to my look at G+, take a look at some of what can be found there.
http://www.photoextract.com/plus-extract/2011/9/28

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 9/30/2011 6:55 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2011-09-30 15:05:35 -0700, Savageduck
said:

A few of us (at least three from the photo-groups) have been exploring
the potential of "Google Plus" or "G+" and it appears that it has an
expanding community of pros, photoshop pros, & talented hobbyists.
I am more impressed than I thought I would be, particularly with
regard to privacy issues and restrictions and limiting sharing of
images. It is simple to share an image, or an album with a limited
select few in a "circle" of friends, family, or photogeeks, or have
them exposed to the public. Downloading can be restricted to
individual images in an album or not at all.
It is also easy to exclude, or ignore the obvious pain in the ass.

There is much here to be inspired by and to learn from. Given some of
what I have seen so far has me truly humbled with regard to my ability
as a photographer.
I feel secure enough that I have come out from under the covers on G+
and I am not using my Usenet nom de Guerre, Savageduck there.

So check it out.
http://www.google.com/intl/en/+/learnmore/

http://www.colbybrownphotography.com...hers-paradise/


To

add to my look at G+, take a look at some of what can be found there.
http://www.photoextract.com/plus-extract/2011/9/28


It looks similar in concept to Facebook.
But, some of those images were quite good.


--
Peter

On 2011-09-30 19:03:31 -0700, tony cooper said:

On Fri, 30 Sep 2011 15:55:32 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2011-09-30 15:05:35 -0700, Savageduck said:

A few of us (at least three from the photo-groups) have been exploring
the potential of "Google Plus" or "G+" and it appears that it has an
expanding community of pros, photoshop pros, & talented hobbyists.
I am more impressed than I thought I would be, particularly with regard
to privacy issues and restrictions and limiting sharing of images. It
is simple to share an image, or an album with a limited select few in a
"circle" of friends, family, or photogeeks, or have them exposed to the
public. Downloading can be restricted to individual images in an album
or not at all.
It is also easy to exclude, or ignore the obvious pain in the ass.

There is much here to be inspired by and to learn from. Given some of
what I have seen so far has me truly humbled with regard to my ability
as a photographer.
I feel secure enough that I have come out from under the covers on G+
and I am not using my Usenet nom de Guerre, Savageduck there.

So check it out.
http://www.google.com/intl/en/+/learnmore/

http://www.colbybrownphotography.com...hers-paradise/

To

add

to my look at G+, take a look at some of what can be found there.
http://www.photoextract.com/plus-extract/2011/9/28

I'm not sure what the advantage is to the average amateur photograph.
I don't see any samples by real people.

In that batch there just what that individual considered his choice for
the top 38 images of Sept. 28.

There are many photo circles, some with shared images and some limited
to that circle. and at all levels, some even posted by "real people".


I do note that the uploaded images are resized at a maximum size of
2048 pixels on the longest side. I upload images at half that
dimension to avoid causing the viewer to scroll. I hope all images
aren't uploaded at that size.

Images uploaded which are larger than that are downsized and they are
displayed at a uniform size in a viewer which works very well, and
permits the addition of comments. You also have the ability to restrict
the sharing or not.


I also note that joining Google+ automatically enrolls you in Picasa
Web Albums and I don't do Picasa. With Lightroom and Bridge, I don't
want anything else trying to control my images.

Well you are more than halfway there with your new gmail address.

Like you I am using LR and Bridge. Picasa was never on my radar.
However I was prepared to explore the possibilities and it seems quite
workable. I would never think of using Picasa for primary storage or
back up, only as a tool for sharing since unless there are some changes
Apple is remove my current method of web distribution with iDisc +
Filechute.
I am also looking at Dropbox which gives me the closest to what I have
now, or Pogoplug where I would have my own "cloud" under my control.

My usual IDisc+FileChute:
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechut...ti-3977A2a.jpg

Dropbox shared image:
http://db.tt/f1b4zzu0

PogoPlug Information:
http://www.pogoplug.com/products-pogoplug.html

I will email a Picasa URL to you as I exist there in all my mundane self.


