Photoshop How To Use: rec.photo.digital - 25 new messages in 8 topics

rec.photo.digital
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital?hl=en

rec.photo.digital@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* Sixteen Reasons to choose a Digital SLR over a Point and Shoot - 4 messages,
3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/cca1e1bb3b88f141?hl=en
* Ford, The Survivor - 11 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/6854901652467a29?hl=en
* It's just wrong - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/06e32c9cd78fc6f1?hl=en
* 4 online geld , wie kann ich online spielen und geld gewinnen , schnell geld
verdienen für , verdienen im internet ebook , mit internet geld verdienen ,
geld verdienen zuhause , geld locker machen , wie komme ich schnell an geld ,
wie kann ich wie - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/aee4cd54cced9f82?hl=en
* Printing small photos - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/5e1f880b355f1fef?hl=en
* camera for quickly-made shots ? - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/380de2e92c70461f?hl=en
* Scenic areas in England - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/1076be556766c491?hl=en
* 25+ Reasons to Choose a High-Quality P&S Camera Over an Obnoxiously LOUD and
Overpriced dslr - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/ed8d9e87086036ed?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Sixteen Reasons to choose a Digital SLR over a Point and Shoot
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/cca1e1bb3b88f141?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 9:48 am
From: SMS

House of Frauds wrote:

>> 12. Cost. Say what? Yes, it's true. With the free-fall of digital SLR
>> prices, you can now buy a D-SLR and a decent lens for less than the cost
>> of a high end point and shoot camera.

> 12. Which cameras are you thinking about ?

For the high end P&S, something like the Cano sx10IS, which is about the
same price as an Olympus E420 with lens. Yeah, you don't get that
ridiculously wide range, mediocre lens. Actually I'm wrong about the
price, since the sx10IS has come down to $377, while the E420 with lens
is $399, both on Amazon.

I'm no big fan of Olympus D-SLRs, when compared against other D-SLRs
they fall far short, but by the same token they're much better than most
P&S cameras, and because sales of 4:3 are in the tank, the prices are
very reasonable.

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 11:24 am
From: House of Frauds

On May 18, 6:48 pm, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> House of Frauds wrote:
> >> 12. Cost. Say what? Yes, it's true. With the free-fall of digital SLR
> >> prices, you can now buy a D-SLR and a decent lens for less than the cost
> >> of a high end point and shoot camera.
> > 12. Which cameras are you thinking about ?
>
> For the high end P&S, something like the Cano sx10IS, which is about the
> same price as an Olympus E420 with lens. Yeah, you don't get that
> ridiculously wide range, mediocre lens. Actually I'm wrong about the
> price, since the sx10IS has come down to $377, while the E420 with lens
> is $399, both on Amazon.
>
> I'm no big fan of Olympus D-SLRs, when compared against other D-SLRs
> they fall far short, but by the same token they're much better than most
> P&S cameras, and because sales of 4:3 are in the tank, the prices are
> very reasonable.

I see an Olympus 590uz for about the same money....26 - 676 mm, I'd
say that was a bargain

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 11:44 am
From: Alfred Molon

In article <4jgQl.15866$jZ1.5765@flpi144.ffdc.sbc.com>, SMS says...

> For the high end P&S, something like the Cano sx10IS, which is about the
> same price as an Olympus E420 with lens. Yeah, you don't get that
> ridiculously wide range, mediocre lens. Actually I'm wrong about the
> price, since the sx10IS has come down to $377, while the E420 with lens
> is $399, both on Amazon.

The E-420 is cheap because it is being replaced by the new model, the E-
450, and stores want to get rid of their inventory.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 11:48 am
From: SMS

Alfred Molon wrote:
> In article <4jgQl.15866$jZ1.5765@flpi144.ffdc.sbc.com>, SMS says...
>
>> For the high end P&S, something like the Cano sx10IS, which is about the
>> same price as an Olympus E420 with lens. Yeah, you don't get that
>> ridiculously wide range, mediocre lens. Actually I'm wrong about the
>> price, since the sx10IS has come down to $377, while the E420 with lens
>> is $399, both on Amazon.
>
> The E-420 is cheap because it is being replaced by the new model, the E-
> 450, and stores want to get rid of their inventory.

Very marginal changes, so I doubt if the price will go up by more than a
few bucks.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Ford, The Survivor
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/6854901652467a29?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 11 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 9:49 am
From: Alan Browne

David J. Littleboy wrote:
> "Alan Browne" <alan.browne@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>> David J. Littleboy wrote:
>>> From Yokohama to Tokyo I get 51.4 Mb/s down, 50.2 Mb/s up. Zippy.
>>> From SF to Tokyo I get 7.7 down, 8.66 up. Not bad.
>>> From Portland Maine to Tokyo I get 2.1 down, 2.3 up.
>>>
>> I can get 50 Mb/s here and 100 next year. Price isn't worth it though
>> (for me anyway).
>
> I'm in a valley here (so no line of sight to a transmitter) and the trees on
> the hill behind my house absorb TV signals. We finally got fed up and got a
> fiber line with all the TV, cable, and satellite channels available in Japan
> as well as internet and phone service. (We still use out POTS phones,
> though.)
>
> IMHO, the speed is irrelevant. The only servers fast enough are the test
> site servers.

Not at all. When I DL large files (say a Linux distro) from the US, it
will pour in at near my cable modems "subscription" capacity. Likewise
video (movie clips) from US servers poor in at full tilt).

I get phone, television and internet on the cable. Nice thing about the
phone is it is in its own physical channel separate from the internet.
(Unlike some "VOIP" which shares the same IP space).

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

== 2 of 11 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 9:54 am
From: Alan Browne

Neil Harrington wrote:
> "David J. Littleboy" <davidjl@gol.com> wrote in message
> news:AbOdncWubJD6_IzXnZ2dnVY3goydnZ2d@giganews.com...
>> "Savageduck" <savageduck1{REMOVESPAM}@me.com> wrote:
>
>>> Anyway the point was the Model A Fords were available in colors other
>>> than black.
>> Sorry; I didn't intend to argue. I didn't realize that the A was available
>> in colors and thought maybe some overenergetic "restorers" had gotten out
>> of hand...
>
> That does frequently happen. I've seen a lot of "restored" antique cars in
> colors the factories never used.
>
> They often look very good, and I suppose the argument can be made that
> someone who puts that much time, money and effort into an old car should be
> able to have it the way he wants it. But my own opinion is that "restored"
> should mean "just as it left the factory."

