Sunday, June 28, 2009

rec.photo.digital - 26 new messages in 11 topics - digest

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

rec.photo.digital@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* Dileep's Hungry Heron - 6 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/1b017725f67663d8?hl=en
* ISP ending Usenet service: which free/cheap ones are best? - 3 messages, 3
authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/d3d77142c047e8f0?hl=en
* Is nothing sacred? :) - 5 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/47a7464e2ecdc094?hl=en
* Photomatix & HDR - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/438bde75c5450595?hl=en
* Why Use That POS Photomatix When There's Better Software? - 1 messages, 1
author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/756bc8a732d2cc09?hl=en
* The Shot Seen 'Round the World - 4 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/15107f2ca666bb2e?hl=en
* simple question...maybe - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/25aaf8517adc4c7e?hl=en
* How To Detect Snapshooters from Photographers - 2 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/1415c1c3e6a92134?hl=en
* Running OS X on my PC!!! - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/bb50fbf2b3ff2f37?hl=en
* A newbie request help selecting digital camera - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/4222610fecc12359?hl=en
* Another falls victim to the horror of P&S's - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/927bee75964a4ce4?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Dileep's Hungry Heron
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/1b017725f67663d8?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 6 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 7:37 pm
From: "Matt Clara"

"Calvin T" <ct@spamprevention.net> wrote in message
news:0rhf45tb5ikq93oktub5sftlnr2c37jg9h@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 13:44:38 -0400, ASAAR <caught@22.com> wrote:

Killfiles. Take one and check your blood pressure in a week.

== 2 of 6 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 7:41 pm
From: "Matt Clara"


"Calvin T" <ct@spamprevention.net> wrote in message
news:pq8d451fdh4c2k0hs59u7dh750mr7ap5tn@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 18:19:41 -0400, ASAAR <caught@22.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Wonderful sequence, from Qatar :
>
>>http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1039&message=32237552
>

I know one thing--DPreview's forum format sucks big time.

== 3 of 6 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 9:23 pm
From: Bob Larter


sligoNoSPAMjoe@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 13:39:16 -0400, Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:08:37 -0500, Calvin T <ct@spamprevention.net> wrote:
>> : On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:20:25 -0400, Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM> wrote:
>> :
>> : >On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 18:12:16 -0500, Calvin T <ct@spamprevention.net> wrote:
>> : >: On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 18:19:41 -0400, ASAAR <caught@22.com> wrote:
>> : >:
>> : >: > Wonderful sequence, from Qatar :
> ....
>
>
>> :
>> : That about sums it up.
>> :
>> : Got it now?
>>
>> Yes, I think so. At least I'm confident that I've deduced a couple of tenets
>> of your philosophy:
>> 1. "I'm smart, and the rest of those yokels are stupid."
>> 2. "Never use ten words when 100 will suffice."
>>
>> Bob
>
> I have to totally agree with Bob.

Ditto.

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


== 4 of 6 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 9:23 pm
From: Bob Larter


Robert Coe wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 18:12:16 -0500, Calvin T <ct@spamprevention.net> wrote:
> : On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 18:19:41 -0400, ASAAR <caught@22.com> wrote:
> :
> : > Wonderful sequence, from Qatar :
> :
> : You don't get out much, do you.
> :
> : >
> : >http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1039&message=32237552
> :
> : The poster/photographer there is a moron. I've not seen one heron species
> : yet that didn't fish that way. This allows for plenty of time to set up
> : for the "strike shot". Then you just remain as patient as the heron. Some
> : of the more interesting photos I've taken are where a heron will form a
> : full-circle umbrella with their wings. Makes for some very artistic
> : compositions with the included reflection in mirror-still waters. The fish
> : will look for and are attracted to this shade in warmer climates and waters
> : when in direct sunlight. I am amazed then at how they can hold their
> : outstretched wings so still for so long. I think my most favorite heron
> : shot is where an alligator on the bank was just a yard away from the heron.
> : The heron determined to keep fishing/waiting there, the alligator hoping
> : to steal either fish or heron. It was a tense 20-30 minutes of waiting on
> : my part. The heron won his stance, the alligator too slow to get either
> : when the heron was finally successful. A "keeper" photograph the results.
>
> IOW, "The picture is a piece of crap because I'm not the one who took it."
> Does that about sum it up?

Good summary.

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


== 5 of 6 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 9:26 pm
From: Bob Larter


Calvin T wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 14:25:36 -0500, Calvin T <ct@spamprevention.net> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 12:26:35 -0500, George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6/27/09 6:12 PM, in article pq8d451fdh4c2k0hs59u7dh750mr7ap5tn@4ax.com,
>>> "Calvin T" <ct@spamprevention.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 18:19:41 -0400, ASAAR <caught@22.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Wonderful sequence, from Qatar :
>>>> You don't get out much, do you.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1039&message=32237552
>>>> The poster/photographer there is a moron. I've not seen one heron species
>>>> yet that didn't fish that way. This allows for plenty of time to set up for
>>>> the "strike shot". Then you just remain as patient as the heron. Some of
>>>> the more interesting photos I've taken are where a heron will form a
>>>> full-circle umbrella with their wings. Makes for some very artistic
>>>> compositions with the included reflection in mirror-still waters. The fish
>>>> will look for and are attracted to this shade in warmer climates and waters
>>>> when in direct sunlight. I am amazed then at how they can hold their
>>>> outstretched wings so still for so long. I think my most favorite heron
>>>> shot is where an alligator on the bank was just a yard away from the heron.
>>>> The heron determined to keep fishing/waiting there, the alligator hoping to
>>>> steal either fish or heron. It was a tense 20-30 minutes of waiting on my
>>>> part. The heron won his stance, the alligator too slow to get either when
>>>> the heron was finally successful. A "keeper" photograph the results.
>>>>
>>> Care to share?
>> Paying customers only (more than you're probably worth in total), and
>> that's only if I like you or your values. Quite the limited and privileged
>> audience. You are not among them, I assure you.
>
>
> Oh, what the hell. Let's take pity on these basement-living shut-ins one
> more time this month.
>
> Here's a shot while I was setting up for the long wait, a commercially
> useless one. Long before anything interesting happened. Slight correction,
> this is not a Great Blue Heron (White Phase) as I was remembering it, it's
> a Great Egret. However, they hunt no differently than all herons I've ever
> photographed.
>
>
> http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3344/3669518856_8d7af1185b_o.jpg

"This photo is currently unavailable"

What a surprise...

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


== 6 of 6 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 9:51 pm
From: Eric Stevens


On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 14:26:02 +1000, Bob Larter <bobbylarter@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Calvin T wrote:
>> On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 14:25:36 -0500, Calvin T <ct@spamprevention.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 12:26:35 -0500, George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 6/27/09 6:12 PM, in article pq8d451fdh4c2k0hs59u7dh750mr7ap5tn@4ax.com,
>>>> "Calvin T" <ct@spamprevention.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 18:19:41 -0400, ASAAR <caught@22.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Wonderful sequence, from Qatar :
>>>>> You don't get out much, do you.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1039&message=32237552
>>>>> The poster/photographer there is a moron. I've not seen one heron species
>>>>> yet that didn't fish that way. This allows for plenty of time to set up for
>>>>> the "strike shot". Then you just remain as patient as the heron. Some of
>>>>> the more interesting photos I've taken are where a heron will form a
>>>>> full-circle umbrella with their wings. Makes for some very artistic
>>>>> compositions with the included reflection in mirror-still waters. The fish
>>>>> will look for and are attracted to this shade in warmer climates and waters
>>>>> when in direct sunlight. I am amazed then at how they can hold their
>>>>> outstretched wings so still for so long. I think my most favorite heron
>>>>> shot is where an alligator on the bank was just a yard away from the heron.
>>>>> The heron determined to keep fishing/waiting there, the alligator hoping to
>>>>> steal either fish or heron. It was a tense 20-30 minutes of waiting on my
>>>>> part. The heron won his stance, the alligator too slow to get either when
>>>>> the heron was finally successful. A "keeper" photograph the results.
>>>>>
>>>> Care to share?
>>> Paying customers only (more than you're probably worth in total), and
>>> that's only if I like you or your values. Quite the limited and privileged
>>> audience. You are not among them, I assure you.
>>
>>
>> Oh, what the hell. Let's take pity on these basement-living shut-ins one
>> more time this month.
>>
>> Here's a shot while I was setting up for the long wait, a commercially
>> useless one. Long before anything interesting happened. Slight correction,
>> this is not a Great Blue Heron (White Phase) as I was remembering it, it's
>> a Great Egret. However, they hunt no differently than all herons I've ever
>> photographed.
>>
>>
>> http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3344/3669518856_8d7af1185b_o.jpg
>
>"This photo is currently unavailable"
>
>What a surprise...

I saw it before. I've got it again.

Try again.