I don't care for albums or photostreams or whatever you call them. I
prefer linking to one image without taking extra steps. But, that's
me.

What extra steps?
Your primary catalog is maintained on your hard drive. You are not
sharing directly from your hard drive, neither am I. To share on line
there will always be some sort of "extra step".


I do link to a SmugMug gallery when I send family photos to relatives.
They can view it like a slideshow or one at a time.

I do not use any of the image sharing services. When sending images to
friends or family I will either send links to those I care to share
which are stored in the 20GB I have on iDisc , either as individual
images, or web galleries I have produced with LR, or Bridge.

I see I have that same ability with G+ &/or Picasa.

All I am doing is exploring the possibilities with an open mind, and I
recognize the potential. It is certainly no worse than some of the
discussion found here, in some instances far superior, and educational.
So if there are any other than you who would care to explore they
should feel free to do so. There is no more I can do than put this out
there. Of the three photo-groups alumni who have engaged in this test
of G+, two of us are a little more active than the third. If they care
to reveal themselves her they can, I am not going to do that.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2011-09-30 19:09:58 -0700, PeterN said:

On 9/30/2011 6:55 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2011-09-30 15:05:35 -0700, Savageduck
said:

A few of us (at least three from the photo-groups) have been exploring
the potential of "Google Plus" or "G+" and it appears that it has an
expanding community of pros, photoshop pros, & talented hobbyists.
I am more impressed than I thought I would be, particularly with
regard to privacy issues and restrictions and limiting sharing of
images. It is simple to share an image, or an album with a limited
select few in a "circle" of friends, family, or photogeeks, or have
them exposed to the public. Downloading can be restricted to
individual images in an album or not at all.
It is also easy to exclude, or ignore the obvious pain in the ass.

There is much here to be inspired by and to learn from. Given some of
what I have seen so far has me truly humbled with regard to my ability
as a photographer.
I feel secure enough that I have come out from under the covers on G+
and I am not using my Usenet nom de Guerre, Savageduck there.

So check it out.
http://www.google.com/intl/en/+/learnmore/

http://www.colbybrownphotography.com...hers-paradise/


To

add

to my look at G+, take a look at some of what can be found there.
http://www.photoextract.com/plus-extract/2011/9/28


It looks similar in concept to Facebook.
But, some of those images were quite good.

From what I have seen G+ is much less controlling than FB, and lets you
secure your participation better than I have heard FB does.
I have never used FB so I have to rely on the hearsay. That said, I am
quite comfortable with my G+ experience so far, and it adds more to the
dialog for photographers of all levels of competence and expertise than
I have seen in the photo-groups lately.

It is worth exploring if only for want of the novelty of a new experience.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2011-09-30 19:59:46 -0700, Savageduck said:

On 2011-09-30 19:03:31 -0700, tony cooper said:

On Fri, 30 Sep 2011 15:55:32 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2011-09-30 15:05:35 -0700, Savageduck said:

A few of us (at least three from the photo-groups) have been exploring
the potential of "Google Plus" or "G+" and it appears that it has an
expanding community of pros, photoshop pros, & talented hobbyists.
I am more impressed than I thought I would be, particularly with regard
to privacy issues and restrictions and limiting sharing of images. It
is simple to share an image, or an album with a limited select few in a
"circle" of friends, family, or photogeeks, or have them exposed to the
public. Downloading can be restricted to individual images in an album
or not at all.
It is also easy to exclude, or ignore the obvious pain in the ass.

There is much here to be inspired by and to learn from. Given some of
what I have seen so far has me truly humbled with regard to my ability
as a photographer.
I feel secure enough that I have come out from under the covers on G+
and I am not using my Usenet nom de Guerre, Savageduck there.

So check it out.
http://www.google.com/intl/en/+/learnmore/

http://www.colbybrownphotography.com...hers-paradise/

To

add

to

my look at G+, take a look at some of what can be found there.
http://www.photoextract.com/plus-extract/2011/9/28

I'm not sure what the advantage is to the average amateur photograph.
I don't see any samples by real people.