I can't remember who this happened to, but he restored a first year car
(Corvette if my memory serves) to factory spec (not sure about paint
source). This included painting the exhaust headers orange (or some
colour). Of course if you run a car the paint is burned off, but he
hardly ran the car at all (never drove it). So judges at a competition
deleted points 'cause of the paint.

He reamed them after the fact, but it was too late and he placed far
from the top 5 finish he deserved. After that he made sure his headers
were burned in...

== 3 of 11 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 10:15 am
From: Alan Browne

Neil Harrington wrote:
> "Alan Browne" <alan.browne@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote in message
> news:ydCdnf4pa5fP44zXnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>> Neil Harrington wrote:
>>> "Alan Browne" <alan.browne@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote in message
>>> news:iZmdnexho_Xwr43XnZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>
> [ . . . ]
>>>> The shortsightedness of this whole thing is perplexing. No matter how
>>>> Chrysler (and GM) come out of this they will inevitably have to go back
>>>> to various creditors for cash at some point.
>>> Unless they become wards of the government. With an unlimited supply of
>>> taxpayer dollars, who knows. I'm wondering whether it may come to that.
>> Mid term elections are only 18 months away.
>
> But voters' memories are reliably short. They can always be given some kind
> of nice-tasting candy before the elections, and the mainstream media (with
> their "slobbering love affair" with Obama, as Bernard Goldberg put it) will
> avoid reminding them of the bad stuff.

Better a slobbering love affair with Obama than a slobbering President
McCain?

Actually I like McCain a lot*, but his reaction to the emerging
financial crisis, ducking a debate and bolting off the trail to the WH
conference then not contributing anything but a slightly dazed smile
kinda killed him off for me. Coupled with driller babe and increasing
trend to underwriting the party line as the election date drew near
(instead of the McCain Maverick line that got him there), he killed his
own ticket.

*some exceptions apply.

When Obama first emerged on the US scene in 2002 (ish) I knew
immediately that he had what it would take. I believed he would wait
until 2012 to try except for the Hilary factor. Had she won the
presidency, he faced a possible lockout of up to 16 years (2 Dem terms +
2 Rep terms) plus whatever other new great talent might emerge - so he
had to go in full throttle. Amazing, really. And that it got so many
disillusioned blacks to vote means that more of them feel invested in
the process - will likely have a profound social impact over time.

I think the US is very fortunate to have a man of Obama's calibre at
this time and it's a shame he didn't get there in 'better times'. The
real test is how he manages this. Bearing in mind that if you're going
to get something done you can't please everyone.

You might not like him, but the lad definitely has class and brains,
like his well educated and charming wife.

As to the Rep party, the leadership has become extremely polarized and
'factions' that adhere to Rush/Cheney are destroying it by making more
moderate Republican views (Powell) not only unwelcome, but vilified.

Maybe Obama and the Dems have nothing to fear at midterm if Cheney and
Rush are banging the drums. Fact is the bills need to be paid.

== 4 of 11 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 10:19 am
From: Alan Browne

Neil Harrington wrote:
> "Alan Browne" <alan.browne@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote in message
> news:L5ednXn37sQhCI3XnZ2dnUVZ_sKdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>> JT's Keeper wrote:
>>> Alan Browne wrote:
>>>
>>>> A really good speed checker is http://www.speedtest.net/ as you can
>>>> select where you dl from / ul to during the test.
>>>>
>>> Nice speed test site... THANKS! ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>> - JT
>>> 10 down, 2 up from Portland, ME
>> When the cable guy came to install the new modem (phone and internet) I
>> showed him that and I was afraid I'd be receiving Christmas cards
>> afterwards, he was so ecstatic.
>>
>> I can't recall how I stumbled on that ... maybe I entered something
>> foolish like "internet speed test" in Google or sumpin'.
>
> Thanks from me too, Alan. That is really a great speed test site.
>
> The one I've been using is http://performance.toast.net/ which is pretty
> good, but Speedtest is much better.
>
> There's quite a difference between the two in results. Using Speedtest.net I
> got 12.95 Mb/s, while Toast.net just now gave me 4.253 Mb/s. Probably this
> is partly because the Speedtest server in my case was in Clifton, NJ, only ~
> 100 miles away. I don't know where the Toast server is located.

That's the cool thing with speedtest, you can select cities worldwide.
Further, it will remember your IP address results from the past and will
put up your ISP's performance (from other users) as well as local
competitors. (You might have to set something in there for that to
happen, don't recall).

I don't take it too seriously, but it is handy when you think something
might be wrong as a first basic test.

== 5 of 11 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 10:25 am
From: Alan Browne

Neil Harrington wrote:
> "Savageduck" <savageduck1{REMOVESPAM}@me.com> wrote in message
> news:2009051722130260903-savageduck1REMOVESPAM@mecom...
>
> [ . . . ]
>> My cable guy gave me the Speakeasy URL http://www.speakeasy.net/speedtest/
>> several yars ago when they finally got the fiber optic cable out to us
>> here at Lake Nacimiento.
>>
>> Damn! I don't miss dialup.
>
> You can say that again. A couple months ago I helped a neighbor with doing
> her tax return online, and she has a dial-up connection. Since there was
> very little in the way of graphics I didn't think dial-up would be at much
> of a disadvantage, but it was so slow as to be an absolute horror.

Yeah I did some banking from a friends country place over modem in Jan.
Took about 10 minutes to do a couple transfers. Come to think of it,
my bank was the first "online" in North America when I still had a modem
connection. It was nice and quick then at a mere 32kb/s.

I'll be spending a couple weeks at the same place this summer. Oh well,
make sure the chequing account is overloaded before I leave and prepay
my bills I guess. I just don't want to think about it.

== 6 of 11 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 10:33 am
From: Alan Browne

Savageduck wrote:

> Then there are the over the top hotrods where anything goes!

Introduced my SO to American Graffiti last night (first half, we got in
a bit late) and there are a lot of cool 50/60's cars in there including
the ubiquitous Deuce and the white T-bird.

== 7 of 11 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 11:03 am
From: "Neil Harrington"

"Savageduck" <savageduck1{REMOVESPAM}@me.com> wrote in message
news:200905180931421669-savageduck1REMOVESPAM@mecom...
> On 2009-05-18 08:53:58 -0700, "Neil Harrington" <secret@illumnati.net>
> said:
>
>>
>> "David J. Littleboy" <davidjl@gol.com> wrote in message
>> news:AbOdncWubJD6_IzXnZ2dnVY3goydnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>
>>> "Savageduck" <savageduck1{REMOVESPAM}@me.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> Anyway the point was the Model A Fords were available in colors other
>>>> than black.
>>>
>>> Sorry; I didn't intend to argue. I didn't realize that the A was
>>> available
>>> in colors and thought maybe some overenergetic "restorers" had gotten
>>> out
>>> of hand...
>>
>> That does frequently happen. I've seen a lot of "restored" antique cars
>> in
>> colors the factories never used.
>>
>> They often look very good, and I suppose the argument can be made that
>> someone who puts that much time, money and effort into an old car should
>> be
>> able to have it the way he wants it. But my own opinion is that
>> "restored"
>> should mean "just as it left the factory."
>
> There are different levels of restoration. A full Concours restoration
> would restore the vehicle to factory spec including paint.
> A running rebuild might leave original weathered paint as is, but
> everything else is brought to original running spec.
>
> The most criminal "restorations" to my mind are those where the restorer
> uses changes to the color which are to his taste, but would never have
> been thought of or available in the original era of the vehicle.

I think one problem there is that in the '20s and early '30s, B&W
photography was just about all there was apart from color artwork in
magazine advertisements, etc., and those were far from reliable. So getting
the colors accurate might be next to impossible even when the restorer
wanted to do that, but in many cases they obviously just didn't care anyway.

>
> Then there are the cars typified by this example which create the illusion
> of a full estoration by using color options available when new, but having
> far from original mechanicals. Sort of stealth hotrods. They are everyday
> drivers and just a lot of fun.
>
> Then there are the over the top hotrods where anything goes!

Yes. A friend rebuilt a Ford coupe, I think a '32, with a Buick V6 and
independent front suspension. It also had more modern wheels which were
obviously too small for the body and fender lines. He and a friend of his
put a lot of work into that car, but the point of doing something like that
eludes me.

== 8 of 11 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 11:12 am
From: Alan Browne

Neil Harrington wrote:

> Yes. A friend rebuilt a Ford coupe, I think a '32, with a Buick V6 and
> independent front suspension. It also had more modern wheels which were
> obviously too small for the body and fender lines. He and a friend of his
> put a lot of work into that car, but the point of doing something like that
> eludes me.

He said as he whiles away the day on the internet ... ;-)

== 9 of 11 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 11:21 am
From: "Neil Harrington"

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:36Gdnbavbv2-B4zXnZ2dnUVZ_jmdnZ2d@giganews.com...
> Neil Harrington wrote:
>> "Savageduck" <savageduck1{REMOVESPAM}@me.com> wrote in message
>> news:2009051722130260903-savageduck1REMOVESPAM@mecom...
>>
>> [ . . . ]
>>> My cable guy gave me the Speakeasy URL
>>> http://www.speakeasy.net/speedtest/ several yars ago when they finally
>>> got the fiber optic cable out to us here at Lake Nacimiento.
>>>
>>> Damn! I don't miss dialup.
>>
>> You can say that again. A couple months ago I helped a neighbor with
>> doing her tax return online, and she has a dial-up connection. Since
>> there was very little in the way of graphics I didn't think dial-up would
>> be at much of a disadvantage, but it was so slow as to be an absolute
>> horror.
>
> Yeah I did some banking from a friends country place over modem in Jan.
> Took about 10 minutes to do a couple transfers. Come to think of it, my
> bank was the first "online" in North America when I still had a modem
> connection. It was nice and quick then at a mere 32kb/s.

Yes, that used to seem like plenty of speed. My first modem was a 300bps
card in an Apple II. Even that wasn't too bad for sending and receiving
text -- characters would appear at just about reading speed as I recall. In
those days the high end was 2400 bps -- and a 2400bps modem cost about $700,
too stiff for me.

>
> I'll be spending a couple weeks at the same place this summer. Oh well,
> make sure the chequing account is overloaded before I leave and prepay my
> bills I guess. I just don't want to think about it.

I sure don't want to think about helping my neighbor with her tax return on
dial-up next year, either. But maybe after having seen it done she'll be
able to do it herself. Normally she only uses the computer for e-mailing her
friends on AOL, so she doesn't really have much need for broadband.

== 10 of 11 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 11:23 am
From: "Neil Harrington"

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:y5udnc09ScIVBYzXnZ2dnUVZ_jednZ2d@giganews.com...
> Neil Harrington wrote:
>> "Alan Browne" <alan.browne@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote in message
>> news:L5ednXn37sQhCI3XnZ2dnUVZ_sKdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>> JT's Keeper wrote:
>>>> Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> A really good speed checker is http://www.speedtest.net/ as you can
>>>>> select where you dl from / ul to during the test.
>>>>>
>>>> Nice speed test site... THANKS! ;-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> - JT
>>>> 10 down, 2 up from Portland, ME
>>> When the cable guy came to install the new modem (phone and internet) I
>>> showed him that and I was afraid I'd be receiving Christmas cards
>>> afterwards, he was so ecstatic.
>>>
>>> I can't recall how I stumbled on that ... maybe I entered something
>>> foolish like "internet speed test" in Google or sumpin'.
>>
>> Thanks from me too, Alan. That is really a great speed test site.
>>
>> The one I've been using is http://performance.toast.net/ which is pretty
>> good, but Speedtest is much better.
>>
>> There's quite a difference between the two in results. Using
>> Speedtest.net I got 12.95 Mb/s, while Toast.net just now gave me 4.253
>> Mb/s. Probably this is partly because the Speedtest server in my case was
>> in Clifton, NJ, only ~ 100 miles away. I don't know where the Toast
>> server is located.
>
> That's the cool thing with speedtest, you can select cities worldwide.
> Further, it will remember your IP address results from the past and will
> put up your ISP's performance (from other users) as well as local
> competitors. (You might have to set something in there for that to
> happen, don't recall).
>
> I don't take it too seriously, but it is handy when you think something
> might be wrong as a first basic test.

