Commenting On Unused Equipment

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by Curiouser and Curiouser, Oct 27, 2009.

  1. Curiouser and Curiouser

    tony cooper Guest

    Mike is probably grateful for this.
    What are the four "RGGB" channels? Here's me thinking that there is
    only one RGB channel and three other channels: red, green, and blue.
    tony cooper, Oct 27, 2009
    1. Advertisements

  2. Curiouser and Curiouser

    Ofnuts Guest

    On the usual Bayer matrix there are two sensors for green for one blue
    and one red. So the sensor output is four channels with two green ones.
    Ofnuts, Oct 27, 2009
    1. Advertisements

  3. Curiouser and Curiouser

    whisky-dave Guest

    Nit if you know what you're doing.
    What makes you think yuo can;t have those problems with P&S.
    So why doesn;t this happen with P&S or is it you've not experienced it.
    I work in electronics and the temperatures that components work in is
    pretty much the same unless you go for military spec stuff.

    Not really sure if any of that is true,.
    Depth of fild doesn;t depend on the size of the camera housing.
    That's convinet isn;t it,.
    That's because they have little else in their lives.

    That's true but it's not the DSLRs problem is it.
    depends what they are saying doesn;t it, if I'm interested in the camera
    they'd be more useful than a photographer who might only know about taking

    yep fair point.
    Yes and it is amusing, it's like some peolpe take advice on sex from the
    whisky-dave, Oct 27, 2009
  4. Curiouser and Curiouser

    Paul Furman Guest

    I don't start trolling threads there... also leaning away from
    cross-posting lately.

    I used an Oly C3030 for about 4 years & had great fun taking lots of
    memorable shots, between my film days & getting back to an SLR. The Oly
    still works but seems painfully slow to operate now. I'm sure the newer
    ones are better.
    Paul Furman, Oct 27, 2009
  5. Curiouser and Curiouser

    whisky-dave Guest

    Perhaps he is just a master-baiter and that's all he's good at ;-)
    whisky-dave, Oct 27, 2009
  6. Curiouser and Curiouser

    tony cooper Guest

    I'm sure they are. However, I clearly stated that I was commenting
    about the Shoot-In where critical comments are often made about what
    is uploaded.

    The P&S shooter can upload to Flickr "critique forums", and that sort
    of "contest" venue, where the standard critique comment is "Great
    shot!". A really bad, out-of-focus, badly composed, over-processed
    shot earns a "Nice try!".

    A great shot can be taken with a P&S camera. However, serious
    photographers who get more than the accidental once-in-a-blue-moon
    great shots aren't using P&Ss.
    tony cooper, Oct 27, 2009
  7. I'm a well accomplished professional. 50,000 photos on some years is not
    out of the question, >75% of that being of marketable quality. I now use
    high-end P&S cameras exclusively. Your comment is the psychotic fabrication
    of an insecure DSLR-Troll. Just as this thread has proved. Many
    professionals now use P&S cameras, if not their mainstay, then a large
    majority of their work.

    Just because you claim the converse to be true doesn't make it so.

    Now the question remains, to stay on topic, why do you feel the need to
    fabricate these wild imaginings of yours and not only present them as facts
    but actually believe these fabrications yourself? Are you just that out of
    touch with reality? Is it that simple?
    Curiouser and Curiouser, Oct 27, 2009

  8. I did a shoot in July for the Pediatric Brain Tumor Foundation,
    where one of the 'official' photographers was shooting a P&S.

    My brother shot a wedding with a Fuji P&S, leaving his 35mm SLR
    in the bag.

    It doesn't happen often. But it does happen.
    D. Peter Maus, Oct 27, 2009
  9. Curiouser and Curiouser

    Guest Guest

    why the quotes? was he hired to do it, or was he someone on staff that
    happened to volunteer?
    was he actually the official photographer or just a friend or relative
    helping out? some couples can't afford a good wedding photographer.
    i'm sure it happens, but the numbers are *very* few.
    Guest, Oct 27, 2009

  10. Like all of us, he was hired to do it. But it was a pro bono job.

    He was the official photographer. Charged them mid 5 figures
    for it, too.
    D. Peter Maus, Oct 27, 2009
  11. Curiouser and Curiouser

    tony cooper Guest

    No one here believes that. If you want to cite an exception to my
    statement, provide a reference to a person who really is a
    professional photographer.

    You can *say* you are anyone you want, but that doesn't mean we
    believe you.
    tony cooper, Oct 27, 2009
  12. Curiouser and Curiouser

    tony cooper Guest

    Yes, I am limiting myself to a single forum. Never claimed otherwise.

    The people that participate in this newsgroup, and the related
    newsgroups, who continue to bleat about the marvelous qualities of P&S
    cameras never seem to enter photographs in the Shoot-In for review by
    the people of this group.
    But non-refutable. You'd be stepping all over yourself furnishing
    cites if you had examples to the contrary.
    tony cooper, Oct 27, 2009
  13. Are you aware that you and others of your ilk, now having proved yourselves
    beyond a shadow of all doubts to be nothing but inexperienced and ignorant
    trolls, that I might not care what you believe?

    Stay on topic, you ignorant and inexperienced know-nothing thread hijacking

    Catch-22. If you did that you wouldn't be a troll. Continue doing that,
    going off topic, and you have precisely proved my point.

    Sucks to be as stupid as you, doesn't it.
    Curiouser and Curiouser, Oct 27, 2009
  14. Curiouser and Curiouser

    tony cooper Guest

    How can you be "hired" to do pro bono work? Approved or accepted,
    maybe, but not hired or not pro bono. It's a contradiction in terms.
    tony cooper, Oct 27, 2009
  15. How can we believe you? You provide no proof. Hearsay evidence coming from
    a well-known P&S-bashing DSLR-Troll.

    Since you love playing that trolls' game so much.

    Can't stay on topic can you? Of course not. Trolls never do.
    Curiouser and Curiouser, Oct 27, 2009

  16. A-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-nd...Scene!

    Nicely done. In two transactions, you've turned a civil
    discussion into personal vitriol.

    Now THAT's skill.

    Especially given that, historically, I've supported your position.

    Do enjoy the rest of your day.

    D. Peter Maus, Oct 27, 2009
  17. Huh. I guess that's what you get for living in backwards backwoods
    last-century-mentality Australia.


    I instantly found it on 4 main servers this side of the world. Posts going
    back all the way to 2005 (as far as I found still retained). I guess they
    like to use it to keep tabs on your trolling-tracks of disaster across the
    globe. A public service to out your troll's history everywhere you go, no
    matter what name you use.

    Not intending to go off-topic or anything (the main reason his own
    newsgroup was created for him), but I thought the Bob Larter troll should
    know how well he's been globally outted. His posts are quite amusing to the
    more advanced sectors of civilization. Amusing, of course, in a way that
    he's totally unaware of.
    Bob Larter is Lionel Lauer - Look it up, Oct 27, 2009
  18. Nope, can't say as I *ever* recall that. Wouldn't matter anyway, I do not
    side with someone just because I know of them or their past behavior. I'm
    not here to invent imaginary friends for myself, nor ignorantly try to gain
    vapid and vacuous allies, as so many trolls only do. I reserve friends and
    allies for real life, with real people. For some odd reason I just can't be
    convinced to be made psychotic. Perhaps that's a character flaw,
    considering how much of that I witness going around.
    Bravo, you managed to try to make yourself (fictitiously) look good while
    still staying off topic and still being the troll.

    Next time address the topic and questions proposed by the OP instead of
    helping to evade them. You might not be as easily perceived as a troll next
    time (or not).
    Curiouser and Curiouser, Oct 28, 2009
  19. Using your off-topic example, which is just more ignorant and inexperienced
    troll's red-herring evasion. You're completely wrong. A small sensor of
    today's technology far surpasses a larger sensor of yesterday's technology.

    Your physics theorems didn't include reality. (Not surprising because
    trolls live in their imaginary cyber-world minds.)

    Do try to stay on topic next time, troll.

    Your mission was to try to explain why people want to give advice about
    something that they know nothing about. Just like the example you provided.
    You know absolutely nothing about reality and physics and tried to wrap
    that into an obvious troll's red-herring evasion. Giving advice about
    things that you know nothing about.

    Why do you do that?
    Curiouser and Curiouser, Oct 28, 2009
  20. Or someone who collects hundreds of news snippets (factual or not) from all
    over the net and posts them into photography groups, someone who doesn't
    even own a camera, using that method to try to get attention for himself.
    As any cat-lady tries to get attention from all her cats. How is that any

    Cat Lady = Collects 100 cats, petted for attention.
    RPD RichA Troll = Collects 100 unverified news bytes, petted for attention.

    Nope, your answer wasn't a good one. Try again.

    So far the only good answers have come from people who have never behaved
    like the ignorant and inexperienced trolls that I'm trying to analyze.
    Curiouser and Curiouser, Oct 28, 2009
    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.