Eric Stevens

==============================================================================
TOPIC: ISP ending Usenet service: which free/cheap ones are best?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/d3d77142c047e8f0?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 7:54 pm
From: Blast of Reality


On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 15:47:08 -0700, Miles <mileschapuis@gmail.com> wrote:

>* John Turco wrote, On 6/14/2009 00:51:
>> Miles wrote:
>>> * John Turco wrote, On 6/10/2009 22:28:
>>
>> <heavily edited for brevity>
>>
>>>> PS: Motzarella was suggested to me, by the late "Blinky the Shark." He
>>>> was a regular (and prolific) Usenet contributor, who died on January 31,
>>>> 2009, at the age of 61.
>>>>
>>>> Very tragic, indeed
>>> I was wondering why Blinky has been so quiet. Gee, what a pity as he
>>> was a great contributor to several newsgroups and offered very
>>> friendly and helpful assistance.
>>> Miles
>>
>>
>> Hello, Miles:
>>
>> Yes, shortly after returning to news:rec.photo.digital, about a month ago,
>> I was shocked to learn of his death. (I'd quit checking this newsgroup,
>> sometime in January, 2009.)
>>
>> Blinky the Shark's real name was Lee Rizor (1947-2009), incidentally.
>>
>>
>> Cordially,
>> John Turco <jtur@concentric.net>
>
>
>Guess I (we) could try to send an email to his old address if it can
>be found and perhaps his family will read out condolences and compliments.
>Miles

Do you honestly think that your existence matters to anyone? Soon as you
stop posting on usenet you cease to exist to anyone who reads this nonsense
and it only proves that you have zero importance.

Get a grip.

Watch for the next time that some prolific troll stops posting. See how
often anyone asks, "Hey? What happened to troll-ASSAR? Rich? etc.?" Nobody
ever does. Because their existence really don't matter to anyone. If they
died and some obscure relative (they have no real friends) posted of their
death, it wouldn't effect usenet for more than one post, if lucky.

Catching onto the reality of usenet yet? I figured not.


== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 8:20 pm
From: Woger


On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 21:54:18 -0500, Blast of Reality <bof@bof.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 15:47:08 -0700, Miles <mileschapuis@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>* John Turco wrote, On 6/14/2009 00:51:
>>> Miles wrote:
>>>> * John Turco wrote, On 6/10/2009 22:28:
>>>
>>> <heavily edited for brevity>
>>>
>>>>> PS: Motzarella was suggested to me, by the late "Blinky the Shark." He
>>>>> was a regular (and prolific) Usenet contributor, who died on January 31,
>>>>> 2009, at the age of 61.
>>>>>
>>>>> Very tragic, indeed
>>>> I was wondering why Blinky has been so quiet. Gee, what a pity as he
>>>> was a great contributor to several newsgroups and offered very
>>>> friendly and helpful assistance.
>>>> Miles
>>>
>>>
>>> Hello, Miles:
>>>
>>> Yes, shortly after returning to news:rec.photo.digital, about a month ago,
>>> I was shocked to learn of his death. (I'd quit checking this newsgroup,
>>> sometime in January, 2009.)
>>>
>>> Blinky the Shark's real name was Lee Rizor (1947-2009), incidentally.
>>>
>>>
>>> Cordially,
>>> John Turco <jtur@concentric.net>
>>
>>
>>Guess I (we) could try to send an email to his old address if it can
>>be found and perhaps his family will read out condolences and compliments.
>>Miles
>
>Do you honestly think that your existence matters to anyone? Soon as you
>stop posting on usenet you cease to exist to anyone who reads this nonsense
>and it only proves that you have zero importance.
>
>Get a grip.
>
>Watch for the next time that some prolific troll stops posting. See how
>often anyone asks, "Hey? What happened to troll-ASSAR? Rich? etc.?" Nobody
>ever does. Because their existence really don't matter to anyone. If they
>died and some obscure relative (they have no real friends) posted of their
>death, it wouldn't effect usenet for more than one post, if lucky.
>
>Catching onto the reality of usenet yet? I figured not.
>
>
>

You Mentally Sick bastard, so stop posting here if that is all you can say,
you must be a very lonely person with no friends at all..

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 9:08 pm
From: SMS


AKT wrote:
> My ISP (ATT) just sent this:
>
>> Please note that on or around July 15, 2009, AT&T will no longer be
>> offering access to the Usenet netnews service.
>
> Does anybody know which free / cheap services are best?

Depending on where you are, you might look for a provider that isn't
discontinuing Usenet, rather than looking for free Usenet service.

But check out "https://news.individual.net/".

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Is nothing sacred? :)
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/47a7464e2ecdc094?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 8:39 pm
From: Rich


On Jun 28, 10:25 pm, Robert Coe <b...@1776.COM> wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:38:52 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> : Ebay ad:  see last image
> :
> :http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=300326063462&viewi...
> :
> : Post I did in May:
> :
> :http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?id=14030
>
> That's a nice picture, Rich. Good composition and technically correct. You had
> me fooled; I didn't think you even owned a camera.
>
> Bob

I try to avoid posting images unless they are decent quality or if
it's to illustrate a technical point.


== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 7:13 pm
From: Paul Furman


RichA wrote:
> Ebay ad: see last image
>
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=300326063462&viewitem=&salenotsupported
>
> Post I did in May:
>
> http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?id=14030

He's got the same lens back up for bid without your pic.
I'm guessing you emailed the seller...

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

all google groups messages filtered due to spam


== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 9:16 pm
From: John A.


On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 19:13:15 -0700, Paul Furman <paul-@-edgehill.net>
wrote:

>RichA wrote:
>> Ebay ad: see last image
>>
>> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=300326063462&viewitem=&salenotsupported
>>
>> Post I did in May:
>>
>> http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?id=14030
>
>He's got the same lens back up for bid without your pic.
>I'm guessing you emailed the seller...

Or he lurks here. Or he has a hit tracker on the item that tells him
he's gotten hits referred by Rich's post.


== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 9:52 pm
From: Rich


On Jun 28, 10:13 pm, Paul Furman <pa...@-edgehill.net> wrote:
> RichA wrote:
> > Ebay ad:  see last image
>
> >http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=300326063462&viewi...
>
> > Post I did in May:
>
> >http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?id=14030
>
> He's got the same lens back up for bid without your pic.
> I'm guessing you emailed the seller...
>
> --
> Paul Furmanwww.edgehill.netwww.baynatives.com
>
> all google groups messages filtered due to spam

Maybe I should just have asked for a cut of the final sale, like Ebay?


== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:40 pm
From: ribbit


Robert Coe wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:38:52 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote:
> : Ebay ad: see last image
> :
> : http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=300326063462&viewitem=&salenotsupported
> :
> : Post I did in May:
> :
> : http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?id=14030
>
> That's a nice picture, Rich. Good composition and technically correct. You had
> me fooled; I didn't think you even owned a camera.
>
> Bob

Seriously Bob...
Those who need to continually post links to mundane happy snaps and then
abuse anyone who calls them that... Seem to have fooled many people. It
seems you've fallen for it too. Does that tell you anything about your
ability to judge character?

At what point did you think Rich was not a good or even just a competent
photographer?

I used to post my commercial and non commercial photo and announce them
specifically in these groups once. At about the time a jackass from
Tennessee got his nose out of joint because I told him his 'pics' were
crap... He stole a client's proof album off my web site ...took a few of
my quite average photos (which I always leave in there to pad the size),
altered them and re-posted them trying to ridicule me when he had no
answer to the plain truth - he was posting happy snaps and not very good
ones at that.

I get about 10% junk with my wedding photography. Instead of getting 600
usable frames, I end up with 540... Way more than I need to deliver.

He's lucky to get 10% technically correct and then has to sort out those
he didn't cut heads off and mess up the composure with! ROTFL. I know
because when I downloaded his pbase and AOL sites, looking for images
he'd stolen from me, I got all his crap wedding and family portrait
photos too!

Usenet changed for me about that time. Similar behaviour by a few
zealots probably affected many photographers in much the same way at
about the same time or earlier.

Lisa Horton endured more hostility and disgusting personal attacks than
anyone... She was as good a photographer as Rich. Do you see her posts
any more? For that matter, do you see any of her Photos?

I have no doubt Rich could go head to head with the best of them on
technical images. Don't take the Mickey out of him (or anyone else)just
because he (they) chooses not to.

Take some worldly advise Bob... Those who need to YELL ABOUT THEIR
PHOTOS are the insecure ones who need uneducated posters to keep telling
them how good they are lest they realise how bad they are.


--
D-Mac... Back from the near-dead!
With my survival comes a new ability ...multi-tasking.
I can laugh, cough, sneeze, fart and pee all at the same time!

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Photomatix & HDR
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/438bde75c5450595?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 7:51 pm
From: "BobS"


Constructive critisim is welcomed here

You are not...