Yes, and the need to do that does come up from time to time.

== 11 of 11 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 11:32 am
From: "Tzortzakakis Dimitrios"

Ï "Neil Harrington" <secret@illumnati.net> Ýãñáøå óôï ìÞíõìá
news:U6adndhMJNTpEozXnZ2dnUVZ_rGdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>
> "Alan Browne" <alan.browne@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote in message
> news:L5ednXn37sQhCI3XnZ2dnUVZ_sKdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>> JT's Keeper wrote:
>>> Alan Browne wrote:
>>>
>>>> A really good speed checker is http://www.speedtest.net/ as you can
>>>> select where you dl from / ul to during the test.
>>>>
I got 890 kbps dl and 180 kbps up from Athens server and 23 ms ping. (I'm
going to have my connection upgraded to 2Mbps)
>>>
>>> Nice speed test site... THANKS! ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>> - JT
>>> 10 down, 2 up from Portland, ME
>>
>> When the cable guy came to install the new modem (phone and internet) I
>> showed him that and I was afraid I'd be receiving Christmas cards
>> afterwards, he was so ecstatic.
>>
>> I can't recall how I stumbled on that ... maybe I entered something
>> foolish like "internet speed test" in Google or sumpin'.
>
> Thanks from me too, Alan. That is really a great speed test site.
>
> The one I've been using is http://performance.toast.net/ which is pretty
> good, but Speedtest is much better.
>
> There's quite a difference between the two in results. Using Speedtest.net
> I got 12.95 Mb/s, while Toast.net just now gave me 4.253 Mb/s. Probably
> this is partly because the Speedtest server in my case was in Clifton, NJ,
> only ~ 100 miles away. I don't know where the Toast server is located.
>
>

--
Tzortzakakis Dimitrios
major in electrical engineering
mechanized infantry reservist
hordad AT otenet DOT gr

==============================================================================
TOPIC: It's just wrong
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/06e32c9cd78fc6f1?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 10:01 am
From: "David Ruether"

"Paul Heslop" <paul.heslop@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:4A1179B0.6E0CBBB1@blueyonder.co.uk...
> Ron Hunter wrote:
>> Paul Heslop wrote:
>> > ray wrote:
>> >> On Sun, 17 May 2009 20:02:43 -0400, Bowser wrote:

>> >>> Maybe it's me, but there's something just wrong with this statue in
>> >>> front of the library in Beaufort, SC.
>> >>>
>> >>> http://www.manzi.org/pix/wrong.jpg
>> >> You're right - it's just you.

>> > obviously not :O)

>> 'Wrong' is in the eye of the beholder, like beauty. I see nothing wrong
>> in the picture. Perhaps it is your mindset, when you viewed the image.

> I find it funny, not 'wrong'
> --
> Paul (We won't die of devotion)

Hmmmm........, after much observation, consideration of the depiction
in all its possible respects, much thought, and much soul-searching,
I heartily agree with you! 8^)
--DR

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 11:27 am
From: Bowser

Paul Heslop wrote:
> Bowser wrote:
>> George Kerby wrote:
>>>
>>> On 5/17/09 7:02 PM, in article
>>> 4a10a66b$0$4916$ec3e2dad@news.usenetmonster.com, "Bowser" <up@gone.now>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Maybe it's me, but there's something just wrong with this statue in front of
>>>> the library in Beaufort, SC.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.manzi.org/pix/wrong.jpg
>>>>
>>> If it were in NORTH Carolina, would it take on another connotation for you?
>>>
>> When I posted this image, I did so to see what type of reaction it
>> provoked. I offered no opinion of my own. None. Despite that, a number
>> of posters have injected many meanings, and have assumed that I offered
>> some meaning in my original post. I did not. I posted merely to provoke
>> and see what happened. And look what happened!
>
> you injected the humour into the scene. some decided to take that as
> being the sign of a sick mind... ah well.
>

I did, and somehow, it spun out of control. Whoda thunk it on usenet?

==============================================================================
TOPIC: 4 online geld , wie kann ich online spielen und geld gewinnen , schnell
geld verdienen für , verdienen im internet ebook , mit internet geld verdienen
, geld verdienen zuhause , geld locker machen , wie komme ich schnell an geld ,
wie kann ich wie
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/aee4cd54cced9f82?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 10:24 am
From: baron1347812@googlemail.com

4 online geld , wie kann ich online spielen und geld gewinnen ,
schnell geld verdienen für , verdienen im internet ebook , mit
internet geld verdienen , geld verdienen zuhause , geld locker
machen , wie komme ich schnell an geld , wie kann ich wie kann ich ,
blogs geld verdienen ,

*
*
*
+++ GELD ONLINE VERDIENEN +++ GELD IM INTERNET VERDIENEN +++
*
http://www.easy-cash-dreams.com
http://www.easy-cash-dreams.com
http://www.easy-cash-dreams.com
http://www.easy-cash-dreams.com
http://www.easy-cash-dreams.com
http://www.easy-cash-dreams.com
*
*
*

mit pc geld verdienen jetzt geld gewinnspiel
wie kann ich wie kann ich leicht geld
geld verdienen nebenverdienst schnell geld verdiene
man online geld viel geld machen
viel geld machen br online geld
geld verdienen per internet wie kann ich wie kann ich
mit online games geld verdienen geld verdienen mit werbung
4 schnell geld online poker geld verdienen
stunden geld im internet verdienen geld leihen im internet
online um echtes geld einfach geld verdienen im
verdienen im internet legal verdienen im internet legal
geld verdienen im internet forum online game geld verdienen
schnell geld vedienen www schnell geld
online um geld spielen geld verdienen zuhause
wie kann ich geld verdienen ps3 online geld
flyff schnell geld leicht geld verdiene
schnell geld verdien geld 2.0 geld verdienen im web 2.0
gewinnspiele kostenlos verdienen wie wo jetzt sofort
geld online online poker geld machen
geld spiele online wie kann ich leicht geld

