<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Kelsch Photography</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.blog.kelschphoto.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.blog.kelschphoto.com</link>
	<description>A Life Long Passion</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 04 Jul 2009 11:54:54 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Photo File Naming Convention by Sara Wilhelm</title>
		<link>http://www.blog.kelschphoto.com/2009/01/photo-file-management/comment-page-1/#comment-11</link>
		<dc:creator>Sara Wilhelm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Jan 2009 02:55:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.photo.franzkelsch.com/?p=212#comment-11</guid>
		<description>Thanks for you thoughts on this subject.  I also organize my pictures into monthly folders and then into yearly folders but now I need a better system for naming my pictures.  Originally I was just remaning everything in a folder to say the same thing for that specific occasion and then they would be assigned 1, 2, 3 after the name of the file. I think that will still be sufficient for now.  I haven't decided if I will go the extra mile and put in the year and month.  It definitely could't hurt and wouldn't really require that much effort considering I would be renaming them anyways.  My biggest concern is like you said, knowing in future years when it was taken and who is in it.  That is where my scrapbooks come in.  Instead of naming everyone in the picture in its file, I am hoping to scrapbook my important pictures over the years where my journaling will tell all who was in those pics.  This is my hope.   Hopefully this will be sufficient!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for you thoughts on this subject.  I also organize my pictures into monthly folders and then into yearly folders but now I need a better system for naming my pictures.  Originally I was just remaning everything in a folder to say the same thing for that specific occasion and then they would be assigned 1, 2, 3 after the name of the file. I think that will still be sufficient for now.  I haven&#8217;t decided if I will go the extra mile and put in the year and month.  It definitely could&#8217;t hurt and wouldn&#8217;t really require that much effort considering I would be renaming them anyways.  My biggest concern is like you said, knowing in future years when it was taken and who is in it.  That is where my scrapbooks come in.  Instead of naming everyone in the picture in its file, I am hoping to scrapbook my important pictures over the years where my journaling will tell all who was in those pics.  This is my hope.   Hopefully this will be sufficient!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Adobe Camera Profiles for Lightroom by Franz</title>
		<link>http://www.blog.kelschphoto.com/2008/11/adobe-camera-profiles/comment-page-1/#comment-6</link>
		<dc:creator>Franz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2008 05:15:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.photo.franzkelsch.com/?p=256#comment-6</guid>
		<description>In the past it was very difficult to try to match the in camera created JPEG files that were using one of the built in curves.  But the new beta Camera Profiles in Lightroom 2.0 and the new Adobe Catpure due a very close job.  As I mentioned in my information testing, it was close enough for me but some will still want to use the Nikon Capture software.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the past it was very difficult to try to match the in camera created JPEG files that were using one of the built in curves.  But the new beta Camera Profiles in Lightroom 2.0 and the new Adobe Catpure due a very close job.  As I mentioned in my information testing, it was close enough for me but some will still want to use the Nikon Capture software.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Adobe Camera Profiles for Lightroom by Tomas</title>
		<link>http://www.blog.kelschphoto.com/2008/11/adobe-camera-profiles/comment-page-1/#comment-5</link>
		<dc:creator>Tomas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2008 20:59:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.photo.franzkelsch.com/?p=256#comment-5</guid>
		<description>Hi!
Your reflections are interesting. I'm curious about what has become your standard setting when it comes to processing these D300 - NEF's? I often find it hard to automatically match the camera rendered jpg's.
/Tomas in Sweden</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi!<br />
Your reflections are interesting. I&#8217;m curious about what has become your standard setting when it comes to processing these D300 - NEF&#8217;s? I often find it hard to automatically match the camera rendered jpg&#8217;s.<br />
/Tomas in Sweden</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on New Nikon D300 Camera Arrives by John</title>
		<link>http://www.blog.kelschphoto.com/2008/05/new-camera-arrives/comment-page-1/#comment-4</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 01:23:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.photo.franzkelsch.com/?p=127#comment-4</guid>
		<description>Nice Camera!  You should have a lot of fun with this 300 model.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice Camera!  You should have a lot of fun with this 300 model.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Long Term Value by Jerry Suppan</title>
		<link>http://www.blog.kelschphoto.com/2008/05/long-term-value/comment-page-1/#comment-3</link>
		<dc:creator>Jerry Suppan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 22:26:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.photo.franzkelsch.com/?p=126#comment-3</guid>
		<description>Very good observation.   Although I have not had the long-term inverstment and interest in photography and photographic equipment as you have (although that is slowly evolving)  I can see where you are coming from in the comparative analysis of the two hobbyist worlds.   Especially in consideration it is possible to create a market and make money from the hobby if you set up your business model correctly as well as exploit internet-based resources.

Computers are still needed to process all that digital data one creates with one's video and photographic equipment.  Thus, I am not completely down on computer equipment per se.  Similarly,  I am not really down on  telephones either as a geeky or nerdy device.  They both are needed and used  as tools or devices to accomplish respective tasks and objectives, just as the tool called an automobile is used to carry you somewhere.

A word on computers:

My switch to the Mac platform from the PC world has been nothing less then an 'emancipation'.    Now, instead of tinkering with technology, trying to make things work 80-90% of the time as so often seems to be the case with Windows, the Apple platform has allowed me to  spend 80-90% of my time in productivity and get on with business at hand.  Since Apple's modern day equipment and operating system are both 64-bit, I found that I have been able to do every thing I need to do via mobile equipment.  This eliminates PC boxes,  and nerdiness that goes along with trying to find the best graphics card, sub-sound system, motherboard, memory type etc., orchestrate it and then hope it all works.

Value:  Although Apple continues to evolve  new models every year,  one can purchase a machine and reliably use it for at least 2-3 years and derive productivity value.   And then when it does come time to resell a Mac, a good part of the initial investment can be recovered through whatever outlet one  might use for such resale.  At least that is the case for me here in Japan using auctions.  (One might consider to being akin to the resale of a BMW or Mercedes versus a Volkswagen.)

Back to the main point, 'Long Term Value', all things eventually obsolete.  Film-based cameras are rapidly being obsoleted in lieu of digital cameras (check out the reductions in labor force at Fuji Film, Kodak, and the likes),  audio cassette radio players have also become obsolete.  Airline propellor plane equipment (Trans World Airlines ?  :-)  etc)  have been obsoleted by jet aircraft (which is also evolving).  It is a process of evolution.  Hard disk drives will give way to SSDs.  And, I think even camera lenses will change dramatically in the future as new technology evolves and allows for it. (look at even current lens evolution now starting to incorporate IS and VR technologies within the lenses). ( http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/09/arts/design/09phot.html )  The issue is if one can derive maximum value (however defined) over time , and minimize value erosion for one's existing equipment and holdings, whether it be a car, real estate, a home, a computer,  photographic equipment, etc.  If the equipment or possessions can be monetized and capitalized upon, and converted into profit or business, then all the better.

Hope this rationale all makes sense.

TokyoJerry</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very good observation.   Although I have not had the long-term inverstment and interest in photography and photographic equipment as you have (although that is slowly evolving)  I can see where you are coming from in the comparative analysis of the two hobbyist worlds.   Especially in consideration it is possible to create a market and make money from the hobby if you set up your business model correctly as well as exploit internet-based resources.</p>
<p>Computers are still needed to process all that digital data one creates with one&#8217;s video and photographic equipment.  Thus, I am not completely down on computer equipment per se.  Similarly,  I am not really down on  telephones either as a geeky or nerdy device.  They both are needed and used  as tools or devices to accomplish respective tasks and objectives, just as the tool called an automobile is used to carry you somewhere.</p>
<p>A word on computers:</p>
<p>My switch to the Mac platform from the PC world has been nothing less then an &#8216;emancipation&#8217;.    Now, instead of tinkering with technology, trying to make things work 80-90% of the time as so often seems to be the case with Windows, the Apple platform has allowed me to  spend 80-90% of my time in productivity and get on with business at hand.  Since Apple&#8217;s modern day equipment and operating system are both 64-bit, I found that I have been able to do every thing I need to do via mobile equipment.  This eliminates PC boxes,  and nerdiness that goes along with trying to find the best graphics card, sub-sound system, motherboard, memory type etc., orchestrate it and then hope it all works.</p>
<p>Value:  Although Apple continues to evolve  new models every year,  one can purchase a machine and reliably use it for at least 2-3 years and derive productivity value.   And then when it does come time to resell a Mac, a good part of the initial investment can be recovered through whatever outlet one  might use for such resale.  At least that is the case for me here in Japan using auctions.  (One might consider to being akin to the resale of a BMW or Mercedes versus a Volkswagen.)</p>
<p>Back to the main point, &#8216;Long Term Value&#8217;, all things eventually obsolete.  Film-based cameras are rapidly being obsoleted in lieu of digital cameras (check out the reductions in labor force at Fuji Film, Kodak, and the likes),  audio cassette radio players have also become obsolete.  Airline propellor plane equipment (Trans World Airlines ?  <img src='http://www.blog.kelschphoto.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' />  etc)  have been obsoleted by jet aircraft (which is also evolving).  It is a process of evolution.  Hard disk drives will give way to SSDs.  And, I think even camera lenses will change dramatically in the future as new technology evolves and allows for it. (look at even current lens evolution now starting to incorporate IS and VR technologies within the lenses). ( <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/09/arts/design/09phot.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/09/arts/design/09phot.html</a> )  The issue is if one can derive maximum value (however defined) over time , and minimize value erosion for one&#8217;s existing equipment and holdings, whether it be a car, real estate, a home, a computer,  photographic equipment, etc.  If the equipment or possessions can be monetized and capitalized upon, and converted into profit or business, then all the better.</p>
<p>Hope this rationale all makes sense.</p>
<p>TokyoJerry</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on About by Alfred D. Wilhelm, Jr.</title>
		<link>http://www.blog.kelschphoto.com/about-2/comment-page-1/#comment-2</link>
		<dc:creator>Alfred D. Wilhelm, Jr.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 22:40:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.photo.franzkelsch.com/?page_id=4#comment-2</guid>
		<description>Congratulations!  Very impressive ride by you and Ann.  I am impressed with the way you two worked together and the results you achieved.  Best wishes, Al</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Congratulations!  Very impressive ride by you and Ann.  I am impressed with the way you two worked together and the results you achieved.  Best wishes, Al</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
