Commenting On Unused Equipment
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: nospam on 1 Nov 2009 13:08 In article <sfkre51nd7uro2nlmff03cb5me9hde1jiq(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >The "available evidence" shows beyond any shadow of a doubt that the > >overwhelming majority of serious photographers, whether professional or > >advanced amateur, prefer SLRs for their most serious work. > > The available evidence actually shows the majority of cameras currently > used by "serious" photographers to be non-SLR, as in the past, when > famous pros preferred simple rangefinder cameras over SLRs. more unsubstantiated bullshit.
From: John McWilliams on 1 Nov 2009 14:08 Neil Harrington wrote: > "Bob Larter" <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > news:4aed04c1$1(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au... >> Curiouser and Curiouser wrote: >>> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 14:30:03 +1000, Bob Larter <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Curiouser and Curiouser wrote: >>>>> I'm a well accomplished professional. 50,000 photos on some years is >>>>> not >>>>> out of the question, >75% of that being of marketable quality. >>>> And yet you can't show us a single one of them. Imagine that. >>> On checking my "Scrapshots that beat DSLRs" folder, I find 14 images that >>> I >>> posted this year >> ROTFL! - I saw most of those images, & they weren't all that good for P&S >> shots, much less DSLR shots. >> >> PS: No, screwing with the follow-ups line won't work on me. > > I'm glad you pointed that out. I tend not to notice that sort of sleazy > trick. This jerk seems determined to be as much of a pest as he can, in > every way he can. IAE, FWIW: Until youse guys stop replying to and talking about the pest, he'll continue. Same with replying to Navas when he's in troll mode. Anyway, GWG. -- lsmft
From: Neil Harrington on 1 Nov 2009 14:16 "John McWilliams" <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote in message news:hckmcb$r80$2(a)news.eternal-september.org... > Neil Harrington wrote: >> "Bob Larter" <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:4aed04c1$1(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au... >>> Curiouser and Curiouser wrote: >>>> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 14:30:03 +1000, Bob Larter <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Curiouser and Curiouser wrote: >>>>>> I'm a well accomplished professional. 50,000 photos on some years is >>>>>> not >>>>>> out of the question, >75% of that being of marketable quality. >>>>> And yet you can't show us a single one of them. Imagine that. >>>> On checking my "Scrapshots that beat DSLRs" folder, I find 14 images >>>> that I >>>> posted this year >>> ROTFL! - I saw most of those images, & they weren't all that good for >>> P&S shots, much less DSLR shots. >>> >>> PS: No, screwing with the follow-ups line won't work on me. >> >> I'm glad you pointed that out. I tend not to notice that sort of sleazy >> trick. This jerk seems determined to be as much of a pest as he can, in >> every way he can. > > IAE, FWIW: Until youse guys stop replying to and talking about the pest, > he'll continue. "IAE"? > Same with replying to Navas when he's in troll mode. > Anyway, GWG. Dunno that one either. "Go with God"?
From: John McWilliams on 1 Nov 2009 15:15 Neil Harrington wrote: > "John McWilliams" <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote in message > news:hckmcb$r80$2(a)news.eternal-september.org... >> Neil Harrington wrote: >>> "Bob Larter" <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:4aed04c1$1(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au... >>>> Curiouser and Curiouser wrote: >>>>> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 14:30:03 +1000, Bob Larter <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Curiouser and Curiouser wrote: >>>>>>> I'm a well accomplished professional. 50,000 photos on some years is >>>>>>> not >>>>>>> out of the question, >75% of that being of marketable quality. >>>>>> And yet you can't show us a single one of them. Imagine that. >>>>> On checking my "Scrapshots that beat DSLRs" folder, I find 14 images >>>>> that I >>>>> posted this year >>>> ROTFL! - I saw most of those images, & they weren't all that good for >>>> P&S shots, much less DSLR shots. >>>> >>>> PS: No, screwing with the follow-ups line won't work on me. >>> I'm glad you pointed that out. I tend not to notice that sort of sleazy >>> trick. This jerk seems determined to be as much of a pest as he can, in >>> every way he can. >> IAE, FWIW: Until youse guys stop replying to and talking about the pest, >> he'll continue. > > "IAE"? > >> Same with replying to Navas when he's in troll mode. >> Anyway, GWG. > > Dunno that one either. "Go with God"? Bingo! You got the tougher one. In any event, iVaya con Dios! -- john mcwilliams
From: Savageduck on 1 Nov 2009 15:32
On 2009-11-01 12:15:59 -0800, John McWilliams <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> said: > Neil Harrington wrote: >> "John McWilliams" <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote in message >> news:hckmcb$r80$2(a)news.eternal-september.org... >>> Neil Harrington wrote: >>>> "Bob Larter" <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >>>> news:4aed04c1$1(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au... >>>>> Curiouser and Curiouser wrote: >>>>>> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 14:30:03 +1000, Bob Larter <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Curiouser and Curiouser wrote: >>>>>>>> I'm a well accomplished professional. 50,000 photos on some years is not >>>>>>>> out of the question, >75% of that being of marketable quality. >>>>>>> And yet you can't show us a single one of them. Imagine that. >>>>>> On checking my "Scrapshots that beat DSLRs" folder, I find 14 images that I >>>>>> posted this year >>>>> ROTFL! - I saw most of those images, & they weren't all that good for >>>>> P&S shots, much less DSLR shots. >>>>> >>>>> PS: No, screwing with the follow-ups line won't work on me. >>>> I'm glad you pointed that out. I tend not to notice that sort of sleazy >>>> trick. This jerk seems determined to be as much of a pest as he can, in >>>> every way he can. >>> IAE, FWIW: Until youse guys stop replying to and talking about the >>> pest, he'll continue. >> >> "IAE"? >> >>> Same with replying to Navas when he's in troll mode. >>> Anyway, GWG. >> >> Dunno that one either. "Go with God"? > > Bingo! You got the tougher one. In any event, > iVaya con Dios! ....and here I was thinking it was "Giggling With Glee" or perhaps more appropriate to NG's and off topic stuff, "Group Within Group"?? -- Regards, Savageduck |