Photoshop How To Use: Jun 22, 2009

Monday, June 22, 2009

[PSP-Snags] New Alpha by Dorian: Johnny the Pirate

The downloads and all previews You can find here:

http://www.alphasbydorian.pytalhost.com

Click "Misc Alphas 5"

If You have problems with advertisements, test these mirrors:

http://dorian. freewebhostx. com/

rec.photo.digital - 26 new messages in 6 topics - digest

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

rec.photo.digital@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* The sponge tool in Photoshop - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/e4a3f1b66a6eaa4a?hl=en
* Running OS X on my PC!!! - 14 messages, 7 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/bb50fbf2b3ff2f37?hl=en
* Why Non-Correlating Print, Negative and CMOS Sizes? - 4 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/a72842738be30c46?hl=en
* Luxury ED Hardy Sunglasses - Discount ED Hardy Sunglasses - 1 messages, 1
author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/1b8ee593e20e65a0?hl=en
* Anything for the Perfect Shot - 4 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/060da06a542937ca?hl=en
* Another falls victim to the horror of P&S's - 2 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/927bee75964a4ce4?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: The sponge tool in Photoshop
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/e4a3f1b66a6eaa4a?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 7:51 pm
From: tony cooper

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:48:37 +1200, Brian <bclark@es.co.nz> wrote:

>tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 00:55:14 +1200, Brian <bclark@es.co.nz> wrote:
>>
>>>I'm using photoshop elements 7.
>>>I understand what the Dodge and Burn tools do and have used them often
>>>to improve a photo but it's not clear what the Sponge tool does.
>>>How what the sponge tool be used to improve a photo?
>>>
>>The sponge tool either increases or decreases the saturation of color
>>on a selective basis. You use it on a small area of an image where
>>you want the color to be a bit different to emphasize or de-emphasize
>>that area. It's not a precise tool.
>>
>>I've used it where the photograph is of something reflective and the
>>reflection picks up the color of the background or something around it
>>on the edge or in some small place. I'll desaturate that reflective
>>spot. I've never had occasion to use it to increase saturation.
>>
>>There's no rule that says "Use the sponge here". This kind of change
>>can be done in several ways, and you try the various tools to see
>>which works best for the individual situation.
>
>Thanks Tony.
>I tried the Photoshop Elements help but there is not much information.
>How do you switch it from increasing saturation to decreasing
>saturation? I can now see that it is useful for toning down bright
>colours that catch the eye.

Look at the tool bar at the top where it says "Mode". It can be set
to either saturate or desaturate. The flow (amount of either) can be
set.

Google for "Elements tutorial (tool)" and insert the tool you want to
learn about. Follow the tutorials.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Running OS X on my PC!!!
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/bb50fbf2b3ff2f37?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 8:00 pm
From: "Larry Thong"

John McWilliams wrote:

At least PC users are smart enough to do it.

So what you are effectively saying is Mac users are dumb mindless idiots
that are nothing more than appliance operators. At least PC users know how
to get around their system. If you don't know the basic nuts and bolts of
your computer you shouldn't be allowed to use one. How do Mac users fix a
problem, other than upgrading to the next level of proprietary hardware?

== 2 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 8:08 pm
From: John McWilliams

Larry Thong wrote:
> John McWilliams wrote:
>
>>> Anyway, here's the simple way of running OS X on a PC. For Christ's
>>> sake Windows XP kicks ass so there's no reason to run OS X.
>>>
>>> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/20/macosx_on_a_pc/>
>>
>> yeah, that's an intelligent move for folks who are mostly
>> photographers!
>
> At least PC users are smart enough to do it.

Of course, many are, but won't. And a lot aren't smart enough. Mac users
have no edge in the cretin category, nor a very big one in the genius
category.

> So what you are effectively saying is Mac users are dumb mindless idiots
> that are nothing more than appliance operators. At least PC users know how
> to get around their system. If you don't know the basic nuts and bolts of
> your computer you shouldn't be allowed to use one. How do Mac users fix a
> problem, other than upgrading to the next level of proprietary hardware?

What eloquence! What provocative statements.

Bored?

--
lsmft

== 3 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 8:15 pm
From: "Larry Thong"

John McWilliams wrote:

>>> yeah, that's an intelligent move for folks who are mostly
>>> photographers!
>>
>> At least PC users are smart enough to do it.
>
> Of course, many are, but won't. And a lot aren't smart enough. Mac
> users have no edge in the cretin category, nor a very big one in the
> genius category.

There's no need for PC users to take a few extra steps to load OS X when
Windows XP does just fine and is much more secure and user friendly.

>> So what you are effectively saying is Mac users are dumb mindless
>> idiots that are nothing more than appliance operators. At least PC
>> users know how to get around their system. If you don't know the
>> basic nuts and bolts of your computer you shouldn't be allowed to
>> use one. How do Mac users fix a problem, other than upgrading to
>> the next level of proprietary hardware?
>
> What eloquence! What provocative statements.

Just trying to find out what makes the Mac so special and what
differentiates it from a PC? I'm really not seeing a difference here other
than you Mac guys get to pay an overpriced premium on the same hardware.

> Bored?

Never! I wish I were at times.

== 4 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 8:22 pm
From: Savageduck

On 2009-06-22 19:23:21 -0700, "Larry Thong" <larry_thong@shitstring.com> said:

> It's amazing how all these Mac idiots are still trying to hold onto a false
> sense of superiority by thinking they have something better. Even the same
> band of lame mindless idiots we have in this group think they have something
> better. Funny thing is ever since Apple went Intel they now only have cute
> and funny Mac vs PC commercials to beacon to the mindless sheep into buying
> overpriced hardware. Enough of that.
>
> Anyway, here's the simple way of running OS X on a PC. For Christ's sake
> Windows XP kicks ass so there's no reason to run OS X.
>
> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/20/macosx_on_a_pc/>

Rita,
Over the years the headers of your posts have consistently demonstrated
your use of MT-NewsWatcher for Intel Mac.
I understand you have this propensity for making provocative statements
from time to time, mostly with tongue in cheek humor.
You have demonstrated a method of installing and running OSX on a PC
and that is just fine.
Since there is OSX software you prefer to run over Wintel or Linux
versions, the question regarding your venom aimed at Mac users is
puzzling. This especially since there really is no sense of superiority
amongst us "Mac idiots". Many of us use Wintel machines in other
environments, and choose to own & use Macs as our machine of choice for
our own reasons, just as you have chosen to run OSX on a PC. The "sense
of superiority" you claim is a Wintel user perception
You are somewhat hypocritical when it comes to a "sense of
superiority", you make a point of letting us know whenever you have
made your next extravagant upgrade within your 18 month plan, detailing
your purchases and trumpeting the superiority of your current
equipment. (...and I certainly envy your D3x, D3 and vault of Nikkor
lenses, my lowly D300 not withstanding)
Many of us here have always accepted your contributions as humorous and
at time instructional, however with this post you have managed the
intructional and insulting as matched pair.

Also, nowhere in any of the current debate have I noted any of the "Mac
idiots" making claims of Wintel PC idiocy for any present in these NGs
not using Macs or like you, bright enough to run OSX on their PC.

