Author |
Message |
Rex
| Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 07:06 pm: |
|
Put me down for a calendar. REX CHANEY |
Blake
| Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 07:22 pm: |
|
Someone want to help Dave tally and post the running list of calendar orders? Blake (Dave's little helper) |
Reepicheep
| Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 08:33 pm: |
|
My Nikon Coolpx does 1600x1200, and holds well up to 8x10 so long as you are more then 5 inches away from the print. Add me to the list of people that want one, and let me lobby for Daves original "xray" photo to be included (alongside a 9sx). |
Shawn_9r
| Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 09:04 pm: |
|
Dave... I have compiled a list of names for cash notations to get it started: vegasbueller $50 shawn_9r $50 The following have indicated they wanted one: tom_b=3 gomo=2 rek=1 sammings=2 shawn_9r =1 blake =1 court =2 ingemar =2 blueblak =2 bud =10 lake_bueller=2 bombe r=2 rex =1 total 31 The following are unconfirmed: cataract=1 left coastal=1 cjxb=1 blackbelt=1 coolice=1 99beullx1=1 charlieboy6649=1 total that need to be confirmed 7 If I wrote your name down wrong or misrepresented you please let me know. If you need to be confirmed please do that also. Hope this helps, Shawn (Message edited by shawn_9r on January 03, 2005) |
Davegess
| Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 09:12 pm: |
|
I've seen 2.1MP photos printed at 8"x10" That is true with a photo printer BUT if we print this using regular printing, cyan, magenta, yellow, black (CYMK) I doubt that we will be real excited with the results. Each dot on the printed page heeds four dots of color to make it work. Eacj one of those dots needs several pixels to make it work. Hence the need for lots of pixels. I have looked at several calendar printing places and the universal requirement is 300 PPI at the size the picture is going to be reproduced. We could go with a 8 1/2 by 5 1/2 picture instead of 8 1/2 x 11 but that is a pretty small calendar. |
Davegess
| Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 09:14 pm: |
|
Photo tally; So far I have two people who have submitted phots. Unless you all want 12 months of antique Buells in front of an even more antique barn I need more submissions. |
Davegess
| Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 10:53 pm: |
|
And if you know anyone who has top notch phots please ask them to donate a pix or two. I know that some of you know folks who shoot racing regularly, get on them plese. |
Cataract2
| Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 11:05 pm: |
|
How much for one again? |
Reepicheep
| Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 11:07 pm: |
|
Thanks for the explanation Dave, that makes sense. I'll take two. |
Bjack
| Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 11:22 pm: |
|
I'll take two. Thanks for your help Dave. |
Henry_the_8th
| Posted on Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - 01:46 am: |
|
I'll take one. Regardless of the format, it will still be an awesome calendar. Thanks for taking this on Dave. |
Buellerthanyou
| Posted on Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - 02:02 am: |
|
Three cheers for Dave Gess! A great idea whose time has come. I'll take one! Preferably not over $20, though. Not everyone in my house is as passionate about Buells as I am! HellBuelly J http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hellbuellies/ "A good Buell calendar vigorously executed right now... is far better than a perfect Buell calendar executed next week." --General George S2 Patton |
Mutt2jeff
| Posted on Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - 02:25 am: |
|
I would send in pictures, but the blast isn't exactly the best looking bike. I will take a calendar. |
Redhatbuell
| Posted on Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - 03:19 am: |
|
I'd like one. |
Charlieboy6649
| Posted on Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - 09:24 am: |
|
Confirming, Yes I wan't one. |
CJXB
| Posted on Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - 09:26 am: |
|
I'll take a calendar !! CJ |
Dsergison
| Posted on Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - 09:44 am: |
|
I'll take one |
Dsergison
| Posted on Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - 09:46 am: |
|
did we perhaps set the bar a little too high with 8mp? a good 5mp or 35mm negative would be ok? no? |
Mikej
| Posted on Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - 10:32 am: |
|
What would be the possibility (I know, late to the party and flinging monkey wrenches around....) of having these printed up as an 18 month calender and available for purchase in June during the Buell Homecoming? June 2005 - December 2006 (hmmm, 19 months, oh well). That way anyone in attendance could get people to sign them for June. Anyway, just a thought, and a way to buy Dave some time to get this done. (ps, saw you Dave before Christmas in your Citroen at the intersection of Port Wa. Road and Hampton.) |
99buellx1
| Posted on Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - 12:13 pm: |
|
I dont think we need to only have one bike per month. Maybee on some, but how bout a grouping of pictures that are smaller resolution to help people get in the callendar. Maybee like a BadWeb month. ?? I'll find my high-res of the picture that I posted and send it off. Thanks for taking this over! Craig I'll take 2. |
Daves
| Posted on Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - 12:23 pm: |
|
|
Bud
| Posted on Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - 12:46 pm: |
|
i don't have any high resolution pics or really nice one's from my bike dham... a wait, daveg you got mail |
Henrik
| Posted on Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - 11:33 am: |
|
A software such as Genuine Fractals is capable of providing a perfectly usable up-sampled version of even 2 - 3 MP photos. Works much better than simple up-sampling in Photoshop. My guess is that most print shops would have either GF or similar software making it possible to use more photos for the calender. Just a thought Henrik |
Ingemar
| Posted on Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - 01:33 pm: |
|
Personally I am happy with the quality demands as they are. It will provide a good quality print. Any slr camera is capable of making pictures Dave can use. I sent Dave some samples and if he decides to use them, I will retake them using my slr camera and send him the film. |
Henrik
| Posted on Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - 02:22 pm: |
|
Nice prints are nice I have reworked images from video capture using GF (640 x 480; generally crummy quality) to be acceptable for medical print publishing (2400 x 1800.) They required quite a bit of Photoshop Noise, Gaussian Blur and Unsharp Mask magic, but they came out pretty darn good if I may say so myself My thought is just this: we're leaving out people with great Badweb related photos (Ferris' epic photo journey for example), and we may not have to. Henrik (Message edited by henrik on January 04, 2005) |
Whodom
| Posted on Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - 02:27 pm: |
|
Please put me down for a calendar also. I have some good still shots of the race bikes that a friend of mine took. If he says it's OK, I'll submit them. Hugh |
Cataract2
| Posted on Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - 02:28 pm: |
|
Oh hell, count me in too. |
Daves
| Posted on Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - 02:39 pm: |
|
I think I already said I'll take a couple. |
Whitetrashxb
| Posted on Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - 02:40 pm: |
|
i'll take one |
Trolldaddi
| Posted on Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - 02:49 pm: |
|
I'll take one. |