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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Risked a pot pie
On 8/3/2015 4:13 PM, MC wrote:
PeterN wrote: On 8/3/2015 8:56 AM, MC wrote: I wouldn't bother trying to help him at this point. That's always your call. He posts his images, often inviting constructive criticism (posting alone on a ng like this you are going to get that anyway), yet when you point out even the bleedin' obvious he is in denial he has done anything wrong. We have all gone over with him the same errors in his "enhancement" techniques (be it heavy cropping, shappening etc.) time after time after time yet he still uses the same methods to hide his inefficiencies in the actual mechanics of taking a photograph. The only way he can improve his photography is to dump the post-processing malarky and practice getting it right in-camera, posting the images straight out of camera for critique if he wants "advice" rather than try and attempt to salvage and post the rubbish in the hope we will not notice. It's easy to say "get it right in the camera." That is rarely possible, or practicable, especially with the type of work I like to do. Could you ever get either of these images in the camera? https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/baboon%20%20bliss.jpg https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/swooper.jpg Neither example is becoming of a good photographer. They just show just someone who can play about with a computer (first one is rather tacky and horrible, by the way). Trouble is, you need to get the basics right first before you try and be something you are not. Gold is easy to make shiny because you have a naturally shiny sunbstance to begin with. However, no amount of polishing will make **** shiny. Also, "A bad workman always blames his tools", this time I notice it is his monitor taking the blame. I don't think even you could work on a dead monitor, or even a 14" laptop screen. Well then, don't use them. Wait until you have the tools to work properly, not blame your own inadequecies because your tools are broken. That's your opinion. It may or may not be shared. But, that is what I like to do. I also did things like that in the darkroom. I made pin registration masks and spent hours. I find it relaxing. You obviously don't. BTW the second has done fairly well in competitions. This one has done very well. It would be highly impractical unless I cropped. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/test/snow%20leopard22%20larger.jpg No one says you have to like it, but I do, and that's what counts. Yes, it is extremely sharp, it needs to be. -- PeterN |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Risked a pot pie
On 8/3/2015 5:36 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 20:13:33 GMT, "MC" wrote: PeterN wrote: On 8/3/2015 8:56 AM, MC wrote: I wouldn't bother trying to help him at this point. That's always your call. He posts his images, often inviting constructive criticism (posting alone on a ng like this you are going to get that anyway), yet when you point out even the bleedin' obvious he is in denial he has done anything wrong. We have all gone over with him the same errors in his "enhancement" techniques (be it heavy cropping, shappening etc.) time after time after time yet he still uses the same methods to hide his inefficiencies in the actual mechanics of taking a photograph. The only way he can improve his photography is to dump the post-processing malarky and practice getting it right in-camera, posting the images straight out of camera for critique if he wants "advice" rather than try and attempt to salvage and post the rubbish in the hope we will not notice. It's easy to say "get it right in the camera." That is rarely possible, or practicable, especially with the type of work I like to do. Could you ever get either of these images in the camera? https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/baboon%20%20bliss.jpg https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/swooper.jpg Neither example is becoming of a good photographer. They just show just someone who can play about with a computer (first one is rather tacky and horrible, by the way). Trouble is, you need to get the basics right first before you try and be something you are not. Gold is easy to make shiny because you have a naturally shiny sunbstance to begin with. However, no amount of polishing will make **** shiny. Also, "A bad workman always blames his tools", this time I notice it is his monitor taking the blame. I don't think even you could work on a dead monitor, or even a 14" laptop screen. Well then, don't use them. Wait until you have the tools to work properly, not blame your own inadequecies because your tools are broken. What on earth makes you think that your opinion is worth having after a diatribe like that? I don't recall seeing any of his work. But don't worry, I have a very think skin. If he doesn't appreciate what I am attempting, that's his loss. -- PeterN |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Risked a pot pie
On 8/3/2015 4:13 PM, MC wrote:
PeterN wrote: On 8/3/2015 8:56 AM, MC wrote: I wouldn't bother trying to help him at this point. That's always your call. He posts his images, often inviting constructive criticism (posting alone on a ng like this you are going to get that anyway), yet when you point out even the bleedin' obvious he is in denial he has done anything wrong. We have all gone over with him the same errors in his "enhancement" techniques (be it heavy cropping, shappening etc.) time after time after time yet he still uses the same methods to hide his inefficiencies in the actual mechanics of taking a photograph. The only way he can improve his photography is to dump the post-processing malarky and practice getting it right in-camera, posting the images straight out of camera for critique if he wants "advice" rather than try and attempt to salvage and post the rubbish in the hope we will not notice. It's easy to say "get it right in the camera." That is rarely possible, or practicable, especially with the type of work I like to do. Could you ever get either of these