In that batch there just what that individual considered his choice for
the top 38 images of Sept. 28.

There are many photo circles, some with shared images and some limited
to that circle. and at all levels, some even posted by "real people".


I do note that the uploaded images are resized at a maximum size of
2048 pixels on the longest side. I upload images at half that
dimension to avoid causing the viewer to scroll. I hope all images
aren't uploaded at that size.

Images uploaded which are larger than that are downsized and they are
displayed at a uniform size in a viewer which works very well, and
permits the addition of comments. You also have the ability to restrict
the sharing or not.


I also note that joining Google+ automatically enrolls you in Picasa
Web Albums and I don't do Picasa. With Lightroom and Bridge, I don't
want anything else trying to control my images.

Well you are more than halfway there with your new gmail address.

Like you I am using LR and Bridge. Picasa was never on my radar.
However I was prepared to explore the possibilities and it seems quite
workable. I would never think of using Picasa for primary storage or
back up, only as a tool for sharing since unless there are some changes
Apple is remove my current method of web distribution with iDisc +
Filechute.
I am also looking at Dropbox which gives me the closest to what I have
now, or Pogoplug where I would have my own "cloud" under my control.

My usual IDisc+FileChute:
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechut...ti-3977A2a.jpg

Dropbox shared image:
http://db.tt/f1b4zzu0

PogoPlug Information:
http://www.pogoplug.com/products-pogoplug.html

I will email a Picasa URL to you as I exist there in all my mundane self.


I don't care for albums or photostreams or whatever you call them. I
prefer linking to one image without taking extra steps. But, that's
me.

What extra steps?
Your primary catalog is maintained on your hard drive. You are not
sharing directly from your hard drive, neither am I. To share on line
there will always be some sort of "extra step".


I do link to a SmugMug gallery when I send family photos to relatives.
They can view it like a slideshow or one at a time.

I do not use any of the image sharing services. When sending images to
friends or family I will either send links to those I care to share
which are stored in the 20GB I have on iDisc , either as individual
images, or web galleries I have produced with LR, or Bridge.

I see I have that same ability with G+ &/or Picasa.

All I am doing is exploring the possibilities with an open mind, and I
recognize the potential. It is certainly no worse than some of the
discussion found here, in some instances far superior, and educational.
So if there are any other than you who would care to explore they
should feel free to do so. There is no more I can do than put this out
there. Of the three photo-groups alumni who have engaged in this test
of G+, two of us are a little more active than the third. If they care
to reveal themselves her they can, I am not going to do that.

BTW; noodling around it seems I can also copy an image URL from G+ with
a right click menu, which will give me something such as this:
DNC4396A.jpg


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2011-09-30 21:21:07 -0700, Savageduck said:

On 2011-09-30 19:59:46 -0700, Savageduck said:

On 2011-09-30 19:03:31 -0700, tony cooper said:

On Fri, 30 Sep 2011 15:55:32 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2011-09-30 15:05:35 -0700, Savageduck said:

A few of us (at least three from the photo-groups) have been exploring
the potential of "Google Plus" or "G+" and it appears that it has an
expanding community of pros, photoshop pros, & talented hobbyists.
I am more impressed than I thought I would be, particularly with regard
to privacy issues and restrictions and limiting sharing of images. It
is simple to share an image, or an album with a limited select few in a
"circle" of friends, family, or photogeeks, or have them exposed to the
public. Downloading can be restricted to individual images in an album
or not at all.
It is also easy to exclude, or ignore the obvious pain in the ass.

There is much here to be inspired by and to learn from. Given some of
what I have seen so far has me truly humbled with regard to my ability
as a photographer.
I feel secure enough that I have come out from under the covers on G+
and I am not using my Usenet nom de Guerre, Savageduck there.

So check it out.
http://www.google.com/intl/en/+/learnmore/

http://www.colbybrownphotography.com...hers-paradise/

To

add

to

my

look at G+, take a look at some of what can be found there.
http://www.photoextract.com/plus-extract/2011/9/28

I'm not sure what the advantage is to the average amateur photograph.
I don't see any samples by real people.

