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: Robert Coe on 31 May 2010 21:04 On Mon, 31 May 2010 17:20:57 -0700, John McWilliams <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote: : Robert Coe wrote: : > On Mon, 31 May 2010 15:52:51 -0700, John McWilliams <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote: : > : Pete wrote: : : > : > "A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize)." : > : > : > : > I enjoyed them (thanks Robert S). : > : > : > : > This is a photography newsgroup not an English lesson. : > : : > : : > : There should be an apostrophe after the word "newsgroup"....! :-) : > : > Actually, the word you were groping for there is "comma". : : No groping at all: Just seeing if anyone knew the difference and was : paying attention; I wasn't! .... :-) : : Besides, you left out the more interesting target: : : > Not to criticalicate anything, though.... Well, I think I'd have said "criticalicize", but ... Bob
From: Robert Coe on 31 May 2010 21:12 On Mon, 31 May 2010 23:32:55 GMT, "Dudley Hanks" <dhanks(a)blind-apertures.ca> wrote: : : "Pete" <available.on.request(a)aserver.invalid> wrote in message : news:2010053123493461221-availableonrequest(a)aserverinvalid... : > On 2010-05-31 23:31:54 +0100, Dudley Hanks said: : > : >> "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 : > : > The OP wrote: : > "A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize)." : > : > I enjoyed them (thanks Robert S). : > : > This is a photography newsgroup not an English lesson. : > : > -- : > Pete : > : : True, but it's a RECREATIONAL photo group... : : The idea behind usenet, as far as I understand, is for people to exchange : ideas, techniques, etc, so each can learn from the experience / talents of : others. The critic seemed to suggest that some arbitrary standard of : proficiency needs to be attained prior to exhibiting ones work, yet : displayed a woeful disregard for certain accepted linguistic standards. : : If others need meet his idea of graphic excellence in order to be welcomed, : then perhaps he needs to live up to the standards others like for ease of : understanding. : : "What's good for the goose, ..." I believe it's "What's SAUCE for the goose ...". ;^) Bob
From: Pete on 31 May 2010 21:24 On 2010-06-01 01:20:57 +0100, John McWilliams said: > Robert Coe wrote: >> On Mon, 31 May 2010 15:52:51 -0700, John McWilliams <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote: >> : Pete wrote: > >> : > "A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize)." >> : > : > I enjoyed them (thanks Robert S). >> : > : > This is a photography newsgroup not an English lesson. >> : : : There should be an apostrophe after the word "newsgroup"....! :-) >> >> Actually, the word you were groping for there is "comma". > > No groping at all: Just seeing if anyone knew the difference and was > paying attention; I wasn't! .... :-) I should've groped for that comma. I get in a muddle, I thought comma groping was something I ought to stop doing. You could've written: there should be a catastrophe after the word "newsgroup" :-) > Besides, you left out the more interesting target: > > > Not to criticalicate anything, though.... An excellent word. No results from Google, which must be a first. -- Pete
From: Pete on 31 May 2010 21:38 On 2010-06-01 00:32:55 +0100, Dudley Hanks said: > "Pete" <available.on.request(a)aserver.invalid> wrote in message > news:2010053123493461221-availableonrequest(a)aserverinvalid... >> On 2010-05-31 23:31:54 +0100, Dudley Hanks said: >> >>> "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 >> >> The OP wrote: >> "A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize)." >> >> I enjoyed them (thanks Robert S). >> >> This is a photography newsgroup not an English lesson. >> >> -- >> Pete >> > > True, but it's a RECREATIONAL photo group... > > The idea behind usenet, as far as I understand, is for people to > exchange ideas, techniques, etc, so each can learn from the experience > / talents of others. The critic seemed to suggest that some arbitrary > standard of proficiency needs to be attained prior to exhibiting ones > work, yet displayed a woeful disregard for certain accepted linguistic > standards. > > If others need meet his idea of graphic excellence in order to be > welcomed, then perhaps he needs to live up to the standards others like > for ease of understanding. > > "What's good for the goose, ..." Point taken. I didn't read the post that way because it gave me something to think about for my own work. -- Pete
From: tony cooper on 31 May 2010 22:29
On Mon, 31 May 2010 15:52:51 -0700, John McWilliams <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote: >Pete wrote: >> On 2010-05-31 23:31:54 +0100, Dudley Hanks said: >> >>> "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 >> >> The OP wrote: >> "A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize)." >> >> I enjoyed them (thanks Robert S). >> >> This is a photography newsgroup not an English lesson. > > >There should be an apostrophe after the word "newsgroup"....! :-) An example of Skitt's Law: Spelling or grammar flames always contain spelling or grammar errors You impropergatedly typed an ellipsis...one too many periods/full stops. >Not to criticalicate That could be considered to be a nonce word. >anything, though.... -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida |