Religious Orders

The Character of a Man...

Posted: Monday February 18 2013 @ 7:54pm

Religious Order: Photos

So, there's this image going around with a man's hand holding a wee bunny. The caption reads You can tell the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him or some twee twaddle like that. Anyway, a friend suggested an alternate second part:

Hand cupping a small bunny

No, I don't advocate throwing small bunnies. Tossing? Maybe.

The postscript is that some douche-bag on Facebook took the modified image, stripped off my friend's name, and then reposted it. What a douche-bag.

This post already has 1 comment(s). Go ahead and add your own...


Surprise Pool

Posted: Friday October 21 2011 @ 6:12pm

Religious Order: Photos

Surprise Pool

More photos from Yellowstone!

Go ahead, add a comment, don't cost nuthin'...


Couldn't Resist

Posted: Monday March 07 2011 @ 7:52am

Religious Order: Photos

Surfing Nun

Go ahead, add a comment, don't cost nuthin'...


I Feel Dirty Now

Posted: Saturday January 22 2011 @ 6:01pm

Religious Order: Photos

Beaker is violated

Go ahead, add a comment, don't cost nuthin'...


Cheetara Striptease

Posted: Wednesday July 21 2010 @ 7:18am

Religious Order: Photos

Because, deep down inside, I'm still a 12-year-old boy.

Yeah, it's a huge-ass animated GIF. Just let it load.

Go ahead, add a comment, don't cost nuthin'...


Hacking Disney

Posted: Thursday April 23 2009 @ 6:35am

Religious Order: Photos

Well, okay, this isn't really a hack. But it is a method for grabbing low-to-medium resolution photos from Disney's rip-off PhotoPass service.

Basically, what you do is go to their site, display each photo, and take a screen-capture of it.

But wait, you say, those images are tiny, a mere 400 x 286 pixels! And it's true, they are. So, here's what you do:


  1. View the image on the PhotoPass site.

  2. Click on Edit Photo.

  3. Zoom in all the way.

  4. Preview the image.

  5. Screen-cap the preview. (It really helps if you have a screen-cap utility that let's you grab just a portion of the screen.)

  6. Close the Preview window.

  7. Use the arrows to move the zoomed in box around and repeat the preview/screen-cap/close routine until you've grabbed every area of the image. It should take 9 caps in total.

Okay, you have the image as 9 close-up images. Now you just put them all together. But, keep in mind that the resulting pieces do not match pixel by pixel where they overlap. (I don't know why. Ask Disney. They just don't.) Here's my method.


  1. Fire up a decent photo editor. I use Pixelmator.

  2. Create a blank canvas about 1600 x 1144. (Or 1144 x 1600, if it's a portrait shot.)

  3. Drag each of the pieces in and drop it in the approximate location in the full image. Each should end up in its own layer.

  4. Using the center piece as a guide, select each layer and move that piece into position. If you bring the layer to the front and set the blending mode to Difference, you can then jiggle the layer around until the overlap is as black as it gets. Then set blending back to Normal.

  5. Repeat for each piece's layer.

  6. Flatten the layers.

  7. Crop.

And that's it. The end result is a photo at 1142 x 761 pixels. Yeah, that's not great at all. But it sure beats 400 x 286. (And it beats paying Disney fifteen bucks for a high-res copy of a poorly-taken photo.)

Go ahead, add a comment, don't cost nuthin'...


lolcats

Posted: Tuesday February 10 2009 @ 7:42am

Religious Order: Photos

I love lolcats! So I made one of my own:

That's all. Get back to work.

Go ahead, add a comment, don't cost nuthin'...


Full Moon

Posted: Monday December 15 2008 @ 11:48am

Religious Order: Photos

A couple nights back was the biggest, brightest full moon in 15 years. The Moon was both completely full and at its nearest approach to the Earth. So I went out with the 18x Lumix and a tripod and took a bunch of exposures. Here's what I ended up with:

Full Moon

True, nothing compared to a telescope or a real camera-zoom combination. But not bad for a consumer-level camera.

The actual image is twice that size. But, frankly, it looks much sharper reduced down a bit.

Go ahead, add a comment, don't cost nuthin'...


High Dynamic Range Madness!

Posted: Thursday October 23 2008 @ 12:30pm

Religious Order: Photos

I've been playing around with high dynamic range images. The idea is that you take multiple exposures of the same scene, combine them into an image with a dynamic range higher than screens can output, then remap the image to a range you can display. The result can simply be an image with more detail, as different areas each get the proper exposure. Or the results can be really hyper-detailed with super-saturated colors.

I've been taking the latter route.

Go ahead, add a comment, don't cost nuthin'...


ScanCafe Away!

Posted: Friday August 15 2008 @ 7:47am

Religious Order: Photos

I heard about a great scanning service recently. It's called ScanCafe. They scan all sorts of stuff: slides, negatives, photos.

They have a neat process. Once they've scanned your stuff, they put them on a web site for you to view. And then you can reject up to half of them. And you don't pay for the ones you reject. (And you can reject for whatever reason you want, even if it's just because Aunt Mildred's eyes were shut.) Then they send you a DVD with all the scans you kept. (And your negatives, of course.)

I've read that their quality is really good, much better than consumer negative scanners can do. And the prices are way low, only 19 cents per photo from negative, which is where my interest lies. You see, we like to take photos. So we have tons and tons of old negatives around the house. In particular, we spent a really nice week touring parts of Europe one summer, before digital cameras were any good. And we took photos, about 400 or so. I've always wanted these in a digital format. So we're trying out these guys with the European trip as a test.

They can also scan APS/Advantix film. Remember that stuff? Anyway, we have a few rolls of it from Europe as well. They were shot in panorama mode. Scanning those costs more than twice as much per photo, because it's a pain with which to work. But some of the photos are really nice, so we bit the bullet. (Okay, actually, I sent them in before I realized they cost more.)

They actually do the scanning manually, rotating and color-correcting things by hand. So, how do they keep their costs down? By doing the actual scanning in India, land of really smart people. (Honestly, I've never know anyone of Indian ancestry who wasn't really smart, starting with Ruma, my old debate partner.)

So, therein lies the sole drawback. You ship your negatives to California. They repackage orders in a big bundle and send them to India. India scans them. Then the negatives get sent back to California and then back to you.

The whole process can take two months. Is that a problem? Not at all. Those negatives have been sitting in a closet for years. (This probably isn't the way to go if you need things back quickly, though.)

So, we sent ours out and they arrived in California this morning. In two months, we should have some great scans. I'll report back then.

(If it all works out, we have loads of negatives from a two week stint in Norway.)

Go ahead, add a comment, don't cost nuthin'...



Secular Stuff

RSS 2.0 Feed