In that batch there just what that individual considered his choice for
the top 38 images of Sept. 28.

There are many photo circles, some with shared images and some limited
to that circle. and at all levels, some even posted by "real people".


I do note that the uploaded images are resized at a maximum size of
2048 pixels on the longest side. I upload images at half that
dimension to avoid causing the viewer to scroll. I hope all images
aren't uploaded at that size.

Images uploaded which are larger than that are downsized and they are
displayed at a uniform size in a viewer which works very well, and
permits the addition of comments. You also have the ability to restrict
the sharing or not.


I also note that joining Google+ automatically enrolls you in Picasa
Web Albums and I don't do Picasa. With Lightroom and Bridge, I don't
want anything else trying to control my images.

Well you are more than halfway there with your new gmail address.

Like you I am using LR and Bridge. Picasa was never on my radar.
However I was prepared to explore the possibilities and it seems quite
workable. I would never think of using Picasa for primary storage or
back up, only as a tool for sharing since unless there are some changes
Apple is remove my current method of web distribution with iDisc +
Filechute.
I am also looking at Dropbox which gives me the closest to what I have
now, or Pogoplug where I would have my own "cloud" under my control.

My usual IDisc+FileChute:
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechut...ti-3977A2a.jpg

Dropbox shared image:
http://db.tt/f1b4zzu0

PogoPlug Information:
http://www.pogoplug.com/products-pogoplug.html

I will email a Picasa URL to you as I exist there in all my mundane self.


I don't care for albums or photostreams or whatever you call them. I
prefer linking to one image without taking extra steps. But, that's
me.

What extra steps?
Your primary catalog is maintained on your hard drive. You are not
sharing directly from your hard drive, neither am I. To share on line
there will always be some sort of "extra step".


I do link to a SmugMug gallery when I send family photos to relatives.
They can view it like a slideshow or one at a time.

I do not use any of the image sharing services. When sending images to
friends or family I will either send links to those I care to share
which are stored in the 20GB I have on iDisc , either as individual
images, or web galleries I have produced with LR, or Bridge.

I see I have that same ability with G+ &/or Picasa.

All I am doing is exploring the possibilities with an open mind, and I
recognize the potential. It is certainly no worse than some of the
discussion found here, in some instances far superior, and educational.
So if there are any other than you who would care to explore they
should feel free to do so. There is no more I can do than put this out
there. Of the three photo-groups alumni who have engaged in this test
of G+, two of us are a little more active than the third. If they care
to reveal themselves her they can, I am not going to do that.

BTW; noodling around it seems I can also copy an image URL from G+ with
a right click menu, which will give me something such as this:
DNC4396A.jpg

Aah! That doesn't work in UseNet as it does in email. I will have to
experiment further.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2011-09-30 21:26:40 -0700, Savageduck said:

On 2011-09-30 21:21:07 -0700, Savageduck said:

On 2011-09-30 19:59:46 -0700, Savageduck said:

On 2011-09-30 19:03:31 -0700, tony cooper said:

On Fri, 30 Sep 2011 15:55:32 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2011-09-30 15:05:35 -0700, Savageduck said:

A few of us (at least three from the photo-groups) have been exploring
the potential of "Google Plus" or "G+" and it appears that it has an
expanding community of pros, photoshop pros, & talented hobbyists.
I am more impressed than I thought I would be, particularly with regard
to privacy issues and restrictions and limiting sharing of images. It
is simple to share an image, or an album with a limited select few in a
"circle" of friends, family, or photogeeks, or have them exposed to the
public. Downloading can be restricted to individual images in an album
or not at all.
It is also easy to exclude, or ignore the obvious pain in the ass.

There is much here to be inspired by and to learn from. Given some of
what I have seen so far has me truly humbled with regard to my ability
as a photographer.
I feel secure enough that I have come out from under the covers on G+
and I am not using my Usenet nom de Guerre, Savageduck there.

