Ain't he cute? [URL]http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/43331893[/URL]
Your photography (and your equipment)+(and your posting skills) suck. Other than that you seem to be a nice lady. RP© - An error is not a mistake until you refuse to correct it.
Your photography (and your equipment)+(and your posting skills) suck. Other than that you seem to be a nice lady.[/QUOTE] You are some sort of script that responds randomly to people who post links to pbase? Or is it just a sad life you live?
You are some sort of script that responds randomly to people who post links to pbase? Or is it just a sad life you live?[/QUOTE] That's Rich Pos, he's a good guy, and he's right. Annika's relentless snapshooting drivel has no place in an equipment group.
I didn't realize it was off topic. But I don't buy the premise that his equipment sucks. If you need to do better than Canon, I can't play here either!
That's Rich Pos, he's a good guy, and he's right. Annika's relentless snapshooting drivel has no place in an equipment group.
From: Roxy d'Urban http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/43331893 Aw, you're just saying that cause you're an idiot. One wonders whether you've ever taken a photograph in your miserable life? Perhaps I should've calculated some hyperfocals before snapping the snake? LOL! Back in your hole, slave!
I'm sure Rich is just having him on. And some shots are ok, but not shot after shot after shot after shot... What's the point? Annika's recent macro images have been of value, because they are made with a specific and unique lens.
Garter snake or something more exotic / dangerous? (He doesn't look dangerous, but a frog might think elsewise). Cheers, Alan
The shots are *ok*... it's all the unmitigated crowing that can be annoying. Annika's acerbic personality seems to be well rehearsed. After years of her inane posts and delusional bragging, I have become numb but occasionally feel compelled to respond. Usually the responses are congruent to how much alcohol has been ingested Any negative comments written about Annika, her equipment and photography skills or lack of are pretty much tongue in cheek (am I the only one who finds them amusing ) Just can't help myself sometimes. RP© - My turn.... www.pbase.com/that_rich
Compared to much of the other drivel posted here, I'd rather see more posts of peoples photos and discussions of equipment used and technique and issues. Bret, despite some of the silliness, is always pushing to get images that a lot of us never attempt, never mind achieve as well as Bret often does. That he doesn't engage in detailled drawn out debates about the minutiae of equipment is no problem when he's actually using the equipment to get images. Cheers, Alan.
I don't disagree with that but to post every stinkin shot, no matter how bad, is overkill. Some of the shots are so bad *I* feel embarrassed looking at them. I do not care what is posted to this group except for blatant trolling. The diversity / personality are what makes it a *community*, IMO.... although photography takes precedence over everything else, Off topic or on topic, I only read what interests me. Annika's posts are interesting in a masochistic sort of way. This drivel brought to you from the keyboard of, RP©
There's a problem, though, in that he's not doing this for any reason but to feed his ego. And other than the macro shots, I'm not sure what you're talking about in terms of attempting images most of us would not. I've certainly seen enough shots of golfers to last me a lifetime!
Matt Clara wrote: -some of his bird and nature shots are pretty impressive and detailed. Not easy to get unless you go to the right places and stake out the shot. (Okay, I'm lazy / unlucky when it comes to birds). -Cheerleaders. Sounds easy, but it is hard to outrun rock salt fired from a shotgun. ( been there, but I was just crosssing the field, I swear ). -Sports shots. Bret has shown some very good sports shots. Okay, not all that tough to attempt but he is persistent in getting better and better shots, but at least he's always shooting, and has a good eye for humor. Unkike most of the rest of us whining twits. As to ego, there are others aroung here who are voracious self ego inflators and who never show anything at all. Cheers, Alan.
As to ego, there are others aroung here who are voracious self ego True that. If I wanted to feed my ego I'd simply boast that I took 50 rolls a week (or was it per day?), or that I just got a new (old) Leica to replace my D70 which replaced my D60. But that ain't me. It would be nice if some of my shots generated helpful responses instead of the usual "they are soft" when they really are anything but. I took this pic of a bald eagle just a few hours ago: http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/43359924 Now it isn't the best bird pic I've ever taken, but for a 400mm w/2X handheld from 200 yards, it ain't that bad. And the challenge is always there for someone to post something better.
How dare you? I always give a link to my website! ;-) (and don't forget those pics of that damn dog of his...
Imagine the ones he doesn't post. Or the ones he posted when he first got his EOS-1v a few years ago. There's always worse! But some of Bret's captions have that New York Post headline cleverness. For example, for a given story, here are two headlines: Wall Street Journal: "Prominent executives murdered in shooting on Wall Street" New York Post: "Blood Bath on Wall Street" ;-) (Sorry I can't recall if the above is real or some humor I spotted some years ago). Another (true one) was the day after the North American Free Trade Agreement was signed. New York Post: "The morning NAFTA". Cheers, Alan.
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/43331893 Garter snake or something more exotic / dangerous? (He doesn't look dangerous, but a frog might think elsewise). ================= Don't know, don't care. There are two kinds of snakes .... good ones and live ones. Maybe someday I'll have guts enough to attempt that shot with the Marvelous Macro MP-E.
