Gone with the what?

Discussion in 'Australia Photography' started by Alienjones, Apr 30, 2008.

  1. Alienjones

    Alienjones Guest

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    Annika1980 wrote:
    |> My accountant see it making money.
    |
    | I kinda doubt that pic will sell too many copies.
    |
    |> It's a perfect image to set as a talking point.
    |>
    |> I'm not sure if you've noticed Neil, but my purpose in posting it has
    |> been served well...
    |>
    |> To get people talking about photography and (hopefully) explore their
    |> own creativity in the process. You should try it sometime or is the
    |> likely hood one of the trolls might do a number on you too daunting?
    |
    | I'll give you credit for posting the pic at least and generating
    | discussion.
    | Hopefully, maybe you or someone else can benefit from the comments.
    |
    | And as much as you like ragging on my ass, you will at least have to
    | admit that I post my pics under my real name ... and I leave them up
    | and don't yank them down whenever someone cirtiques them. And I don't
    | hide behind 100 aliases .... just this one.
    |
    |
    |
    |
    |
    |
    Oh give us a break Bret.
    You are the biggest sock puppet user on Usenet. Be honest for a change.

    You don't have to yank down the photos you post... Because they're mine!
    I get them taken down legally.

    Like these: http://www.annika1980.com/plagiarized.htm

    And more recently from the legal team at AOL:
    Thank you for your complaint. The account has been closed and your
    images removed from our servers.

    Don't try your bullshit here Bret. You are one of the worst trolls on
    Usenet. Not hesitating to engage in illegal activities the "get back" at
    anyone who criticizes your happy snaps. Like this despicable attempt to
    sabotage the sale of my prints: http://www.annika1980.com/cracking.htm

    All your illegal attacks on me (that are verified) are described clearly
    here: http://www.annika1980.com

    Taking another photographer's images and reposting them with pornography
    pasted into them is about as low as you can go. It doesn't bother me
    anymore but it sure shows you up for the childish idiot you are.

    - --

    from Douglas,
    If my PGP key is missing, the
    post is a forgery. Ignore it.
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)

    iD8DBQFIGhu7huxzk5D6V14RAixcAJwI5VY6vt+a1xWVbm3Sq/1R6v/inACgnl0P
    JpIPj2OMAV5YBOwo4Sgx0C4=
    =Nx2R
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
     
    Alienjones, May 1, 2008
    #61
    1. Advertisements

  2. Alienjones

    TRoss Guest

    The D3 doesn't have a functioning Delete button?
    Next time you're ready to drop $160, spend it on lessons or a handful
    of decent Photoshop books. The Beautifier plugin from Red Paw Media
    (redpawmedia.com) will give you similar effects, and it's free. It's
    rather limited compared to Nik Color Efex, but it does the job. And
    it's free.

    Here's one way to create the high key effect using just what's in
    Photoshop.

    1. Create a Channel Mixer Adjustment Layer
    - Red +100%, Green 0%, Blue 0%
    (you may need to adjust these levels)
    - Select the Monochrome option

    2. Add a Black, White Gradient Map Adustment Layer

    3. Duplicate the Backgraound Image
    - Set the Blending Mode to Overlay

    4. Apply Gaussian Blur
    - Use a mask the blur to taste.
    (In your example would have reduced the blur on the woman's eyes, if
    only to give focus to something other than the noses.)

    5. Adjust as needed
    - Using a Curves Adjustment Layer, or by
    - Reducing the Opacity of the Channel Mixer Adjustment Layer


    TR
     
    TRoss, May 1, 2008
    #62
    1. Advertisements

  3. Alienjones

    Annika1980 Guest

    Now you're just being stupid. I've posted as Annika1980 since I
    started on Usenet. Over 33,000 posts so far, according to the Google.

    In that same time span you have had at least 50 names that most of us
    recognize. The actual number is probably closer to 100. You have
    even admitted to most of these. They say that memory is the 2nd thing
    to go.
    Anything pasted into your images would be an improvement.
    Except maybe this:
    http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f230/Reinfinity/fat_guy_in_girl_underwear.jpg

    Was that your good side, D-Mac?
     
    Annika1980, May 1, 2008
    #63
  4. Alienjones

    Alienjones Guest

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    TRoss wrote:
    | On Thu, 01 May 2008 15:39:39 +1000, Alienjones

    |
    | Next time you're ready to drop $160, spend it on lessons or a handful
    | of decent Photoshop books. The Beautifier plugin from Red Paw Media
    | (redpawmedia.com) will give you similar effects, and it's free. It's
    | rather limited compared to Nik Color Efex, but it does the job. And
    | it's free.
    |

    Just because you think that God Awful rubbish from Red Paw is good
    doesn't mean zilch. You don't like my art either. That means zilch too.

    The people who's opinions I care about are those with money to spend...
    My clients and oddly enough, there is no shortage of them. That should
    tell you something about your opinion.

    Perhaps something worth considering is the fact that everyone who
    develops a style of their own, attracts critics who don't like it. You
    obviously are one of those critics. That's OK, you are entitled to your
    opinion just don't keep repeating it in the same thread. It make you
    look like a troll.

    Stylized photographers also attract customers looking for something
    different to what their relatives can take with a $50 digicam. When I
    attempted to carry over the classic style I used for 30 years last
    century into this century, I discovered a number of things.

    The most important was that digital cameras allowed everyone to take
    clear, colourful pictures. To succeed in a business where every Tom Bret
    and Harry could pick up a camera and take nice looking pictures, I
    realized - like a few of my peers - that I had to develop some themes
    and a unique style.

    5 years on and instead of struggling to get work, I'm shedding the
    excess work to other photographers. This may sound like bragging but it
    really is a lesson you could well learn if you think my work is below
    your standards... Which you have not volunteered any examples of...

    So how about posting a link to your wedding and portrait portfolio so I
    can see what I really ought to be aiming for?



    - --

    from Douglas,
    If my PGP key is missing, the
    post is a forgery. Ignore it.
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)

    iD8DBQFIGlKZhuxzk5D6V14RAtWQAJ9Tt2Ft6wSNl648p1BKALZScYSNCgCgnQHs
    haiRh1r+fAe2o7APyEYaHsI=
    =FxAv
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
     
    Alienjones, May 2, 2008
    #64
  5. Alienjones

    XxYyZz Guest


    You first need to learn to how to take a qaulity photograph yourself so that
    you know what one looks like. Only then will you be able to judge the quality
    of someone elses work. For a self proclaimed "professional wedding
    photographer" you sure take some crappy pics. Maybe it's that D3 camera you
    and Rita spew about all the time. It seems neither of you can take a decent
    photo with it.



    Or... Are you just acting as a sock puppet for another well known
     
    XxYyZz, May 2, 2008
    #65
  6. Alienjones

    XxYyZz Guest


    What type of work is that, crap photography ?


    You need a plugin to make crappy photos? I think you wasted $160. I'll bet
    your photos look just as bad right out of the camera. Weren't you the one that
    was against photoshop ?
     
    XxYyZz, May 2, 2008
    #66
  7. Alienjones

    XxYyZz Guest

    I don't think you ever posted any art.


    That really is odd, are they all blind ? Or do you only charge 1/3 of what
    a real photogrpher would get ?


    That should

    The way it gor you fired up I would guess he was correct ?

    They won't find much difference between that and your photography.


    When I

    That you still suck after 30 years ?

    Not everyone, you haven't mastered that yet.


    To succeed in a business where every Tom Bret

    Too bad the crap style isn't really a money maker.

    I thought you said above it was 30 years ? So which is it, 5 years or 30
    ???


    and instead of struggling to get work, I'm shedding the
    Yes, I bet anyone that sees your work hires one of the other photographers
    right away !

    No, sounds more like bullshit from the pics you've posted !



    but it

    A ten year old with a $50 digital camera couldn't learn anything form you.


    Most pros don't stoop that low that they,ll do wedding potography. They
    actually make money.
     
    XxYyZz, May 2, 2008
    #67
  8. That's not such a bad theme, if that was your intention; I just don't see
    that the photo suggests that at all. I've seen a lot of '30s movies, and
    stills from them, and I would never have guessed that was what you were
    trying to do.
    I think there's not only the problem of his nose being practically in her
    eye, but also the sharp shadow of his nose on her cheek, which was probably
    unavoidable with single flash given that pose. And her face looks blotchy.
    Look at the distinct line running down her right cheek and then under her
    nose to the other cheek. It's noticably darker above that line and lighter
    below. Believe me, no '30s professional photographer *or* cinematographer
    would have delivered a picture like that.

    I just don't understand your choice of pose. In addition to the above, it
    emphasizes the fact that she's taller than he is; he has to tilt his head
    back to get his eyes level with hers. Can you imagine Clark Gable ever being
    put in such a position?
    Yes, that it has -- if that was really your purpose.
    Not at all. But I'm wondering at this point if *you* have learned anything
    from the discussion or if you still believe the photo to be the flawless
    masterpiece you apparently thought it was when you put it up. In other
    words, have *you* really "explored your own creativity"? Remember what the
    word "explore" means. It doesn't mean just "look at one's own work with
    uncritical self-admiration."

    Neil
     
    Neil Harrington, May 2, 2008
    #68
  9. Alienjones

    Alienjones Guest

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    Neil Harrington wrote:

    |
    |> To get people talking about photography and (hopefully) explore their
    |> own creativity in the process. You should try it sometime or is the
    |> likely hood one of the trolls might do a number on you too daunting?
    |
    | Not at all. But I'm wondering at this point if *you* have learned
    anything
    | from the discussion or if you still believe the photo to be the flawless
    | masterpiece you apparently thought it was when you put it up. In other
    | words, have *you* really "explored your own creativity"? Remember what
    the
    | word "explore" means. It doesn't mean just "look at one's own work with
    | uncritical self-admiration."
    |
    | Neil
    |
    |

    So have you side stepped the question regarding your photos or do we get
    a link?

    I learn a lot from every photo I post a link to... Before ever I post
    it. Every day I wake, I explore my creativity. I live amongst some of
    the most creative and artistic people in Australia. Their opinions I
    value deeply.

    Opinions of Usenet posters who criticize without showing they can and
    do, do better are taken with the knowledge this is after all Usenet.

    I never thought this picture was "flawless" as you put it. If you knew
    my posting history you'd know different. As for your "no 30's
    Professional Photographer" rubbish... ROTFL.

    When I was 14 I stood in the back of a Professional Photographer's van
    developing photos for five quid a week. He was a street photographer in
    the main street of Melbourne. A genuine article "30's professional
    photographer".

    You seem to confuse a working professional with the pedantic fiddling of
    Amateurs who churn out one or two photo of exemplary merit every month.

    Long ago I learned that the difference between a professional and an
    enthusiastic amateur is that a pro knows what he can get away with and
    exactly how much his photos are worth, an enthusiast doesn't know either.

    I churn out anywhere between 300 and 600 "professional" photos every
    week. In the high season I produce twice that many. My panorama ans
    seascape canvas prints are on sale all up the east coast of Australia.

    Your rather naive belief people like me can afford the luxury of being
    pedantic and spend hours fiddling an image, carries with it the
    suggestion there are a plethora of clients in Australia who will pay
    serious money for a single photo... There isn't. They evaporated when
    digital cameras came on the scene.

    IN 1982 my average client asked what poses they would get and if the
    album was leather or cheap plastic. Typically they were willing to pay 2
    to 3 grand.

    Today 40% of inquiries ask first how much I charge and second, how many
    'images' they will get and bugger the album, they want all the files on
    disc for $600!.

    If anything I am an evolution of the species. When most ex Pro
    photographer's my age are sitting in a deck chair on some cruise ship as
    they demolish their kid's inheritance, I evolved and compete quite
    nicely with the kids armed with digital cameras and a fast mouth.

    So show us your photos, Neil before I consider you a troll and shut the
    lid on you.
    - --

    from Douglas,
    If my PGP key is missing, the
    post is a forgery. Ignore it.
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)

    iD8DBQFIGm/uhuxzk5D6V14RArfRAKCVkrGn7ZfgDa9Gi0CPYPGoHP3XrQCffJY3
    C0iksj5aAIZFI59gbXfFDpE=
    =u/3W
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
     
    Alienjones, May 2, 2008
    #69
  10. Alienjones

    Annika1980 Guest

    Well you've certainly developed a "unique" style in sharp contrast
    with those of us who can take nice looking pictures. If your goal was
    to produce crappy looking pictures then you have succeeded beyond your
    wildest expectations. Yes, you've carved out quite a niche for
    yourself.

    Also, it pleases me to know that I am still in your every thought.
    I wonder if you even realized that you used my name?
    I just hope the substitution wasn't part of some sick sexual fantasy
    you have going .... you know, like you did with Julian.

    Oh yeah, I have to laugh whenever you launch into your "my clients all
    love my work" nonsense. What clients? You're lucky if you sell one
    or two wedding packages a year on EBAY, and you have been known to win
    your own auctions with your own sockpuppets, just so you could leave
    positive feedback. How many other successful photographers sell their
    services on EBAY? Can you say "ZERO?"
    EBAY is for selling crap you can't get rid of any other way.

    You claim all these photo sales, and yet nobody can locate any of your
    galleries or digital print centres. They must be Super Top Secret
    because I've got half of Queensland out there looking for them. You
    claim that all your thousands of calendars always sell out, but nobody
    has ever seen one except me and a few others you've mailed them to.
    Don't you realize by now that nobody is buying your crap, either
    literally or figuratively? How fuckin stupid would I sound if anytime
    someone criticizes my photos I said, "What do you know? I sold 5000
    of this photo last week." I'd be laughed off Usenet. Hell, the only
    reason we let you stay is because you invented the damn thing!
     
    Annika1980, May 2, 2008
    #70
  11. I don't have any photos online.
    No, I don't confuse "working professionals" with anyone else. I suppose I'm
    one of those "pedantic fiddling amateurs."
    I'm an enthusiast and neither know nor care "exactly how much my photos are
    worth." I have done a little photography for pay -- when asked to as a
    favor -- but hardly enough to mention, and I really have no interest in
    doing that.
    Well, many people who are serious about their photography (whether as a
    hobby or a profession) do exactly that. You seem to be saying you're
    careless about your work and it doesn't matter, as long as customers will
    pay for it.

    That's interesting. I guess I'm not surprised, though. Digital cameras have
    surely changed a lot about photography in many ways.
    That's a threat that's supposed to matter to me?

    If I ever do put any photos online and think others might be interested,
    I'll post a link. Really I do photography only for myself, my friends and
    relatives, and because I enjoy doing it. I have no need or desire to try to
    impress you or anyone else. But I can assure you that if I ever do link to a
    photo of mine, the girl won't have a blotchy face and someone's nose in her
    eye -- unless I do it for comic effect.

    The fact that *you* want to post your photos, for whatever reason, does not
    oblige anyone else to. In the case of the photo you did link to, which was
    your example of "capturing the essence of the moment with the classic and
    timeless," the photo has some obvious problems which I and others have
    pointed out, and which you did not seem to be aware of.

    Neil
     
    Neil Harrington, May 2, 2008
    #71
  12. Alienjones

    Mr.T Guest

    Maybe that's what you tell your customers, but not beforehand I bet! :)
    Btw, I wonder what "to spec" is if quality is not a consideration. Only the
    expected poses maybe?

    MrT.
     
    Mr.T, May 2, 2008
    #72
  13. Alienjones

    Mr.T Guest

    Er, not necessarily. The film is used to make photographic prints. Most
    people refer to the prints as "photographs".
    All photographic emulsion papers are developed in chemicals, as opposed to
    inkjet, dye-sub or similar printers.
    Photographic prints made on chemically processed paper, from digital files
    are also *extremely* common.

    MrT.
     
    Mr.T, May 2, 2008
    #73
  14. Alienjones

    TRoss Guest

    I didn't say I thought the Beautifier plugin was good; I said it would
    give you the high key effect you were so proud of in your picture.
    FWIW, I think the Red Paw plugins have merit.
    Actually, it tells me more about your clients.
    That photograph was crap. The composition was poor, and the Photoshop
    skills you displayed were lacking. Crap is not a style, so stop trying
    to polish a turd.

    TR
     
    TRoss, May 2, 2008
    #74
  15. Verified how Douglas, in your own mind or have any of those claims been
    tested in a court of law ??
    we all know the answer is that none of your claims of Brett trying to
    alegedly hack your ebay account or pretty much any thing else on that
    defamatory page has passed even a cursory test of verasity.
    I don't begrudge you your right to persue any copyright infringments and I
    never have, but everything else you have posted on that site is nothing more
    than blind, un-verified accusations.
    You know that Brett cannot afford to get a (half) decent lawyer to persue
    the matter so you think you are safe, for my money I wouldnt be so cock
    sure, Brett might find someone to take it on pro bono and agree to take a
    cut of the proceeds from the sucesful sueing of your fat old arse. I would
    imagine that you might have to take up permanent residence in your daughters
    basement while Brett claims a new holiday home on Tangalooma and a Yacht to
    sail the Whitsundays in. I'm sure Mark Thomas would only be too happy to
    provide enough evidence of your continual Usenet bullying and outright lies
    and fraud to make any case you bring up in defence (short of "not guilty be
    reason of mental illness") so weak that your Legal team will be talking of
    setteling before the first writ is posted.
    Of course it bothers you, you bring it up at every opportunity, along with
    all the other utter crap you spew at ever turn.
    We can almost set a clock by the amount of time it is between you posting
    your diatribe yet again
     
    Atheist Chaplain, May 2, 2008
    #75
  16. Alienjones

    Annika1980 Guest

    You are right that I couldn't afford to retain a lawyer at their
    normal rates.
    However, one of my biggest fans and a man I do a lot of photo work for
    is the head of one of the largest law firms in the SE USA. (He's the
    C in CBS)

    http://www.cbslawfirm.com/

    Mr. C.has often told me that if I ever need help in any way that he
    would be happy to oblige. So it wouldn't be a big deal for him to put
    a few of his lawyers on the case if the need ever arises. And yes,
    they practice in Australia as well and I'm sure they are quite versed
    in Australian law. That's one reason I've never taken D-Mac's threats
    seriously. If legal action between us ever did arise, I'd own his
    broke ass.
     
    Annika1980, May 2, 2008
    #76
  17. Alienjones

    XxYyZz Guest

    You are right that I couldn't afford to retain a lawyer at their
    normal rates.
    However, one of my biggest fans and a man I do a lot of photo work for
    is the head of one of the largest law firms in the SE USA. (He's the
    C in CBS)

    http://www.cbslawfirm.com/

    Mr. C.has often told me that if I ever need help in any way that he
    would be happy to oblige. So it wouldn't be a big deal for him to put
    a few of his lawyers on the case if the need ever arises. And yes,
    they practice in Australia as well and I'm sure they are quite versed
    in Australian law. That's one reason I've never taken D-Mac's threats
    seriously. If legal action between us ever did arise, I'd own his
    broke ass.




    There is no doubt you would win, but what would you get from him ? Probably
    just a couple old point and shoots, a few beat up old printers and his pirated
    software. I think that's all he owns. Doesn't he live in his daughters
    basement ?
     
    XxYyZz, May 3, 2008
    #77
  18. Alienjones

    Yoshi Guest

    .. Maybe it's that D3 camera you
    Sorry, you can't blame Doug's complete lack of talent on the D3.

    Yoshi
     
    Yoshi, May 3, 2008
    #78
  19. Alienjones

    Annika1980 Guest


    That cuts both ways. The only difference is that I never acted like I
    had loads of cash.
     
    Annika1980, May 3, 2008
    #79
  20. Alienjones

    Robert Coe Guest

    : -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    : Hash: SHA1
    :
    : Annika1980 wrote:
    : |> hmm
    : |> shiny nose on the bride
    : |> groom looks like he is about to take her eye out with his nose
    : |> at least the focus is sharp on the brides shiny nose :)
    : |
    : |
    : | Beat me to it! It's hard to believe that any "Sought-after
    : | Professional Wedding Photographer with over 30 years experience" would
    : | claim that one. He admitted to using CS3 (probably a cracked version)
    : | so how could he miss those hotspots on her nose and cheek?
    : |
    : | All in all, a good one to add to the collection.
    : |
    : |
    : |
    : Oh I see.
    : Odd that someone living in the "deep south" couldn't see the connection
    : between gone with the wind and the steamy heat of the moment, given that
    : I led into it with an introduction based on the concept.

    If the gratuitous lack of sharpness (this photograph's only prominent
    characteristic) is supposed to mimic photography as is was in 1864, it doesn't
    wash. There is a large corpus of images taken of and during the American Civil
    War, and even the actual battlefield pictures are universally sharper than
    this.

    Note that the 1939 movie of "Gone With the Wind" doesn't fall into this trap.
    The photography is colorful and sharp, and it conveys the spirit of the story
    and its time very successfully.

    BTW, the "introduction based on the concept" also included some sort of rant
    on Australian immigration policy. I assume that I'm far from alone in this
    newsgroup in knowing nothing whatever, and caring not a whit, about that
    issue.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, May 3, 2008
    #80
    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.