HDR and Stepping out a Panorama

Discussion in '35mm Cameras' started by Alienjones, Jul 6, 2008.

  1. Alienjones

    Alienjones Guest

    Alienjones, Jul 6, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  2. Alienjones

    Jeff R. Guest


    Weekend away is still on (planning stage only) - we'll just have to tone
    down the celebrations. :-(

    Your HDR.
    Yeah? So what?

    Your stepped out pano.
    Are you ever going to acknowledge and respond to the many reasonable
    criticisms of your example?

    Let's start with, oh I dunno, how about:
    "How come the footpath gets covered up in grass in your shot, when its not
    in the original?"

    Others may like to chime in with their favourites.

    Or not.
    Jeff R., Jul 7, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  3. Alienjones

    Mark Thomas Guest

    I would add that it would be a 'nice' scene, except for the absolute
    screw up directly underneath the shelter roofs - look at the
    ridiculously faded area of sea and sky - there is simply no way that
    area could/should be that light. Doug's usual attention to detail.
    I'd like to see Doug apologise to AC for the completely mistaken
    identity, and show us the final version of his Manly esplanade linear

    Or tell us all about all the venues where it is for sale. (O:

    (Or post it in the current SI.. - that would teach us all a lesson)

    As for his Tangalooma example, that has been laughed off the planet and
    is barely worth re-visiting.
    Oh yes, where is that, Doug? And mine? Got a string of new excuses, Doug?

    In summary - a coupla months wasn't long enough. Douglas MacDonald (aka
    Douglas james, aka Douglas St James, aka Ryadia/Alienjones/Cryptopix and
    hundreds of others..), your background, lies and abuse will be brought
    up every time you post here.

    Sown. Reaped. Enjoy!
    Mark Thomas, Jul 7, 2008
  4. Alienjones

    Annika1980 Guest

    So you are Douglas St. James now?
    Is that your real name?
    What happened to Douglas J. MacDonald or Douglas St. James MacDonald?
    And whatever happened to Julian Abbot?

    Hey, that reminds me ... the current Shootin is right up your alley.

    Current Challenge : Frauds, Flim-flams, and Shams
    Annika1980, Jul 7, 2008
  5. Alienjones

    Alienjones Guest

    Ahhh Yes... The stalker himself.
    Before you start on me... How about putting up some proof to your claim
    to having been a Professional Wedding Photographer in Adelaide?
    While you're at it... Let's see some shots from that mythical Bronica
    you claim to have in the closet and never use.

    Loser is a generous description of you.
    Alienjones, Jul 7, 2008
  6. Alienjones

    m II Guest

    Whose picture are you entering as your own work?

    m II, Jul 7, 2008
  7. Alienjones

    annika1980 Guest

    Hey D-Mac, at least your stalker is intelligent and can talk about
    I'm stuck with this idiot.
    annika1980, Jul 7, 2008
  8. Alienjones

    m II Guest

    Evasion noted, Douglas. I ask again, whose pictures are you entering as
    your own? You have a history of stealing the work of others. That will
    haunt you if you ever get a contract with a reputable publisher.

    Count on it.

    m II, Jul 7, 2008
  9. Yeah, its the real Douggie, no one else is such a complete dickhead right
    off the bat
    So Douggie, did you enjoy hiding under that rock when you ran away, tail
    between your legs, after your laughably horrendous "Stepped out Panno" was
    given the ridicule and derision it so rightfully deserved.
    I still get a laugh out of that one :)
    BTW, even though I know your not man enough to ever admit it, but I am still
    awaiting an apology.
    Please insert your usual tirade of abuse, half truths and completely
    fabricated untruths if you admit to the above fact!
    Atheist Chaplain, Jul 7, 2008
  10. Alienjones

    annika1980 Guest

    Actually, I don't. If you have some evidence to the contrary I'd sure
    love to see it. Otherwise, STFU stalker.
    annika1980, Jul 7, 2008

  11. Please don't let me interrupt your squabble with various posters, many of
    whom I have found to make considerate, polite and informative posts, but
    you have aroused my curiosity. When you refer to a "stepped out" panorama,
    you are actually referring to what is usually known as a linear panorama
    are you not?