So if you want to continue running OSX on your PC that is fine, even
though you make it obvious, based on your Nikon/Nikkor purchases, the
purchase price of a Mac Pro is well within your means.
Just note that not all of us "mac idiots" are actual idiots, just as
not all of the "Wintel PC idiots" are actual idiots.
--
Regards,

Savageduck

== 5 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 8:31 pm
From: "Larry Thong"

Savageduck wrote:

>> Anyway, here's the simple way of running OS X on a PC. For Christ's
>> sake Windows XP kicks ass so there's no reason to run OS X.
>>
>> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/20/macosx_on_a_pc/>
>
> Rita,
> Over the years the headers of your posts have consistently
> demonstrated your use of MT-NewsWatcher for Intel Mac.
> I understand you have this propensity for making provocative
> statements from time to time, mostly with tongue in cheek humor.

And that's all it was, a provocative statement that wasn't meant to be taken
as nothing more than "it can be done" type of post to demonstrate there
really is *NO* difference between the two platforms. The "Mac idiots"
reference wasn't directed at you or anyone in particular, just a cattle prod
to point to show the Mac cult follower they really have no magical Kool Aid.
Trust me; I don't want to upset the duck!!!

== 6 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 8:32 pm
From: Savageduck

On 2009-06-22 20:31:03 -0700, "Larry Thong" <larry_thong@shitstring.com> said:

> Savageduck wrote:
>
>>> Anyway, here's the simple way of running OS X on a PC. For Christ's
>>> sake Windows XP kicks ass so there's no reason to run OS X.
>>>
>>> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/20/macosx_on_a_pc/>
>>
>> Rita,
>> Over the years the headers of your posts have consistently
>> demonstrated your use of MT-NewsWatcher for Intel Mac.
>> I understand you have this propensity for making provocative
>> statements from time to time, mostly with tongue in cheek humor.
>
> And that's all it was, a provocative statement that wasn't meant to be
> taken as nothing more than "it can be done" type of post to demonstrate
> there really is *NO* difference between the two platforms. The "Mac
> idiots" reference wasn't directed at you or anyone in particular, just
> a cattle prod to point to show the Mac cult follower they really have
> no magical Kool Aid. Trust me; I don't want to upset the duck!!!

'duck understands.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

== 7 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 8:44 pm
From: tony cooper

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:22:09 -0700, Savageduck
<savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

> This especially since there really is no sense of superiority
>amongst us "Mac idiots".

Oh, yeah. Sure there is. It's just for certain values of "us". You
may not be in that group, but many are. Boring twits, they are, too.
On both sides.

I don't really understand it, myself. Your stuff on the screen looks
the same to me as my stuff that is created on a PC.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

== 8 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 8:51 pm
From: "botox"

Actually the best way to run OSx on a pc is to buy the $240 dollar USB
dongle.
Including that piece you can build a machine that will be faster than
anything Apple sells at a fraction of the cost.
The operating system wars are over anyway--both Windows and Mac OS whatever
are going the way of Kodachrome.
Most users, sooner rather than later, will do almost everything via a
platform neutral browser using web based applications.

== 9 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 9:08 pm
From: Savageduck

On 2009-06-22 20:44:34 -0700, tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> said:

> On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:22:09 -0700, Savageduck
> <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>
>> This especially since there really is no sense of superiority
>> amongst us "Mac idiots".
>
> Oh, yeah. Sure there is. It's just for certain values of "us". You
> may not be in that group, but many are. Boring twits, they are, too.
> On both sides.
>
> I don't really understand it, myself. Your stuff on the screen looks
> the same to me as my stuff that is created on a PC.

Strange isn't it?

I have issues with almost all evangelists, religious, political,
products, systems, and self aggrandizement.
If it works for me and not someone else, who am I to convince the other
person another tool might have different benefits they might find
useful. My Mac works for me within its limitation just as your PC works
for you within its limitations.
It is like the crowd running to Face Book, Twitter & iPhones, none of
these work for me and I choose not to join those crowds.
...and they will be blessed with my absence.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

== 10 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 9:32 pm
From: John McWilliams

botox wrote:
> Actually the best way to run OSx on a pc is to buy the $240 dollar USB
> dongle.
> Including that piece you can build a machine that will be faster than
> anything Apple sells at a fraction of the cost.
> The operating system wars are over anyway--both Windows and Mac OS
> whatever are going the way of Kodachrome.
> Most users, sooner rather than later, will do almost everything via a
> platform neutral browser using web based applications.

Er, no.

--
john mcwilliams

== 11 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 10:04 pm
From: ASAAR

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:08:45 -0700, John McWilliams bit:

> What eloquence! What provocative statements.
>
> Bored?

Trolled?

== 12 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 10:09 pm
From: John McWilliams

ASAAR wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:08:45 -0700, John McWilliams bit:
>
>> What eloquence! What provocative statements.
>>
>> Bored?
>
> Trolled?
>
> :)
>
Yowza.

'Ceptin' Rita is usually too intelligent to resort to such unvarnished
fishing, so I thought he'd take leave of his brain.

--
john mcwilliams

== 13 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 10:37 pm
From: Rich

On Jun 22, 10:23 pm, "Larry Thong" <larry_th...@shitstring.com> wrote:
> It's amazing how all these Mac idiots are still trying to hold onto a false
> sense of superiority by thinking they have something better. Even the same
> band of lame mindless idiots we have in this group think they have something
> better. Funny thing is ever since Apple went Intel they now only have cute
> and funny Mac vs PC commercials to beacon to the mindless sheep into buying
> overpriced hardware. Enough of that.
>
> Anyway, here's the simple way of running OS X on a PC. For Christ's sake
> Windows XP kicks ass so there's no reason to run OS X.
>
> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/20/macosx_on_a_pc/>

Apple going to Intel was the last straw. The Apple II and subsequent
run-on-Motorola processor machines were innovative, a shot in the face
to the IBM P.C. and P.C. clone environment. But Intel is one of the
most repellent American companies, widely known for illegal and
unethical business practices. As for Apple's, friend of mine who went
into graphics processing in the 1980s said, "Apple users are a group
of computer-illiterates working on sub-standard machines." Compared to
the dedicated graphics workstations at the time, that was true.
Apple's future now hinges on the iPhone and less and less, the iPod.
In a perfect world, IBM and Motorola would have had the marketing
savvy to keep making and improving processors and in a really perfect
world, the DEC Alpha would still be around. The one bright spot in
the computer world as it is was how AMD's Althon (no longer) dominated
high-end machines for many years against flawed Intel offerings.

== 14 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 10:52 pm
From: Savageduck

On 2009-06-22 22:37:30 -0700, Rich <rander3127@gmail.com> said:

> On Jun 22, 10:23 pm, "Larry Thong" <larry_th...@shitstring.com> wrote:
>> It's amazing how all these Mac idiots are still trying to hold onto a fal
> se
>> sense of superiority by thinking they have something better. Even the
> same
>> band of lame mindless idiots we have in this group think they have someth
> ing
>> better. Funny thing is ever since Apple went Intel they now only have
> cute
>> and funny Mac vs PC commercials to beacon to the mindless sheep into buyi
> ng
>> overpriced hardware. Enough of that.
>>
>> Anyway, here's the simple way of running OS X on a PC. For Christ's sa
> ke
>> Windows XP kicks ass so there's no reason to run OS X.
>>
>> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/20/macosx_on_a_pc/>
>
> Apple going to Intel was the last straw. The Apple II and subsequent
> run-on-Motorola processor machines were innovative, a shot in the face
> to the IBM P.C. and P.C. clone environment. But Intel is one of the
> most repellent American companies, widely known for illegal and
> unethical business practices. As for Apple's, friend of mine who went
> into graphics processing in the 1980s said, "Apple users are a group
> of computer-illiterates working on sub-standard machines." Compared to
> the dedicated graphics workstations at the time, that was true.
> Apple's future now hinges on the iPhone and less and less, the iPod.
> In a perfect world, IBM and Motorola would have had the marketing
> savvy to keep making and improving processors and in a really perfect
> world, the DEC Alpha would still be around. The one bright spot in
> the computer world as it is was how AMD's Althon (no longer) dominated
> high-end machines for many years against flawed Intel offerings.

Have you finally become completely unhinged?

--
Regards,

Savageduck

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Why Non-Correlating Print, Negative and CMOS Sizes?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/a72842738be30c46?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 8:37 pm
From: Bob Larter

nospam wrote:
> In article <4a3dd3d6$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, Bob Larter
> <bobbylarter@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> People say that anything over 300 is wasted, but I've yet to see a
>>>> convincing argument that proves this. Of course, I've never seen
>>>> convincing argument that anything over 300 improves, either.
>>> it depends on the image and viewing conditions.
>>>
>>> <http://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/printer-ppi/>
>>>
>>> Laser printers used to be 300 dots per inch (dpi), but evolved to 600
>>> and even 1200 dpi. Why? People could see ragged edges on letters on 300
>>> dpi laser printers. At 600 dpi edges appear smoother. Some can tell the
>>> difference between 600 and 1200 dpi printers if the paper quality is
>>> high.
>> That's for monochrome bi-level prints. Continuous tone images are much
>> less demanding. For example; dye-sub prints give good results at 100-150DPI.
>
> i find that to be extremely low, at least with ink jet printers, and
> can easily see a difference between that and 250-300 ppi (not dpi).

Inkjets aren't continuous tone, they use dithering.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 9:42 pm
From: Eric Stevens

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:37:19 +1000, Bob Larter <bobbylarter@gmail.com>
wrote:

>nospam wrote:
>> In article <4a3dd3d6$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, Bob Larter
>> <bobbylarter@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> People say that anything over 300 is wasted, but I've yet to see a
>>>>> convincing argument that proves this. Of course, I've never seen
>>>>> convincing argument that anything over 300 improves, either.
>>>> it depends on the image and viewing conditions.
>>>>
>>>> <http://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/printer-ppi/>
>>>>
>>>> Laser printers used to be 300 dots per inch (dpi), but evolved to 600
>>>> and even 1200 dpi. Why? People could see ragged edges on letters on 300
>>>> dpi laser printers. At 600 dpi edges appear smoother. Some can tell the
>>>> difference between 600 and 1200 dpi printers if the paper quality is
>>>> high.
>>> That's for monochrome bi-level prints. Continuous tone images are much
>>> less demanding. For example; dye-sub prints give good results at 100-150DPI.
>>
>> i find that to be extremely low, at least with ink jet printers, and
>> can easily see a difference between that and 250-300 ppi (not dpi).
>
>Inkjets aren't continuous tone, they use dithering.

Epson printers can be continuous tone for all practical purposes.
Their printers control droplet size and make use of blending to mix
colours on the paper.

Eric Stevens

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 11:01 pm
From: John Navas

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:37:19 +1000, Bob Larter <bobbylarter@gmail.com>
wrote in <4a404def$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au>:

>nospam wrote:
>> In article <4a3dd3d6$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, Bob Larter
>> <bobbylarter@gmail.com> wrote:

>>> That's for monochrome bi-level prints. Continuous tone images are much
>>> less demanding. For example; dye-sub prints give good results at 100-150DPI.
>>
>> i find that to be extremely low, at least with ink jet printers, and
>> can easily see a difference between that and 250-300 ppi (not dpi).
>
>Inkjets aren't continuous tone, they use dithering.

And overlaying.

--
Best regards,
John (Panasonic DMC-FZ28, and several others)

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 11:02 pm
From: John Navas

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 16:42:26 +1200, Eric Stevens
<eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> wrote in
<i4n0455fq6n59b9a8ce9mas9noa0bs5hh1@4ax.com>:

>On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:37:19 +1000, Bob Larter <bobbylarter@gmail.com>
>wrote:

>>Inkjets aren't continuous tone, they use dithering.
>
>Epson printers can be continuous tone for all practical purposes.
>Their printers control droplet size and make use of blending to mix
>colours on the paper.

Not without more colors.

--
Best regards,
John (Panasonic DMC-FZ28, and several others)

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Luxury ED Hardy Sunglasses - Discount ED Hardy Sunglasses
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/1b8ee593e20e65a0?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 9:36 pm
From: damo

Designer New Style Luxury ED Hardy Sunglasses fine quality.
You can check them:
http://www.luxury-fashion.org/static/Apparels/ED-Hardy-Sunglasses.html
http://www.luxury-fashion.org/static/Apparels/Ed-Hardy-Sunglasses-100.html

And find more new fashionable apparels please view :
www.luxury-fashion.org

You can find what do you want here!
Welcome view our other pages or feel free contact us.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Anything for the Perfect Shot
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/060da06a542937ca?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 9:46 pm
From: John A.

On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 16:55:00 +1000, Bob Larter <bobbylarter@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Alan Browne wrote:
>> On 20-06-09 11:01, John McWilliams wrote:
>>> Alan Browne wrote:
>>>> On 19-06-09 23:25, Matt Clara wrote:
>>>>> http://www.darkroastedblend.com/2007/07/anything-for-perfect-shot.html
>>>>> Four pages, I believe. Some fun ones in there, too.
>>>>
>>>> Those have been posted before, Matt. There are some good ones in there
>>>> (the fellow with the view camera on the side of cliff, for example...)
>>>>
>>>> That site had a lot of pop-up ads ("Your computer is a swamp filled
>>>> with computer viruses") and persistent ads too. (Cancel the pop up and
>>>> they come right up again).
>>>
>>> Not a single popup using Safari just ten minutes ago.
>>
>> I was using Firefox with ad-block activated. This was not the pop-over
>> type, but drop boxes when scrolling or closing the page.
>
>Dump ad-block & use no-script instead. I didn't see any rubbish at all
>when viewing that page with Firefox + No-Script.

Me neither. SeaMonkey + no-ads.pac.

A proxy autoconfig file requires a little bit of code editing ability
to add to its blocking since it's essentially a javascript file with a
function to return a proxy based on a resource's URL, but it will work
with pretty much any browser since Netscape 2.0 and IE3.

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 11:03 pm
From: John Navas

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 18:05:33 -0700, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote
in <220620091805335238%nospam@nospam.invalid>:

>In article <bl9045ts540e69juvtjvjuitkj2l0amee2@4ax.com>, John Navas
><spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> >assuming one gets their software from legitimate sources, the risk of
>> >malware is essentially zero. ...
>>
>> That's both dead wrong and dangerously naive -- there have been quite a
>> few cases of malware-infected software from legitimate sources.
>
>none with mac os x. ...

That you know of.

--
Best regards,
John (Panasonic DMC-FZ28, and several others)

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 11:07 pm
From: John Navas

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:29:32 -0500, Semi-Yawning <sy@here.com> wrote in
<e4b045lfs9voaniik2dubidmubvb585bdk@4ax.com>:

>On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 17:14:53 -0700, John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 16:57:28 -0700, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote
>>in <220620091657280123%nospam@nospam.invalid>:

>>Laws here in the USA are pretty lax, and enforcement even laxer (largely
>>due to budget issues), so you'd be well advised here to scale back those
>>expectations here.
>>
>>Expert assessment is that food poisoning is way underreported and quite
>>common. I got food poisoning myself this weekend, which was fortunately
>>relatively mild, probably from some undercooked meat.
>
>Don't take this personally, just "typing out loud".
>
>"Food Poisoning" is the sign of a really weak body. Did you know that E.
>coli is a naturally occurring bacterium in your own gut? That's where it
>originated and why it is even named E. coli. [SNIP]

<http://www.wrongdiagnosis.com/f/food_poisoning/prevalence.htm>:

Food Poisoning or Foodborne Illness - incidence
* 1,200-1,400 outbreaks of foodborne disease reported each year
in the US
* Estimated 76 million illnesses in the US annually
* Estimated 5,000 deaths in the US annually

--
Best regards,
John (Panasonic DMC-FZ28, and several others)

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 11:08 pm
From: John Navas

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 17:55:55 -0700, John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net>
wrote in <h1p9a0$l1n$1@news.eternal-september.org>:

>John Navas wrote:
>> On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 19:41:49 -0400, Alan Browne
>
>
>>> All we say is we don't waste money, effort and tears on AV software.
>>> [SNIP]
>>
>> Mac fans campaign incessantly for Macs and against PCs.
>> Mac advocacy is one of the biggest noise sources on the Internet.
>
>That's rubbish, John.
>
>However........
>
>By your protestations, I can see you really, deep down, desire a nice
>new Mac. You'll deny it of course, just as Alan did until I talked him
>into buying one. (He'll deny that, too!) :-)

That's childish, John.

--
Best regards,
John (Panasonic DMC-FZ28, and several others)

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Another falls victim to the horror of P&S's
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/927bee75964a4ce4?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 10:50 pm
From: Rich

On Jun 22, 12:02 pm, John Navas <spamfilt...@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 04:03:04 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3...@gmail.com>
> wrote in
> <e80d5fc9-9a56-4f7d-80f4-8d0ba06df...@j12g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>:
>
> >Heavy evident noise at 100 ISO.
>
> >http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1033&message=32138366
>
> Another lame troll.
> Image is 100% crop from a poorly focused shot at reduced resolution and
> quality, possibly with a dirty lens.
> I could easily manufacture similar dSLR images.
> Get a life and give it a rest.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> John (Panasonic DMC-FZ28, and several others)

And focus effects noise...how? Not just noise, not nice, grainy film-
like noise, but ugly, blobby crappy processor noise.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 10:52 pm
From: Rich

On Jun 22, 5:16 pm, ribbit <rib...@news.group> wrote:
> RichA wrote:
> > Heavy evident noise at 100 ISO.
>
> >http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1033&message=32138366
>
> The photo he is using for a supposed example was substantially under
> exposed and had the virtual ISO lifted so something like ISO 1200 by
> bring up the levels to 'look' like a correctly exposed image.

"Something like?" 3.5 stops? Rubbish.

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

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

[fnftwo] Fw: You little rat!...

Subject: Fw: You little rat!...

Probably realised the little creature wasn't going to eat much LOL!!!

You dirty rat: Daring rodent shows puzzled leopard exactly who's boss by stealing its lunch
This mouse diced with death when it tucked into the lunch of a hungry leopard.

Seemingly unaware of the beast towering over it, the mischievous rodent grabbed at scraps of meat thrown into the African Leopard's enclosure.

But instead of pouncing on the the tiny intruder the 12-year-old leopard, called Sheena, appeared to be afraid of the daring mouse and kept her distance.

At one stage she tried to nudge the mouse away with her nose, but the determined little chap carried on chewing away until he was full...

cid:3327046766_654728
Excuse me? A perturbed Sheena the leopard looks on as a cheeky mouse nibbles her food at the Santago Rare Leopard Project in Hertfordshire...

The extraordinary scene was captured by photography student Casey Gutteridge at the Santago Rare Leopard Project in Hertfordshire.

The 19-year-old, from Potters Bar, Hertfordshire, who was photographing the leopard for a course project, was astounded by the mouse's behaviour.

He said: 'I have no idea where the mouse came from - he just appeared in the enclosure after the keeper had dropped in the meat for the leopard.

'He didn't take any notice of the leopard, just went straight over to the meat and started feeding himself.

'But the leopard was pretty surprised - she bent down and sniffed the mouse and flinched a bit like she was scared.

'In the meantime the mouse just carried on eating like nothing had happened.

cid:3327046766_679389
...but even a gentle shove does not deter the little creature from getting his fill...

'It was amazing, even the keeper who had thrown the meat into the enclosure was shocked - he said he'd never seen anything like it before.'

Project owner Jackie James added: 'It was so funny to see - Sheena batted the mouse a couple of times to try to get it away from her food.

'But the determined little thing took no notice and just carried on.'

Sheena was brought in to the Santago Rare Leopard Project from a UK zoo when she was just four months old.

She is one of 14 big cats in the private collection started by Jackie's late husband Peter in 1989.

The African Leopard can be found in the continent's forests, grasslands, savannas, and rainforests...

cid:3327046766_634809
...so the mouse continued to eat the leopard's lunch and show the leopard who was boss

The leopard is the most elusive of all the big cats. They are solitary animals and are primarily nocturnal - preferring to hunt at night.

The species is also a strong climber and is capable of killing prey larger than itself.

The leopard's prey ranges from fish, reptiles and birds to smaller mammals such as hares and monkeys.

A stealthy hunter, leopard's are known to to stalk close to their prey and run a relatively short distance on the hunt.

They kill by grabbing their prey by the throat and biting down with their jaws and store their larger kills in trees - out of the reach of prowling lions and hyenas.

[PSP-Snags] Re: Gif Piggies

Thank you these are cute,from Agnes

2009/6/22 Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ JFanny Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ <jfanny67@gmail.com>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
PSP-Snags Google group: http://groups.google.com/group/PSP-Snags
Send to: psp-snags@googlegroups.com
Uunsubscribe: psp-snags-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

http://groups.google.com/group/Cartoon-PSP * http://groups.google.com/group/Disney-Tubes * http://groups.google.com/group/PSP-Snags-Adult * http://I-Love-PSP.com * http://PSP.I-Love-Disney.com * http://I-Love-Cartoons.com * http://I-Love-Disney.com * http://KTimothy.com * http://Disney-Stationary.com * http://Disney-Kingdom.com * http://Disney-Clipart.com * http://twitter.com/ktimothy *

This is a private email and is covered by TITLE 18, PART I, CHAPTER 47, Sec. 1030 and Internet Privacy Law. Sharing done, within this group, is for personal use only - NOT FOR PROFIT
NO COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT IS INTENDED.
Group owner is not responsible for the sends/opinions of its members
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

[fnftwo] NICOLE - HUGZ, LYNN

[PSP-Snags] Re: / Kit messagerie Papa (anglais)

Yeah, that's pretty much what I meant... after going through DSS training to be able to foster and adopt troubled kids, it could be I'm looking for creeps everywhere, but we just saw/heard/learned too much!

On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 12:02 AM, cherokeecandy <can@cherokeecandy.com> wrote:

I thought it was a bit insinuating thus disgusting... but thats me... always looking out for the kids

----- Original Message -----
From: Kirsten aka mcgaelicgal

To: PSP-Snags@googlegroups.com

Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 7:50 PM

Subject: [PSP-Snags] Re: / Kit messagerie Papa (anglais)

Ummmm, is it just me, or are these kinda creepy?? Especially the "Yeessss" one!! ;-p

[PSP-Snags] Re: / Kit messagerie Papa (anglais)

I thought it was a bit insinuating thus disgusting... but thats me... always looking out for the kids

----- Original Message -----

From: Kirsten aka mcgaelicgal

To: PSP-Snags@googlegroups.com

Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 7:50 PM

Subject: [PSP-Snags] Re: / Kit messagerie Papa (anglais)

Ummmm, is it just me, or are these kinda creepy?? Especially the "Yeessss" one!! ;-p

[PSP-Snags] ISO Microferk_Joy & EKipler_Got Ants

I down loaded the kit Microferk_Joy & EKipler_Got Ants
but all my zips were corupted was wondering if anyone that got it would resend it to me?
Debbie
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
PSP-Snags Google group: http://groups.google.com/group/PSP-Snags
Send to: psp-snags@googlegroups.com
Uunsubscribe: psp-snags-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

[PSP-Snags] BON MARDI GROS BISOUSSSSSS

Papier offert par Tina

[PSP-Snags] ISO Microferk_Joy & EKipler_Got Ants

I down loaded the kit Microferk_Joy & EKipler_Got Ants
but all my zips were corupted was wondering if anyone that got it would resend it to me?
Debbie

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
PSP-Snags Google group: http://groups.google.com/group/PSP-Snags
Send to: psp-snags@googlegroups.com
Uunsubscribe: psp-snags-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

rec.photo.digital - 25 new messages in 7 topics - digest

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

rec.photo.digital@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* Anything for the Perfect Shot - 15 messages, 6 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/060da06a542937ca?hl=en
* Why Non-Correlating Print, Negative and CMOS Sizes? - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/a72842738be30c46?hl=en
* Boycott Panasonic cameras - forced proprietary battery use in firmware - 3
messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/79623194af1b296b?hl=en
* Scanning Resolution - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/7e30b92d301d28d9?hl=en
* Cutting and pasting a person to another photo - light/colour problem - 1
messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/adfb4da8762e7805?hl=en
* The sponge tool in Photoshop - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/e4a3f1b66a6eaa4a?hl=en
* Running OS X on my PC!!! - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/bb50fbf2b3ff2f37?hl=en

== 1 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 5:01 pm
From: Savageduck

On 2009-06-22 16:32:58 -0700, John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> said:

> On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 11:58:42 -0700, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote
> in <220620091158423343%nospam@nospam.invalid>:
>
>> In article <m5kv359pb7g060090hs07pf2a3h4btrdqs@4ax.com>, John Navas
>> <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> Mac users are so defensive. I guess they have to be.
>>>>
>>>> ignoring your insult, it's the constant onslaught of detractors who
>>>> claim things that are simply not true over which mac users comment.
>>>
>>> Just an observation and a guess.
>>> A wee bit defensive, are we? ;)
>>
>> not really. a better question is why people care so much about what
>> other people buy and enjoy and insist on proving why that product is
>> flawed in some way, usually with bogus claims.
>
> Good question. Let us know what Mac fans say about that.

I think most of us would say we were quite happy with our Macs, and we
view most of the derision of Macs as attempts to instill FUD. We also
choose not to deride the bliss you experience in the Wintel World, but
present OSX and the Mac as the more pleasant experience.

Hey! To each his own.
It is not for me to evangelize one OS over another, just as we all know
the P&S/DSLR and brand arguments are for the most part posturing over
individual choices.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

== 2 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 5:14 pm
From: John Navas

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 16:57:28 -0700, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote
in <220620091657280123%nospam@nospam.invalid>:

>In article <615045lmc8iml1ncoq5pomk4ldlfb3so9d@4ax.com>, John Navas
><spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> You don't go outside in urban areas? ;)
>
>frequently. what does that have to do with anything?

No ads where you live? How far to the nearest town? ;)

>> In other words, you define away the misleading stuff. ;)
>
>i was referring to buying a product and it being what it says it is on
>the label. in fact, there are laws regulating that.

We're talking marketing here, not labels.

>i expect that the
>food i buy is healthy and not rancid. if i go into a restaurant, i
>expect that it's safe to eat there and that i won't be visiting the
>hospital for food poisoning or that a cockroach will crawl out from
>under my sandwich.

Laws here in the USA are pretty lax, and enforcement even laxer (largely
due to budget issues), so you'd be well advised here to scale back those
expectations here.

Expert assessment is that food poisoning is way underreported and quite
common. I got food poisoning myself this weekend, which was fortunately
relatively mild, probably from some undercooked meat.

>as for ads, they imply quite a bit but they cannot lie.

Of course they can, here in the USA at least, thanks to Pres Ronnie.

--
Best regards,
John (Panasonic DMC-FZ28, and several others)

== 3 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 5:15 pm
From: OMG

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 17:01:22 -0700, Savageduck
<savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

>Hey! To each his own.
>It is not for me to evangelize one OS over another, just as we all _NOW_ know
>the P&S/DSLR and brand arguments are for the most part posturing over
>individual choices.
>

Caps inserted word (above) to emphasize your recent kindergarten-level
educational experience.

Was like pulling rotted teeth that weren't worth it to try to save a rotted
jaw originally infected by a rotted brain.

== 4 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 5:16 pm
From: John Navas

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 19:41:49 -0400, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote in
<fPCdnb5_ZZkgi93XnZ2dnUVZ_tGdnZ2d@giganews.com>:

>On 22-06-09 19:32, John Navas wrote:
>> On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 11:58:42 -0700, nospam<nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote
>> in<220620091158423343%nospam@nospam.invalid>:
>>
>>> In article<m5kv359pb7g060090hs07pf2a3h4btrdqs@4ax.com>, John Navas
>>> <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> Mac users are so defensive. I guess they have to be.
>>>>> ignoring your insult, it's the constant onslaught of detractors who
>>>>> claim things that are simply not true over which mac users comment.
>>>> Just an observation and a guess.
>>>> A wee bit defensive, are we? ;)
>>> not really. a better question is why people care so much about what
>>> other people buy and enjoy and insist on proving why that product is
>>> flawed in some way, usually with bogus claims.
>>
>> Good question. Let us know what Mac fans say about that.
>
>All we say is we don't waste money, effort and tears on AV software.
>[SNIP]

Mac fans campaign incessantly for Macs and against PCs.
Mac advocacy is one of the biggest noise sources on the Internet.

--
Best regards,
John (Panasonic DMC-FZ28, and several others)

== 5 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 5:17 pm
From: John Navas

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 16:57:30 -0700, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote
in <220620091657300265%nospam@nospam.invalid>:

>In article <d45045p8fuop6q3m3imkbt1d1099rgbmfk@4ax.com>, John Navas
><spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> >not really. a better question is why people care so much about what
>> >other people buy and enjoy and insist on proving why that product is
>> >flawed in some way, usually with bogus claims.
>>
>> Good question. Let us know what Mac fans say about that.
>
>ignoring your pejorative 'mac fan' remark,

Even for you that's over the top -- LOL!

--
Best regards,
John (Panasonic DMC-FZ28, and several others)

== 6 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 5:23 pm
From: John Navas

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 19:46:25 -0400, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote in
<f8-dnQrw_71Mit3XnZ2dnUVZ_oSdnZ2d@giganews.com>:

>On 22-06-09 19:35, John Navas wrote:
>> On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 17:07:03 -0400, Alan Browne
>> <alan.browne@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote in
>> <nsydnQibPujqb6LXnZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d@giganews.com>:
>>
>>> On 22-06-09 11:36, John Navas wrote:
>>>
>>>> Mac users are so defensive. I guess they have to be.
>>> Hardly. Just trying to bring the ignorant out of the dark.
>>> Perhaps the theme song for the Mac should be "Amazing Grace".
>>
>> Ah yes, crusaders and missionaries. Electronic Moral Majority.
>> Presuming to tell others what's good for them. How arrogant.
>
>Anyone with a gentle humanity and spirit sees that hymn transcending
>religious doctrine.