So check it out.
http://www.google.com/intl/en/+/learnmore/

http://www.colbybrownphotography.com...hers-paradise/

To

add

to

my

look

at G+, take a look at some of what can be found there.
http://www.photoextract.com/plus-extract/2011/9/28

I'm not sure what the advantage is to the average amateur photograph.
I don't see any samples by real people.

In that batch there just what that individual considered his choice for
the top 38 images of Sept. 28.

There are many photo circles, some with shared images and some limited
to that circle. and at all levels, some even posted by "real people".


I do note that the uploaded images are resized at a maximum size of
2048 pixels on the longest side. I upload images at half that
dimension to avoid causing the viewer to scroll. I hope all images
aren't uploaded at that size.

Images uploaded which are larger than that are downsized and they are
displayed at a uniform size in a viewer which works very well, and
permits the addition of comments. You also have the ability to restrict
the sharing or not.


I also note that joining Google+ automatically enrolls you in Picasa
Web Albums and I don't do Picasa. With Lightroom and Bridge, I don't
want anything else trying to control my images.

Well you are more than halfway there with your new gmail address.

Like you I am using LR and Bridge. Picasa was never on my radar.
However I was prepared to explore the possibilities and it seems quite
workable. I would never think of using Picasa for primary storage or
back up, only as a tool for sharing since unless there are some changes
Apple is remove my current method of web distribution with iDisc +
Filechute.
I am also looking at Dropbox which gives me the closest to what I have
now, or Pogoplug where I would have my own "cloud" under my control.

My usual IDisc+FileChute:
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechut...ti-3977A2a.jpg

Dropbox shared image:
http://db.tt/f1b4zzu0

PogoPlug Information:
http://www.pogoplug.com/products-pogoplug.html

I will email a Picasa URL to you as I exist there in all my mundane self.


I don't care for albums or photostreams or whatever you call them. I
prefer linking to one image without taking extra steps. But, that's
me.

What extra steps?
Your primary catalog is maintained on your hard drive. You are not
sharing directly from your hard drive, neither am I. To share on line
there will always be some sort of "extra step".


I do link to a SmugMug gallery when I send family photos to relatives.
They can view it like a slideshow or one at a time.

I do not use any of the image sharing services. When sending images to
friends or family I will either send links to those I care to share
which are stored in the 20GB I have on iDisc , either as individual
images, or web galleries I have produced with LR, or Bridge.

I see I have that same ability with G+ &/or Picasa.

All I am doing is exploring the possibilities with an open mind, and I
recognize the potential. It is certainly no worse than some of the
discussion found here, in some instances far superior, and educational.
So if there are any other than you who would care to explore they
should feel free to do so. There is no more I can do than put this out
there. Of the three photo-groups alumni who have engaged in this test
of G+, two of us are a little more active than the third. If they care
to reveal themselves her they can, I am not going to do that.

BTW; noodling around it seems I can also copy an image URL from G+ with
a right click menu, which will give me something such as this:
DNC4396A.jpg

Aah! That doesn't work in UseNet as it does in email. I will have to
experiment further.

Let's try this.

DNC4396A.jpg

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2011-09-30 21:28:56 -0700, Savageduck said:

On 2011-09-30 21:26:40 -0700, Savageduck said:

LE SNIP

BTW; noodling around it seems I can also copy an image URL from G+ with
a right click menu, which will give me something such as this:
DNC4396A.jpg

Aah! That doesn't work in UseNet as it does in email. I will have to
experiment further.

Let's try this.

DNC4396A.jpg

Nope!

Next attempt;


https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-V...2/DNC4396A.jpg


or
http://tinyurl.com/42to5u9


--
Regards,

Savageduck

"tony cooper" wrote in message
...

I'm not sure what the advantage is to the average amateur photograph.
I don't see any samples by real people.

Brand name, number of subscribers, and access control. Beyond that the rest
is just bull****.

Personally, I'd rather these protocols were handled at a low level instead
of just handing your assets over to yet another monopoly to monetize.

--
Charles E. Hardwidge