    When I did my second photography unit in college we were taught about
    linear panoramas as against rotational or pivotal panoramas. I did one as
    an assignment for credit in that course, using a mini-tripod clamped to a
    luggage carrier mounted on my mountain bike, a device created by my father.
    Using the tripod's inbuilt level and the bike's computer I could move an
    exact distance before each shot, making the final "assembly" less arduous
    and the result more consistent. The only trouble I had initially, causing
    me to wait for a clear day, was with constantly moving clouds. The outcome
    was pleasing and the project was interesting, it earned me a Distinction
    (but not a High Distinction unfortunately).

    Why do you choose to re-name a well established procedure? Calling it
    "stepped out" sounds clumsy and imprecise to my thinking. Was there a
    reason why you did that? Are you actually attempting to do this hand-held
    and walking rather than mounted in some form?

    Secret Squirrel
    clandestin_écureuil, Jul 7, 2008
  12. Alienjones

    Alienjones Guest

    When I make linear panoramas I use a trolly on a fold up "rail" that
    serves the same purpose as your bicycle mount did.

    The "step" thing goes back nearly a year to when I suggested to Troy
    Piggins he might find more challenge in making "stepped out" panoramas
    than rotational ones. The trolls picked it up and ran with it. Later I
    fueled the flames by posting an example I'd taken a mere 6" apart. It
    was part of a 50 frame panorama.

    Anyway... You are right. They are linear panoramas. I used the "stepped
    out" description to separate ones taken using my purpose built rail to
    the quick and dirty ones made by walking along a path.

    As you probably know, there is quite a lot of work in making one, even
    if you use a rail. Even more work when the camera is hand held. The
    theme from the gallery of trolls has changed from "it can't be done" to
    "it can be done but..." after the fanboi troll actually did some
    research ...into the current flame. I didn't do it cleanly enough.

    The thing about Usenet that will eventually see it's demise is the way
    in which a couple of key individuals can create an environment in a
    group that prevents people from engaging in discussion for fear of
    attracting the attention of one of them.

    Excuse me if I adopt a low tolerance to the noise in the group. No one
    is immune from them or insulated from them. The best idea is to ignore
    the flak. I'll happily talk to anyone (except the trolls) who has
    anything photographic to talk about.
    Alienjones, Jul 7, 2008
  13. You post, the public replies. It's how usenet works, Einstein. Got
    any other evidence to back up your stupid assertion?

    We all know who has the problem. Has your 'leet legal team managed to
    find/identify/prosecute/scare *anyone* yet?
    Too late.
    Why? Only *you* have asked. I and many others are asking *you* to be
    a man and live up to your claims and apologise for your errors and
    abuse. Making a claim about my/your history is irrelevant and of no
    interest to anyone but.. you, apparently.

    You can bleat all you like about your 'indenturedness' and
    international recognition ((O:, and I don't ask you to 'prove' it.
    (Making claims on an Ebay item is a different matter, however - see
    below..) Your work, and use of meaningless terms speaks for itself.
    Eg, from your site:
    "Douglas is an Australian qualified Photographer (a Victorian
    indentured tradesman) who is also an Internationally recognized (sic)
    Member of the World Institute of Photographic masters (sic)."
    What a load of claptrap. *NO* photographer in Oz refers to themselves
    as an 'indentured tradesman', it is meaningless. And of course the
    WIPM is exactly like those Internet degrees.. except aimed at even
    stupider people. That's what you are internationally recognised as...
    (By the way, 'masters' should probably have an upper case M, but I
    guess in your case, it's appropriate. More of your attention to
    Again, why? I don't respond to requests from nobodies. I've posted
    plenty of stuff of late, dig around and add your critiques.

    Back to the topic - WHY did you post those Manly pictures from
    exactly the same location, pretend they were 'stepped out', promise to
    post the result, and then run away like a scalded cat?

    Don't answer, we all know why. Just re-read the thread.
    Funny I don't feel like one, and not many other folks seem to concur.
    At least I haven't abused people without reason (eg your comments to
    AC, see below, he's still waiting), I haven't lied about my images (eg
    the Manly shots and MANY others), I haven't posted ridiculous claims
    about enlargement.

    And while we are on challenges, remember how you accused me of taking
    images of your market stall, and then you changed the story to include
    me stealing something from you? Remember how you said you had
    security footage?
    Answer these two questions - I've asked them before, and you just run
    away again:
    1. How did you recognise me in the 'footage', given that you have
    never seen an image of me?
    2. Can you describe me? There is something *very* recognisable about

    And please post your solicitor's name so I can hand my address to him/
    her. I can't wait - I've got so much to show them!!
    And post your documents to my postal address - it's still valid, just
    like Jeff's.
    I'll be repeating these requests every time you post, Doug. You are
    still a snivelling, cowardly liar, and prove it every time you avoid
    those questions..

    Have a pleasant evening, Doug!

    PS - while on the topic of your webpage at www.douglasjames.com.au ...
    - the 1st sentence and many others are missing verbs.
    - the words wedding and photography are not capitalised, except by
    egotistical wankers.. but if you must, be *consistent*.
    - Nossa should really be spelt Noosa
    - there should be an 'a' in front of 'finalist'
    - don't use 'my', 'we' and 'our' - stick to one 'person'
    - I trust your real name is "Douglas James" and that is also the name
    listed as proprietor of "weddings n portraits", otherwise your
    copyright claim is completely invalid... Oh dear - your copyright
    page has a different name. Forgot who we are today?
    - a link check reveals a 404 on the 'Fine Art' page...
    - where *are* all Mandy's images as per her comments??? (O:

    That quick run-down on your webpage problems is free, by the way. Fix
    it all up so you don't continue to look silly, there's a good chap.

    PPS - For those still seeking Doug's services, here's his only
    'shopfront', it seems...
    Nice pics, Doug. (O:

    And I'm glad to note you are CERTIFIED. What exactly does 'certified'
    mean in regard to an Australian photographer, Doug? I'm sure many of
    us aspire to your level of expertise.... In that Ebay item you have
    listed the WIPM and the CPPA as "Industry Associations" - can you
    elaborate on how these are accepted and recognised IA's in Oz?

    And indeed, can you tell me what exactly the 'CPPA' is?? You seem to
    be the only Australian who claims this 'title' - I've never heard of
    them - perhaps it is because I have not been working 'pro' for so
    long... (O:
    mark.thomas.7, Jul 7, 2008
  14. Alienjones

    m II Guest

    You have already posted here that you took the picture and put it on
    your 'experimental' site. Then you wrote that the link you posted to my
    picture on YOUR web site was ok, as in your opinion, there is a limited
    viewing audience here. Then you said it wasn't really theft because it
    was a very bad picture.

    I also have the original name calling you posted when I first asked you
    to attribute the picture. Doing one minute of Photoshop work on the
    picture did NOT make it yours. You know that.

    A while back I asked you to publicly state you wouldn't do it again, to
    me or anyone else. I said I'd get off your case. You refused, so here I am.

    m II, Jul 7, 2008
  15. SS, it's quite dififcult to explain exactly why Douglas gets this
    response, if you have not seen his fascinating and lengthy history..
    But if interested, read on. Be patient, and make up your own mind
    *after* visiting the links - beware of taking anything Doug says on
    face value (same for me - judge for yourself!). You'll note that
    Doug's answer to you didn't include any references - mine does...

    Thanks! (O:
    Yes, he is. Here's the original thread:
    Pretty heavy going, and you will see that there has been quite a bit
    of ill feeeling surrounding Doug in the past..
    Anyway, to stay ontopic - the page he offered up to demonstrate the
    concept showed a scene that was a seriously flawed candidate for a
    linear panorama (see link below). Further more, his sample 'stepped
    out' images were very obviously taken from exactly the same vantage
    point, with merely a slight rotation.. The page received a lot of
    very negative feedback, and, presumably because of this, Douglas
    pulled the page from view. Douglas has a history of this type of
    behavior. Ie making extraordinary and often false claims and then
    pulling the pages down and running away.

    So the evidence was gone... Or so he thought! Because of his
    'history', several of us now grab copies of Douglas' pages, just in
    case they are withdrawn. And here:
    you will find Doug's original 'stepped out panorama' page reposted by
    Jeff R (another of those considerate folk you refer to!), along with
    copious explanatory notes at left. You'll note Douglas was rather
    scathing in his comments about another poster, "Atheist Chaplain".
    Yet AC had posted absolutely no such thing - Douglas had confused him
    with someone else! But Douglas has refused to apologise. That's the
    sort of guy he is....

    Note the complex scene that Doug suggests would be a good candidate
    for a linear panorama. Note how his two sample images (of the alleged
    50) are *not* even taken from different vantage points!! Note the
    tone of the page, and finally note that Douglas has *not* returned to
    post the promised result. I've even offered to supply real source
    images of this very scene, taken to Douglas' specifications, for
    anyone who wants to try. No takers, strangely. (O: Do you wish to
    have a go? Here are two:
    I have more images if you want, and at larger sizes... but I think it
    is patently clear that this sort of scene simply *cannot* be stitched
    as a linear. Douglas has not proved otherwise.

    Amusingly, some time after that initial thread, Douglas posted this:
    to 'prove' he could do a linear panorama and show us 'idiots' a thing
    or two... As you can see, he avoided the original scene. And when
    you look closely, that one is.. oh.. a little less than
    satisfactory...? It is dissected in detail here:
    Do you still have it? Why not post it if you do... We are all
    actually quite gentle on posters who do not make silly claims about
    their work..!
    Indeed. We can only presume Douglas had not heard of the correct
    He said this "(the photographer) may be better off walking and
    snapping shots to stich (sic) than the recent method of using a
    rotating head on a tripod". At no time did he refer to the potential
    problems caused by perspective changes, nor did he point out the fact
    that linear panoramams are generally only useful when there is a
    relatively 'linear' or flat scene without a lot of fore-/mid-/back-
    ground clutter, depending on the plane of interest.

    Don't get me wrong, linears have their place, but Doug's suggestions
    were so wide of the mark, it all had to be challenged.

    So, we still await Douglas' masterpiece showing all those yachts and
    masts.. (O: Perhaps, as he is talking to you, you can convince him
    to show us his expertise, as promised..


    mark.thomas.7, Jul 7, 2008
  16. Alienjones

    Annika1980 Guest

    Contrary to what you keep saying, I have NEVER claimed that your lousy
    photo was my own. Yes, I did some work on it after you posted the
    original and I posted the new and improved version on my site and
    linked to it here. I even offered to send you an improved version if
    you sent me the original. **** me for trying to be nice.

    But there was never the implication that the photo was taken by me as
    you claim. Your gripe at the time was that the photo on my pbase site
    originally had no caption or credit or attribution to you, but instead
    of asking me to properly credit you you starting yelling that I had
    stolen your pic. So after listening to you cry like a bitch for a day
    or so I credited it to you on the site. Nobody else (besides you) was
    stupid enough to believe that I took that horrible pic because the
    only ones that saw it were directed to it from here and they all knew
    it was simply an improved version of your lousy photo.

    If you want to keep stalking me then that's your right, but that poor
    horse was beaten to death years ago. You just make yourself look like
    a bigger idiot with each post. Kinda like Rita.
    Annika1980, Jul 7, 2008
  17. Alienjones

    Jeff R. Guest


    In the above paragraph Douglas *finally* admits that the two Manly photos
    were indeed taken from the same spot - not "stepped-out" as he had
    previously insisted.

    Here is a sample of the explanatory notes which accompanied Doug's post of
    these two pix:

    "...Either way this is a quick and dirty example of a Panorama (...)
    made by walking along the pathway above the road, taking shots
    at frequent intervals. Dozens of them!
    This is just two images of the final picture ... ...(it's an
    unfinished work) because there are another 8 or 9 images
    to be stitched into the picture before I'm done with it."

    Eight or nine, or dozens, or fifty? The "fifty" reference follows:

    " 10 megapixel images x 5 or 6 equals a final 50 or 60
    megapixel image..."

    Poor Doug.
    So easily confused. 50 Megapixels becomes 50 images.
    "Stepped-out" becomes 6"

    But wait! There's more:

    " I shot these images with a Panasonic FZ50 in RAW mode,
    setting it's Leica lens to 50mm which equates to about a
    medium wide lens in 35mm terms"

    That FZ50 of yours must have a h-u-u-u-ge sensor, Doug, for that to be the
    case. I guess that would make your Panasonic a "Stepped-out-Panno"?

    (...and why bother mentioning "it's (sic) Leica lens"? Who cares what
    company owns the franchise? You write like someone who's terminally hung up
    on brand-name envy. Nikes or Reebok, Doug?)

    Still more:

    " And yes! My dual CPU PC with 5 Meg of RAM labors under the
    strain of the computations needed as the image grows but... "

    My dual CPU PC would surely labour under the strain if it only had 5 Meg of

    Yes - I'm (we're) picking on you Doug - because you beg for it, with your
    supercilious invective and downright dishonesty. Your libellous webpages
    and your tiresome hollow threats.

    All I ask is that you admit your mistakes (a few of which are mentioned
    above) and apologise for being such a rude and ingracious old SOB.

    Then - who knows?
    We might share a friendly beer or two.
    Heaven knows - I've stocked up a few slabs for a (ahem) similar sort of
    occasion anyway...

    Waiting, but breath not held...
    Jeff R., Jul 7, 2008
  18. Alienjones

    Alienjones Guest

    All irrelevant rantings removed

    Boy... You are one sick puppy. Mark - or is it Charles today?

    A happy snapper with a digicam trying to make out in a DSLR forum...
    that he somehow has a clue while demonstrating quite the opposite.

    Now why is that?
    Alienjones, Jul 8, 2008
  19. Alienjones

    Mark Thomas Guest

    Which is a perfectly accurate summary - I watched this event unfold at
    the time, as I'm sure many others here did.

    Since then, Mr Obsessed has ranted and raved about this incident as if
    it was the end of his life. Can you imagine the sort of person who
    would get so upset about an incident that didn't actually cost him
    anything except (deserved) embarrassment? The fact that not a single
    person has rallied to mII's completely lost (and completely trivial)
    complaint would be a hint to most people. The only reason he now
    persists, is his ongoing need for 15 minutes of fame, and he *so* needs
    to be a 'victim'...

    It's a bit late to fix your credibility problem, mII, so maybe just
    change your name and try again. And try to understand what most people
    seem to get - when you post images to the web, expect them to be
    'reused' and reposted, especially if you post them asking for
    comment/advice. As long as you are not being ripped off (and you
    weren't), consider it publicity (it's all good!), and listen to the
    advice. I have no problem with folk altering and reposting my images
    for a good cause, and I think you'll find that applies to most here -
    except you. I remember the original image well, and believe me, you
    should have accepted the good advice offered to you. As it is, I
    presume you have learnt nothing except how to waste your existence on
    your lame 'crusade'.

    But do carry on. You and Dmac seem to have a lot in common, so keep it
    to this thread... (O:
    Mark Thomas, Jul 8, 2008
  20. Alienjones

    Mark Thomas Guest

    Let me translate the 'Dougspeak'
    "I am guilty of all charges, and would rather they were not brought up
    "I like to post personal abuse, and nobody but me is allowed to use more
    than identity. You may know me as Ryadia, Alienjones, Cryptopix or
    about a hundred others - I am the posterboy for HYPOCRISY."
    "I like to claim superiority, even though all my images get slammed. I
    am jealous that Mark seems to avoid attracting such criticism when he
    posts. I wish I knew why.."
    It's simple, Douglas. I don't make stupid claims. I do what I say I
    will do. I don't lie. There's the difference between us.

    Now, here's the questions again:

    1. Why did you post those Manly pictures from exactly the same location,
    pretend they were 'stepped out', promise to post the result, and then
    run away?

    2. Why won't you describe me, from your alleged security footage?

    3. Why won't you post your solicitor's name?

    4. Why haven't you posted your legal documents to Jeff?

    5. Can you explain exactly what the 'CPPA' is?? You claim on your Ebay
    shopfront that you are certified with them, and that the CPPA is an
    Industry Association. So who are they?

    I'll be repeating these requests every time you post, Doug. You are
    still a cowardly liar, and prove it every time you avoid
    those questions..
    Mark Thomas, Jul 8, 2008
    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.