Photo Printer Suggestions?

Let's just clarify why Douglas is so upset.

He posted a page containing lies and bad advice about linear panoramas
and promoted it here. After it was criticised by Jeff R, me and many
others, he removed the page but continued posting about how he could do
a linear panorama of the scene (in Manly, Qld).

Jeff reposted the missing page, giving Douglas clear credit for its
content and not substantially altering it in any form.

So, essentially Douglas "St James" MacDonald is saying that he is really
angry because his *own webpage* is embarrassing him, and he wants to be
able to continue with this practice of posting pages with flawed
information and then trying to pretend it never happened.

Just like his old reduction-passed-off-as-enlargement claims.. For
example, on the very same thread on which he introduced "Graham Hunt" to
the world:
http://groups.google.com.au/group/rec.photo.digital.slr-systems/browse_frm/thread/38251efcf54a561c
Douglas was also busted by Gisle Hannemyr and others for trying the 3
card trick..:

Gisle wrote (in reply to Douglas):

So it's no surprise that Douglas finds his own webpages so embarrassing.

 

You stated that you don't care what the law is, you'll continue to
steal other people's work.

I'd say he was accurate in saying that you're a feral idiot.

"Sociopath" is another word.

Nope.

 

'Ray', would you explain to the eager audience how reposting a webpage
is 'stealing other people's work'?

While you're doing that, would you also explain how Google avoids
prosecution for its cached page service, given it is doing exactly the
same thing? And then, how (and why) www.archive.org manages to exist?

And then do comment on the morality of posting a webpage full of
misleading information, then removing it and refusing to be accountable
for what you said.

I'm sure you will be highly erudite and informed on such matters, and
that you have looked into the circumstances before commenting.

 

(Ray Fischer) wrote in

What the idiots don't tell you Ray is that I posted a complete example of
the process along with all the images I made it from here:
http://www.d-mac.info/examples/4theidiots.htm

The notion someone else can decide when and where I post my web pages and
who actaully controls what of my copyright images are published and where
they are published is absurd.

The copyright laws exist to protect me from feral idiots like these two.

 

Never mind what I posted. I cancelled the article after readin back
in the thread some but, as you see, cancels don't always work.

 

but it doesn't include ALL THE IMAGES Doug, so yet again you lie, there are
parts of the (for want of a better word) finished article that have no
relation to any of the images you said were the source images. the end
result has lost the concrete pathway, a tree starts growing in mid air,
there is a stairway to nowhere, a one legged bench and a whole raft of
perspective and alignment errors that you tried to hide behind hastily
place, pasted in trees.
You really are delusional if you keep bringing that complete hodgepodge of
an image and call it a stepped out or linear panorama, even Picasso would
get sea sick looking at it.

 

Wow! I sometimes (..grin..) disagree with what you say, Ray, but you've
just proven you have another side.. Well done.

cheers,

mt


PS - Seeing Doug raised that ridiculous 'linear pano' link again, here
is where his work got reviewed (aka trashed by all who saw it):

http://groups.google.com.au/group/aus.photo/browse_frm/thread/935da59cde7a455


Selected quotes:
N - The evidence is clear, Doug. It can't be done by you.
T - no where near a pano, there's bits missing
X - Obvious to everone but D-mac. He thinks everyone is as dumb as him
DJ - you seriously call that a decent "stepped out panorama"? ROFL.
What happened to the front of the 2nd beach-house from the left?...
Oops D-Mac, looks like you put your foot in it again.
PD - not even any sort of attempt at stepping out at all, poor fake
A - a quite poorly pieced together montage...not even close to being a
panorama, stepped out or otherwise. It is rubbish. Another botched
attempt for D-mac the liar.
Mike - that.. architect built the second flat in the condo' a good 1.5
m wider than the other flats.
ONS - Is this (a) spot the mistakes puzzles from Take 5 magazine? The
whole area around the 2 in 2008 is out of whack, steps missing...
J - Why did you bother? To prove that stitching is something new to
you?

 

No no no, AC, You must have missed Doug's earlier post.
Doug's "client" for that photo *asked* him to to remove the path.

mmmpphhhh...
ROTFLMAO!

Fair dinkum - you couldn't make this stuff up.

I *betch'a* Doug's "client" asked for all those changes, too.

Wait and see.

 

....where he trys to (unsuccessfully) weasel out of admitting that he cannot
produce the panorama described on this page:
http://www.mendosus.com/photography/doug.html

You misunderstand Doug. I am just trying to give you an opportunity to
prove me wrong - which you have failed at miserably to date.

Working well so far, Doug? http://www.mendosus.com/photography/doug.html

Do the Manly thing, Doug.

 

"The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,
Moves on: nor all your Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all your Tears wash out a Word of it"--The Rubaiyat of Omar
Khayyam

Assume that if it posted it is now part of history. Even if your
server honors cancels from the original poster, the next server down
the line likely doesn't honor foreign cancels. Always reread your
post and make sure you want to send it.

 

just goes to show I dont read all of Douggies post's

he will, and totaly ignore the fact that you proposed these excuses, and in
about a month he will call you a liar and a thief for even sugesting that it
was your idea all along
I might just forward the "image" to a friend who is the Art teacher at one
of the Schools I used to do work for, She might want to give it to one of
her Photography classes to disect, just as an educational way of showing
them that not everyone is an expert with Photoshop.

 

You realise that this will mean that the next addition to Doug's website
will be:

"My professionalism has now been recognised by its inclusion as part of
the approved State School Curriculum."
(O:

First, he was the only Oz photographer referring to himself as an
'Australian qualified.. Victorian indentured tradesman'.
Then of course he gained his WIPm award. (Only $35 and you can buy one
too!)
Then he became a Finalist (yes, a *finalist* mark you), in the
absolutely *huge* Quest Newspaper 2007 Business Achiever awards. (Er,
at least the ones for the Redlands district - let's not get carried away.)
And then, the honour of not only being certified by the well-known
"CPPA", but also, coincidentally, its registrant, CEO, and seemingly
only 'member'! I note that the CPPA isn't actually mentioned on his wnp
website now, perhaps related to the fact that the CPPA site
(www.cppa.org.au) is strangely frozen in time. Yes, still awaiting that
one extra member so it can legally incorporate, and therefore actually..
exist. And it still has the grammatical error in it's title (pun
intended). Wonder who wrote that page?


He's an entertainer, alright.

 

I have him killfiled, he bores me, same shit different day.
I did notice in one of your replies to him he said, apologise or I
will serve the papers.

Didn't he say they were served back in March/April?
Jesus, I have been to western Sydney several times the las couple of
months and each time I think "What ever happened to the papers serving
party"

 

I would do that too but I know that he often posts misleading
information and false claims, and I would like to think that newbies to
usenet (not that there are many nowadays as usenet slowly expires) are
not taken in. And also that anyone considering using his services can
search the web and find out about his 'skills', methods and morals and
make their own judgements..

I don't have the exact dates to hand, but yes. There have been about 4
occasions when Douglas (or his very best friend Julian) claimed to have
either served 'the papers' or was just about to, but nothing has ever
shown up, of course.

On several occasions he has said he knows where I am, and he does indeed
have a valid postal address for me (from my domain name info), and my
email address has always been valid. I have made the offer several
times to give my full details to any nominated legal representative,
but of course he won't do that. His approach is just to bluff and
threaten anyone who criticises his 'work'.

He did once complain to my ISP about me reposting one of his images,
brave boy that he is. The ISP rep and I had quite a chuckle over his
postings and 'demand', but I had already removed the image as it had
served its purpose. Needless to say if a web image is reposted with
full attribution (which it was), Douglas would have such a demand
laughed out of court if it ever got that far - which is why he seems to
be having some difficulty getting Jeff R to take down his reposted page at:
http://www.mendosus.com/photography/doug.html

There's a fairly good chance, given some of his threats and comments in
the past, that the final result of all this will be the exact *reverse*
of what Douglas fantasises about...

 

? "Helen" <> ?????? ??? ??????

Alan is correct, as I mentioned in a reply on this thread, most of my
work is b&w. I also asked if archival prints are possible.
Helen

<end quote>
Yes, with the ink I am currently using, Chroma life 100, as its name
implies. (On the Canon Pixma iP 4300;if you think it's too cheap you can go
to the next model, 5500 or whatever). This ink is the standard Canon ink.
You can use then Canon Photo Paper Pro. Also, regular chemical prints are
not forever"Colour dyes may in time change".

HTH.HAND.

 

This one looks to have the same size carts as my 1800 but a different
ink set with light version of colors and only one black, not gloss & matte.

--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam