8x10 photos

Discussion in '35mm Cameras' started by Mr.Happy, Oct 2, 2005.

  1. Mr.Happy

    DD (Rox) Guest

    Mark knows he is a shill for Canon, but he tries cover this up with a
    multitude of "reasonings" to imply the contrary.

    I know I am a shill for Nikon and I won't try to hide it either. Their
    products are on the whole much better than Canons. I can't be proven
    wrong on this forum, so I must be right.

    Everyone with half a brain should switch to Nikon right now or suffer
    the consequences of falling for the hype known as EOS.

    It's been a trying day...
    DD (Rox), Oct 5, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. Mr.Happy

    Skip M Guest

    You give me too much credit for subtlety.
    Since most of our clients are English speaking, it makes little sense to do
    other wise, doesn't it?
    I did no such thing. I've not offered any of my images as a comparison to
    his, or any others'. The one time, recently that I've put up images was to
    refute a comment that wedding photography was the equivalent of party shots,
    and had no photographic value.
    Well, it's obvious you can't find much to fault, either, or you wouldn't use
    the time honored "if you don't know, I'm certainly not going to tell you!"
    You need to work on your reading comprehension. And I've explained that to
    you several times.
    Skip M, Oct 5, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. Mr.Happy

    Skip M Guest

    By the way, Douglas, none of my images on my website are offered up to trump
    anyone else's photography. They are there because we are proud of them, and
    nothing more. We've never said we were better than anyone else, ever. If
    others choose to think so, or think that we are not as good as other
    photographers, that is fine. We are not competing with them, imagewise.
    Skip M, Oct 5, 2005
  4. Mr.Happy

    Tony Polson Guest

    Why am I not surprised to learn that you have some empathy with
    someone who makes outrageous claims about his photography, but falls
    well short of the mark?

    When it comes to defending the indefensible, it would appear that you
    have a lot in common.

    Tony Polson, Oct 5, 2005
  5. Mr.Happy

    Annika1980 Guest

    I have not looked at the site, but don't need to.
    The main reason that Ali is considered the greatest is because he kept
    telling people so. He said it so many times, people finally started to
    agree with him. Someday you'll come around about me.
    That is wise.
    Not surprising that my name would come up in a discussion about the
    greatest photographers. I'm fatter .... uh, flattered!
    Btw, if you can do it, it ain't braggin, baby!
    Annika1980, Oct 5, 2005
  6. Required a password when I tried it.

    David Littlewood, Oct 5, 2005
  7. Mr.Happy

    Colin D Guest

    Thanks for the info, Doug. My next question was going to be about
    graduated ND filter if the answer was a non-swing lens, but you
    anticipated that nicely. $14,000!!! Boy, it'd be stitching for me!!

    Colin D.
    Colin D, Oct 5, 2005
  8. Mr.Happy

    no_name Guest

    Well, it'd look pretty stupid for the rest of us to sign all our
    messages "Douglas ..."
    no_name, Oct 5, 2005
  9. Mr.Happy

    Colin D Guest


    Maybe you don't realize it, but your manner of expression is apt to rub
    people the wrong way. Your posts read like they were written by a
    know-it-all adolescent schoolboy. Without hearing or seeing the person
    who is 'talking' on a newsgroup, the manner and friendliness (or
    otherwise) of what is written is all there is to go on, unless and until
    the writer and his style are well enough known. As yet, you and your
    style aren't. And finishing your remarks with the snide 'Either that,
    or you were just posting to fill space' will not win you any friends.

    Given that, your initial remarks about sensor size were written as if
    you were talking to somebody who knows nothing at all about photographic
    matters, a completely wrong assumption on your part. Now, you are
    declaring that I was 'puzzled' by Doug's post, simply because 'I asked a
    question'. Say what? FYI, I know about fixed-lens wide-angle cameras,
    and I know about swing-lens cameras, and I know about stitching digital
    images to achieve panoramic results. I have used all of them. I was
    enquiring of Douglas what type of camera this Fuji was. 'Puzzled' I was
    Another arse-hole smart rejoinder, in lieu of something intelligent.
    You aren't doing yourself any favors here.
    Can you not see that I was asking what type of camera this Fuji was, not
    because I don't understand them, but because I wanted to know which. It
    could be either wide-angle or swing-lens. What's wrong with asking
    More ridiculous assumption. I'm beginning to think you see the words,
    but can't understand. My *original* question mentioned the words 'wide
    *You* might remember. Who are the 'we'? Are you royalty? No, I
    thought not. A lesson you might learn the hard way on newsgroups,
    specially this one: do not answer for anyone but yourself.

    In point of fact, of course anyone may answer any post they like. If,
    however, they answer in the manner you have in your two posts here, then
    they might expect to be bitten back.

    Colin D.
    Colin D, Oct 5, 2005
  10. Mr.Happy

    Mark² Guest

    Well...that, and he sent them sprawling onto the canvas.
    When your pictures do that to us...perhaps you'll get somewhere...
    I noticed that the Krispy Kremes have begun to take their toll, Mr.
    Of course!
    -Which is why "bragging" fits with you.
    Mark², Oct 6, 2005
  11. Mr.Happy

    Mark² Guest

    If it was Douglas (I'm confused who is who, now), he always did have a habit
    of posting links, only to take them down when criticized...
    Mark², Oct 6, 2005
  12. Mr.Happy

    Douglas... Guest

    5 year lease, ends at Christmas. I'd say from the Ebay prices, I'd be
    lucky to pull $3k for it now. That's OK, I'll keep it. The most amazing
    camera I've ever owned. Plenty of life left in it too.
    Douglas..., Oct 6, 2005
  13. Mr.Happy

    DD (Rox) Guest

    But if it takes you (what?) 70,000 frames to get about a dozen half-
    decent shots can you still call yourself great?
    DD (Rox), Oct 6, 2005
  14. Mr.Happy

    Gordon Moat Guest

    Hey, I am full of opinions . . . but you knew that already. ;-)
    Well, you can't please everyone, though hopefully you please the people paying

    The demands that a gentleman makes are upon himself; those that a small man
    makes are upon others.
    I just think it is improper to make a statement about oneself about "World's
    Greatest" anything. Such a term should be left to the judgement of others. Even
    Schumacher does not claim he is the "World's Greatest".
    Gordon Moat, Oct 6, 2005
  15. Mr.Happy

    Mark² Guest

    How many more clicks do you figure you'll need to
    press before you take half a dozen decent shots?
    Mark², Oct 6, 2005
  16. Mr.Happy

    Gordon Moat Guest

    Maybe not so cut-and-dried . . . there are some wedding and portrait photographers
    who have garnered a great deal of notice, and favourable comment in the world of
    The last two sentences seem to contradict each other. If someone can find fault,
    then why not criticize? Of course, the proper approach to criticism is to do it in
    a constructive manner.

    Excellence in photography, or any visual art, is something a truly creative person
    hopes they never really achieve. At the moment when someone has what is considered
    to be their ultimate creative achievement, everything created past that point would
    pale in comparison. Might as well quit and move on towards some other challenge. If
    that makes sense to you, they maybe you would understand why I never want to
    achieve the ultimate of my creativity.
    I might go with him not being tactful, but I would not call his comments out of
    line. I actually saw Skip's statements as being on the level of our self proclaimed
    "World's Greatest" . . . not an approach I would use, but it seems to have been
    effective. Sometimes being a little harsh can shock someone down to a realistic
    level . . . oh well.
    Thought you liked flowers? ;-)
    Technically correct can be extremely boring. Skip is not doing Photogrammetry.
    Examples are needed to attract clients . . . seems fairly obvious. However, when
    one rights (types) claims of attaining a certain level, then that is another
    manner. Had the approach of the WGWP been humorous, and not appearing serious, then
    the statements might have been taken more lightly. I think it was obvious from the
    WGWP's typing on this news group that he was not joking about his claims.
    To work in any creative profession, you have to like your own work, and you have to
    be able to promote it. Obviously, there are many approaches that could be made,
    though which ones work is trial and error (often lots of error). Being confident
    can come across as conceit, and there is a fine line between confidence and
    egotism; the perceptions of others will cross that line in judgement of all
    creative professionals. To lack confidence, or appear to not speak highly of one's
    own work, would be detrimental to continuation of that creative profession.

    Basically, if you are not confident about your work, or do not indicate some
    confidence, then you will not succeed. I think people who are more technically
    oriented, like yourself, might tend to see confidence more as conceit. You have to
    understand that even when you have created something you might not like much,
    though maybe some others might like it, you need to have an ability to speak highly
    about it; never criticize your own efforts, even when you want to do so.
    Is that the concept in Bambi . . . . Thumper's mom stated to Thumper "If you don't
    have anything nice to say, then don't say anything at all". :)
    Sure, and I would expect anyone who makes comments understands that they are open
    to comments. We have an activity that happens each year in the US connected with
    Universities and Colleges of Art. That event running in many cities is called
    National Portfolio Day. The comments a prospective student could hear on such days
    would be even to drive a weak individual to give up entirely, and often
    substantially more harsh than any critiques I have seen on this news group
    (including the fake ones). The reality of Portfolio Day is that you take note of
    comments from all individuals reviewing your work, then you consider changing
    something when you hear nearly the same comments from at least three individuals.
    It is a huge learning experience, and can make you much more confident, or at least
    able to speak well about things you are not so sure about.
    I feel that constructive criticism is valid. If someone just stated "Your work is
    shit", then I don't see that as constructive. However, when someone claims such a
    lofty height as "World's Greatest", it would be easy for anyone to be disappointed,
    and then react in a harsh manner. Had the WGWP just stated he had some well done
    samples on his web site, I doubt the responses would have been harsh, from Skip,
    from me, or from anyone else.
    I did . . . though perhaps you missed that. I hope I have given some examples, and
    clarified my approach to this matter. I stand by what I stated, and how I stated
    it. The WGWP crossed that fine line to conceit, and I don't think anyone missed
    Gordon Moat, Oct 6, 2005
  17. Mr.Happy

    DD (Rox) Guest

    My greatness is apparent everytime I hit the delete button.
    DD (Rox), Oct 6, 2005
  18. I'm sure the human right index finger is capable of millions of button
    presses.....I play a trumpet when I'm not taking pictures, and so I use my
    right index finger even more than Bret......:^)
    William Graham, Oct 6, 2005
  19. Mr.Happy

    Jeff Rife Guest

    Colin D ([email protected]) wrote in rec.photo.equipment.35mm:
    I guess you didn't read your own post, then.

    "Kindly do not tell me what my thinking is constrained to, thank you.
    You must be new around here, else you would know that I have been in
    photography for many, many years, and on this group for many years as

    Thank you Mr. Condescending. Whether I am new to this newsgroup or not
    makes little difference. Have you ever considered that someone who has
    read this group without posting for several months has only seen 30 or so
    posts by you, many of which would lead to the conclusion that you are
    exactly what you are complaining about.
    Neither will requesting that only certain people answer your posts. But,
    when you know the answer to a question, don't complain just because
    somebody gives you the answer to the question you asked.
    You appeared not to know the answer, asking how he got that image if he
    didn't use a swinging lens. I explained the "how" behind it, because
    that's the question you asked. Yet, you obviously knew the "how", so your
    actual "puzzlement" now is shown to be even more condescending...you were
    amazed that he had come into contact with such an expensive lens.
    Nor are you.
    Because you didn't?

    Your question was: "how else does a 90mm lens cover 170mm wide?" This is
    the question I answered...how it is physically possible.

    You have now shown several times that you know the answer to this
    question, and knew it when you posted. And, then you got annoyed that I
    didn't know that you already knew the answer. I apologize that I didn't
    read your mind and realize you wanted to know "did you use a really
    expensive lens?"

    Maybe you should take your own writing to heart:

    "Maybe you don't realize it, but your manner of expression is apt to rub
    people the wrong way. Your posts read like they were written by a
    know-it-all adolescent schoolboy. Without hearing or seeing the person
    who is 'talking' on a newsgroup, the manner and friendliness (or
    otherwise) of what is written is all there is to go on, unless and until
    the writer and his style are well enough known. As yet, you and your
    style aren't."
    Jeff Rife, Oct 9, 2005
  20. Mr.Happy

    Colin D Guest

    Whatever, Jeffrey. Clearly, though, my message got through, as
    evidenced by your aggrieved replies.

    Colin D.
    Colin D, Oct 9, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.