rec.photo.digital
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital?hl=en
rec.photo.digital@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens - 3 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/ef39fca12569e5d3?hl=en
* 8-Way Processing With Intel's New Superchip!! - 3 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/2e50dafd5821524d?hl=en
* Can you see this Flash site? - 3 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/445c408900fc3a17?hl=en
* Communication is posted! - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/884818656f02af72?hl=en
* two problems - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/c2764c3ae533887e?hl=en
* So called Freeware, MPEG-2 licensing and you - 4 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/514dbdd886b02f31?hl=en
* Photos of Guppys - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/ad5f006dfb858982?hl=en
* Top flight DSLRs in novice hands - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/a405372c4093d0be?hl=en
* Palestinians Under Attack - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/c2fab188817ea6e4?hl=en
* Palestinians Under Attack - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/609bc34fba44e89d?hl=en
* Palestinians Under Attack - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/785f7679e18aa82a?hl=en
* Palestinians Under Attack - 2 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/3589f9dbd5f68fe9?hl=en
* Palestinians Under Attack - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/387bff17b803f555?hl=en
* Palestinians Under Attack - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/1d5db52ba756e8f4?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/ef39fca12569e5d3?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 6:19 am
From: "k"
"Sir John Howard" <sirjohnhoward@gmail.con> wrote in message
news:0197cb11$0$20669$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
| C J Campbell wrote:
| > On 2009-02-02 11:59:33 -0800, "Focus" <not@nowhere.pt> said:
| >
| >> http://atlantic-diesel.com/Miniferrari.jpg
| >>
| >> Of course the picture was taken with a normal lens. With PS, without
| >> filters, you can create this effect quite easily.
| >> Here's one tutorial:
| >>
| >>
http://martybugs.net/blog/blog.cgi/photoshop/tutorials/TiltShiftTutorial.htm
l
| >>
| >>
| >> If you Google Fake shift tilt, you can find some very funny,
interesting
| >> pictures. Specially those taken from above look like it's some
miniature
| >> street or scene.
| >
| > This is fine if you want to reduce depth of field. However, a tilt/shift
| > lens is often used to increase depth of field. You cannot do that in
| > Photoshop with a single image.
|
| A tilt/shift lens is primary used to correct perspective. A lens aperture
| controls depth of field.
i think he meant plane of focus
== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 8:03 am
From: ASAAR
On Tue, 03 Feb 2009 16:24:33 +1100, Sir John Howard wrote:
>> This is fine if you want to reduce depth of field. However, a tilt/shift
>> lens is often used to increase depth of field. You cannot do that in
>> Photoshop with a single image.
>
> A tilt/shift lens is primary used to correct perspective. A lens aperture
> controls depth of field.
That's not entirely correct. Perspective can be manipulated with
shifts, but depth of field is controlled both by aperture and tilt.
[Page 20 of the 24mm PC-E Nikkor manual]
> This is a retrofocus-type perspective control (PC) lens that lets you
> emphasize or correct near and far perspective, or control depth of
> field. It also lets you correct distortion caused by the camera angle.
> Moreover, you can use the lens' tilt and shift mechanism to achieve
> focus of the entire subject plane when it is not parallel to the camera.
== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 10:33 am
From: MIXA
On Feb 2, 11:59 am, "Focus" <n...@nowhere.pt> wrote:
> http://atlantic-diesel.com/Miniferrari.jpg
>
> Of course the picture was taken with a normal lens. With PS, without
> filters, you can create this effect quite easily.
> Here's one tutorial:
>
> http://martybugs.net/blog/blog.cgi/photoshop/tutorials/TiltShiftTutor...
>
> If you Google Fake shift tilt, you can find some very funny, interesting
> pictures. Specially those taken from above look like it's some miniature
> street or scene.
>
> --
> Focus
I think that this is a great effect, and I sometimes use it. but I
wish I had a camera with the type of lens that would do it
automatically.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: 8-Way Processing With Intel's New Superchip!!
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/2e50dafd5821524d?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 7:34 am
From: Douglas Johnson
"D-Mac" <alienjones@y7mail.com> wrote:
>I've never known of an AMD powered PC in 20 years of PC use to last
>more than a few month without giving problems. Maybe now you'll know
>it's INTEL or Intel?
Meet mine. I haven't had an Intel chip in a desktop since 1997. All 8 AMD
systems worked flawlessly. Four are still running. My current desktop just
passed the three year mark.
That said, I'm looking at Intel processors for the next one. AMD seems to be
behind in the performance race right now.
Their logo is "intel" in a circle. their formal corporate name is "Intel
Corporation". Their web site appears to use "Intel".
-- Doug
== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 8:04 am
From: "whisky-dave"
"Larry Thong" <larry_thong@shitstring.com> wrote in message
news:8aydnWo3OvOhghXUnZ2dnUVZ_jGdnZ2d@supernews.com...
> See above. Haven't you ever wondered why AMD chips are never chosen for
> mission critical applications or environments where life and safety are at
> stake? How many police/rescue vehicles or service/industrial vehicles
> have
> you seen with and AMD based laptop? A hint, ZERO. The Tough Book made by
> Panasonic has never used anything other than Intel chips. Even Apple
> recognized the problems with AMD and refused to embarrass themselves.
> Sorry
> to say it, AMD is nothing more than a technological embarrassment. Don't
> get me wrong, AMD can be acceptable for use in gaming PCs, but I would
> never
> use one for business apps.
What !!! are you implying gaming isn't important ;-)
== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 8:47 am
From: "J. Clarke"
whisky-dave wrote:
> "Larry Thong" <larry_thong@shitstring.com> wrote in message
> news:8aydnWo3OvOhghXUnZ2dnUVZ_jGdnZ2d@supernews.com...
>
>> See above. Haven't you ever wondered why AMD chips are never
>> chosen
>> for mission critical applications or environments where life and
>> safety are at stake? How many police/rescue vehicles or
>> service/industrial vehicles have
>> you seen with and AMD based laptop? A hint, ZERO. The Tough Book
>> made by Panasonic has never used anything other than Intel chips.
>> Even Apple recognized the problems with AMD and refused to
>> embarrass
>> themselves. Sorry
>> to say it, AMD is nothing more than a technological embarrassment.
>> Don't get me wrong, AMD can be acceptable for use in gaming PCs,
>> but
>> I would never
>> use one for business apps.
>
> What !!! are you implying gaming isn't important ;-)
You're arguing with a religious fanatic. Such people are no more
rational than Jerry Falwell or Osama bin Laden--the only difference is
that their deity is some consumer product or other. It's kind of sad,
really.
--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Can you see this Flash site?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/445c408900fc3a17?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 7:56 am
From: ray
On Tue, 03 Feb 2009 13:00:38 +0000, Focus wrote:
> A few people complained that they couldn't see my site or nothing
> happened. It's a 3D castle with some pictures in it. Can you tell me
> what happens and what web program you use? Thanks:
>
> http://atlantic-diesel.com/Station/
Using Epiphany on Gentoo - I see a big square with "click here to
download plugin".
Using Epiphany on Ubuntu - same thing.
== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 9:01 am
From: Dave Cohen
tony cooper wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Feb 2009 13:00:38 -0000, "Focus" <not@nowhere.pt> wrote:
>
>> A few people complained that they couldn't see my site or nothing happened.
>> It's a 3D castle with some pictures in it.
>> Can you tell me what happens and what web program you use?
>> Thanks:
>>
>> http://atlantic-diesel.com/Station/
>
> Using a PC, WindowsXP, and Firefox, it loads after updating Flash, but
> takes forever to load...and I'm on cable. Muddy, dark images, but it
> works.
>
>
Same here. Had to install flash player manually in firefox. Poor image.
Dave Cohen
== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 9:07 am
From: Dave Cohen
Dave Cohen wrote:
> tony cooper wrote:
>> On Tue, 3 Feb 2009 13:00:38 -0000, "Focus" <not@nowhere.pt> wrote:
>>
>>> A few people complained that they couldn't see my site or nothing
>>> happened. It's a 3D castle with some pictures in it.
>>> Can you tell me what happens and what web program you use?
>>> Thanks:
>>>
>>> http://atlantic-diesel.com/Station/
>>
>> Using a PC, WindowsXP, and Firefox, it loads after updating Flash, but
>> takes forever to load...and I'm on cable. Muddy, dark images, but it
>> works.
>>
>>
> Same here. Had to install flash player manually in firefox. Poor image.
> Dave Cohen
Take that back (a little). After I posted and after a delay, the image
started to display as a movie. Sort of slow to respond and I'm on DSL,
but it does work.
Dave Cohen
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Communication is posted!
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/884818656f02af72?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 8:07 am
From: Annika1980
On Feb 3, 6:44 am, "bowser" <w...@tisgoing.on> wrote:
>
> And your shot of a bird shitting off an antenna? That's why you bought the
> Mark II?
>
> Don't complain, shoot! Show us how it's done!
That wasn't just any bird taking a crap.
That was a red-tailed hawk showing his displeasure for the upcoming
Digital TV transition.
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 10:00 am
From: "bowser"
"Annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com> wrote in message
news:ee34f741-569d-4568-809d-b2818889ee23@r10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 3, 6:44 am, "bowser" <w...@tisgoing.on> wrote:
>
> And your shot of a bird shitting off an antenna? That's why you bought the
> Mark II?
>
> Don't complain, shoot! Show us how it's done!
>That wasn't just any bird taking a crap.
>That was a red-tailed hawk showing his displeasure for the upcoming
<Digital TV transition.
Doesn't that bird know that you can get a voucher for an adapter and his
antenna and TV are still good?
Stoopid bird.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: two problems
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/c2764c3ae533887e?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 9:08 am
From: thedarkman
Thanks for the info; I believe I downloaded Irfan a while ago but
couldn't make anything of it, but I tried it again today and it works
a treat.
On 1 Feb, 21:41, "mianileng" <mianil...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> thedarkman wrote:
> > I need to find a free program which can rotate jpgs slightly. I
> > tried
> > Photoeditor but this will only rotate by 90% increments. Can
> > anyone
> > point me in the direction of one?
>
> Irfanview at http://www.irfanview.comwill rotate jpegs and
> other formats in almost any step size you choose, down to 0.01
> degree. There are separate menu items for rotating in steps of 90
> degrees (often very useful).
>
>
>
>
>
> > Also, I posted this below sometime ago.
>
> > I have a serious problem regarding jpgs. I noticed some time
> > ago that
> > a lot of mine, which are mostly of people and buildings, etc,
> > have
> > become corrupted. I am using a fairly old computer with
> > Windows
> > 2000;
> > last year I was using an older one but upgraded of sorts.
>
> > A lot of the files don't read at all, but some have become
> > mixed up,
> > ie a jpg that is meant to be of a tree will be of something
> > entirely
> > different.
>
> > I've had file corruption before, years ago, but that was with
> > WordStar
> > files, and the problem was floppy disks. A lot of these files
> > have
> > been burned to CD; I'm not sure about the others.
>
> > I thought one cause could be that I have a lot of files in the
> > directories, some I have five thousand or more, but this really
> > shouldn't be a problem,
>
> > Can anyone identify the problem, and more to the point tell me
> > how to
> > stop it in future, and how if possible to recover the lost
> > files?
>
> Could be a virus or a problem with the hard disk. I suggest you
> run a surface scan of your hard disk.
>
> PC Inspector athttp://www.pcinspector.deis a good free data
> recovery program.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
==============================================================================
TOPIC: So called Freeware, MPEG-2 licensing and you
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/514dbdd886b02f31?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 9:18 am
From: Dave Cohen
TruthSquad@hope.com wrote:
> This post is offered in FAQ format to answer some question OBVIOUSLY
> some are confused over or simply choose to ignore.
>
> Q. Is it "legal" for any person using his personal computer to "burn"
> a "video" DVD under the de facto MPEG-2 specification using a non
> licensed encoder (CODEC)?
>
> A. No! There really isn't any wiggle room. The reason is the MPEG
> (Motion Picture Experts Group) holds the patent and licenses it's
> use through small licensing fees. You as the USER of the CODEC
> don't pay a dime, however whoever included ANY MPEG-2 encoder is
> required under international law to pay the license free to the
> legal owners.
>
> Q. I'm confused, the "freeware" I use claims it is covered under the
> GNU or the General Public License, which implies the software is
> free to use as long as the terms of the GNU are followed.
>
> A. Apples and oranges. The GNU, http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html
> is a license to use the freeware itself, not any pirated or
> unauthorized CODEC the freeware author includes or tells you to
> obtain on your own. Even if it is called something else... IF it
> creates a MPEG-2 compliant file and you use the result to burn a
> DVD it is ILLEGAL unless it was licensed for use.
>
> Q. Why is the MPEG group such a bunch of up tight crybabies about
> this, I'm only making a few DVD's for private use.
>
> A. Ask Microsoft why it protects it's patents and ask Apple while
> you're at it. They like the MPEG group vigorously protect CODECS
> they have developed and have successfully defended that right
> and continue to threaten legal action against software developers
> that attempt to misuse their intellectual property or try to get
> around licensing requirements.
>
> Q. OK, I get it, using freeware to burn DVD's legally might be wrong,
> but I don't care. Any other reasons not to use it?
>
> A. Many! One of the common reasons many files don't open or play
> correctly in main stream software like Microsoft's Movie Maker,
> Media Player, much commercial software, some free standing DVD
> Players is the file was encoded with a hacked CODEC that was
> changed just enough to not make it a mirror image of a genuine
> CODEC. This also can and does mess up the generation of thumbnails,
> causes files to not play correctly, stop, sputter, get out of
> sync etc..
>
> Besides, running the risk of messing up your computer causing other
> software to malfunction the quality of hacked codecs is inferior
> to REAL MPEG-2 codecs. That said, their are good and not so good
> licensed codecs. Just like everything else, you get what you pay
> for... or don't.
>
> Q. Forget the licensing issues, how does freeware video software
> compare to commercial grade?
>
> A. With a few exceptions, it simply doesn't. Just like there will
> always be people that refuse to buckle up when driving or never
> check the air pressure in their tires, they're usually the first
> to bitch and moan when something goes wrong.
>
> Newsgroups like this are filled with people that for lack of a better
> phase are too damn cheap to buy the software they need to do a decent
> job. They much prefer to break the law, slide by with inferior
> results, then puff out their chests and fake being expert on all
> things video. Well, the good news is I doubt any of that crowd read
> this far. ;-)
>
> Remember you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.
> People will continue to bitch and moan and keep making the same dumb
> mistakes then blame the blank media, or the DVD burner or the software
> they found somewhere on the web, never the nut sitting behind the
> keyboard. The funny thing is all the money they think they saved they
> more that lost in time wasted. Oh well, that's human nature. ;-)
>
>
It's very possible that any of us might inadvertently or otherwise
engage in practices bordering on the illegal from time to time.
Thus we are indebted to the op and other well intentioned busybodies
willing to remind us of our possible failings.
You're a good boy, we've got the message, now fuck off.
Dave Cohen
== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 10:02 am
From: Ari©
On Tue, 03 Feb 2009 10:00:21 -0600, TruthSquad@hope.com wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Feb 2009 09:56:03 -0500, Ari© <TheJooseIsLoose@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 02 Feb 2009 19:15:06 -0600, TruthSquad@hope.com wrote:
>>
>>> This post is offered
>>
>>Hey, AssClown, did you enjoy your entree' into alt.comp.freeware, you
>>know, the posts where everyone claimed you are an assclown, AssClown?
>
> Oh for sure... I enjoyed pissing on Euro trash assholes like you.
lol
> That's a given you brainless little turd.
You shit brained turds? Put one aside for freeware science, will ya',
AssClown?
> Maybe one of these days
> you'll sober up. Second thought, I doubt it. Consider yourself shit
> on.
Brained or brainless, AssClown?
Hey, AssClown, I reinstated your original Xpost, I am sure you omitted
it by mistake. lol Surely you meant for everyone to see the wittiness of
your assclownish response.
AssClown that you are. You silly little "no nothing" lol
Regards,
Ari from "Europe" lol
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.2
iQA/AwUBR/qGPRv8knkS0DI6EQLqQQCfYI/+jhW28/0AaBVgq58mnuYYo2AAnRMP
r/ChOzrJkKnGHZcngwRffPMG
=2EPtTHEASSCLOWNCAN'TREADAHEADER
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 10:13 am
From: Ari©
On Tue, 03 Feb 2009 12:18:58 -0500, Dave Cohen wrote:
> TruthSquad@hope.com wrote:
>> This post is offered in FAQ format to answer some question OBVIOUSLY
>> some are confused over or simply choose to ignore.
>>
>> Q. Is it "legal" for any person using his personal computer to "burn"
>> a "video" DVD under the de facto MPEG-2 specification using a non
>> licensed encoder (CODEC)?
>>
>> A. No! There really isn't any wiggle room. The reason is the MPEG
>> (Motion Picture Experts Group) holds the patent and licenses it's
>> use through small licensing fees. You as the USER of the CODEC
>> don't pay a dime, however whoever included ANY MPEG-2 encoder is
>> required under international law to pay the license free to the
>> legal owners.
>>
>> Q. I'm confused, the "freeware" I use claims it is covered under the
>> GNU or the General Public License, which implies the software is
>> free to use as long as the terms of the GNU are followed.
>>
>> A. Apples and oranges. The GNU, http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html
>> is a license to use the freeware itself, not any pirated or
>> unauthorized CODEC the freeware author includes or tells you to
>> obtain on your own. Even if it is called something else... IF it
>> creates a MPEG-2 compliant file and you use the result to burn a
>> DVD it is ILLEGAL unless it was licensed for use.
>>
>> Q. Why is the MPEG group such a bunch of up tight crybabies about
>> this, I'm only making a few DVD's for private use.
>>
>> A. Ask Microsoft why it protects it's patents and ask Apple while
>> you're at it. They like the MPEG group vigorously protect CODECS
>> they have developed and have successfully defended that right
>> and continue to threaten legal action against software developers
>> that attempt to misuse their intellectual property or try to get
>> around licensing requirements.
>>
>> Q. OK, I get it, using freeware to burn DVD's legally might be wrong,
>> but I don't care. Any other reasons not to use it?
>>
>> A. Many! One of the common reasons many files don't open or play
>> correctly in main stream software like Microsoft's Movie Maker,
>> Media Player, much commercial software, some free standing DVD
>> Players is the file was encoded with a hacked CODEC that was
>> changed just enough to not make it a mirror image of a genuine
>> CODEC. This also can and does mess up the generation of thumbnails,
>> causes files to not play correctly, stop, sputter, get out of
>> sync etc..