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Printing small photos
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/5e1f880b355f1fef?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 10:35 am
From: "Bill Wittmer"

"Bill Wittmer" <wr.wittmer1@nospamverizon.net> wrote in message
news:O_4Ql.2017$5F2.1317@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
>I am working on a project for the family and would like to print out small
>photos ranging from 1"x1", 1"x2", 2"x3", etc. Can anyone recommend good
>software, free or pay, which will allow me to print out phots in various
>sizes with little trouble.
>
> Regards,
> Bill
>

Thanks for all the suggestions. Its much appreciated,

Bill

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 11:58 am
From: "Tzortzakakis Dimitrios"

Ï "Bill Wittmer" <wr.wittmer1@nospamverizon.net> Ýãñáøå óôï ìÞíõìá
news:O_4Ql.2017$5F2.1317@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
>I am working on a project for the family and would like to print out small
>photos ranging from 1"x1", 1"x2", 2"x3", etc. Can anyone recommend good
>software, free or pay, which will allow me to print out phots in various
>sizes with little trouble.
>
> Regards,
> Bill
>
My Canon Pixma iP4300 photo printer has software that allows you to print
photos in small sizes, too. So, if you haven't already got a printer,
consider getting this one (current model is iP4500, I think).

--
Tzortzakakis Dimitrios
major in electrical engineering
mechanized infantry reservist
hordad AT otenet DOT gr

==============================================================================
TOPIC: camera for quickly-made shots ?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/380de2e92c70461f?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 10:36 am
From: Paul Furman

Fred wrote:
> "eNo" <grandepatzer@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e6f02935-2bcf-40c9-bfe7-59c9bba06a01@k19g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> On May 15, 9:15 am, Antonio Huerta <ahue...@inbox.com> wrote:
>>> Anyone could suggest a camera ? Thanks.
>
>> In terms of size, you are describing a small P&S, and I know none that
>> is quick to focus and/or shoot. DSLRs are the best for that, and among
>> them, probably the D40 is the best deal going right now. You might
>> want to also check out 4/3 format cameras and see if there's anything
>> out there right now with quick startup and focus/shoot times.
>
>
> Neither of these types fit the OP's original requirement of "I would like to
> be able
> to whip the camera out of my pocket", neither are they suitable as a carry
> everywhere
> camera for instant use in the street, unless you happen to be wearing a very
> large overcoat
> with deep pockets, not to mention that these cameras are rather indiscrete,
> making you stand
> out in the crowd like a "professional" photographer.

Maybe micro 4/3 will work for the OP?

--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Scenic areas in England
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/1076be556766c491?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 11:07 am
From: William Black

Savageduck wrote:

>> And what's the distance for a gun wielding individual ?
>
> Different responses for different weapons. That is what training is
all
> about.

They train you to watch the body language of someone with a rifle?

You're gonna die...

For the most part the threat is confirmed with any detected
> movement of a fire arm from a passively held position to a ready
position
> regardless of proximity

For a very small group of firearms, yes.

For most of them, no...

> To use a firearm there are very noticeable body language signatures,
> which warn of the threat.

Yeah, the target enters the cross hairs...

--
William Black

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 11:41 am
From: Savageduck

On 2009-05-18 11:07:42 -0700, William Black <william.black@hotmail.co.uk> said:

> Savageduck wrote:
>
>
>
>>> And what's the distance for a gun wielding individual ?
>>
>> Different responses for different weapons. That is what training is
> all
>> about.
>
> They train you to watch the body language of someone with a rifle?

The type of weapon is irrelevant, the behaviour is.
If they are not concealed you observe the behaviour and take the
appropriate action.

>
> You're gonna die...

Not necessarily.
>
> For the most part the threat is confirmed with any detected
>> movement of a fire arm from a passively held position to a ready
> position
>> regardless of proximity
>
> For a very small group of firearms, yes.

For most police, we are talking close confrontation ranging from 3 to
20 feet. That would permit a defensive action against an assailant
armed with most fire arms, even fully automatic weapons. Provided
training is maintained at a high level, certainly in some departments
and with some individual police officers this is not the case.
>
> For most of them, no...

With good and frequent training yes.

In many of the cases, even the most recent ones in the US, police
officers have been shot due to complacency on their part, or an attack
which was made with sudden deliberate ferocity taking the officers off
guard.
>
>
>> To use a firearm there are very noticeable body language signatures,
>> which warn of the threat.
>
> Yeah, the target enters the cross hairs...

You have quite an imagination which seems to be ignorant of the reality
police (& the military) have to deal with.

We are talking confrontation situations, not stealth attack by sniper.
These are two different things.

When snipers firing from concealment are the issue, that is when
tactical teams are brought in.
There are many Police departments in the US (and the UK and Europe)
which have fine tactical units (SWAT or SERT)
There are normally members of these teams, some ex-military who are
trained counter-sniper specialists. They are particularly skilled in
this discipline in the urban environment. So much so the military
sniper schools are now adding elements of the police urban
counter-sniper role to their training to deal with the current
situation found in urban Iraq.

--
Regards,
Savageduck

==============================================================================
TOPIC: 25+ Reasons to Choose a High-Quality P&S Camera Over an Obnoxiously
LOUD and Overpriced dslr
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/ed8d9e87086036ed?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 11:47 am
From: Paul Remier

1. P&S cameras can have more seamless zoom range than any DSLR glass in
existence. (E.g. 9mm f2.7 - 1248mm f/3.5.) There are now some excellent
wide-angle and telephoto (telextender) add-on lenses for many makes and
models of P&S cameras. Add either or both of these small additions to your
photography gear and, with some of the new super-zoom P&S cameras, you can
far surpass any range of focal-lengths and apertures that are available or
will ever be made for larger format cameras.

