Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Miscellania
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 30th March 2016, 09:07 AM   #1
kronckew
Member
 
kronckew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Room 101, Glos. UK
Posts: 4,225
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fernando
...
Man, you are getting old. How about applying some lubricant in the joints ?
i thought good vintage port was a universal lubricant...

the pics are at the limit for attachments at 1280 pixels wide, so as to provide the most detail. i run them thru an size optimizer that cuts the file size quite a bit as well for easier uploads, downloads by slow connections and storage on the forum server. i was going to crop them in height but got side tracked.

my camera can go up to about 4k pixels (8meg sensor) wide HiDef* but most forum software cannot handle that.

*- for the techies, i can take 3 (or more) photos - from a tripod at +1, 0,-1 exposure then merge them to extend the dynamic range & detail. best done outdoors with good lighting. seems like every time i think about that tho, it's raining or cloudy.

Last edited by kronckew; 30th March 2016 at 09:23 AM.
kronckew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th March 2016, 09:33 AM   #2
kronckew
Member
 
kronckew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Room 101, Glos. UK
Posts: 4,225
Default

the bottom ferrule is brass, 4.5cm long with a worn steel shoe with a dark black patination. the steel is quite rounded, not flat. held on with a deliberate dimple (and some glue i suspect).

the ball end covering does not pass my crude silver test.

actually, i suspect the number is a model number or serial no. of some sort, rather prominent tho.

the late 19c is more likely i think.
kronckew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2016, 05:55 PM   #3
fernando
(deceased)
 
fernando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9,694
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kronckew
... the pics are at the limit for attachments at 1280 pixels wide ...
Indeed the limit allowed is 1280, but it needs some side scrolling to visualize the whole image, thus loosing some instant impact. Same goes for the height, although this is not often a problem, as usually pictures are more in the 'landscape' perspective. I also use plenty boost for picture taking (3648x2736 in a 18 megapixel camera) but then i edit them, by first cropping all the blank space and then resize them to 1100X600 pixel, therefore obtaining an image that appears full size in the (laptop) screen. Effort goes for the cutting of all waste space around the object so that, when resize the picture, it still shows a decent quality. Of course this is only a personal perspective .
fernando is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.