Film vs Digital

Discussion in 'Photography' started by Pumper Hinkle, Mar 23, 2008.

  1. I don't believe I've run into a discussion of medical photography on
    this ng.
    Ditto for scientific cataloging.
    No. Manipulation is manipulation.
    Now, you're touching on the subject, at last. There is no such thing as
    'fine art photography', I thought I was quite clear on this. You want
    to see a roll of toilet paper as art, so long as you can profit from
    your delusion, eh? The mind of the relativist is generally void of
    conceptually valid concepts. (A conceptually valid concept is one that
    is self reliant, untethered in slavish agreement to someone else's notions.)
    What is a "snapshot"?
     
    Roy Jose Lorr, Mar 31, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  2. Pumper Hinkle

    Rob Morley Guest

    "Pray: entreat or call upon a higher power." In my world there is no
    higher power to call upon.
    Maybe in your world.
    Why are you babbling about saints and prayer?
    No, I claim to be a monkey.
    You think of it how you want, and I'll think of it how I want. Are you
    going to answer the question?
     
    Rob Morley, Mar 31, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  3. The higher power in your world is Self. That's who you pray to.
    My world is the same as yours.
    You bring them to mind.
    So you pray.
    All human behavior is subject to intellectual scrutiny. That's what
    makes us human, distinguishable from monkeys.
     
    Roy Jose Lorr, Mar 31, 2008
  4. Pumper Hinkle

    Vance Guest

     
    Vance, Mar 31, 2008
  5.  
    Roy Jose Lorr, Mar 31, 2008
  6. Since the start of 2008 you have posted to well over 20
    different newsgroups. That is a verifiable *fact* that
    anyone can check using Google. Google also says that
    "recently" you have posted 24,664 articles in 132
    groups. I don't know if recent means the last year, 5
    years or 10 years...

    You have a lot of nerve calling someone else a
    pathological liar.
     
    Floyd L. Davidson, Mar 31, 2008
  7. Why don't you settle it by listing those groups and reference one
    message I posted to each of them. Till then you join the ranks of the
    few pathological liars I've run into. In any event, finding 20 groups I
    allegedly posted to is far different than the 200 I was accused of.
    And, no matter what the actual number is, its not a crime as inferred
    but a dishonest way of diverting the subject. That you are more than
    willing to enter into this despicable ruse says more of your lack of
    character than anything else.
     
    Roy Jose Lorr, Mar 31, 2008
  8. Well, that was really difficult! I only had to look at the last
    TEN DAYS to find where you have posted to 20 newsgroups:

    <> posted to"
    1 alt.photography

    <> posted to:
    2 rec.arts.movies.past-films
    3 alt.philosophy
    4 alt.literature
    5 alt.postmodern
    6 rec.arts.fine

    <> posted to:
    7 rec.arts.tv
    8 alt.atheism
    9 alt.messianic
    10 alt.religion.christian
    11 alt.education

    <> posted to:
    12 alt.bible
    13 alt.religion.christian.biblestudy
    14 alt.religion.w-w-church-god

    <> posted to:
    15 soc.culture.jewish

    <> posted to:
    16 alt.history.future
    17 alt.politics.liberalism
    18 alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic posted to:

    <> posted to:
    19 alt.abortion,
    20 alt.society.liberalism
    Your continued dishonesty in the face of obvious truth
    is noted. Most people think that's a bit insane, which
    is to say, they would classify someone who does so a
    "pathological liar".
    No it is not. You claimed emphatically to have only
    ever posted to a dozen or so in 17 years. In fact, as
    shown above, you've posted to to 20 in merely the last
    ten days. Google says you've posted to 132 groups
    recently (and gives statistics for 2 years, back to
    March 2006). It would appear that 200 total is probably
    incorrect in terms of being vastly too small a number!

    I say that because previous to your current address, you
    were using the same name but posting from an
    att.worldnet.com address rather than comcast.com, and
    Google says that beginning in 1999 and continuing until
    2006, you posted to 400 newsgroups (with 54,925
    articles).

    Given that you say you'd been posting to Usenet 8 year
    prior to that, obviously the 400 total is going to be
    low...

    What I do not understand is why you are lying about it.
    But given that nothing you've said in this thread has
    been even slightly sensible about art and/or photography,
    I guess posting nonsense is simply what you do.
    That you are lying about it is the point. Worse yet,
    you call those who cite easy to verify statistics
    "pathological liars" because they have facts.
    That you produce this ruse tells about your character.
     
    Floyd L. Davidson, Mar 31, 2008
  9. Pumper Hinkle

    Rob Morley Guest

    Unless he believes what he's saying, in which case he's delusional.
    Grandiose delusions are symptomatic of various psychotic disorders, so
    he's possibly rather more than "a bit insane".
     
    Rob Morley, Mar 31, 2008
  10. Moron, I am not the subject of this thread despite your hysterical
    desire to change its focus.

    You idiotically included in your count, the number of cross posted
    threads I responded to, instead of reporting the only relevant
    statistic: the groups I actually posted from, which amount in the
    neighborhood of one dozen over an 18 year span.

    Now, perhaps you'd care to return to the subject at hand: film as
    opposed to digital. We may then get on with the discussion you so
    assiduously avoid: the general lack of artistic merit in the realm of
    photography.
     
    Roy Jose Lorr, Mar 31, 2008
  11. Sure, anyone pricking your little grandiose bubble must be insane.

    I posted this to another idiot dissembler and I'll repeat it for your
    benefit:

    "You idiotically included in your count, the number of cross posted
    threads I responded to, instead of reporting the only relevant
    statistic: the groups I actually posted from, which amount in the
    neighborhood of one dozen over an 18 year span.

    Now, perhaps you'd care to return to the subject at hand: film as
    opposed to digital. We may then get on with the discussion you so
    assiduously avoid: the general lack of artistic merit in the realm of
    photography."
     
    Roy Jose Lorr, Mar 31, 2008
  12. An afterthought: In all the groups I've visited in the last 18 years
    there has always been present a good number of lying, religious fanatics
    such as yourself.
     
    Roy Jose Lorr, Mar 31, 2008
  13. I stated originally, and posted a list of, newsgroups
    that you have "posted to". That is the same terminology
    that you used, claiming to have only ever posted to a
    dozen or so.

    You have posted to hundreds, and obviously in the past
    10 days alone you have posted to 20.
    You lack any credibility on that topic (or any other).

    My only point was and is that you denied having posted
    to many many newsgroups and called someone else a
    pathological liar for telling you there was clear
    evidence that you've posted to more than a couple
    hundred. I've demonstrated that the other fellow was
    right, and it is probably you that suffers
    pathologically.

    Your status is now once again returned to that of those
    I simply ignore totally.
     
    Floyd L. Davidson, Mar 31, 2008
  14. Got it straight now?
    So you pray for something you have no evidence of. How utterly
    religious of you.
    Still insisting that a twist of words is evidence of the ridiculous.
    How utterly religious of you.
    Sure, you need to ignore anyone who pricks your ego.
     
    Roy Jose Lorr, Mar 31, 2008
  15. Pumper Hinkle

    Peter Guest


    My apologies to everybody in the group for letting myself be fooled that
    you are trying to have a serious discussion.
     
    Peter, Apr 2, 2008
  16. Pumper Hinkle

    Peter Guest


    If you believe as you state that there is no art in photography, then there
    is nothing further to discuss.
    I will not be further trolled.
     
    Peter, Apr 2, 2008
  17. By trolled you mean anything that challenges your belief system.
     
    Roy Jose Lorr, Apr 4, 2008
  18. Fine use of marxist dialectic. Accuse others of your own crimes.
     
    Roy Jose Lorr, Apr 4, 2008
  19. Pumper Hinkle

    Noons Guest

    rwalker wrote,on my timestamp of 15/03/2010 2:10 PM:

    Dude: that's a post from two years ago, you sure you got your dates set right?
     
    Noons, Mar 15, 2010
    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.