2. P&S cameras can have much wider apertures at longer focal lengths than
any DSLR glass in existence. (E.g. 549mm f/2.4 and 1248mm f/3.5) when used
with high-quality telextenders, which do not reduce the lens' original
aperture one bit. Following is a link to a hand-held taken image of a 432mm
f/3.5 P&S lens increased to an effective 2197mm f/3.5 lens by using two
high-quality teleconverters. To achieve that apparent focal-length the
photographer also added a small step of 1.7x digital zoom to take advantage
of the RAW sensor's slightly greater detail retention when upsampled
directly in the camera for JPG output. As opposed to trying to upsample a
JPG image on the computer where those finer RAW sensor details are already
lost once it's left the camera's processing. (Digital-zoom is not totally
empty zoom, contrary to all the net-parroting idiots online.) A HAND-HELD
2197mm f/3.5 image from a P&S camera (downsized only, no crop):
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3141/3060429818_b01dbdb8ac_o.jpg Note that
any in-focus details are cleanly defined to the corners and there is no CA
whatsoever. If you study the EXIF data the author reduced contrast and
sharpening by 2-steps, which accounts for the slight softness overall. Any
decent photographer will handle those operations properly in editing with
more powerful tools and not allow a camera to do them for him. A full f/3.5
aperture achieved at an effective focal-length of 2197mm (35mm equivalent).
Only DSLRs suffer from loss of aperture due to the manner in which their
teleconverters work. P&S cameras can also have higher quality full-frame
180-degree circular fisheye and intermediate super-wide-angle views than
any DSLR and its glass for far less cost. Some excellent fish-eye adapters
can be added to your P&S camera which do not impart any chromatic
aberration nor edge softness. When used with a super-zoom P&S camera this
allows you to seamlessly go from as wide as a 9mm (or even wider) 35mm
equivalent focal-length up to the wide-angle setting of the camera's own
lens.

3. P&S smaller sensor cameras can and do have wider dynamic range than
larger sensor cameras E.g. a 1/2.5" sized sensor can have a 10.3EV Dynamic
Range vs. an APS-C's typical 7.0-8.0EV Dynamic Range. One quick example:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3142/2861257547_9a7ceaf3a1_o.jpg

4. P&S cameras are cost efficient. Due to the smaller (but excellent)
sensors used in many of them today, the lenses for these cameras are much
smaller. Smaller lenses are easier to manufacture to exacting curvatures
and are more easily corrected for aberrations than larger glass used for
DSLRs. This also allows them to perform better at all apertures rather than
DSLR glass which usually performs well at only one aperture setting per
lens. Side by side tests prove that P&S glass can out-resolve even the best
DSLR glass ever made. See this side-by-side comparison for example
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_PowerShot_SX10_IS/outdoor_results.shtml
When adjusted for sensor size, the DSLR lens is creating 4.3x's the CA that
the P&S lens is creating, and the P&S lens is resolving almost 10x's the
amount of detail that the DSLR lens is resolving. A difficult to figure 20x
P&S zoom lens easily surpassing a much more easy to make 3x DSLR zoom lens.
After all is said and done you will spend anywhere from 1/10th to 1/50th
the price on a P&S camera that you would have to spend in order to get
comparable performance in a DSLR camera. To obtain the same focal-length
ranges as that $340 SX10 camera with DSLR glass that *might* approach or
equal the P&S resolution, it would cost over $6,500 to accomplish that (at
the time of this writing). This isn't counting the extra costs of a
heavy-duty tripod required to make it functional at those longer
focal-lengths and a backpack to carry it all. Bringing that DSLR investment
to over 20 times the cost of a comparable P&S camera. When you buy a DSLR
you are investing in a body that will require expensive lenses, hand-grips,
external flash units, heavy tripods, more expensive larger filters, etc.
etc. The outrageous costs of owning a DSLR add up fast after that initial
DSLR body purchase. Camera companies count on this, all the way to their
banks.

5. P&S cameras are lightweight and convenient. With just one P&S camera
plus one small wide-angle adapter and one small telephoto adapter weighing
just a couple pounds, you have the same amount of zoom range as would
require over 15 pounds of DSLR body + lenses. The P&S camera mentioned in
the previous example is only 1.3 lbs. The DSLR + expensive lenses that
*might* equal it in image quality comes in at 9.6 lbs. of dead-weight to
lug around all day (not counting the massive and expensive tripod, et.al.)
You can carry the whole P&S kit + accessory lenses in one roomy pocket of a
wind-breaker or jacket. The DSLR kit would require a sturdy backpack. You
also don't require a massive tripod. Large tripods are required to
stabilize the heavy and unbalanced mass of the larger DSLR and its massive
lenses. A P&S camera, being so light, can be used on some of the most
inexpensive, compact, and lightweight tripods with excellent results.

6. P&S cameras are silent. For the more common snap-shooter/photographer,
you will not be barred from using your camera at public events,
stage-performances, and ceremonies. Or when trying to capture candid shots
you won't so easily alert all those within a block around, by the obnoxious
clattering noise that your DSLR is making, that you are capturing anyone's
images. For the more dedicated wildlife photographer a P&S camera will not
endanger your life when photographing potentially dangerous animals by
alerting them to your presence.

7. Some P&S cameras can run the revolutionary CHDK software on them, which
allows for lightning-fast motion detection (literally, lightning fast 45ms
response time, able to capture lightning strikes automatically) so that you
may capture more elusive and shy animals (in still-frame and video) where
any evidence of your presence at all might prevent their appearance.
Without the need of carrying a tethered laptop along or any other hardware
into remote areas--which only limits your range, distance, and time
allotted for bringing back that one-of-a-kind image. It also allows for
unattended time-lapse photography for days and weeks at a time, so that you
may capture those unusual or intriguing subject-studies in nature. E.g. a
rare slime-mold's propagation, that you happened to find in a
mountain-ravine, 10-days hike from the nearest laptop or other time-lapse
hardware. (The wealth of astounding new features that CHDK brings to the
creative-table of photography are too extensive to begin to list them all
here. See http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK )

8. P&S cameras can have shutter speeds up to 1/40,000th of a second. See:
http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CameraFeatures Allowing you to capture fast
subject motion in nature (e.g. insect and hummingbird wings) WITHOUT the
need of artificial and image destroying flash, using available light alone.
Nor will their wing shapes be unnaturally distorted from the focal-plane
shutter distortions imparted in any fast moving objects, as when
photographed with all DSLRs. (See focal-plane-shutter-distortions
example-image link in #10.)

9. P&S cameras can have full-frame flash-sync up to and including
shutter-speeds of 1/40,000th of a second. E.g.
http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/Samples:_High-Speed_Shutter_%26_Flash-Sync
without the use of any expensive and specialized focal-plane shutter
flash-units that must pulse their light-output for the full duration of the
shutter's curtain to pass slowly over the frame. The other downside to
those kinds of flash units is that the light-output is greatly reduced the
faster the shutter speed. Any shutter speed used that is faster than your
camera's X-Sync speed is cutting off some of the flash output. Not so when
using a leaf-shutter. The full intensity of the flash is recorded no matter
the shutter speed used. Unless, as in the case of CHDK capable cameras
where the camera's shutter speed can even be faster than the lightning-fast
single burst from a flash unit. E.g. If the flash's duration is 1/10,000 of
a second, and your CHDK camera's shutter is set to 1/20,000 of a second,
then it will only record half of that flash output. P&S cameras also don't
require any expensive and dedicated external flash unit. Any of them may be
used with any flash unit made by using an inexpensive slave-trigger that
can compensate for any automated pre-flash conditions. Example:
http://www.adorama.com/SZ23504.html

10. P&S cameras do not suffer from focal-plane shutter drawbacks and
limitations. Causing camera shake, moving-subject image distortions
(focal-plane-shutter distortions, e.g.
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/chdk/images//4/46/Focalplane_shutter_distortions.jpg
do note the distorted tail-rotor too and its shadow on the ground,
90-degrees from one another), last-century-slow flash-sync, obnoxiously
loud slapping mirrors and shutter curtains, shorter mechanical life, easily
damaged, expensive repair costs, etc.

11. When doing wildlife photography in remote and rugged areas and harsh
environments; or even when the amateur snap-shooter is trying to take their
vacation photos on a beach or dusty intersection on some city street;
you're not worrying about trying to change lenses in time to get that shot
(fewer missed shots), dropping one in the mud, lake, surf, or on concrete
while you do; and not worrying about ruining all the rest of your photos
that day from having gotten dust & crud on the sensor. For the adventurous
photographer you're no longer weighed down by many many extra pounds of
unneeded glass, allowing you to carry more of the important supplies, like
food and water, allowing you to trek much further than you've ever been
able to travel before with your old D/SLR bricks.

12. Smaller sensors and the larger apertures available at longer
focal-lengths allow for the deep DOF required for excellent
macro-photography when using normal macro or tele-macro lens arrangements.
All done WITHOUT the need of any image destroying, subject irritating,
natural-look destroying flash. No DSLR on the planet can compare in the
quality of available-light macro photography that can be accomplished with
nearly any smaller-sensor P&S camera. (To clarify for DSLR owners/promoters
who don't even know basic photography principles: In order to obtain the
same DOF on a DSLR you'll need to stop down that lens greatly. When you do
then you have to use shutter speeds so slow that hand-held
macro-photography, even in full daylight, is all but impossible. Not even
your highest ISO is going to save you at times. The only solution for the
DSLR user is to resort to artificial flash which then ruins the subject and
the image; turning it into some staged, fake-looking, studio setup.)

13. P&S cameras include video, and some even provide for CD-quality stereo
audio recordings, so that you might capture those rare events in nature
where a still-frame alone could never prove all those "scientists" wrong.
E.g. recording the paw-drumming communication patterns of eusocial-living
field-mice. With your P&S video-capable camera in your pocket you won't
miss that once-in-a-lifetime chance to record some unexpected event, like
the passage of a bright meteor in the sky in daytime, a mid-air explosion,
or any other newsworthy event. Imagine the gaping hole in our history of
the Hindenberg if there were no film cameras there at the time. The mystery
of how it exploded would have never been solved. Or the amateur 8mm film of
the shooting of President Kennedy. Your video-ready P&S camera being with
you all the time might capture something that will be a valuable part of
human history one day.

14. P&S cameras have 100% viewfinder coverage that exactly matches your
final image. No important bits lost, and no chance of ruining your
composition by trying to "guess" what will show up in the final image. With
the ability to overlay live RGB-histograms, and under/over-exposure area
alerts (and dozens of other important shooting data) directly on your
electronic viewfinder display you are also not going to guess if your
exposure might be right this time. Nor do you have to remove your eye from
the view of your subject to check some external LCD histogram display,
ruining your chances of getting that perfect shot when it happens.

15. P&S cameras can and do focus in lower-light (which is common in natural
settings) than any DSLRs in existence, due to electronic viewfinders and
sensors that can be increased in gain for framing and focusing purposes as
light-levels drop. Some P&S cameras can even take images (AND videos) in
total darkness by using IR illumination alone. (See: Sony) No other
multi-purpose cameras are capable of taking still-frame and videos of
nocturnal wildlife as easily nor as well. Shooting videos and still-frames
of nocturnal animals in the total-dark, without disturbing their natural
behavior by the use of flash, from 90 ft. away with a 549mm f/2.4 lens is
not only possible, it's been done, many times, by myself. (An interesting
and true story: one wildlife photographer was nearly stomped to death by an
irate moose that attacked where it saw his camera's flash come from.)

16. Without the need to use flash in all situations, and a P&S's nearly
100% silent operation, you are not disturbing your wildlife, neither
scaring it away nor changing their natural behavior with your existence.
Nor, as previously mentioned, drawing its defensive behavior in your
direction. You are recording nature as it is, and should be, not some
artificial human-changed distortion of reality and nature.

17. Nature photography requires that the image be captured with the
greatest degree of accuracy possible. NO focal-plane shutter in existence,
with its inherent focal-plane-shutter distortions imparted on any moving
subject will EVER capture any moving subject in nature 100% accurately. A
leaf-shutter or electronic shutter, as is found in ALL P&S cameras, will
capture your moving subject in nature with 100% accuracy. Your P&S
photography will no longer lead a biologist nor other scientist down
another DSLR-distorted path of non-reality.

18. Some P&S cameras have shutter-lag times that are even shorter than all
the popular DSLRs, due to the fact that they don't have to move those
agonizingly slow and loud mirrors and shutter curtains in time before the
shot is recorded. In the hands of an experienced photographer that will
always rely on prefocusing their camera, there is no hit & miss
auto-focusing that happens on all auto-focus systems, DSLRs included. This
allows you to take advantage of the faster shutter response times of P&S
cameras. Any pro worth his salt knows that if you really want to get every
shot, you don't depend on automatic anything in any camera.

19. An electronic viewfinder, as exists in all P&S cameras, can accurately
relay the camera's shutter-speed in real-time. Giving you a 100% accurate
preview of what your final subject is going to look like when shot at 3
seconds or 1/20,000th of a second. Your soft waterfall effects, or the
crisp sharp outlines of your stopped-motion hummingbird wings will be 100%
accurately depicted in your viewfinder before you even record the shot.
What you see in a P&S camera is truly what you get. You won't have to guess
in advance at what shutter speed to use to obtain those artistic effects or
those scientifically accurate nature studies that you require or that your
client requires. When testing CHDK P&S cameras that could have shutter
speeds as fast as 1/40,000th of a second, I was amazed that I could
half-depress the shutter and watch in the viewfinder as a Dremel-Drill's
30,000 rpm rotating disk was stopped in crisp detail in real time, without
ever having taken an example shot yet. Similarly true when lowering shutter
speeds for milky-water effects when shooting rapids and falls, instantly
seeing the effect in your viewfinder. Poor DSLR-trolls will never realize
what they are missing with their anciently slow focal-plane shutters and
wholly inaccurate optical viewfinders.

20. P&S cameras can obtain the very same bokeh (out of focus foreground and
background) as any DSLR by just increasing your focal length, through use
of its own built-in super-zoom lens or attaching a high-quality telextender
on the front. Just back up from your subject more than you usually would
with a DSLR. Framing and the included background is relative to the subject
at the time and has nothing at all to do with the kind of camera and lens
in use. Your f/ratio (which determines your depth-of-field), is a
computation of focal-length divided by aperture diameter. Increase the
focal-length and you make your DOF shallower. No different than opening up
the aperture to accomplish the same. The two methods are identically
related where DOF is concerned.

21. P&S cameras will have perfectly fine noise-free images at lower ISOs
with just as much resolution as any DSLR camera. Experienced Pros grew up
on ISO25 and ISO64 film all their lives. They won't even care if their P&S
camera can't go above ISO400 without noise. An added bonus is that the P&S
camera can have larger apertures at longer focal-lengths than any DSLR in
existence. The time when you really need a fast lens to prevent
camera-shake that gets amplified at those focal-lengths. Even at low ISOs
you can take perfectly fine hand-held images at super-zoom settings.
Whereas the DSLR, with its very small apertures at long focal lengths
require ISOs above 3200 to obtain the same results. They need high ISOs,
you don't. If you really require low-noise high ISOs, there are some
excellent models of Fuji P&S cameras that do have noise-free images up to
ISO1600 and more.

22. Don't for one minute think that the price of your camera will in any
way determine the quality of your photography. Any of the newer cameras of
around $100 or more are plenty good for nearly any talented photographer
today. IF they have talent to begin with. A REAL pro can take an award
winning photograph with a cardboard Brownie Box Camera made a century ago.
If you can't take excellent photos on a P&S camera then you won't be able
to get good photos on a DSLR either. Never blame your inability to obtain a
good photograph on the kind of camera that you own. Those who claim they
NEED a DSLR are only fooling themselves and all others. These are the same
people that buy a new camera every year, each time thinking, "Oh, if I only
had the right camera, a better camera, better lenses, faster lenses, then I
will be a great photographer!" If they just throw enough money at their
hobby then the talent-fairy will come by one day, after just the right
offering to the DSLR gods was made, and bestow them with something that
they never had in the first place--talent. Camera company's love these
people. They'll never be able to get a camera that will make their
photography better, because they never were a good photographer to begin
with. They're forever searching for that more expensive camera that might
one day come included with that new "talent in a box" feature. The irony is
that they'll never look in the mirror to see what the real problem has been
all along. They'll NEVER become good photographers. Perhaps this is why
these self-proclaimed "pros" hate P&S cameras so much. P&S cameras
instantly reveal to them their piss-poor photography skills. It also
reveals the harsh reality that all the wealth in the world won't make them
any better at photography. It's difficult for them to face the truth.

23. Have you ever had the fun of showing some of your exceptional P&S
photography to some self-proclaimed "Pro" who uses $30,000 worth of camera
gear. They are so impressed that they must know how you did it. You smile
and tell them, "Oh, I just use a $150 P&S camera." Don't you just love the
look on their face? A half-life of self-doubt, the realization of all that
lost money, and a sadness just courses through every fiber of their being.
Wondering why they can't get photographs as good after they spent all that
time and money. Get good on your P&S camera and you too can enjoy this fun
experience.

24. Did we mention portability yet? I think we did, but it is worth
mentioning the importance of this a few times. A camera in your pocket that
is instantly ready to get any shot during any part of the day will get more
award-winning photographs than that DSLR gear that's sitting back at home,
collecting dust, and waiting to be loaded up into that expensive back-pack
or camera bag, hoping that you'll lug it around again some day.

25. A good P&S camera is a good theft deterrent. When traveling you are not
advertising to the world that you are carrying $20,000 around with you.
That's like having a sign on your back saying, "PLEASE MUG ME! I'M THIS
STUPID AND I DESERVE IT!" Keep a small P&S camera in your pocket and only
take it out when needed. You'll have a better chance of returning home with
all your photos. And should you accidentally lose your P&S camera you're
not out $20,000. They are inexpensive to replace.

There are many more reasons to add to this list but this should be more
than enough for even the most unaware person to realize that P&S cameras
are just better, all around. No doubt about it.

The phenomenon of the pretend-photographer usenet trolls yelling "You NEED
a DSLR!" can be summed up in just one short phrase:

"If even 5 billion people are saying and doing a foolish thing, it remains
a foolish thing."

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, May 18 2009 12:04 pm
From: Savageduck

On 2009-05-18 11:47:24 -0700, Paul Remier <premier@myplace.org> said:

>
>
> 1. P&S cameras can have more seamle.....

Damn! you reek of troll even with a fresh sock.

--
Regards,
Savageduck

==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rec.photo.digital"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rec.photo.digital+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en

Photoshop How To Use

Categories

Blog Archive

About Me

Monday, May 18, 2009

rec.photo.digital - 25 new messages in 8 topics - digest

0 comments:

Live Traffic