A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Depth of field - two of them?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old January 25th 19, 06:06 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Commander Kinsey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 548
Default Depth of field - two of them?

On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 10:12:48 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:

On Monday, 21 January 2019 18:19:19 UTC, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 16:37:50 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:

On Monday, 21 January 2019 15:59:55 UTC, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 15:39:12 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:

On Monday, 21 January 2019 15:12:57 UTC, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 15:03:11 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:


If I block friends of friends, and also friends, I'd see nothing. So what would be the point? Anyone I actually want to speak to, I email, phone, text, or visit in person. Why would I want to discuss things with friends where everyone can see them?

Although I only have ~80 friends on FB most I don't see anything from, but they can messege me or contact me in a group message or post, I don't see what they have for dinner as I have seleted not to see every post they make.
I think I only have 2 friends on FB that I haven't met in real life anyway.
If you know how to use FB it can be useful, but like any method of communication you should be able to control it and I can.

It just seems completely pointless to me. If you want to contact your friend, why not just email them? You can send them videos or photos that way quite easily, and even to more than one friend at a time.

But what if I want all the followers of a friends band to see the video I recordeed of them, I don;t have all their email address and there might be others that liike the band that are not my friends, I might not even like them but why should that stop them from watching the video ?

My Aunt is in several communities of 50 people. She simply has mailing lists in her email program.

and can those in the mailing list contact each other easily almost without thought ?


Just how difficult do you think it is to send an email?


It isn't difficult but it's easier with FB to a group of people that are actually interested. They can subscribe to the group or not there decision on a day to day basis.
I know peolpe in bands and maintaining a list of a few hundred emails address and keeping it up to date with who wants to recieve what isn't easy.
It;s OK for soem who have half a dozen friends but witha few hundred sometimes 1000s it gets more difficult.
But people with a handful of friends might never understand such problems.


The trouble is FB is web-based - if you've ever had the misfortune to use webmail you'll know it's nothing like the real thing. Too much fluffy ****ing about, far better with a program on your own computer. As for large groups of 1000, what's the chances of all those people actually having a FB account?

But I do use youtube to store the video and FB to publicise it, and I don't want 100s of people knowing my email address and I don't want their email addresses.

Why would you want to show a video to people you don't like?

Why not, I'm pretty sure attenbough wouldn't like everyone that views what he does, it's sort of against the laws of probability.


Youtube can publicise a video without using FB.


Yes it can but it isn't as effective as FB is.


I've not found FB to be effective for anything. It's so full of junk adverts and things from people you're not interested in, you're bound to miss the things you actually want to see.

And Hitler was a vegitarian does that make all vegatarians bad , don;t answer that ;-)


Maybe that's what made him think clearly.


Depending on your definition of clearly, as clearly he lost.


Against huge odds. If you entered a chess tournament and were beaten by 7 grandmasters, but won against 3, you'd say you were pretty damn good.
  #102  
Old January 25th 19, 07:32 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Commander Kinsey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 548
Default Depth of field - two of them?

On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 10:23:53 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:

On Monday, 21 January 2019 18:37:59 UTC, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 16:48:13 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:


If I'm looking for something, I want to buy it today, not when an ad happens to appear.


How do you get soemthing today from amazon via china.
You see I order lots of things on behalf of the students and they often want things yesterday.


If I'm in a hurry I buy from a UK Ebay seller who has a 1st class post option. You could get it the next day, as fast as any mail order outlet like CPC, RS etc. I used to get all sorts on Ebay for the school - like a replacement Dell motherboard for £20 instead of £100, or a laptop battery for £15 instead of £40. I used freecycle a lot too, mostly in the other direction. The council tried to charge us for disposal of old desks, computers, filing cabinets, etc, so I just photographed them, stuck them on freecycle, and people came and collected them. In one case (as I happened to own a Transit van at the time) I took 30 pieces of furniture to a local charity. They got free perfectly usable stuff, we had to pay no disposal fee. People just don't think outside the box enough nowadays.

Everybody fastforwards ads on TV,

Then how the hell do you know when anything is on TV or what time.


The EPG or the TV Times.


Yjose are ads, didn't you know,


No ads on the Sky EPG. Just a list of the programs on each channel along with a description.

and what about the ads yuo have to lok at in TV times.


I don't have to look at them, I just look at the listings. It's not like on the TV where you have to wait or fastforward. And they're not moving images that are distracting like on a webpage.

and blocks them on the internet. If I want to buy something, I search for it, they shouldn't be searching for me.

they aren't.


They're telling me to buy something when I clearly don't want it.


No they aren't, an offer isn't an instruction to buy unless you have a really low IQ something just below the level my cat manages.


Ok, I rephrase, they're ASKING me if I would like to buy something. It's as annoying as someone coming to my door to sell me double glazing. When I want double glazing I'll phone them up (and three of them to get a good quote), not the other way round.

Before Xmas I was looking to buy a 4 TB HD, looked on amazon seleted the one I wanted at £85 to find it was only availble at that price with amazon prime which I don't have. A day or so later an ad appeared for PCworld telling me that they had the same drive for exaclty the same price and I didn't need amazon prime all I needed to do was take a 10min walk to my nearest store.
I never really think of checking PCworld when buying anything let alone stuff for my mac.


Use Ebay, a wider selection of stuff at much lower prices than Amazon.. I buy everything except food on Ebay.


Prove it.


Prove what? The wider selection, the lower prices, or that I only buy food elsewhere?

I want a WD 4 TB external drive NEW not used and I want it today.
I want it by 1pm.

I can get one within 10 mins from me at PCworld (well at lunchtime)
So show me where it is cheaper on ebay and easier to get and from a relible source.

https://www.pcworld.co.uk/gbuk/compu...10868-pdt.html


PC WORLD! You gotta be kidding me. I once went in there to get a simple adapter - from DVI to HDMI or something. £12!!! I said no and bought it for £2 on Ebay including postage. I don't understand why that company isstill in business with the stupidly high prices they charge.

So why do you have to have this drive today and not tomorrow? Things I used often, like RAM and hard disks, I'd have a pile of them in stock myself, so I had them instantly available. Anything uncommon, well they just had to wait a day or two. Some of the teachers were quite surprised I even had batteries in stock. I'd get asked "Where's the best place to buy AA NiMH batteries? I need 20 of them." I'd pull a box of them out of a drawer and say "Here". They were even more surprised when the cost was a third of what they'd have paid in Argos. It did get a bit out of hand when all the kids started wanting USB sticks :-) I ended up buying a pack of 300 on Ebay.
  #103  
Old January 25th 19, 11:30 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default Depth of field - two of them?

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 18:06:17 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 10:12:48 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:

On Monday, 21 January 2019 18:19:19 UTC, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 16:37:50 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:

On Monday, 21 January 2019 15:59:55 UTC, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 15:39:12 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:

On Monday, 21 January 2019 15:12:57 UTC, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 15:03:11 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:


If I block friends of friends, and also friends, I'd see nothing. So what would be the point? Anyone I actually want to speak to, I email, phone, text, or visit in person. Why would I want to discuss things with friends where everyone can see them?

Although I only have ~80 friends on FB most I don't see anything from, but they can messege me or contact me in a group message or post, I don't see what they have for dinner as I have seleted not to see every post they make.
I think I only have 2 friends on FB that I haven't met in real life anyway.
If you know how to use FB it can be useful, but like any method of communication you should be able to control it and I can.

It just seems completely pointless to me. If you want to contact your friend, why not just email them? You can send them videos or photos that way quite easily, and even to more than one friend at a time.

But what if I want all the followers of a friends band to see the video I recordeed of them, I don;t have all their email address and there might be others that liike the band that are not my friends, I might not even like them but why should that stop them from watching the video ?

My Aunt is in several communities of 50 people. She simply has mailing lists in her email program.

and can those in the mailing list contact each other easily almost without thought ?