==============================================================================
TOPIC: Why Use That POS Photomatix When There's Better Software?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/756bc8a732d2cc09?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:25 pm
From: "PDM"


> Wow! I sure hope you are not in sales.
>Len

He's sales manager for IBM

PDM

==============================================================================
TOPIC: The Shot Seen 'Round the World
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/15107f2ca666bb2e?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:48 pm
From: John Turco


ASAAR wrote:
>
> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 00:30:41 -0500, John Turco wrote:
>
> >> Basket ball is a minority sport outside the USA. It is hardly played in
> >> many countries
> >
> > That's a very dubious claim.
> > . . .
> >
> > Suffice to say, basketball and soccer are both quite popular, worldwide.
>
> If basketball wasn't so popular, worldwide, NBA teams wouldn't
> have signed so many players from so many countries, worldwide.
>
> Even extremely good athletes won't attain the necessary skills
> unless they spend many years developing their skills by playing at a
> relatively high level in a large talent pool. The development of
> that skill requires much more than a backyard basketball net.


Hello, ASAAR:

That same logic applies to Major Leage Baseball, as well. There's not only
the usual influx of Latin Americans, but...more recently, Japanese and other
Asians have been making their individual marks, on our country's erstwhile
"national pastime."


Cordially,
John Turco <jtur@concentric.net>


== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:48 pm
From: John Turco


Savageduck wrote:
>
> On 2009-06-26 00:37:46 -0700, Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> said:

<heavily edited for brevity>

> > I would bet that there is more soccer played in the USA than American
> > Football (or basball or basketball) is played outside the USA.
>
> If any of you have been following the Confederations Cup, you might
> have noticed this Semi-Final result; USA 2 : Spain 0.
> http://www.sportingnews.com/soccer/article/2009-06-24/us-stuns-spain-confederations-cup-semis

<edited>

Hello, Savageduck:

Myriad Spaniards may be crying their eyes out, after reading that score.

Americans, on the other hand, probably want to know one thing: When is
the NFL's upcoming "Hall Of Fame Game" played, and on what TV channel
will it be shown? <g>


Cordially,
John Turco <jtur@concentric.net>


== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:48 pm
From: John Turco


tony cooper wrote:

<heavily edited for brevity>

> Football - the game we call "soccer" in the US - is a very popular
> sport in Europe. It's a great game for people with a limited
> attention span because you really don't have to know what is going on
> on the field. The players just mill around kicking the ball this way
> and that way until someone accidently kicks the ball into one of the
> nets. This often happens once or twice during a complete game.
>
> American football is a game of set plays intended to advance the ball
> in a particular direction. Because of the variety of set plays that
> can be called, this allows for some excitement during the game. In
> European football, the excitement is all concentrated at the end of
> the game when all of the fans exit the stadium though one gate and
> over each other's bodies.


Hello, Tony:

You make a lot of sense, man. :-P


Cordially,
John Turco <jtur@concentric.net>


== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:48 pm
From: John Turco


Chris H wrote:

<edited for brevity>

> I prefer Rugby... it's like American football but for men. I.e. no
> armour and only 3 substitutions. Not separate teams for offence and
> defence.


Hello, Chris:

Oh, so, you think that our beloved, rugged "gridiron" game is some kind
of a "sissy sport," do you? As a matter of fact, "armour" and massive
"substitutions" weren't always staples of American football.

As examples thereof, here are a few links and related excerpts:

Wikepedia - One-platoon system
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-platoon_football>

'The one-platoon system, also known as "iron man football", was a set
of rules in American football that limited player substitutions and
required players to play on both offense and defense. The alternate
system is known simply as the "platoon system" or the "two-platoon"
due to the use of two separate offensive and defensive units. Both
systems have been used at different times in American college football
and the National Football League.'

<edited>

'After the 1964 season, twelve years since the mandate requiring
one-platoon, the NCAA repealed the rules enforcing its use and
allowed an unlimited amount of player substitutions.[3][4] This
allowed, starting with the 1965 season,[5] teams to form separate
offensive and defensive units as well as "special teams" which
would be employed in kicking situations. The reinstatement of the
two-platoon system allowed players to become more specialized by
focusing on a limited number of plays and skills related to their
specific position.[3] By the early 1970s, however, some university
administrators, coaches and others were calling for a return to
the days of one-platoon football.'

----

NFL History - The Start of the Professional Game
<http://www.nflfootballhistory.net/begin.htm>

'After World War II, college teams were allowed free substitution of
players—that is, a player could enter and leave the game an unlimited
number of times, as long as the ball was not in play during the
substitution. This feature of the game led to the modern two-platoon
system, in which one group of 11 players enters the game to play
offense and a second group enters to play defense. The trend toward
platoons crossed over to the professional game.'

----

Wikepedia - Football helmet
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_helmet>

'By the mid 1940s, helmets were finally required in the NFL. They were
still made of leather, but with improved manufacturing techniques had
assumed their more familiar spherical shape. By the 1950s, the
introduction of polymers brought the leather helmet era to an end. The
face mask was also introduced around this time, reducing the number of
broken noses and teeth, but also necessitating new rules prohibiting
opposing players from grabbing the face mask, a dangerous action which
can call for a penalty of 5 or 15 yards, depending on severity and
intention. The Los Angeles Rams were the first NFL team to put logos on
their helmets, and as of 2008 only the Cleveland Browns do not have any
form of primary logo on their helmets.'

----

Wikepedia - College Football
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_football>

'College football increased in popularity through the remainder of the
19th century. It also became increasingly violent. In 1905, President
Theodore Roosevelt threatened to ban the sport following a series of
player deaths from injuries suffered during games. The response to
this was the formation of what became the National Collegiate Athletic
Association, which set rules governing the sport. The rules committee
considered widening the playing field to "open up" the game, but
Harvard Stadium (the first large permanent football stadium) had
recently been built at great expense; it would be rendered useless
by a wider field. The rules committee legalized the forward pass
instead. The first legal pass was thrown by Bradbury Robinson on
September 5, 1906, playing for coach Eddie Cochems, who developed
an early but sophisticated passing offense at St. Louis University.
Another rule change banned "mass momentum" plays (many of which,
like the infamous "flying wedge", were sometimes literally deadly).'


Cordially,
John Turco <jtur@concentric.net>

==============================================================================
TOPIC: simple question...maybe
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/25aaf8517adc4c7e?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:48 pm
From: John Turco


Tzorzakakis Dimitrios wrote:
>
> ? "John Turco" <jtur@concentric.net> ?????? ??? ??????
> news:4A445D21.1C9A54C0@concentric.net...
> > Nicko wrote:
> >>
> >> At what resolution do you save photos that you show people on the web?
> >> Not photos to be used for specific purposes in web pages, but photos to
> >> be posted just to show to people, say, in a personal gallery.
> >>
> >> Or, I guess more specifically, what is the most common resolution that
> >> people (not necessarily photographers, just average people) have their
> >> monitors set at?
> >>
> >> I'm having a hard time deciding what I should use as a default. I have
> >> been using 96ppi, because that's a compromise between 72ppi (way too
> >> coarse) and 120ppi(files too big?), which is the native resolution of my
> >> 19" monitor, but will the larger dimensions of photos annoy people who
> >> are still running monitors at 72ppi on smaller screens? I don't think
> >> that bandwidth is of much of a concern, but correct me if I am wrong
> >> (how many people are actually still using dialup service?).
> >>
> >> Cheers!
> >
> >
> > Hello, Nicko:
> >
> > I'm a dial-up slug, and my Sceptre 24" LCD monitor (model X24WG) is
> > always running at its native resolution of 1920x1200 pixels.
> >
> >
> Hi,
> I have a 2mbps DSL, my 20" Samsung is @1680X1050 which is its native
> resolution. (Widescreen 16:10 or whatever).{Syncmaster 206BW}.


Hello, Tzorzakakis:

Forgot to add that, my Sceptre X24WG is 16:9 (wide screen).


Cordially,
John Turco <jtur@concentric.net>

==============================================================================
TOPIC: How To Detect Snapshooters from Photographers
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/1415c1c3e6a92134?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:48 pm
From: John Turco


Ron Hunter wrote:

<heavily edited for brevity>

> times as much time each day in newsgroups as I currently do.
> I have reached an age where I am very aware of the ticking of the clock,
> and I would rather have my pleasure than spend my seconds of life
> editing newsgroup posts. If you don't like that attitude, by all means
> add me to your 'twit list'. Life is way too short to waste doing
> something you don't need to do, and which gives you no pleasure.


Hello, Ron:

They're "ganging up" on you, old man! <g> Seriously, your lack of editing
skill seems to be the rule (rather than the exception), on Usenet.

Incidentally, >everybody< must be aware of "the ticking of the clock," at
one time or another. Regardless of age, life can end suddenly, due to
accidents, natural disasters, etc.


Cordially,
John Turco <jtur@concentric.net>


== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:49 pm
From: John Turco


RichA wrote:
>
> Plastic? Thermal expansion of plastic is much greater than metal and
> it could very well be why we are seeing focus issues that need "lens
> re-calibration" at service depots or that we see the need for in-
> camera focus fine-tuning. Even cameras and lenses that appear to be
> metal today may have plastic cells holding lenses, components in
> cameras. The cameras are produced in a control temp environment but
> that isn't real life use where temps can vary by 10's of degrees. I
> don't remember all metal AF SLRs needing focus fine-tuning (or having
> that facility) in the film days.


Hello, Rich:

Well, then, why are we seeing so many "posting errors," by >you<?


Cordially,
John Turco <jtur@concentric.net>

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

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:48 pm
From: John Turco


whisky-dave wrote:
>
> "Chris H" <chris@phaedsys.org> wrote in message

<heavily edited for brevity>

> >>The user didnt; remember which fonts, but I was lucky in that the
> >>offending fonts all had creation dates of April 1st 1976.
> >
> > Just look for last modification date.
>
> Well I was suspicious as we didn;t have any PCs in 1976.
> In fact the first PC was about 1981 or so.
> So that made me suspicious and that the fonts might be a virus or Trojan.

<edited>

Hello, Dave:

Uh, there's more that's "suspicious," than just the year 1976; have
another look at the >date<, below:

April 1st - APRIL FOOL'S DAY! :-D


Cordially,
John Turco <jtur@concentric.net>

==============================================================================
TOPIC: A newbie request help selecting digital camera
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/4222610fecc12359?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:48 pm
From: John Turco


ASAAR wrote:
>
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 03:18:55 -0500, John Turco wrote:
>
> > I've nothing against refurbished products, and even prefer them, in
> > many cases. Nonetheless, where DSLR's are concerned, it might be a
> > better idea, to limit purchases to brand-new merchandise.
> >
> > This is due to the fact that such cameras have "focal-plane" shutters,
> > whose "lifetimes" can be relatively short. (50,000 actuations is the
> > norm, for entry-level models.)
>
> You're thinking of "used" cameras, John, not those that have been
> refurbished. I've yet to see a refurb. that shows even a week's
> worth of wear, and the manufacturer's stated shutter lifetimes
> appear to be substantial understatements, at least for Nikon's and
> Canon's shutters. All of the reports I've read of cameras that have
> had to have their shutters replaced, usually "pro" models, have been
> after they were used for several times more shots than you'd have
> expected, between 400,00 and 500,000. Here are two recent threads
> you may find interesting. The first has several reports of advanced
> shutter life (Nikon & Canon). The second has detailed photos of the
> just replaced Nikon shutter mentioned in the first thread :
>
> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1000&message=31894999
>
> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1021&message=32099700


Hello, ASAAR:

Okay, that's good news, for my "entry-level" Pentax K100D -- it only has
1,212 shutter actuations, at the moment. <g>


Cordially,
John Turco <jtur@concentric.net>

==============================================================================
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 1 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:49 pm
From: John Turco


Rich wrote:
>
> 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.


Hello, Rich:

Hmmm..."rubbish," you say? You should be an expert on that particular
subject -- as you haul so much of it around, during your "day job," as
one of Canada's finest "sanitation engineers." ;-)


Cordially,
John Turco <jtur@concentric.net>


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

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

[PSP-Snags] Ants ss

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

[PSP-Snags] Cans... Bionic Bird


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

rec.photo.digital - 25 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:

* Why Use That POS Photomatix When There's Better Software? - 7 messages, 4
authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/756bc8a732d2cc09?hl=en
* Photomatix & HDR (REDUX) - 11 messages, 7 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/438bde75c5450595?hl=en
* Photo of Pyrrhopterus - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/8176eb8ffb060d4d?hl=en
* Dileep's Hungry Heron - 3 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/1b017725f67663d8?hl=en
* Proud Performer - 2 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/f5e7547338ad4134?hl=en
* Future of the megapixel race - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/c78a5377356e2e48?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Why Use That POS Photomatix When There's Better Software?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/756bc8a732d2cc09?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 9:27 am
From: Savageduck


On 2009-06-28 09:17:18 -0700, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> said:

> On 28-06-09 12:02, Savageduck wrote:
>
>> It uses all the terrible Windows design features which good OSX software
>> avoids. The lack of familiarity with OSX programing by these developers
>> is all too obvious.
>
> Actually I find many OS X specific programs poorly designed, needing
> more mouse moves and clicks than on comparable Windows apps. The
> included OS X calculator's unit conversion method is an absolute bore
> to use compared to a Win app such as PCalc. Apple's own "Pages" and
> "Numbers" (word processing and spreadsheet) programs are atrocious
> designs - so bad I might buy the MS office pack (which I returned last
> year).
>
> Other programs I've recently DL'd designed for Mac OS X have been
> really badly designed.
>
> I really hate in OS X how 'drop down' menus start at the top of the
> primary display, esp. when the application window is in a second
> display.
>
> As an OS, OS X is superior in almost all ways, but the GUI paradigm
> could use many improvements. The notion that a program's menu bar be
> detached to the top of the primary display is one of the worst aspects
> of the Mac OS X GUI IMO.

That may be true for many of the over simplified pieces of OSX SW,
however keeping the discussion on this piece of SW, which undoubtably
has its value, remains a terrible translation from Windows to OSX. The
interface is probably just as awkward to work with on a Windows machine.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

== 2 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 9:49 am
From: And ... THEY'RE OFF!


On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 09:27:04 -0700, Savageduck
<savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

>On 2009-06-28 09:17:18 -0700, Alan Browne
><alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> said:
>
>> On 28-06-09 12:02, Savageduck wrote:
>>
>>> It uses all the terrible Windows design features which good OSX software
>>> avoids. The lack of familiarity with OSX programing by these developers
>>> is all too obvious.
>>
>> Actually I find many OS X specific programs poorly designed, needing
>> more mouse moves and clicks than on comparable Windows apps. The
>> included OS X calculator's unit conversion method is an absolute bore
>> to use compared to a Win app such as PCalc. Apple's own "Pages" and
>> "Numbers" (word processing and spreadsheet) programs are atrocious
>> designs - so bad I might buy the MS office pack (which I returned last
>> year).
>>
>> Other programs I've recently DL'd designed for Mac OS X have been
>> really badly designed.
>>
>> I really hate in OS X how 'drop down' menus start at the top of the
>> primary display, esp. when the application window is in a second
>> display.
>>
>> As an OS, OS X is superior in almost all ways, but the GUI paradigm
>> could use many improvements. The notion that a program's menu bar be
>> detached to the top of the primary display is one of the worst aspects
>> of the Mac OS X GUI IMO.
>
>That may be true for many of the over simplified pieces of OSX SW,
>however keeping the discussion on this piece of SW, which undoubtably
>has its value, remains a terrible translation from Windows to OSX. The
>interface is probably just as awkward to work with on a Windows machine.

And now the pretend-photographers quickly veer off into an area that they
know a little something about, the computers under their fingers. And prove
that they know absolutely nothing about cameras and photography. They stay
away from those scary topics every chance they get.

Do go on proving how you avoid all topics about photography. It's quite
revealing.

== 3 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 9:52 am
From: Savageduck


On 2009-06-28 09:27:04 -0700, Savageduck <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> said:

> On 2009-06-28 09:17:18 -0700, Alan Browne
> <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> said:
>
>> On 28-06-09 12:02, Savageduck wrote:
>>
>>> It uses all the terrible Windows design features which good OSX software
>>> avoids. The lack of familiarity with OSX programing by these developers
>>> is all too obvious.
>>
>> Actually I find many OS X specific programs poorly designed, needing
>> more mouse moves and clicks than on comparable Windows apps. The
>> included OS X calculator's unit conversion method is an absolute bore
>> to use compared to a Win app such as PCalc. Apple's own "Pages" and
>> "Numbers" (word processing and spreadsheet) programs are atrocious
>> designs - so bad I might buy the MS office pack (which I returned last
>> year).
>>
>> Other programs I've recently DL'd designed for Mac OS X have been
>> really badly designed.
>>
>> I really hate in OS X how 'drop down' menus start at the top of the
>> primary display, esp. when the application window is in a second
>> display.
>>
>> As an OS, OS X is superior in almost all ways, but the GUI paradigm
>> could use many improvements. The notion that a program's menu bar be
>> detached to the top of the primary display is one of the worst aspects
>> of the Mac OS X GUI IMO.
>
> That may be true for many of the over simplified pieces of OSX SW,
> however keeping the discussion on this piece of SW, which undoubtably
> has its value, remains a terrible translation from Windows to OSX. The
> interface is probably just as awkward to work with on a Windows machine.

BTW I did actually try the Dynamc Photo HDR trial and the results
aren't too bad, just awkward to work with, and the price isn't too bad
either.
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/HDR-1121-DynamicPhoto-w.jpg


--
Regards,

Savageduck

== 4 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:15 am
From: Robert Spanjaard


On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 09:52:22 -0700, Savageduck wrote:

>> That may be true for many of the over simplified pieces of OSX SW,
>> however keeping the discussion on this piece of SW, which undoubtably
>> has its value, remains a terrible translation from Windows to OSX. The
>> interface is probably just as awkward to work with on a Windows
>> machine.
>
> BTW I did actually try the Dynamc Photo HDR trial and the results aren't
> too bad, just awkward to work with, and the price isn't too bad either.
> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/HDR-1121-DynamicPhoto-w.jpg

I certainly wouldn't pay for it based on this result. Your Photomatix-
versions, although far from perfect, were much better than this one.

--
Regards, Robert http://www.arumes.com


== 5 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:22 am
From: Alan Browne


On 28-06-09 12:52, Savageduck wrote:

> BTW I did actually try the Dynamc Photo HDR trial and the results aren't
> too bad, just awkward to work with, and the price isn't too bad either.
> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/HDR-1121-DynamicPhoto-w.jpg

I think you need to take a walk away from the monitor. They seem to be
getting worse and worse.


== 6 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:23 am
From: Alan Browne


On 28-06-09 12:49, And ... THEY'RE OFF! wrote:

> Do go on proving how you avoid all topics about photography. It's quite
> revealing.

Well you know you're the master so please do show us your fantastic
photography.


== 7 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:36 am
From: Savageduck


On 2009-06-28 10:22:40 -0700, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> said:

> On 28-06-09 12:52, Savageduck wrote:
>
>> BTW I did actually try the Dynamc Photo HDR trial and the results aren't
>> too bad, just awkward to work with, and the price isn't too bad either.
>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/HDR-1121-DynamicPhoto-w.jpg
>
> I think you need to take a walk away from the monitor. They seem to be
> getting worse and worse.

sigh! :-)


--
Regards,

Savageduck


==============================================================================
TOPIC: Photomatix & HDR (REDUX)
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/438bde75c5450595?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 9:43 am
From: Savageduck


On 2009-06-28 09:11:52 -0700, John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> said:

> Savageduck wrote:
>> On 2009-06-27 20:31:58 -0700, Savageduck <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> said:
>>
>>> I have been dabbling with HDR both with CS4 (OK , but not great) &
>>> Photomatix Pro, which seems to give a fair degree of flexibility and
>>> reasonable results.
>>>
>>> Here is an image I have been working with from a recent Yosemite road
>>> trip. 3 exposures -1: 0: +1.
>>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/Yosemite-19-20-21-HDRtm-Dc1w.jpg
>>>
>>> Any suggestions?
>>
>> Thanks to all who have commented, I have taken the suggestions to heart.
>>
>> I have revisited the problem and have made tweeks in Photomatix
>> tonemapping and CS4 to come up with this:
>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/HDR-1119_20_21_tonemapped-w.jpg
>>
>>
> Both represent good work. I find neither quite right, but it may well
> be because I know in advance it's HDR, and so I am subconsciously
> looking for reasons it looks at odds with other photos of similar
> content.
>
> How dark was the mountain face in the 'normal' exposure?

Well just so you can see what I was working with here are the 3
exposures resized only, no PP:
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1119w.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1120w.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1121w.jpg


--
Regards,

Savageduck

== 2 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 9:43 am
From: Yeah - you're pathetic - no doubt about it now.


On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 09:05:45 -0700, Savageduck
<savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

>On 2009-06-27 20:31:58 -0700, Savageduck <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> said:
>
>> I have been dabbling with HDR both with CS4 (OK , but not great) &
>> Photomatix Pro, which seems to give a fair degree of flexibility and
>> reasonable results.
>>
>> Here is an image I have been working with from a recent Yosemite road
>> trip. 3 exposures -1: 0: +1.
>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/Yosemite-19-20-21-HDRtm-Dc1w.jpg
>>
>> Any suggestions?
>
>Thanks to all who have commented, I have taken the suggestions to heart.
>
>I have revisited the problem and have made tweeks in Photomatix
>tonemapping and CS4 to come up with this:
>http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/HDR-1119_20_21_tonemapped-w.jpg

Now tell us again why you're such a lame photographer that you couldn't
have done that with just one properly exposed frame in less than one minute
of editing by using curves? Are you trying to tell me that the dynamic
range of your camera's sensor is even less than that in all my P&S cameras?
Seems to be the case if you need HDR for a simple tourist's snapshot like
this one. You even have the sun to your back so the area of sky in your FOV
is already dark enough to be adequately captured by any camera on earth.

Still a boring composition, there's nothing you can ever do about that. And
it's still crooked. How much more "beginner" can you possibly get. At least
you're learning how to use simple tools like white-balance and not
oversaturate your images so much that it burns out everyone's cones in
their eyes. Again, simple beginner's mistakes unrelated to any HDR work.
Learn the basics of editing and composition before you try something more
complex like HDR. This is like watching someone trying to drive a Harley
with training-wheels on it and they keep falling over every 2 ft. It'd be
funny if it wasn't so pathetically sad.

== 3 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:02 am
From: tony cooper


On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:43:57 -0500, Yeah - you're pathetic - no doubt
about it now. <nocontact@noaddress.com> wrote:

>Now tell us again why you're such a lame photographer that you couldn't
>have done that with just one properly exposed frame in less than one minute
>of editing by using curves?

I have never seen an HDR image that I find to be appealing. It seems
to me that it involves taking a good photograph and making something
harsh and unappealing of it.

That said, I completely understand Savageduck's interest. Part of the
fun of photography is trying new techniques and pushing the envelope.
The process can be an enjoyable learning experience even if the
results are not something better than the original.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida


== 4 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:07 am
From: "Peter"


"Savageduck" <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
news:2009062809054597157-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
> On 2009-06-27 20:31:58 -0700, Savageduck <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>
> said:
>
>> I have been dabbling with HDR both with CS4 (OK , but not great) &
>> Photomatix Pro, which seems to give a fair degree of flexibility and
>> reasonable results.
>>
>> Here is an image I have been working with from a recent Yosemite road
>> trip. 3 exposures -1: 0: +1.
>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/Yosemite-19-20-21-HDRtm-Dc1w.jpg
>>
>> Any suggestions?
>
> Thanks to all who have commented, I have taken the suggestions to heart.
>
> I have revisited the problem and have made tweeks in Photomatix
> tonemapping and CS4 to come up with this:
> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/HDR-1119_20_21_tonemapped-w.jpg
>


I would like somewhere in between.
The second try looks color balanced to me, but under saturated with too
little contrast on the mountain and the clouds just over the mountain look
washed out to me.

If you used layers, try some selective masking.

--
Peter

== 5 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:08 am
From: Savageduck


On 2009-06-28 09:26:43 -0700, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> said:

> On 28-06-09 12:20, Savageduck wrote:
>
>>
>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/HDR-1119_20_21_tonemapped-2w.jpg
>
> Has a 1960's postcard look to it. The whites in the clouds here are
> often flat burned out.
>
> Just shows that scenic photos should be shot in the morning or late
> afternoon, not mid-day. (I know that photography was not your primary
> reason for the trip).

Yup. Timing, timing, timing.

As far as photography not being the primary reason for the trip goes
you are probably more right than wrong. It was a part of the trip.
I was last in Yosemite over 10 years ago. My wife had been ill and that
precluded any lengthy road trips over the last 10 or so years, we had
other travels, but it was limited to some cruises and some trips back
East.
She died 18 months ago and I retired at the end of February, so it was
time for me to start revisiting some of those places.

Zion NP, Kings Canyon-Sequoia NP, Glacier NP, Yellowstone NP, Lake
Louise, more Alaska & more BC next.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

== 6 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:16 am
From: Robert Spanjaard


On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 13:02:45 -0400, tony cooper wrote:

> On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:43:57 -0500, Yeah - you're pathetic - no doubt
> about it now. <nocontact@noaddress.com> wrote:
>
>>Now tell us again why you're such a lame photographer that you couldn't
>>have done that with just one properly exposed frame in less than one
>>minute of editing by using curves?
>
> I have never seen an HDR image that I find to be appealing.

How about these?

http://www.arumes.com/photo/fullsize/CRW_2840.jpg
http://www.arumes.com/photo/fullsize/CRW_3356.jpg

--
Regards, Robert http://www.arumes.com


== 7 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:18 am
From: Paul Furman


Savageduck wrote:
> On 2009-06-28 09:11:52 -0700, John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> said:
>
>> Savageduck wrote:
>>> On 2009-06-27 20:31:58 -0700, Savageduck
>>> <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> said:
>>>
>>>> I have been dabbling with HDR both with CS4 (OK , but not great) &
>>>> Photomatix Pro, which seems to give a fair degree of flexibility and
>>>> reasonable results.
>>>>
>>>> Here is an image I have been working with from a recent Yosemite
>>>> road trip. 3 exposures -1: 0: +1.
>>>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/Yosemite-19-20-21-HDRtm-Dc1w.jpg
>>>>
>>>> Any suggestions?
>>>
>>> Thanks to all who have commented, I have taken the suggestions to heart.
>>>
>>> I have revisited the problem and have made tweeks in Photomatix
>>> tonemapping and CS4 to come up with this:
>>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/HDR-1119_20_21_tonemapped-w.jpg
>>>
>>>
>> Both represent good work. I find neither quite right, but it may well
>> be because I know in advance it's HDR, and so I am subconsciously
>> looking for reasons it looks at odds with other photos of similar
>> content.
>>
>> How dark was the mountain face in the 'normal' exposure?
>
> Well just so you can see what I was working with here are the 3
> exposures resized only, no PP:
> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1119w.jpg
> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1120w.jpg
> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1121w.jpg

I tried overlaying those in PS and used a soft-edged 200-pixel eraser
for a manual graduated neutral density effect and it was pretty easy for
this particular shot. The dark sky frame was only used for a slight
translucent overlay on the clouds, the foreground looks fine in the
overexposed shot.

Then I overlaid your new tonemapped version & tried luminosity & color
mode... I prefer the manual version. It took some fiddling to get them
to align, set mode to difference & free transform using arrow keys to
nudge & a little rotating too.
Here's the layered photoshop file: http://edgehill.net/1/temp/1119w.psd
-hdr
on the top layer, turned off

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

all google groups messages filtered due to spam


== 8 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:25 am
From: Savageduck


On 2009-06-28 10:16:14 -0700, Robert Spanjaard <spamtrap@arumes.com> said:

> On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 13:02:45 -0400, tony cooper wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:43:57 -0500, Yeah - you're pathetic - no doubt
>> about it now. <nocontact@noaddress.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Now tell us again why you're such a lame photographer that you couldn't
>>> have done that with just one properly exposed frame in less than one
>>> minute of editing by using curves?
>>
>> I have never seen an HDR image that I find to be appealing.
>
> How about these?
>
> http://www.arumes.com/photo/fullsize/CRW_2840.jpg
> http://www.arumes.com/photo/fullsize/CRW_3356.jpg

Very nice.

As I said, I am just starting out on the climb up this learning curve,
and I will probably find more suitable subjects for HDR in the future.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

== 9 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:35 am
From: Savageduck


On 2009-06-28 10:18:57 -0700, Paul Furman <paul-@-edgehill.net> said:

> Savageduck wrote:
>> On 2009-06-28 09:11:52 -0700, John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> said:
>>
>>> Savageduck wrote:
>>>> On 2009-06-27 20:31:58 -0700, Savageduck <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> said:
>>>>
>>>>> I have been dabbling with HDR both with CS4 (OK , but not great) &
>>>>> Photomatix Pro, which seems to give a fair degree of flexibility and
>>>>> reasonable results.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here is an image I have been working with from a recent Yosemite road
>>>>> trip. 3 exposures -1: 0: +1.
>>>>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/Yosemite-19-20-21-HDRtm-Dc1w.jpg
>>>>>
>>>>> Any suggestions?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks to all who have commented, I have taken the suggestions to heart.
>>>>
>>>> I have revisited the problem and have made tweeks in Photomatix
>>>> tonemapping and CS4 to come up with this:
>>>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/HDR-1119_20_21_tonemapped-w.jpg
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Both represent good work. I find neither quite right, but it may well
>>> be because I know in advance it's HDR, and so I am subconsciously
>>> looking for reasons it looks at odds with other photos of similar
>>> content.
>>>
>>> How dark was the mountain face in the 'normal' exposure?
>>
>> Well just so you can see what I was working with here are the 3
>> exposures resized only, no PP:
>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1119w.jpg
>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1120w.jpg
>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1121w.jpg
>
> I tried overlaying those in PS and used a soft-edged 200-pixel eraser
> for a manual graduated neutral density effect and it was pretty easy
> for this particular shot. The dark sky frame was only used for a slight
> translucent overlay on the clouds, the foreground looks fine in the
> overexposed shot.
>
> Then I overlaid your new tonemapped version & tried luminosity & color
> mode... I prefer the manual version. It took some fiddling to get them
> to align, set mode to difference & free transform using arrow keys to
> nudge & a little rotating too.
> Here's the layered photoshop file: http://edgehill.net/1/temp/1119w.psd
> -hdr on the top layer, turned off

Thanks for the effort.

Not bad at all.

As I was saying this is all an exercise in solving problem exposures at
the wrong time of day using HDR (when a ND Grad might have been better)
and I (and I hope some others) can only learn from it.

Who cares about the critics if they can't add something constructive
and useful to the debate.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

== 10 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:45 am
From: burt@mindstorm-inc.com (Burt Johnson)


Yeah - you're pathetic - no doubt about it now.
<nocontact@noaddress.com> wrote:

> >Thanks to all who have commented, I have taken the suggestions to heart.
> >
> >I have revisited the problem and have made tweeks in Photomatix
> >tonemapping and CS4 to come up with this:
> >http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/HDR-1119_20_21_tonemapped-w.jpg
>
> Now tell us again why you're such a lame photographer

Now tell us again why you are such a lame excuse for a human being?

Oh well, one more for the killfile...


--
- Burt Johnson
MindStorm, Inc.
http://www.mindstorm-inc.com/software.html


== 11 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:45 am
From: burt@mindstorm-inc.com (Burt Johnson)


Paul Furman <paul-@-edgehill.net> wrote:

>> > Well just so you can see what I was working with here are the 3
> > exposures resized only, no PP:
> > http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1119w.jpg
> > http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1120w.jpg
> > http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1121w.jpg
>
> I tried overlaying those in PS and used a soft-edged 200-pixel eraser
> for a manual graduated neutral density effect and it was pretty easy for
> this particular shot. The dark sky frame was only used for a slight
> translucent overlay on the clouds, the foreground looks fine in the
> overexposed shot.
>
> Then I overlaid your new tonemapped version & tried luminosity & color
> mode... I prefer the manual version. It took some fiddling to get them
> to align, set mode to difference & free transform using arrow keys to
> nudge & a little rotating too.
> Here's the layered photoshop file: http://edgehill.net/1/temp/1119w.psd
> -hdr on the top layer, turned off

Rather nicely done. I think I agree that I prefer your manual result
over the Photomatrix one.

As for the aligning though, Photoshop can do that automatically for you.
Did it not succeed here for some reason?

--
- Burt Johnson
MindStorm, Inc.
http://www.mindstorm-inc.com/software.html

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Photo of Pyrrhopterus
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/8176eb8ffb060d4d?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 9:49 am
From: "Miguel"


"Robert Coe" <bob@1776.COM> escribió en el mensaje
news:3ene459mhc2f7ho6mjk7e6rbhap3drdl3t@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 23:01:05 -0700, Paul Furman <paul-@-edgehill.net>
> wrote:
> : Miguel wrote:
> : > "rwalker" <rwalker@despammed.com> escribió en el mensaje
> : > news:spdd45husapc9krvqg6r4t331iuuhfmt7k@4ax.com...
> : >> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 19:00:11 -0500, terry andersen
> : >> <tandersen@myisp.org> wrote:
> : >>
> : >>> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 18:34:04 -0500, "Miguel"
> : >>> <responderalgrupo@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> : >>>
> : >>>> Hello:
> : >>>>
> : >>>> I have just done this photo about this interesting species:
> : >>>>
> : >>>> http://...
> : >>>>
> : >>>> Thanks to all for your comments about photography.
> : >>> Caged birds and other caged animals are not very interesting, and
> not
> : >>> just because of the ugly cage-bar lines with no chance of any decent
> : >>> composition. Some people even find caged-animal photos to be
> annoying, if
> : >>> not disturbing. Try to get out into their native habitat and
> photograph
> : >>> them in their natural environment. You'd be far better off by
> learning
> : >>> photography with common sparrows on a branch or pigeons in the park
> than
> : >>> you'll ever be by photographing caged birds.
> : >> Or for that matter, if he's tame enough, let him out of the cage and
> : >> try a few shots.
> : >
> : > Yes, It is a good option, as soon as, thoses parrots will have a
> special
> : > processing, but now I only can take photos "as is".
> :
> : Then don't take the photos, or do tell the story...
> :
> : Maybe it's art, calling attention to the cruel caging of animals?
> : The bad composition just makes it more painful.
> :
> : Seriously, do these birds have owners? Much more interesting to shoot
> : them interacting with their owner, otherwise I get an image of abandoned
> : birds in cages going insane. These are very smart, highly social
> creatures.
>
> Intelligent animals get bored easily, and almost anything you do with them
> can
> attract their interest. Remember the National Geo cover of a gorilla,
> Nikon in
> hand, taking a picture of herself in a full-length mirror? Maybe Miguel
> should
> show the parrot the pictures he takes of him. ;^)


That remember me this photo:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmyv/3257895183/in/set-72157613403875084/

By the way, these parrots, and other animals that I am taking photos, they
are registered and protected by The National Institute of Natural Resources
(INRENA).

--
Miguel M. Yalán
http://mmyv.com

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Dileep's Hungry Heron
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/1b017725f67663d8?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:26 am
From: George Kerby

On 6/27/09 6:12 PM, in article pq8d451fdh4c2k0hs59u7dh750mr7ap5tn@4ax.com,
"Calvin T" <ct@spamprevention.net> wrote:

> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 18:19:41 -0400, ASAAR <caught@22.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Wonderful sequence, from Qatar :
>
> You don't get out much, do you.
>
>>
>>
>> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1039&message=32237552
>
> The poster/photographer there is a moron. I've not seen one heron species
> yet that didn't fish that way. This allows for plenty of time to set up for
> the "strike shot". Then you just remain as patient as the heron. Some of
> the more interesting photos I've taken are where a heron will form a
> full-circle umbrella with their wings. Makes for some very artistic
> compositions with the included reflection in mirror-still waters. The fish
> will look for and are attracted to this shade in warmer climates and waters
> when in direct sunlight. I am amazed then at how they can hold their
> outstretched wings so still for so long. I think my most favorite heron
> shot is where an alligator on the bank was just a yard away from the heron.
> The heron determined to keep fishing/waiting there, the alligator hoping to
> steal either fish or heron. It was a tense 20-30 minutes of waiting on my
> part. The heron won his stance, the alligator too slow to get either when
> the heron was finally successful. A "keeper" photograph the results.
>
Care to share?

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:39 am
From: Robert Coe


On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:08:37 -0500, Calvin T <ct@spamprevention.net> wrote:
: On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:20:25 -0400, Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM> wrote:
:
: >On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 18:12:16 -0500, Calvin T <ct@spamprevention.net> wrote:
: >: On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 18:19:41 -0400, ASAAR <caught@22.com> wrote:
: >:
: >: > Wonderful sequence, from Qatar :
: >:
: >: You don't get out much, do you.
: >:
: >: >
: >: >http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1039&message=32237552
: >:
: >: The poster/photographer there is a moron. I've not seen one heron species
: >: yet that didn't fish that way. This allows for plenty of time to set up
: >: for the "strike shot". Then you just remain as patient as the heron. Some
: >: of the more interesting photos I've taken are where a heron will form a
: >: full-circle umbrella with their wings. Makes for some very artistic
: >: compositions with the included reflection in mirror-still waters. The fish
: >: will look for and are attracted to this shade in warmer climates and waters
: >: when in direct sunlight. I am amazed then at how they can hold their
: >: outstretched wings so still for so long. I think my most favorite heron
: >: shot is where an alligator on the bank was just a yard away from the heron.
: >: The heron determined to keep fishing/waiting there, the alligator hoping
: >: to steal either fish or heron. It was a tense 20-30 minutes of waiting on
: >: my part. The heron won his stance, the alligator too slow to get either
: >: when the heron was finally successful. A "keeper" photograph the results.
: >
: >IOW, "The picture is a piece of crap because I'm not the one who took it."
: >Does that about sum it up?
: >
: >Bob
:
: No.
:
: The pictures are, "Eh, there's thousands like that in the world, but the
: creator of them is blowing smoke up everyone's ass because he knows nothing
: about bird behavior. Which makes his claims about being a bird photographer
: a bunch of bullshit. He was probably taking burst-mode snapshots while on
: vacation, as he normally does using his camera in automatic machine-gun
: point and shoot mode, and just happened to get some from a nearby ditch
: that are better than he's done before. Never once has he taken photos of
: any kind of heron before or he'd know better about how they commonly fish.
: All species of herons hunt similarly. His being 'astounded' about their
: photographed behavior says it all. Green-around-the-gills is putting it
: mildly."
:
: That about sums it up.
:
: Got it now?

Yes, I think so. At least I'm confident that I've deduced a couple of tenets
of your philosophy:
1. "I'm smart, and the rest of those yokels are stupid."
2. "Never use ten words when 100 will suffice."

Bob


== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:44 am
From: ASAAR


On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:20:25 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:

> IOW, "The picture is a piece of crap because I'm not the one who took it."
> Does that about sum it up?

Not really. It might be the case if links were ever posted to any
of the supposedly "award winning" shots that she/he/it claims to
have taken.

Its next post showed that it hasn't even the slightest
understanding of what he saw. And it's nice that the troll did go
out of its way to view the images [I trolled the troll! <g>], but
the troll showed that it either hasn't the slightest understanding
of what was seen ("He was probably taking burst-mode snapshots"), or
more likely, it's just here to fabricate and troll.

In fact, the 8 shot sequence (shot with a D300 and 500mm VR f/4
with 1.4 TC) took just a bit over 4 minutes to complete. The
compliments for the shots of the Squacco Heron patiently waiting
for, catching and managing to get a rather large fish down its
gullet were quite a bit more enthusiastic than any I've seen before
on DPR, and the "fantastic"s and "AWESOME!"s seemed much more
sincere than the usual rubber stamp variety. Full EXIFs were also
embedded in the images. Well worth a look for any that missed it :


http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1039&message=32237552


==============================================================================
TOPIC: Proud Performer
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/f5e7547338ad4134?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:43 am
From: George Kerby

On 6/27/09 9:34 PM, in article
de8c9e8c-477c-4843-92a2-b19cfd113ceb@m19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com, "PatM"
<groups@artisticphotography.us> wrote:

> On Jun 27, 12:49 pm, More-Reality <m...@sigh.com> wrote:
>> Congratulations! Your post was voted the most likely to use for my own
>> entertainment! No other offers nor coupons implied. ...... I'd type up the
>> rest of the standard disclaimer but it's about 20 pages long. (honest, it's
>> long, but fun to read)
>>
>> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 08:01:26 GMT, "Dudley Hanks" <dha...@spammers.ca>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.spamlink.ca/gallery/main.php?g2_itemId=130
>>
>>> For GDB supporters, the economic downturn has hurt everybody, including
>>> charities.  Guide Dogs for the Blind needs donations now more than ever.
>>> Last year, the school paid out about $1.3 million in vet costs alone  --  
>>> part of that was for Dima.
>>
>>> http://www.spamlink.com
>>
>> And here I thought that blind people all want to be treated just like
>> everyone else. Live and learn. What's the matter? Aren't they gainfully
>> employed? Did people write all that free accessibility software for your
>> computers for nothing? Can't they afford to have their own dogs trained?
>> Pay for their own vets? I've taken in up to 25 abused, abandoned, or
>> otherwise suffering and neglected dogs at one time, nurturing and feeding
>> all of them until they all finally died of old-age. Quite a few of them
>> died from complications caused by the Lyme-vaccine being pushed at the
>> time, testing it in vets offices before they were going to use it on
>> humans. But nobody saw me asking for donations. In fact the one vet that I
>> finally learned to trust even put together an emergency field-kit that she
>> sold to me for her cost. With cauterizing swabs and injectable anesthetics
>> so I could stitch up gaping wounds, set bones, and do basic emergency tasks
>> on my own. Then I wouldn't have to always be bringing in every new dog to
>> her. With living so far in the country it was difficult to get them to the
>> vet in time, better I should do as much as I can on my own, on-site. The
>> "wholesome" christian farmers in this area treat their dogs worse than
>> livestock. You know why, christians don't believe that animals have souls,
>> they can do anything that they want to them. Things like gashes around legs
>> down to the bone from being tied to fences with thin bare wire. So many
>> kept coming to my door of their own accord when they finally got free. I
>> guess they sensed where to go for help.
>>
>> I think the saddest one of all was Rocket. I woke up one morning before
>> sunrise to see this dog I've never seen before push open the dog-door on
>> the porch. From her jaws she dropped a newborn pup inside. So thin and
>> weak, just rib-bones with sticks for legs -- her, not her pup. She ran off,
>> came back a half-hour later with another one, pushed it through the
>> dog-door and left it inside the porch. Did this 8 more times that long
>> morning. How she found my place originally I'll never know, or how she even
>> knew what that dog-door was for. All of mine were inside still snoring when
>> this started. She was desperate, not even enough energy to produce milk for
>> her pups. With care, they all survived and became plump and happy jumpy
>> dogs. Come to find out weeks later she came from a devout-christian's farm
>> about a mile down the road, they were breeding her to sell expensive
>> hunting-dog pups. She came all that way 10 times, 20 miles total, to save
>> her pups that morning. She's also the one that had the gaping wound around
>> her leg from being tied-up with bare wire. An amazing animal, once owned by
>> disgusting humans that should rot forever in their hell. But they don't,
>> they still think they are the best people on earth! Just ask them! As they
>> drive around in their fancy new refrigerated semi's hauling their goods to
>> market as all their animals suffer a life worse than death. (Yes, I
>> reported them to 3 different agencies. Didn't do much good. I was told to
>> only keep the dogs long enough to bring them back to health then return
>> them to the christian-fuckhead owners. Rocket would occasionally bring some
>> of her pups by a few times that summer to let me know they were doing okay.
>> Or, if abused again, she would stay a few days to a week until the pain was
>> past and the owners decided to come get her again. 'Til one year that I saw
>> none of them anymore. I didn't want to know what happened.)
>>
>> Are you telling me that none of you can even teach your dogs how to stop at
>> the curb? (Let alone stitch up their wounds if they get them.) How about
>> this: You get a bunch of blind people together, with dogs they adopt from
>> the Humane Society. All agree to converge in the local park for a few hours
>> for 5 days a week for a couple of months. Teach your own dogs how to not
>> have them run you into trees. Instant feedback, instant lessons for all,
>> FOR FREE. I'm starting to suspect that the blind should succumb to
>> Darwinism if all they're ever going to do is survive off of donations and
>> the learning and skills of others their whole lives. Sell that camera of
>> yours that you can't ever and never will be able to focus or compose scenes
>> in properly, you'll then be able to afford your vet bills if you're not
>> willing to do something as simple as giving them their shots on your own.
>> [Lightly pinch the skin a few inches in front of their tail, on the top of
>> their back. Form a little pocket of skin. Inject there between your
>> fingers. Easy-peasy. They don't even notice it and still slobber all over
>> your face when done. Go to your local livestock feed-mill for all
>> antibiotics and syringes needed. I've even used the powdered forms for
>> myself, it's the exact same stuff they put in capsules for humans. 100%
>> identical, I've checked. Just relabeled for livestock use but at 1/100th to
>> 1/1000th the cost. The only thing you have to learn is how to convert
>> dosages per lb. of swine or bovine to dog or human weights.]
>>
>> Is this Guide-Dog program just like those organizations that exploit
>> suffering children so they can sit back on the gravy-train raking in all
>> that cash while pretending to do something beneficial? You know, those
>> christians who would actually do better by handing out condoms and RU-486
>> abortion pills so they wouldn't be condemning the next generation to
>> starvation, disease, and abject poverty. All the while the Vatican and its
>> millions of churches smugly sitting on more gold and land-possessions than
>> the wealth in Fort Knox and Wall St. combined, while their fool followers
>> still "donate". But oh no, they are wholesome pro-life christians who don't
>> believe in population control. Every sperm is sacred! Every sperm is good!
>> The only way they're going to overtake the planet with their fool-beliefs
>> is by out-breeding all others. The biggest evil of the last century was
>> that Mother-Fuckin' Theresa. Not only did she perpetuate the suffering for
>> this generation while her church benefited from it, but she also ensured
>> that the suffering of those she "helped" would continue for many more
>> generations to come. All on the premise that her church and belief system
>> should have a reason to exist, with no other goal nor purpose to her
>> efforts.
>>
>> How "saintly" of her, playing Satan's right-hand gal her whole life. What a
>> fine and upstanding missionary. Just like all of them that have come before
>> and after her. Spreading and ensuring the perpetuation of suffering so
>> their church may benefit from it and have a reason to exist. That's some
>> really piss-poor faith if you have to perpetuate and exploit that much
>> suffering so you can maybe one day believe in your chosen god. Dole out the
>> gold contained in the Vatican to everyone and give them back their lands
>> (which the churches originally stole) to grow food on, then there'd be no
>> starvation to exploit. Ooops, then the church wouldn't have a reason to
>> exist. Catch-22, they have to hoard all that wealth and land to give
>> themselves a purpose for being. Got starving children in your area? Tear
>> down that stupid soulless and useless church that you wasted all your time,
>> money and energy in building. Instead use what supplies you can recycle
>> from that ghastly spiritual-monstrosity to plant a community-owned field of
>> food there. Much less effort with vastly greater benefit for many
>> generations to come. What's that? You're too busy praying for food and
>> asking for hand-outs? Starve sucker. Death by Darwinism is too good for
>> you.
>>
>> But I digress, with a real solution instead of some psychotic
>> daddy-in-the-sky nonsense. One of those greedy self-serving and disgusting
>> christian "Save the Children" exploitations was on TV and it got me
>> distracted. Let's get back to the problem at hand.
>>
>> Sure, I could donate to the Guide-Dogs program, but then what would that
>> teach you? How to leach off of society your whole life? Oh wait, you've
>> already learned that, as I see by your next statement.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Also, if you would like to support my passion for art, remember you can
>>> Paypal donations to:  dha...@spamlink.com
>>
>>> All donations very much appreciated.
>>
>> I'm sure they would be appreciated very much. I'm going to start up a
>> passion for hangnails and get donations started for that too. The unsung
>> suffering of society--Hangnails. Do you know how many tasks have been
>> prevented by hangnails? How many accidents have been caused by distracting
>> and painful hangnails? Donate now! We will find a way to wipe-out this
>> scourge of modern society. All donations very much appreciated. Donate
>> before you get your next hangnail. Each donor will receive a small packet
>> of Palmolive Dishwashing Liquid so that you may soak your cuticles in a
>> dilute solution of it. This temporary cure found by "Mother Madge", the
>> Hangnail Saint. She didn't just exploit those with hangnails, she stopped
>> hangnails in their tracks. We may not be able to prevent all hangnails yet,
>> that's what your donations are for. But we can damned sure try to ease the
>> suffering of those that still get them. DONATE NOW! So I too can live off
>> of your donations until I am confronted with pleas of "Hey? What happened
>> to my donations?" Then you get the usual reply about advertising costs,
>> supplies, assistant's paychecks, overhead, start-up fees, private jets to
>> cut down on transportation costs ... you know. Lots of money is ...
>>
>> read more »
>
> I don't know what set you off, dude, but take a pill. A regular
> poster solicited for a charity in a not-too-obnoxious way. It's
> okay. If you don't like it, ignore it. But your reaction was a bit
> overboard.

Some people have a lot of time when in mental confinement.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:46 am
From: George Kerby

On 6/27/09 11:29 PM, in article 6qrd455n6dmv8114ivjsn1ochm5cpkoju4@4ax.com,
"Oh Look! I Found Another MORON" <olifam@ss.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 19:34:37 -0700 (PDT), PatM
> <groups@artisticphotography.us> wrote:
>
>>
>> I don't know what set you off, dude, but take a pill. A regular
>> poster solicited for a charity in a not-too-obnoxious way. It's
>> okay. If you don't like it, ignore it. But your reaction was a bit
>> overboard.
>
> Do not misconstrue your overreaction in trying to defend some lame-assed
> begging spammer who can't even take a decent photo to save his life vs.
> someone who types 130wpm and was having a good ol' time making the useless
> beggar oh-so obvious to all; as their "being set off", "needing a pill", or
> going "overboard". If you have a difficult time understanding words more
> than two syllables long or reading more complex sentence structures of
> length, then don't.
>
> Here, try this:
>
> Jane met Sally. See Spot chase the red ball.
>
> Better for you?
>
> Shove it up your beggar boyfriend's blind talentless ass.
>
>
I would guess the electroshock therapy is not doing much for your anger
management, no?


==============================================================================
TOPIC: Future of the megapixel race
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/c78a5377356e2e48?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Jun 28 2009 10:45 am
From: "Tzorzakakis Dimitrios"

? "nospam" <nospam@nospam.invalid> ?????? ??? ??????
news:270620090310554763%nospam@nospam.invalid...
> In article <4a45c2a7$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, Bob Larter
> <bobbylarter@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Don't get me started on audiophools...
>> <http://grumpyoldarts.com/2009/04/18/audiophools/>
>
> they're a hoot. how about a 770 pound turntable that uses bullet-proof
> wood, for only $150k:
> <http://www.needledoctor.com/Clearaudio-Statement-Turntable>
>
> and don't cheap out on the needle:
> <http://www.needledoctor.com/Clearaudio-Goldfinger-Phono-Cartridge>
My turntable, a Project Debut III, goes for 370 euros, complete with Ortofon
OM5 moving magnet cartridge, and Cambridge Audio 540 P MM preamplifier. If
someone has $ 150,000 and is willing to spend them on this trurntable...but
the chinese have a proverb, that even if you have acres of rice-plantages,
you still eat one helping of rice in your supper....

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


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

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

Template by - Abdul Munir | Daya Earth Blogger Template