Flower macros
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: How far have P&S's come?
Next: Why P&S's should do some reading before taking the plunge with real cameras
From: MC on 30 May 2010 13:26 Richard wrote: > > "MC" <any(a)any.any> wrote in message > news:xn0gur32t1mhtg000(a)news.virginmedia.com... > > Robert Spanjaard wrote: > > > > > A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize). > > > > > > They might do well in the Wallpaper Shootin too, especially 4 and > > > 5. But I already submitted a different shot. > > > > > > http://www.arumes.com/temp/macro/ > > > > You should first ask yourself, as should every photographer who > > wishes to put their photos on public dispaly (let alone unashemedly > > publicise the websites containing said pictures), are they really > > worthy of public scrutiny? You must, firstly, be your own harshest > > critic and then (and only then) allow others to critcise. > > > > May I ask why you think these are worthy? > > > > MC > > No. If you have to ask permission to ask a question, you are not > worthy of asking the question. > > Richard Hmm... I was not asking permission in the context of asking permission but merely as vehicle of politeness. MC
From: John Navas on 30 May 2010 13:47 On Sun, 30 May 2010 17:26:08 GMT, "MC" <any(a)any.any> wrote in <xn0gurbyadltam000(a)news.virginmedia.com>: >Richard wrote: >> "MC" <any(a)any.any> wrote in message >> news:xn0gur32t1mhtg000(a)news.virginmedia.com... >> > May I ask why you think these are worthy? >> No. If you have to ask permission to ask a question, you are not >> worthy of asking the question. >Hmm... I was not asking permission in the context of asking permission >but merely as vehicle of politeness. He knows. He's just being cute and a jerk. -- Best regards, John "Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea - massive, difficult to redirect, awe inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it." --Gene Spafford
From: Robert Coe on 31 May 2010 18:14 On Sun, 30 May 2010 17:26:08 GMT, "MC" <any(a)any.any> wrote: : Richard wrote: : : > "MC" <any(a)any.any> wrote in message : > news:xn0gur32t1mhtg000(a)news.virginmedia.com... : > > Robert Spanjaard wrote: : > > : > > > A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize). : > > > : > > > They might do well in the Wallpaper Shootin too, especially 4 and : > > > 5. But I already submitted a different shot. : > > > : > > > http://www.arumes.com/temp/macro/ : > > : > > You should first ask yourself, as should every photographer who : > > wishes to put their photos on public dispaly (let alone unashemedly : > > publicise the websites containing said pictures), are they really : > > worthy of public scrutiny? You must, firstly, be your own harshest : > > critic and then (and only then) allow others to critcise. : > > : > > May I ask why you think these are worthy? : > > : > > MC : > : > No. If you have to ask permission to ask a question, you are not : > worthy of asking the question. : > : > Richard : : Hmm... I was not asking permission in the context of asking permission : but merely as vehicle of politeness. Politeness? You were sneering at the man's photos. Where's the politeness in that? Bob
From: Dudley Hanks on 31 May 2010 18:31 "Robert Coe" <bob(a)1776.COM> wrote in message news:80d806leqf30v8ep1q2aqjgq3d3lr84asu(a)4ax.com... > On Sun, 30 May 2010 17:26:08 GMT, "MC" <any(a)any.any> wrote: > : Richard wrote: > : > : > "MC" <any(a)any.any> wrote in message > : > news:xn0gur32t1mhtg000(a)news.virginmedia.com... > : > > Robert Spanjaard wrote: > : > > > : > > > A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize). > : > > > > : > > > They might do well in the Wallpaper Shootin too, especially 4 and > : > > > 5. But I already submitted a different shot. > : > > > > : > > > http://www.arumes.com/temp/macro/ > : > > > : > > You should first ask yourself, as should every photographer who > : > > wishes to put their photos on public dispaly (let alone unashemedly > : > > publicise the websites containing said pictures), are they really > : > > worthy of public scrutiny? You must, firstly, be your own harshest > : > > critic and then (and only then) allow others to critcise. > : > > > : > > May I ask why you think these are worthy? > : > > > : > > MC > : > > : > No. If you have to ask permission to ask a question, you are not > : > worthy of asking the question. > : > > : > Richard > : > : Hmm... I was not asking permission in the context of asking permission > : but merely as vehicle of politeness. > > Politeness? You were sneering at the man's photos. Where's the politeness > in > that? > > Bob Perhaps, before posting a criticism to a public group for scrutiny, the critic should ask himself whether or not the grammar, spelling, syntax, tone, etc of his message is worthy of public attention... He really should be his own harshest critic... Take Care, Dudley
From: MC on 31 May 2010 18:32
Robert Coe wrote: > On Sun, 30 May 2010 17:26:08 GMT, "MC" <any(a)any.any> wrote: > : Richard wrote: > : > : > "MC" <any(a)any.any> wrote in message > : > news:xn0gur32t1mhtg000(a)news.virginmedia.com... > : > > Robert Spanjaard wrote: > : > > > : > > > A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize). > : > > > > : > > > They might do well in the Wallpaper Shootin too, especially 4 > and : > > > 5. But I already submitted a different shot. > : > > > > : > > > http://www.arumes.com/temp/macro/ > : > > > : > > You should first ask yourself, as should every photographer who > : > > wishes to put their photos on public dispaly (let alone > unashemedly : > > publicise the websites containing said pictures), > are they really : > > worthy of public scrutiny? You must, firstly, > be your own harshest : > > critic and then (and only then) allow > others to critcise. : > > > : > > May I ask why you think these are worthy? > : > > > : > > MC > : > > : > No. If you have to ask permission to ask a question, you are not > : > worthy of asking the question. > : > > : > Richard > : > : Hmm... I was not asking permission in the context of asking > permission : but merely as vehicle of politeness. > > Politeness? You were sneering at the man's photos. Where's the > politeness in that? > In what context was I "sneering". I think you need to read my post again then re read it and tell me where I was impolite, because I certainly was not "sneering. MC |