Just how difficult do you think it is to send an email?


It isn't difficult but it's easier with FB to a group of people that are actually interested. They can subscribe to the group or not there decision on a day to day basis.
I know peolpe in bands and maintaining a list of a few hundred emails address and keeping it up to date with who wants to recieve what isn't easy.
It;s OK for soem who have half a dozen friends but witha few hundred sometimes 1000s it gets more difficult.
But people with a handful of friends might never understand such problems.


The trouble is FB is web-based - if you've ever had the misfortune to use webmail you'll know it's nothing like the real thing. Too much fluffy ****ing about, far better with a program on your own computer. As for large groups of 1000, what's the chances of all those people actually having a FB account?

But I do use youtube to store the video and FB to publicise it, and I don't want 100s of people knowing my email address and I don't want their email addresses.

Why would you want to show a video to people you don't like?

Why not, I'm pretty sure attenbough wouldn't like everyone that views what he does, it's sort of against the laws of probability.

Youtube can publicise a video without using FB.


Yes it can but it isn't as effective as FB is.


I've not found FB to be effective for anything. It's so full of junk adverts and things from people you're not interested in, you're bound to miss the things you actually want to see.

And Hitler was a vegitarian does that make all vegatarians bad , don;t answer that ;-)

Maybe that's what made him think clearly.


Depending on your definition of clearly, as clearly he lost.


Against huge odds. If you entered a chess tournament and were beaten by 7 grandmasters, but won against 3, you'd say you were pretty damn good.


The Germany they built was pretty damned good, but still not good
enough.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #104  
Old January 26th 19, 12:38 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Commander Kinsey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 548
Default Depth of field - two of them?

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 23:30:25 -0000, Eric Stevens wrote:

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 18:06:17 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 10:12:48 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:

On Monday, 21 January 2019 18:19:19 UTC, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 16:37:50 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:

On Monday, 21 January 2019 15:59:55 UTC, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 15:39:12 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:

On Monday, 21 January 2019 15:12:57 UTC, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 15:03:11 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:


If I block friends of friends, and also friends, I'd see nothing. So what would be the point? Anyone I actually want to speak to, I email, phone, text, or visit in person. Why would I want to discuss things with friends where everyone can see them?

Although I only have ~80 friends on FB most I don't see anything from, but they can messege me or contact me in a group message or post, I don't see what they have for dinner as I have seleted not to see every post they make.
I think I only have 2 friends on FB that I haven't met in real life anyway.
If you know how to use FB it can be useful, but like any method of communication you should be able to control it and I can.

It just seems completely pointless to me. If you want to contact your friend, why not just email them? You can send them videos or photos that way quite easily, and even to more than one friend at a time.

But what if I want all the followers of a friends band to see the video I recordeed of them, I don;t have all their email address and there might be others that liike the band that are not my friends, I might not even like them but why should that stop them from watching the video ?

My Aunt is in several communities of 50 people. She simply has mailing lists in her email program.

and can those in the mailing list contact each other easily almost without thought ?

Just how difficult do you think it is to send an email?

It isn't difficult but it's easier with FB to a group of people that are actually interested. They can subscribe to the group or not there decision on a day to day basis.
I know peolpe in bands and maintaining a list of a few hundred emails address and keeping it up to date with who wants to recieve what isn't easy.
It;s OK for soem who have half a dozen friends but witha few hundred sometimes 1000s it gets more difficult.
But people with a handful of friends might never understand such problems.


The trouble is FB is web-based - if you've ever had the misfortune to use webmail you'll know it's nothing like the real thing. Too much fluffy ****ing about, far better with a program on your own computer. As for large groups of 1000, what's the chances of all those people actually having a FB account?

But I do use youtube to store the video and FB to publicise it, and I don't want 100s of people knowing my email address and I don't want their email addresses.

Why would you want to show a video to people you don't like?

Why not, I'm pretty sure attenbough wouldn't like everyone that views what he does, it's sort of against the laws of probability.

Youtube can publicise a video without using FB.

Yes it can but it isn't as effective as FB is.


I've not found FB to be effective for anything. It's so full of junk adverts and things from people you're not interested in, you're bound to miss the things you actually want to see.

And Hitler was a vegitarian does that make all vegatarians bad , don;t answer that ;-)

Maybe that's what made him think clearly.

Depending on your definition of clearly, as clearly he lost.


Against huge odds. If you entered a chess tournament and were beaten by 7 grandmasters, but won against 3, you'd say you were pretty damn good.


The Germany they built was pretty damned good, but still not good
enough.


If an enormous bodybuilder gets beaten up by 50 wimps, would you say the bodybuilder was useless at fighting?
  #105  
Old January 26th 19, 01:04 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default Depth of field - two of them?

On Sat, 26 Jan 2019 00:38:29 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 23:30:25 -0000, Eric Stevens wrote:

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 18:06:17 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 10:12:48 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:

On Monday, 21 January 2019 18:19:19 UTC, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 16:37:50 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:

On Monday, 21 January 2019 15:59:55 UTC, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 15:39:12 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:

On Monday, 21 January 2019 15:12:57 UTC, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 15:03:11 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:


If I block friends of friends, and also friends, I'd see nothing. So what would be the point? Anyone I actually want to speak to, I email, phone, text, or visit in person. Why would I want to discuss things with friends where everyone can see them?

Although I only have ~80 friends on FB most I don't see anything from, but they can messege me or contact me in a group message or post, I don't see what they have for dinner as I have seleted not to see every post they make.
I think I only have 2 friends on FB that I haven't met in real life anyway.
If you know how to use FB it can be useful, but like any method of communication you should be able to control it and I can.

It just seems completely pointless to me. If you want to contact your friend, why not just email them? You can send them videos or photos that way quite easily, and even to more than one friend at a time.

But what if I want all the followers of a friends band to see the video I recordeed of them, I don;t have all their email address and there might be others that liike the band that are not my friends, I might not even like them but why should that stop them from watching the video ?

My Aunt is in several communities of 50 people. She simply has mailing lists in her email program.

and can those in the mailing list contact each other easily almost without thought ?

Just how difficult do you think it is to send an email?

It isn't difficult but it's easier with FB to a group of people that are actually interested. They can subscribe to the group or not there decision on a day to day basis.
I know peolpe in bands and maintaining a list of a few hundred emails address and keeping it up to date with who wants to recieve what isn't easy.
It;s OK for soem who have half a dozen friends but witha few hundred sometimes 1000s it gets more difficult.
But people with a handful of friends might never understand such problems.

The trouble is FB is web-based - if you've ever had the misfortune to use webmail you'll know it's nothing like the real thing. Too much fluffy ****ing about, far better with a program on your own computer. As for large groups of 1000, what's the chances of all those people actually having a FB account?

But I do use youtube to store the video and FB to publicise it, and I don't want 100s of people knowing my email address and I don't want their email addresses.

Why would you want to show a video to people you don't like?

Why not, I'm pretty sure attenbough wouldn't like everyone that views what he does, it's sort of against the laws of probability.

Youtube can publicise a video without using FB.

Yes it can but it isn't as effective as FB is.

I've not found FB to be effective for anything. It's so full of junk adverts and things from people you're not interested in, you're bound to miss the things you actually want to see.

And Hitler was a vegitarian does that make all vegatarians bad , don;t answer that ;-)

Maybe that's what made him think clearly.

Depending on your definition of clearly, as clearly he lost.

Against huge odds. If you entered a chess tournament and were beaten by 7 grandmasters, but won against 3, you'd say you were pretty damn good.


The Germany they built was pretty damned good, but still not good
enough.


If an enormous bodybuilder gets beaten up by 50 wimps, would you say the bodybuilder was useless at fighting?


I would say he was not good enough.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #106  
Old January 26th 19, 10:50 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Commander Kinsey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 548
Default Depth of field - two of them?

On Sat, 26 Jan 2019 01:04:32 -0000, Eric Stevens wrote:

On Sat, 26 Jan 2019 00:38:29 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 23:30:25 -0000, Eric Stevens wrote:

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 18:06:17 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 10:12:48 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:

On Monday, 21 January 2019 18:19:19 UTC, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 16:37:50 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:

On Monday, 21 January 2019 15:59:55 UTC, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 15:39:12 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:

On Monday, 21 January 2019 15:12:57 UTC, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 15:03:11 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:


If I block friends of friends, and also friends, I'd see nothing. So what would be the point? Anyone I actually want to speak to, I email, phone, text, or visit in person. Why would I want to discuss things with friends where everyone can see them?

Although I only have ~80 friends on FB most I don't see anything from, but they can messege me or contact me in a group message or post, I don't see what they have for dinner as I have seleted not to see every post they make.
I think I only have 2 friends on FB that I haven't met in real life anyway.
If you know how to use FB it can be useful, but like any method of communication you should be able to control it and I can.

It just seems completely pointless to me. If you want to contact your friend, why not just email them? You can send them videos or photos that way quite easily, and even to more than one friend at a time.

But what if I want all the followers of a friends band to see the video I recordeed of them, I don;t have all their email address and there might be others that liike the band that are not my friends, I might not even like them but why should that stop them from watching the video ?

My Aunt is in several communities of 50 people. She simply has mailing lists in her email program.

and can those in the mailing list contact each other easily almost without thought ?

Just how difficult do you think it is to send an email?

It isn't difficult but it's easier with FB to a group of people that are actually interested. They can subscribe to the group or not there decision on a day to day basis.
I know peolpe in bands and maintaining a list of a few hundred emails address and keeping it up to date with who wants to recieve what isn't easy.
It;s OK for soem who have half a dozen friends but witha few hundred sometimes 1000s it gets more difficult.
But people with a handful of friends might never understand such problems.

The trouble is FB is web-based - if you've ever had the misfortune to use webmail you'll know it's nothing like the real thing. Too much fluffy ****ing about, far better with a program on your own computer. As for large groups of 1000, what's the chances of all those people actually having a FB account?

But I do use youtube to store the video and FB to publicise it, and I don't want 100s of people knowing my email address and I don't want their email addresses.

Why would you want to show a video to people you don't like?

Why not, I'm pretty sure attenbough wouldn't like everyone that views what he does, it's sort of against the laws of probability.

Youtube can publicise a video without using FB.

Yes it can but it isn't as effective as FB is.

I've not found FB to be effective for anything. It's so full of junk adverts and things from people you're not interested in, you're bound to miss the things you actually want to see.

And Hitler was a vegitarian does that make all vegatarians bad , don;t answer that ;-)

Maybe that's what made him think clearly.

Depending on your definition of clearly, as clearly he lost.

Against huge odds. If you entered a chess tournament and were beaten by 7 grandmasters, but won against 3, you'd say you were pretty damn good.

The Germany they built was pretty damned good, but still not good
enough.


If an enormous bodybuilder gets beaten up by 50 wimps, would you say the bodybuilder was useless at fighting?


I would say he was not good enough.


You're disappointed when someone is less than 50 times stronger than others? I guess you're disappointed in 99.9999999% of the population then.
  #107  
Old January 29th 19, 07:23 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Commander Kinsey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 548
Default Depth of field - two of them?

On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 10:37:16 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:

On Friday, 25 January 2019 18:06:21 UTC, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 10:12:48 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:

On Monday, 21 January 2019 18:19:19 UTC, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 16:37:50 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:

On Monday, 21 January 2019 15:59:55 UTC, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 15:39:12 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:

On Monday, 21 January 2019 15:12:57 UTC, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 15:03:11 -0000, Whisky-dave wrote:


If I block friends of friends, and also friends, I'd see nothing. So what would be the point? Anyone I actually want to speak to, I email, phone, text, or visit in person. Why would I want to discuss things with friends where everyone can see them?

Although I only have ~80 friends on FB most I don't see anything from, but they can messege me or contact me in a group message or post, I don't see what they have for dinner as I have seleted not to see every post they make.
I think I only have 2 friends on FB that I haven't met in real life anyway.
If you know how to use FB it can be useful, but like any method of communication you should be able to control it and I can.

It just seems completely pointless to me. If you want to contact your friend, why not just email them? You can send them videos or photos that way quite easily, and even to more than one friend at a time.

But what if I want all the followers of a friends band to see the video I recordeed of them, I don;t have all their email address and there might be others that liike the band that are not my friends, I might not even like them but why should that stop them from watching the video ?

My Aunt is in several communities of 50 people. She simply has mailing lists in her email program.

and can those in the mailing list contact each other easily almost without thought ?

Just how difficult do you think it is to send an email?

It isn't difficult but it's easier with FB to a group of people that are actually interested. They can subscribe to the group or not there decision on a day to day basis.
I know peolpe in bands and maintaining a list of a few hundred emails address and keeping it up to date with who wants to recieve what isn't easy.
It;s OK for soem who have half a dozen friends but witha few hundred sometimes 1000s it gets more difficult.
But people with a handful of friends might never understand such problems.


The trouble is FB is web-based -


So ? it doesn't really matter in the 21st century.


Why would he century make a difference?

if you've ever had the misfortune to use webmail you'll know it's nothing like the real thing.


So, if the person only uses webmail then that;s the only way to contect them.


Bull****. Webmail uses a normal email address.

Too much fluffy ****ing about, far better with a program on your own computer.


If yuo even have one.


You need one for the web too.

As for large groups of 1000, what's the chances of all those people actually having a FB account?


about 100%


Bull****, do you really honestly think that everyone uses facebook?

But I do use youtube to store the video and FB to publicise it, and I don't want 100s of people knowing my email address and I don't want their email addresses.

Why would you want to show a video to people you don't like?

Why not, I'm pretty sure attenbough wouldn't like everyone that views what he does, it's sort of against the laws of probability.

Youtube can publicise a video without using FB.

Yes it can but it isn't as effective as FB is.


I've not found FB to be effective for anything.


That's you're problem.


"your".

And it's not my problem at all, I simply stopped using a system which doesn't give me any advantages.

It's so full of junk adverts and things from people you're not interested in, you're bound to miss the things you actually want to see.


Then write it on a tablet and stick it at the top of some moutain and hope someone climbs the mountain to find it.
I'd stick to FB.


Since when did I suggest going back to smoke signals? Facebook is only one way of electronic communication. I prefer email, phonecalls, texts, etc. They're direct to the people you want, not via some bloody website full of junk.
  #108  
Old January 29th 19, 07:32 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Depth of field - two of them?

In article , Commander Kinsey
wrote:


if you've ever had the misfortune to use webmail you'll know it's nothing
like the real thing.


So, if the person only uses webmail then that;s the only way to contect
them.


Bull****. Webmail uses a normal email address.


which means it *is* the real thing.

webmail is just another way to access it.
  #109  
Old January 30th 19, 10:53 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
David B.[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 28
Default Depth of field - two of them?

On 30/01/2019 10:44, Whisky-Dave wrote:

Just because you can't cope with FB.....


That's FIGHTING talk! ;-)

Tell the Commander what you do for a living, Dave - you may have things
in common!

--
David B.
  #110  
Old January 30th 19, 04:01 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Depth of field - two of them?

In article , David B.
wrote:

Tell the Commander what you do for a living, Dave - you may have things
in common!


stalk attempt.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Depth of Field Ray Paseur[_3_] Digital SLR Cameras 13 January 24th 08 08:43 PM
P & S and depth-of-field Jeff Layman Digital Photography 16 November 9th 07 05:54 PM
Depth Of Field Matalog Digital Photography 17 January 19th 06 03:22 PM
Depth of field Armando Digital Photography 20 November 19th 05 09:01 PM
Depth of field rda Digital Photography 12 January 1st 05 06:29 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.