<?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 on: Mac is back, and even more beautiful {Class of 2009 sneak peek}</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.emilygphotography.com/blog/2008/12/02/mac-is-back-and-even-more-beautiful-class-of-2009-sneak-peek/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.emilygphotography.com/blog/2008/12/02/mac-is-back-and-even-more-beautiful-class-of-2009-sneak-peek/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 06:38:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kyle</title>
		<link>http://www.emilygphotography.com/blog/2008/12/02/mac-is-back-and-even-more-beautiful-class-of-2009-sneak-peek/comment-page-1/#comment-1733</link>
		<dc:creator>Kyle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 05:50:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.emilygphotography.com/blog/?p=596#comment-1733</guid>
		<description>Whats the new lens? Whats the advantage of using a glass fisheye instead of the Photoshop spherize and then cropping? I don&#039;t think you&#039;d have to crop a lot and wouldn&#039;t lose too many pixels and the depth of field should be preserved. Although looking at the photo more closely the focus wouldn&#039;t be the same and it would look &#039;shopped.... as with the actual lens you are shooting up under the lip and get the underside of the bricks where a front shot &#039;shopped wouldn&#039;t. I want to hear about the new lens!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whats the new lens? Whats the advantage of using a glass fisheye instead of the Photoshop spherize and then cropping? I don&#8217;t think you&#8217;d have to crop a lot and wouldn&#8217;t lose too many pixels and the depth of field should be preserved. Although looking at the photo more closely the focus wouldn&#8217;t be the same and it would look &#8216;shopped&#8230;. as with the actual lens you are shooting up under the lip and get the underside of the bricks where a front shot &#8216;shopped wouldn&#8217;t. I want to hear about the new lens!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: shar</title>
		<link>http://www.emilygphotography.com/blog/2008/12/02/mac-is-back-and-even-more-beautiful-class-of-2009-sneak-peek/comment-page-1/#comment-1721</link>
		<dc:creator>shar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 06:59:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.emilygphotography.com/blog/?p=596#comment-1721</guid>
		<description>She&#039;s adorable. Love the new lens! :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>She&#8217;s adorable. Love the new lens! <img src='http://www.emilygphotography.com/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