images in the camera? https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/baboon%20%20bliss.jpg https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/swooper.jpg Neither example is becoming of a good photographer. They just show just someone who can play about with a computer (first one is rather tacky and horrible, by the way). Trouble is, you need to get the basics right first before you try and be something you are not. Gold is easy to make shiny because you have a naturally shiny sunbstance to begin with. However, no amount of polishing will make **** shiny. I forgot to add. When the Duck makes a comment, he is intending to be helpful, and it comes across to me that way. I don't recall you making a helpful comment. If I am wrong, I apologize. Also I could not find the word: "sunbustance" in any dictionary. What language is that word in. Well then, don't use them. Wait until you have the tools to work properly, not blame your own inadequecies because your tools are broken. You need a lesson in reality. -- PeterN |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Risked a pot pie
On 8/3/2015 7:56 PM, MC wrote:
Eric Stevens wrote: On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 20:13:33 GMT, "MC" wrote: PeterN wrote: On 8/3/2015 8:56 AM, MC wrote: I wouldn't bother trying to help him at this point. That's always your call. He posts his images, often inviting constructive criticism (posting alone on a ng like this you are going to get that anyway), yet when you point out even the bleedin' obvious he is in denial he has done anything wrong. We have all gone over with him the same errors in his "enhancement" techniques (be it heavy cropping, shappening etc.) time after time after time yet he still uses the same methods to hide his inefficiencies in the actual mechanics of taking a photograph. The only way he can improve his photography is to dump the post-processing malarky and practice getting it right in-camera, posting the images straight out of camera for critique if he wants "advice" rather than try and attempt to salvage and post the rubbish in the hope we will not notice. It's easy to say "get it right in the camera." That is rarely possible, or practicable, especially with the type of work I like to do. Could you ever get either of these images in the camera? https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/baboon%20%20bliss.jpg https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/swooper.jpg Neither example is becoming of a good photographer. They just show just someone who can play about with a computer (first one is rather tacky and horrible, by the way). Trouble is, you need to get the basics right first before you try and be something you are not. Gold is easy to make shiny because you have a naturally shiny sunbstance to begin with. However, no amount of polishing will make **** shiny. Also, "A bad workman always blames his tools", this time I notice it is his monitor taking the blame. I don't think even you could work on a dead monitor, or even a 14" laptop screen. Well then, don't use them. Wait until you have the tools to work properly, not blame your own inadequecies because your tools are broken. What on earth makes you think that your opinion is worth having after a diatribe like that? He blamed a broken monitor for his inadequate skills. I stand by what I say and that a bad workman does, indeed always blame his tools. He blamed his tools. If neither of you like that then that is yet to be my problem. Get over it. If you have images that you have posted, we would like to see them. For some reason I am beginning to question your qualifications to judge work. If you are an event photographer, you must be aware that event photography is totally different from what I do. We await your qualifications with bated breath. -- PeterN |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Risked a pot pie
On Tue, 04 Aug 2015 00:26:58 GMT, "MC" wrote:
--- snip --- No one says you have to like it, but I do, and that's what counts. Yes, it is extremely sharp, it needs to be. It "needs" to be? Why does it "need" to be? Because you say so? Nothing "needs" to be anything. You may "like" it to be but it does not "need" to be. It needs 'to be' because that's how he likes it. It doesn't seem to have dawned on you that that's how he likes it because that's his taste. And then you go on to write: "I do not criticise somebody else's taste because tastes do, indeed, differ ... " I do not criticise somebody else's taste because tastes do, indeed, differ including mine. I will say if I like or do not like something but I will never be critical of someone else's taste if it differs to my own. What do you think you have been doing in your last few posts but criticising his tastes? So much for your "I will never be critical of someone else's taste if it differs to my own." However, I will criticise someone's skill, especially when they continually ignore suggestions designed to help said person to improve that skill. Many times you have been given advice (not necessarily mine), many times you have ignored it and continued posting images with the same technical errors. You are in constant denial that your images are often flawed and you blame anything, including your tools, other than the one thing you need to improve, basic technique. It still hasn't got through to you that PeterN's images so often look the way they do because that's the way he likes it. It's not due to his lack of skill: it's his personal taste. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Risked a pot pie
On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 19:16:19 -0400, PeterN