>>
>> Besides, running the risk of messing up your computer causing other
>> software to malfunction the quality of hacked codecs is inferior
>> to REAL MPEG-2 codecs. That said, their are good and not so good
>> licensed codecs. Just like everything else, you get what you pay
>> for... or don't.
>>
>> Q. Forget the licensing issues, how does freeware video software
>> compare to commercial grade?
>>
>> A. With a few exceptions, it simply doesn't. Just like there will
>> always be people that refuse to buckle up when driving or never
>> check the air pressure in their tires, they're usually the first
>> to bitch and moan when something goes wrong.
>>
>> Newsgroups like this are filled with people that for lack of a better
>> phase are too damn cheap to buy the software they need to do a decent
>> job. They much prefer to break the law, slide by with inferior
>> results, then puff out their chests and fake being expert on all
>> things video. Well, the good news is I doubt any of that crowd read
>> this far. ;-)
>>
>> Remember you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.
>> People will continue to bitch and moan and keep making the same dumb
>> mistakes then blame the blank media, or the DVD burner or the software
>> they found somewhere on the web, never the nut sitting behind the
>> keyboard. The funny thing is all the money they think they saved they
>> more that lost in time wasted. Oh well, that's human nature. ;-)
>>
>
> It's very possible that any of us might inadvertently or otherwise
> engage in practices bordering on the illegal from time to time.
> Thus we are indebted to the op and other well intentioned busybodies
> willing to remind us of our possible failings.
> You're a good boy, we've got the message, now fuck off.
> Dave Cohen
I see you have met the Wandering AssClown, Dave. One Jew to another, you
think he's a k'vatsh yatebedam or a tandaitneh little shnorrer.
Me?
I know he's an AssClown.
--
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.2
iQA/AwUBR/qGPRv8knkS0DI6EQLqQQCfYI/+jhW28/0AaBVgq58mnuYYo2AAnRMP
r/ChOzrJkKnGHZcngwRffPMG
=2EPt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 10:23 am
From: "ARACari, Ph.D."
On Mon, 02 Feb 2009 19:15:06 -0600, TruthSquad@hope.com wrote:
> This post is offered
Do not let the naggers like Stubbles/AriSlime, European excrements, put
you off your course, Truth. One must have a giant sized ego and
elephantititical balls to withstand the Haters Of Freeware Research.
I can see that you have both.
Welcommen!
--
Doctorate from and Graduate of FreeBeArSciEnce University
(FreeBASE U)
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Photos of Guppys
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/ad5f006dfb858982?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 9:19 am
From: John McWilliams
tony cooper wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Feb 2009 18:35:36 -0800, John McWilliams
> <jpmcw@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> C J Campbell wrote:
>>> On 2009-02-02 11:25:17 -0800, tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net>
>>> said:
>>>> I get a page with no images and instructions to download. Cutting off
>>>> the specifics after the "/" brings me to the album, and I can go from
>>>> there to Page 2 and the salmon.
>>> Okay, thanks. I may have to fiddle with it. Of course, with my web
>>> writing ability, I will probably make it worse.
>>>
>> tony-
>>
>> Try the links in my post upstream a few, esp. the one with dashes (and
>> sans % or spaces.)
>
> Oh, I got to his full gallery. I just backtracked on the URL.
>
Er, yes; I know. I wanted to see if the URL worked for you and your news
client.
Not a biggie.
--
John McWilliams
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Top flight DSLRs in novice hands
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/a405372c4093d0be?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 9:41 am
From: C J Campbell
On 2009-02-01 21:42:47 -0800, Paul Furman <paul-@-edgehill.net> said:
> JT's Keeper wrote:
>> Alan Browne wrote:
>>
>>> Further, the better zooms (aka holy-trinity zooms) are larger aperture
>>> and low zoom ratio which aids in their high (for zooms) resolution.
>>
>> O.K. I seem to be a little slow today... what exactly is meant by the
>> holy-trinity zooms?
>
> 16-35, 28-70, 70-200 - f/2.8
> (or close to that depending on brand and year).
> The idea being, those are the only 3 lenses you need to do almost
> anything professionally.
>
>
>> - JT
>> doesn't remember hearing (reading) this term before
For me it is the 14-24, 24-70, and 70-200 mm f/2.8 Nikkors. These are
the lenses I carry nearly all of the time. If I am expecting any
wildlife I also take the 400 mm f/2.8, but the 200-400 mm f/4 is much
more popular. Whatever. I can fill in much of the range between 200 and
400 mm in a pinch with a teleconverter if I have to. I haven't really
had to, though.
But you are correct in saying that these lenses are heavy and bulky. If
weight is an issue, though, I still have the D300 and any number of
smaller, lighter DX lenses. I like DX for that. I also like it for the
crop factor on the 400 mm lens.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Palestinians Under Attack
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/c2fab188817ea6e4?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 10:02 am
From: Stephen Bishop
On 03 Feb 2009 03:59:06 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>>On 01 Feb 2009 22:42:44 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>
>>>HEMI-Powered <none@none.gn> wrote:
>>>>Stephen Bishop added these comments in the current discussion du
>>>>jour ...
>>>>
>>>>>>There have also been protest marches in support of the Gazan's
>>>>>>and anti Israel that have not been predominantly Islamic but a
>>>>>>general cross section of the population including Jews who
>>>>>>understand that criticising the state of Israel is not
>>>>>>anti-sematic.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Since when have the protest marches of university students been
>>>>> the "real world?" When have they ever been evidence of
>>>>> expertise on world facts or foreign affairs?
>>>>
>>>>It's also common for students to be ultra-liberal,
>>>
>>>Only if you're so far to the right that you'd embarrasss Hitler.
>>
>>Hitler was an extreme left-winger,
>
>That's an outright lie, but one that neonazis like to use to try and
>distance themselves from their nazi-like ideology.
Being the neonazi you are, I can understand how you believe that way.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Palestinians Under Attack
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/609bc34fba44e89d?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 10:12 am
From: Stephen Bishop
On 03 Feb 2009 04:06:31 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>> rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>Again you justify the evil actions of one side by pointing fingers at
>>>>the other side.
>>>
>>>Which is exactly what you have done again and again and again.
>>>You justifying killing hundreds of innocent people by claiming
>>>that Israel was justified because a few people fired rockets.
>>
>>Define "few people."
>
>Notice that everything that follows is YOU "pointing fingers at
>the other side" in order to justify the "evil actions" of Israel.
Notice that you refuse to respond to a simple request but instead
point fingers back in a lame attempt to dodge the issue.
>
>>Those "few people" aren't just some crackpots setting off fireworks.
>>They are working for the elected government of Gaza and firing those
>>rockets under their direction, dunderhead.
>
>Or they're some extremist faction that is taking advantage of
>Israeli-imposed anarchy in order to vent at their oppressors.
Hamas controls those rockets. Hamas is the elected government in
charge of Gaza.
But notice how you again point fingers at the other side to try to
justify the evil actions of some, by what you think others are doing.
>
>>Those "few people" have fired thousands of rockets for the sole
>>purpose of killing and maiming Israeli civilians.
>
>And you know their purpose because you've been a member of their
>organizations?
Obviously for you to ask such a question, you must think you already
have the answer. Tell me, Ray, why are they firing those rockets at
civilian areas if not only for the purpose of killing and terrorizing
civilians?
OBTW, it was just reported on the news this morning that your militant
friends have yet again broken the cease-fire by launching a
longer-range rocket into Israel.
>>Those "few people" are supported by a well-organized supply line that
>>smuggles weapons and supplies through underground tunnels and stores
>>them in civilian areas.
>
>All of Gaza is "civilian areas".
Then all of those civilian areas which are used for military purposes
are legitimate military targets.
>
>>Your "few people" are quite evil
>
>As opposed to the murderous thugs
As opposed to themselves. What you might think of others is a
different issue.
>who deliberatly kill innocent people
>by the hundreds and punish a million people because of the actions of
>a few fanatics?
That's your value judgement, not a fact.
You still haven't defined "few," Ray. What percentage of the
Palestinian population recognizes Israel's right to exist and truly
desires to live at peace with them? Surely you must know.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Palestinians Under Attack
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/785f7679e18aa82a?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 10:15 am
From: Stephen Bishop
On 03 Feb 2009 04:09:44 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.gn>
>>>Stephen Bishop added these comments in the current discussion du
>>>jour ...
>>>
>>>>>Are you against liberty or do you defend liberty?
>>>>
>>>> Oh, and while you rant about liberty, what have you actually
>>>> done to defend it? I served in the military, Ray, when did you
>>>> do the same?
>>>>
>>>> Or maybe you just aren't aware that the liberty you speak of was
>>>> won at the cost of thousands of deaths, beginning in the 1770's.
>>>>
>>>I also served in the military, the US Army. And, my father was a WWII
>>>Marine who fought at Saipan, Tinian, and Iwo Jima. The thing about
>>>liberty is that it MUST be defended VIGOROUSLY by all, else it will
>>>soon be lost. Thus, the true cost of war's awful casualties often is
>>>freedom itself, followed closely by national security.
>>
>>Absolutely true. The left-wing loons who shout the loudest about
>>liberty have *no idea* how fragile it really is or what it really
>>costs to maintain it.
>
>We see how you rightards support killing people, kidnapping them,
>torturing them, all in order to "defend" liberty.
Another totally baseless and uninformed insulting false accusation
from clueless Ray.
Look out for those black helicopters, they're after you. Your phone
is tapped, too. You're next on our list, and there is nowhere you
can hide. Sheeeesh.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Palestinians Under Attack
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/3589f9dbd5f68fe9?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 10:18 am
From: Stephen Bishop
On 03 Feb 2009 04:13:39 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>HEMI-Powered <none@none.gn> wrote:
>>Stephen Bishop added these comments in the current discussion du
>>jour ...
>>
>>>>>Without liberalism, social legislation in this country almost
>>>>>never gets enacted, so I agree, liberalism isn't bad per se.
>>>>>But, just as conservatism ran amok has been shown to be bad for
>>>>>our country overall, so too is social engineering where the
>>>>>idea seems to be that the government somehow can spend our
>>>>>money better than we can.
>>>>
>>>>Jesus was a liberal, as were the people who founded this
>>>>country.
>>>
>>> Or perhaps you think that Jesus would be on the side of today's
>>> liberals insisting on a woman's right to an abortion?
>>
>>I've always wondered why those so passionately in favor of
>>"choice" for the woman, why they always seem to "choose" death for
>>the innocent fetus?
>
>Why do YOU choose death for children, hypocrite? Or is it that only
>women should be enslaved by the government?
There goes clueless Ray again, diverting his own murderous hatred by
trying to accuse others of the same thing.
Watch out for those black helicopters, Ray. If some woman is
unfortunate enough to be married to you, they're after her, too. We
need more slaves to breed more right wingers with... What a looney
toon you are.
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 10:37 am
From: Stephen Bishop
On 03 Feb 2009 04:12:50 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>>On 02 Feb 2009 01:07:34 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>
>>>HEMI-Powered <none@none.gn> wrote:
>>>>Stephen Bishop added these comments in the current discussion du
>>>>jour ...
>>>>
>>>>> The sad thing is that liberalism isn't a bad thing. True
>>>>> liberalism, that is, where all ideas are given equal status and
>>>>> the best float to the top during the course of the political
>>>>> process. The problem is that modern liberalism not true
>>>>> liberalism. It is as you say, it talks the talk of liberty and
>>>>> freedom of speech, but God help you if in your exercise of free
>>>>> speech you disagree with the those liberals who think they have
>>>>> the moral high ground.
>>>>>
>>>>Without liberalism, social legislation in this country almost never
>>>>gets enacted, so I agree, liberalism isn't bad per se. But, just as
>>>>conservatism ran amok has been shown to be bad for our country
>>>>overall, so too is social engineering where the idea seems to be
>>>>that the government somehow can spend our money better than we can.
>>>
>>>Jesus was a liberal, as were the people who founded this country.
>>
>>What propaganda are you listening to?
>
>It's the facts, rightward.
What facts, left-tard?
>
>> Exactly how is it you think
>>that Jesus was a liberal?
>
>Help the poor, critical of the established order, forgiving ...
All good conservative values. We should all help the poor, be
critical of the established order if it isn't serving the people, and
we should also be forgiving. If you understand the biblical concept
of forgiveness, it is always accompanied by repentance and changing
one's ways. A good place for you to start might be in cleaning up
your language and being more tolerant of other people's opinions.
Have you ever noticed how it is the conservatives who tend to give
more to charities than the liberals do? The liberals love to give
away *other people's money,* but they are QUITE tight with their own.
Just look at the tax records of Joe Biden and Obama and see how little
either of them gave of their own income.
And just look at all the nominees in Obama's new administration who
are being busted for dodging their taxes? There is where the true
hypocrisy is. The typical bigoted and biased "do as I say, not as I
do" liberal left.
>> While he pointed out the hypocrisy of his
>>day, he was very much a conservative (if such a thing could be
>>compared to what that word means today.) He said that he came to
>>fulfill the law, not abolish it.
>
>Which law? The Pharisee's law?
The Ten Commandments. God's law. The Pharisees were more like
today's liberals in that they wanted to force everyone to do things
*their* way with endless rules and regulations that went way beyond
God's law.
>
>> He taught that we should take care
>>of the poor, not that the government should do that.
>
>We ARE the government.
What office do you hold, Ray? Minister of propaganda and paranoid
left-wing fantasy?
>
>> In the famous
>>confrontation with the men who were about to stone a woman for
>>adultery, after pointing out their hypocrisy he charged that woman to
>>"go and sin no more."
>
>Whereas the cnservatives would be trowing the first stones.
That's your opinion, but you are sadly misinformed. There are just
as many liberal hypocrites as there are conservative ones.
>
>> He constantly taught about submitting to a
>>higher authority.
>
>Which higher authority is that?
God. Don't you know that?
>
>> He was very clear about what it means to obey the
>>Ten Commandments, which in the minds of today's liberals is more like
>>the "Ten Suggestions."
>
>And so you resort to the usual hatred of anybody who doesn't
>goose-step to your rightist agenda.
How did you come to that nonsensical conclusion? Oh, that's right,
you have a pathalogical reaction to anyone who isn't as far left as
you are. You must think Jesus was also a Nazi for actually expecting
people to obey the laws of God and threatening that hell awaited those
who don't.
>>The founding fathers may have been liberals in comparison to the
>>king's government, because the very idea of self-governing was a very
>>liberal idea in that day.
>
>How about that.
>
>> But they would be aghast at what the
>>liberals of today have been trying to do to the constitution they
>
>Your rank bigotry isn't the truth, asshole.
And again the bigoted Ray has rectal things on his mind when he
attempts to take the moral high road.
Your rank bigotry again causes you to delete text and respond to the
truth in frustration with lame accusations and insults.
You are such a hypocrite, Ray.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Palestinians Under Attack
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/387bff17b803f555?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 10:43 am
From: Stephen Bishop
On 03 Feb 2009 04:15:40 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>>On 01 Feb 2009 22:51:15 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>
>>>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>>>>On 01 Feb 2009 02:54:06 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>>>>>> rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>>>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Read the charters of Hamas and the PLO
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Hamas has said that they will recognize Israel. The PLO is
>>>>>>>>>>>irrelevant.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>No response.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>What response do you want?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>An apology for being a lying bigot.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Yes, Ray, I'm waiting.
>>>>>
>>>>>You're pretty stupid, aren't you?
>>>>
>>>>Not at all, Ray.
>>>>
>>>>>You spew evil lies about Arabs in order to justify human rights
>>>>>violations and when you're proven to be wrong you just act like a
>>>>>bigger asshole.
>>>>
>>>>Name one "evil lie" about Arabs I've "spewed."
>>>
>>>You claimed that Arabs and Palestinian don't recognize Israel's right
>>>to exist.
>>
>>You're twisting again.
>
>You're lying again, asshole.
Nope.
>
>> I never said that all of them do.
>
>Yes, you did.
You are the biggest lying fool I've ever seen, Ray. I never did.
>
>>>>Show where you have proven me wrong about anything.
>>>
>>> The West Bank [...] is just as much a part of Israel as California is a part of the U.S.
>>> Stephen Bishop in <36rcn4h5k7k7g271u7oojn06q2gibpirga@4ax.com>
>>>
>>> >You claimed that the West Bank is part of Israel.
>>> You are a pathetic liar. I never said that.
>>> Stephen Bishop in <hgmgn41dpgb93jeda2un9cf849ihbc1moj@4ax.com>
>>
>>
>>As pointed out to you many times, you take those things out of context
>
>You keep making that whine but as yet it's been nothing BUT a pathetic
>whine. The statements are not taken out of context.
Yes, Ray. That's your mode of attack. Selective quoting and
twisting.
>
>You LIED. In fact there are at least TWO lies quoted above.
You ignored and deleted everything I said about that and ignored
questions to illustrate what I said.
You spout your evil bigoted lies that I say all Arabs are terrorists
or don't recognize Israel and I want to see all of them dead. You are
an evil, wretched excuse for a man. Hitler would be very proud of
you, fascist lying bigot.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Palestinians Under Attack
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/1d5db52ba756e8f4?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 3 2009 10:44 am
From: Stephen Bishop
On 03 Feb 2009 04:16:20 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>>On 01 Feb 2009 22:52:42 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>
>>>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>>>>On 01 Feb 2009 02:54:51 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>>>>>>On 31 Jan 2009 20:50:35 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just read the Hamas charter or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Choke on this, you lying bigot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> JERUSALEM - Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter said Monday that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hamas - the Islamic militant group known for its suicide bombings
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and rocket attacks on Israel - is prepared to accept the Jewish
>>>>>>>>>>>>> state's right to "live as a neighbor next door in peace."
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>I'm not choking.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Because you have no shame, even whan you're caught lying your sleazy
>>>>>>>>>>>ass off.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Yet again you dodge and weave by clipping text making sleazy false
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>And once again the bigot ignores the facts and goes off on another
>>>>>>>>>childish sleazefest.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>And even as you say that, you demonstrate your own childish sleaziness
>>>>>>>>by clipping away what others wrote.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I have NO obligation to repeat your bigoted filth. If all you can do
>>>>>>>is whine that I won't worship your lies then you have lost the argument.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>What a fool you are.
>>>>>
>>>>>What a whiny little baby you are.
>>>>
>>>>Ooooh good one, Ray. To you the truth is "whining."
>>>
>>>There's another one of your many lies.
>>
>>Funny that the liar still thinks the truth is whining.
>
>And yet another lie.
>
>You can't win with the truth so you lie about people instead.
Sounds to me like you're making a confession about yourself.
==============================================================================
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
__._,_.___ 