Hymns are proselytizing of delusion.

>Go Mac and you never go back ...

Been there; done that. I'm platform neutral, using the best tool for
the job at hand without regard to loyalty, Windows, UNIX,
UNIX-workalike, Mac, RTOS, etc.

The most effective way to approach computing is to pick the best
software for the job, then the best platform (hardware and OS) for that
application software.

Starting with the OS is bassackwards.

--
Best regards,
John (Panasonic DMC-FZ28, and several others)

== 7 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 5:40 pm
From: nospam

In article <j97045hid42tk0pkf0ngn86d5mvjn2m307@4ax.com>, John Navas
<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> >i was referring to buying a product and it being what it says it is on
> >the label. in fact, there are laws regulating that.
>
> We're talking marketing here, not labels.

'we' ? i was talking labels, since the post to which i responded was
about software that wasn't what it claimed to be, installing malware
rather than what the label said it was.

assuming one gets their software from legitimate sources, the risk of
malware is essentially zero. on the other hand if one procures it from
warez servers, then the risk is quite a bit higher. and as far as ads
go, i've yet to see malware take out an ad.

== 8 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 5:40 pm
From: nospam

In article <1n70451aukuq6n5reph76pknqr9htohv65@4ax.com>, John Navas
<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> >> Good question. Let us know what Mac fans say about that.
> >
> >ignoring your pejorative 'mac fan' remark,
>
> Even for you that's over the top -- LOL!

you can dish it out but can't take it.

== 9 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 5:40 pm
From: nospam

In article <8k7045tfhsjb8clcgupemq7rdpcqvloavd@4ax.com>, John Navas
<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> Mac fans campaign incessantly for Macs and against PCs.
> Mac advocacy is one of the biggest noise sources on the Internet.

nonsense. it's mainly windows trolls who instigate the flame fests. i
rarely see mac users visit windows forums and berate the products and
users, but i often see windows users do exactly that, and not just on
usenet but on other venues too.

== 10 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 5:51 pm
From: John Navas

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 17:40:55 -0700, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote
in <220620091740556531%nospam@nospam.invalid>:

>In article <j97045hid42tk0pkf0ngn86d5mvjn2m307@4ax.com>, John Navas
><spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> >i was referring to buying a product and it being what it says it is on
>> >the label. in fact, there are laws regulating that.
>>
>> We're talking marketing here, not labels.
>
>'we' ? i was talking labels, since the post to which i responded was
>about software that wasn't what it claimed to be, installing malware
>rather than what the label said it was.

Nice try, but no cigar.

>assuming one gets their software from legitimate sources, the risk of
>malware is essentially zero. ...

That's both dead wrong and dangerously naive -- there have been quite a
few cases of malware-infected software from legitimate sources.

--
Best regards,
John (Panasonic DMC-FZ28, and several others)

== 11 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 5:51 pm
From: John Navas

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 17:40:56 -0700, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote
in <220620091740566638%nospam@nospam.invalid>:

>In article <1n70451aukuq6n5reph76pknqr9htohv65@4ax.com>, John Navas
><spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> >> Good question. Let us know what Mac fans say about that.
>> >
>> >ignoring your pejorative 'mac fan' remark,
>>
>> Even for you that's over the top -- LOL!
>
>you can dish it out but can't take it.

Not even a nice try.

--
Best regards,
John (Panasonic DMC-FZ28, and several others)

== 12 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 5:55 pm
From: John McWilliams

John Navas wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 19:41:49 -0400, Alan Browne

>> All we say is we don't waste money, effort and tears on AV software.
>> [SNIP]
>
> Mac fans campaign incessantly for Macs and against PCs.
> Mac advocacy is one of the biggest noise sources on the Internet.

That's rubbish, John.

However........

By your protestations, I can see you really, deep down, desire a nice
new Mac. You'll deny it of course, just as Alan did until I talked him
into buying one. (He'll deny that, too!) :-)

--
John McWilliams

== 13 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 6:03 pm
From: Savageduck

On 2009-06-22 17:15:23 -0700, OMG <nah@hesfakingit.com> said:

> On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 17:01:22 -0700, Savageduck
> <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>
>> <---------------------------------------------------->

You are a toxic troll aren't you?

--
Regards,

Savageduck

== 14 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 6:05 pm
From: nospam

In article <bl9045ts540e69juvtjvjuitkj2l0amee2@4ax.com>, John Navas
<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> >assuming one gets their software from legitimate sources, the risk of
> >malware is essentially zero. ...
>
> That's both dead wrong and dangerously naive -- there have been quite a
> few cases of malware-infected software from legitimate sources.

none with mac os x. there was a cd in a macworld magazine like 15 or
20 years ago that had a virus. apple shipped some ipods with windows
malware though.

== 15 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 6:29 pm
From: Semi-Yawning

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 17:14:53 -0700, John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com>
wrote:

>On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 16:57:28 -0700, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote
>in <220620091657280123%nospam@nospam.invalid>:
>
>>In article <615045lmc8iml1ncoq5pomk4ldlfb3so9d@4ax.com>, John Navas
>><spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>>> You don't go outside in urban areas? ;)
>>
>>frequently. what does that have to do with anything?
>
>No ads where you live? How far to the nearest town? ;)
>
>>> In other words, you define away the misleading stuff. ;)
>>
>>i was referring to buying a product and it being what it says it is on
>>the label. in fact, there are laws regulating that.
>
>We're talking marketing here, not labels.
>
>>i expect that the
>>food i buy is healthy and not rancid. if i go into a restaurant, i
>>expect that it's safe to eat there and that i won't be visiting the
>>hospital for food poisoning or that a cockroach will crawl out from
>>under my sandwich.
>
>Laws here in the USA are pretty lax, and enforcement even laxer (largely
>due to budget issues), so you'd be well advised here to scale back those
>expectations here.
>
>Expert assessment is that food poisoning is way underreported and quite
>common. I got food poisoning myself this weekend, which was fortunately
>relatively mild, probably from some undercooked meat.

Don't take this personally, just "typing out loud".

"Food Poisoning" is the sign of a really weak body. Did you know that E.
coli is a naturally occurring bacterium in your own gut? That's where it
originated and why it is even named E. coli. (hint: coli = colon, used to
stain samples of that strain in high-school bio-lab long ago, where we
learned of its totally SAFE origin) Yet they spin that into some media
scare regularly just to sell shares, and you all fall for it. The weakest
of you succumbing to the suggestion, mostly mentally implanted into
children by their paranoid and amazingly stupid parents. I guess there's a
reason that their genetics shouldn't survive.

Oh NO! Everyone on earth is going to die from the new Avian Influenza or
Swine Flu!

Yeah?!? Where'd those go to? Where PIGS FLY I guess! You paranoid
media-controlled morons.

I regularly drink out of cloudy streams and lakes just like any other
critter in the wild will do. As a kid I never got sick from accidentally
gulping green-scummy lake-waters while swimming. I keep my immune system
in-step with whatever earth plans to dish out, just as all animals should
and do. Though, I do take issue around beaver dams. Giardia can be a bitch.
I just paddle my kayak or canoe further out in the lake or stream away from
their beaver housing complexes and scoop up water in my leather hat,
drinking it straight, no energy wasting boiling needed. For some reason my
immune system hasn't become immune to Giardia. Though I haven't tested this
recently. Wish my immune system would overcome that, then I wouldn't have
to waste extra paddling time. After all, if beavers can do it I should be
able to. What are they doing that I'm not? Not fair. Maybe I need to chew
on more inner-bark on occasion.

Occasionally, very rarely, I might get an upset tummy from some
food-product that I've tried to store too long. But did you know that
yogurt is still good 1.5 years later? Amazed the shit out of me the time I
tried some which I found, some date-labeled homemade stuff that I found in
the back of the fridge one winter when I was snowed-in with no foods for 3
months. (Jars of molasses mixed with hot-water kept my strength up for the
main duration. Like sweetened coffee but without the coffee.) Didn't even
get an upset tummy from that "expired foods" yogurt experiment. Was just as
yummy as originally made. Only had to stir it up a bit so the lumps in it
weren't so yucky, got it as smooth and creamy as when originally made.
Other over-stored food never amounts to anything more than a mildly "upset
tummy" and I still manage to retain all the nutritional value from said
"tainted" foods. Ever eat "aged steaks" where you scrape the various
rainbow-colored layers of fungi and iridescent bacteria layers off of the
months-old meat before cooking it?

Expiration dates? Are you fucking kidding me? LOL!

Humanity's gone SO majorly soft. They are destined to fall prey to their
own "antibiotic" paranoias.

Soon I hope.

I guess this is what allows me to stay out in the wilds so long, with
camera. I just love digital. With compact folding solar-panels and DC-DC
voltage converters, I'm good for many many months. Screw film.

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 5:09 pm
From: John Navas

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 19:48:03 -0400, tony cooper
<tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote in
<ck50455cs2p9vuukpo8n4htn11duele5qp@4ax.com>:

>On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 16:30:04 -0700, John Navas
><spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:

>>For you, but not for me, because the urban context was what I was trying
>>to capture. It would have been all too easy to make yet another pretty
>>flower picture as you suggest. What I wanted instead was a floral
>>moment in a parking lot.
>>
>>There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good
>>photographs. ~Ansel Adams
>>
>>A Ming vase can be well-designed and well-made and is beautiful for that
>>reason alone. I don't think this can be true for photography. Unless
>>there is something a little incomplete and a little strange, it will
>>simply look like a copy of something pretty. We won't take an interest
>>in it. ~John Loengard, "Pictures Under Discussion"
>
>Good Lord. Are we having a Quote Off?

>[SNIP irrelevant quotes]

>If you wanted a floral moment in a parking lot, the correct setting
>was f/16. You have "neither fish nor flesh, nor good red herring".

Nope, sorry, not even a good scramble.

It was just what I wanted and like, whether you like it or not.

--
Best regards,
John (Panasonic DMC-FZ28, and several others)

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Boycott Panasonic cameras - forced proprietary battery use in firmware
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/79623194af1b296b?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 5:31 pm
From: "Peter"

"Charles E Hardwidge" <boing@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:qWU%l.46268$OO7.34830@text.news.virginmedia.com...
> "Peter" <peternew@nospamoptonline.net> wrote in message
> news:4a401975$0$8672$8f2e0ebb@news.shared-secrets.com...
>> "abo mahab" <imanway3333@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:18faa503-14f9-4bd7-abb2-17240dd23c82@k15g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
>>>Justice to all Mankind, Even Those Who Make an Enemy of Islam
>>>I hope you don't mind receiving my letter. It is short but full of
>>>information.
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> I certainly do mind, very much.
>>
>> Your letter has what? to do with photography. No one here, except some
>> that may know me from another group, knows my religious and political
>> beliefs. Not that I'm bashful, just that it's grossly inappropriate in a
>> group where try to share some things about photography and art.
>
> It's probably just a spambot.
>
> I'm happy discussing Zen and politics alongside photography but it's
> really
> a background thing. Indeed, as photography involve insight and
> self-empowerment (to use that ghastly overused phrase) photography, is
> mostly, enough on its own with confusing the issue.
>

Those who know me consider me to be a very spiritual person. Certainly my
photography is influenced by Zen. It is also influenced by my current mood
which in turn may very well be influenced by the antics of the politicians
in power.

Call me a stick in the mud, if you will, but I believe that political and
religious discussions lead to bitterness that may very well inhibit the free
interchange of artistic and technical concepts.

--
Peter
Have you heard about the Buddhist who said to a hot dog vendor, "make me one
with everything."

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 5:46 pm
From: Twibil

On Jun 22, 4:53 pm, "Peter" <peter...@nospamoptonline.net> wrote:
>
> I certainly do mind, very much.
>
> Your letter has what? to do with photography. No one here, except some that
> may know me from another group, knows my religious and political beliefs.
> Not that I'm bashful, just that it's grossly inappropriate in a group where
> try to share some things about photography and art.

But the fact that he'd hit newgroups with his religious spam
automatically tells you what he is: only fanatics think that their
views are appropriate anywhere and anytime. And you'll never convince
a fanatic -*any* fanatic- that he's not doing you a favor by cross-
posting his trash to your newsgroup.

The concept of "inappropriate" is simply not within his scope.

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 6:00 pm
From: "Charles E Hardwidge"

"Peter" <peternew@nospamoptonline.net> wrote in message
news:4a402282$0$8689$8f2e0ebb@news.shared-secrets.com...
> "Charles E Hardwidge" <boing@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> news:qWU%l.46268$OO7.34830@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>> "Peter" <peternew@nospamoptonline.net> wrote in message
>> news:4a401975$0$8672$8f2e0ebb@news.shared-secrets.com...
>>> "abo mahab" <imanway3333@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:18faa503-14f9-4bd7-abb2-17240dd23c82@k15g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
>>>>Justice to all Mankind, Even Those Who Make an Enemy of Islam
>>>>I hope you don't mind receiving my letter. It is short but full of
>>>>information.
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>> I certainly do mind, very much.
>>>
>>> Your letter has what? to do with photography. No one here, except some
>>> that may know me from another group, knows my religious and political
>>> beliefs. Not that I'm bashful, just that it's grossly inappropriate in a
>>> group where try to share some things about photography and art.
>>
>> It's probably just a spambot.
>>
>> I'm happy discussing Zen and politics alongside photography but it's
>> really a background thing. Indeed, as photography involve insight and
>> self-empowerment (to use that ghastly overused phrase) photography, is
>> mostly, enough on its own with confusing the issue.
>
> Those who know me consider me to be a very spiritual person. Certainly my
> photography is influenced by Zen. It is also influenced by my current mood
> which in turn may very well be influenced by the antics of the politicians
> in power.
>
> Call me a stick in the mud, if you will, but I believe that political and
> religious discussions lead to bitterness that may very well inhibit the
> free interchange of artistic and technical concepts.

Yes, it would be jolly rude to get in the way of the Photoshop and raw
arguments. ;-)

These things can be raised and people probably need the outlet sometime but
I'd agree that they're mostly a side issue unless there's something about
them specifically which can add value to the topic of photography.

Speaking for myself, at the moment, photography is a vehicle for practicing
Zen and drawing out a more personal practical and social focus. But, the
main aim is developing skill and getting the shot.

--
Charles E Hardwidge

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Scanning Resolution
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/7e30b92d301d28d9?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 6:35 pm
From: "Stormin Mormon"

What belongs to the photo? What belongs to the neg?

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"PDM" <pdcm99[deletethisbit]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4a3fd24a$1_2@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...

He's scanning photo's not neg's or transparancies. So how
can he see film
grain?

PDM

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Cutting and pasting a person to another photo - light/colour problem
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/adfb4da8762e7805?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 6:44 pm
From: Brian

"Roy G" <royphot@virgin.net> wrote:

>
>"Brian" <bclark@es.co.nz> wrote in message
>news:9ruu35ludr0mch0f2lfffd65red8pqe030@4ax.com...
>> I'm using Phhotoshop Elements 7 and recently took a photo of a group
>> of people. Because I took the photo I could not be in the group.
>> Someone also took my photo that day. What I'd like to do is cut and
>> paste myself with the group. I've been told that there can be
>> lightning and colour problems when doing this and I want the photo to
>> look natural as if I was standing in the group when the photo was
>> taken.
>> Is there a way to copy the light and colour levels across to the photo
>> of myself from the group photo so that when I cut and paste myself
>> into the group then all the light and colour levels will match?
>> Both photos were taken inside but using different room lights.
>>
>> Regards Brian
>
>It can be done depending on a number of factors.
>
>However what you should have done at the time
>was to use the Delay Timer while the Camera was on a Tripod.
>
>It is always much simpler and better to get it right in the Camera.
>
>Roy G
>
Hi Roy.
The problem with the delay timer is that it can take a photo when you
don't want it to. You have much better control of the photo if you
take it yourself. Also by the time you have setup the tripod someone
has wandered off. But thanks ffor reminding me about the self timer
which has worked a few times for me in the past.

Regards Brian

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 6:48 pm
From: Brian

tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:

>On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 00:55:14 +1200, Brian <bclark@es.co.nz> wrote:
>
>>I'm using photoshop elements 7.
>>I understand what the Dodge and Burn tools do and have used them often
>>to improve a photo but it's not clear what the Sponge tool does.
>>How what the sponge tool be used to improve a photo?
>>
>The sponge tool either increases or decreases the saturation of color
>on a selective basis. You use it on a small area of an image where
>you want the color to be a bit different to emphasize or de-emphasize
>that area. It's not a precise tool.
>
>I've used it where the photograph is of something reflective and the
>reflection picks up the color of the background or something around it
>on the edge or in some small place. I'll desaturate that reflective
>spot. I've never had occasion to use it to increase saturation.
>
>There's no rule that says "Use the sponge here". This kind of change
>can be done in several ways, and you try the various tools to see
>which works best for the individual situation.

Thanks Tony.
I tried the Photoshop Elements help but there is not much information.
How do you switch it from increasing saturation to decreasing
saturation? I can now see that it is useful for toning down bright
colours that catch the eye.

Regards Brian

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 7:51 pm
From: tony cooper

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:48:37 +1200, Brian <bclark@es.co.nz> wrote:

Look at the tool bar at the top where it says "Mode". It can be set
to either saturate or desaturate. The flow (amount of either) can be
set.

Google for "Elements tutorial (tool)" and insert the tool you want to
learn about. Follow the tutorials.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 7:23 pm
From: "Larry Thong"

It's amazing how all these Mac idiots are still trying to hold onto a false
sense of superiority by thinking they have something better. Even the same
band of lame mindless idiots we have in this group think they have something
better. Funny thing is ever since Apple went Intel they now only have cute
and funny Mac vs PC commercials to beacon to the mindless sheep into buying
overpriced hardware. Enough of that.

Anyway, here's the simple way of running OS X on a PC. For Christ's sake
Windows XP kicks ass so there's no reason to run OS X.

<http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/20/macosx_on_a_pc/>

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 22 2009 7:47 pm
From: John McWilliams

Larry Thong wrote:
> It's amazing how all these Mac idiots are still trying to hold onto a false
> sense of superiority by thinking they have something better. Even the same
> band of lame mindless idiots we have in this group think they have
> something
> better. Funny thing is ever since Apple went Intel they now only have cute
> and funny Mac vs PC commercials to beacon to the mindless sheep into buying
> overpriced hardware. Enough of that.
>
> Anyway, here's the simple way of running OS X on a PC. For Christ's sake
> Windows XP kicks ass so there's no reason to run OS X.
>
> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/20/macosx_on_a_pc/>

yeah, that's an intelligent move for folks who are mostly photographers!
From the site:
> Should you try this? As a minimum, I'd recommend the following: You are comfortable editing BIOS settings and knowing the details of your hardware and chipsets. You're not afraid of the Unix command line (not a definite requirement, but many of the troubleshooting guides out there mention it, so you'll probably have to use it at some point). And probably the most important: You have a lot of time.
>
> Preliminary steps
>
> Before trying this upgrade, you'll need to do some prep work.
>
> Know your hardware. There is no automatic hardware detection in this install. You will have to specify in detail your PC hardware configuration, including video card, amount of video memory, network card, CPU, sound card and motherboard chipset. Windows users can find this information in the Device Manager or by running msinfo32.exe. Linux users should run lspci and lsdev. Print this out and set it aside.
> Check the hardware compatibility list on the OSx86 wiki for known issues with your configuration. Take this with a grain of salt, as there are no guarantees your hardware will be supported. As the wiki says, "We want to keep it as accurate as possible, but please, do not entirely rely on this list when buying hardware."
> Download the Kalyway 10.5.2 ISO from your favorite torrent site and burn it on a DVD.
> Backup your data. You will be running disk partitioning software to create a Mac OS X partition, and the installer will be overwriting both that partition and the MBR of your drive.
> Choose a drive and create a partition for Mac OS X. The various OS X installation guides out there really dwell on disk partitioning. There are step by step guides for using Windows Disk Manager, diskpart, Partition Magic, and the Gparted live CD, among others. Whichever one you pick, be sure to create a partition at least 9GB. Don't worry about specifying the partition type or formatting it, the OS X installer will take care of that. What it won't do is create the partition, which is why we're doing it here.
> Since the installer will be overwriting the disk's Master Boot Record, any other OS present won't boot unless you restore the previous MBR. By far the easiest way around this problem is to use a separate drive for OS X.
>
> In my case, I'm installing on a new system with two disk drives, so I unplugged the Slackware/Windows drive and plugged the second drive in the primary SATA slot on the motherboard.
>
> If all this talk of partitioning, MBRs and switching drive cables scares you, best to stop now. It gets a lot worse.

Sheesh.

--
lsmft

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

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, June 22, 2009

[PSP-Snags] Siamese Cat

[PSP-Snags] New Alpha by Dorian: Johnny the Pirate

The downloads and all previews You can find here:

http://www.alphasbydorian.pytalhost.com

Click "Misc Alphas 5"

If You have problems with advertisements, test these mirrors:

http://dorian. freewebhostx. com/

http://dorian. sqweebs.com

http://dorian. fh50.com

[PSP-Snags] Black Cat Extras

[PSP-Snags] Boop Extras

rec.photo.digital - 26 new messages in 6 topics - digest

[fnftwo] Fw: You little rat!...

[PSP-Snags] Re: Gif Piggies

[fnftwo] NICOLE - HUGZ, LYNN

[PSP-Snags] Re: / Kit messagerie Papa (anglais)

[PSP-Snags] Re: / Kit messagerie Papa (anglais)

[PSP-Snags] ISO Microferk_Joy & EKipler_Got Ants

[PSP-Snags] BON MARDI GROS BISOUSSSSSS

[PSP-Snags] ISO Microferk_Joy & EKipler_Got Ants

rec.photo.digital - 25 new messages in 7 topics - digest

Live Traffic

Categories

Blog Archive

About Me

Monday, June 22, 2009

The downloads and all previews You can find here:

http://www.alphasbydorian.pytalhost.com

Click "Misc Alphas 5"

If You have problems with advertisements, test these mirrors:

Search

Live Traffic