wrote: On 8/3/2015 4:13 PM, MC wrote: PeterN wrote: On 8/3/2015 8:56 AM, MC wrote: I wouldn't bother trying to help him at this point. That's always your call. He posts his images, often inviting constructive criticism (posting alone on a ng like this you are going to get that anyway), yet when you point out even the bleedin' obvious he is in denial he has done anything wrong. We have all gone over with him the same errors in his "enhancement" techniques (be it heavy cropping, shappening etc.) time after time after time yet he still uses the same methods to hide his inefficiencies in the actual mechanics of taking a photograph. The only way he can improve his photography is to dump the post-processing malarky and practice getting it right in-camera, posting the images straight out of camera for critique if he wants "advice" rather than try and attempt to salvage and post the rubbish in the hope we will not notice. It's easy to say "get it right in the camera." That is rarely possible, or practicable, especially with the type of work I like to do. Could you ever get either of these images in the camera? https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/baboon%20%20bliss.jpg https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/swooper.jpg Neither example is becoming of a good photographer. They just show just someone who can play about with a computer (first one is rather tacky and horrible, by the way). Trouble is, you need to get the basics right first before you try and be something you are not. Gold is easy to make shiny because you have a naturally shiny sunbstance to begin with. However, no amount of polishing will make **** shiny. I forgot to add. When the Duck makes a comment, he is intending to be helpful, and it comes across to me that way. I don't recall you making a helpful comment. If I am wrong, I apologize. Also I could not find the word: "sunbustance" in any dictionary. What language is that word in. Well then, don't use them. Wait until you have the tools to work properly, not blame your own inadequecies because your tools are broken. You need a lesson in reality. And civility. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Risked a pot pie
On Tue, 04 Aug 2015 04:16:49 GMT, "MC" wrote:
Eric Stevens wrote: On Tue, 04 Aug 2015 00:26:58 GMT, "MC" wrote: --- snip --- No one says you have to like it, but I do, and that's what counts. Yes, it is extremely sharp, it needs to be. It "needs" to be? Why does it "need" to be? Because you say so? Nothing "needs" to be anything. You may "like" it to be but it does not "need" to be. It needs 'to be' because that's how he likes it. Erm have you actually read and understood my post? Yes, and you have missed the central point. PeterN does it on purpose because that's how he likes it. It doesn't seem to have dawned on you that that's how he likes it because that's his taste. And then you go on to write: "I do not criticise somebody else's taste because tastes do, indeed, differ ... " Erm have you actually read and understood my post? Yes, and you have missed the central point. PeterN does it on purpose because that's how he likes it. I do not criticise somebody else's taste because tastes do, indeed, differ including mine. I will say if I like or do not like something but I will never be critical of someone else's taste if it differs to my own. What do you think you have been doing in your last few posts but criticising his tastes? So much for your "I will never be critical of someone else's taste if it differs to my own." Erm have you actually read and understood my post? Yes, and you have missed the central point. PeterN does it on purpose because that's how he likes it. However, I will criticise someone's skill, especially when they continually ignore suggestions designed to help said person to improve that skill. Many times you have been given advice (not necessarily mine), many times you have ignored it and continued posting images with the same technical errors. You are in constant denial that your images are often flawed and you blame anything, including your tools, other than the one thing you need to improve, basic technique. It still hasn't got through to you that PeterN's images so often look the way they do because that's the way he likes it. It's not due to his lack of skill: it's his personal taste. Erm, have you actually read and understood my post?... I think not. Yes, and you have missed the central point. PeterN does it on purpose because that's how he likes it. And if you actually did think you would have understood that point a long time ago. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Risked a pot pie
On 8/3/2015 8:26 PM, MC wrote:
PeterN wrote: On 8/3/2015 4:13 PM, MC wrote: PeterN wrote: On 8/3/2015 8:56 AM, MC wrote: I wouldn't bother trying to help him at this point. That's always your call. He posts his images, often inviting constructive criticism (posting alone on a ng like this you are going to get that anyway), yet when you point out even the bleedin' obvious he is in denial he has done anything wrong. We have all gone over with him the same errors in his "enhancement" techniques (be it heavy cropping, shappening etc.) time after time after time yet he still uses the same methods to hide his inefficiencies in the actual mechanics of taking a photograph. The only way he can improve his photography is to dump the post-processing malarky and practice getting it right in-camera, posting the images straight out of camera for critique if he wants "advice" rather than try and attempt to salvage and post the rubbish in the hope we will not notice. It's easy to say "get it right in the camera." That is rarely possible, or practicable, especially with the type of work I like to do. Could you ever get either of these images in the camera? https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/baboon%20%20bliss.jpg https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/swooper.jpg Neither example is becoming of a good photographer. They just show just someone who can play about with a computer (first one is rather tacky and horrible, by the way). Trouble is, you need to get the basics right first before you try and be something you are not. Gold is easy to make shiny because you have a naturally shiny sunbstance to begin with. However, no amount of polishing will make **** shiny. Also, "A bad workman always blames his tools", this time I notice it is his monitor taking the blame. I don't think even you could work on a dead monitor, or even a 14" laptop screen. Well then, don't use them. Wait until you have the tools to work properly, not blame your own inadequecies because your tools are broken. That's your opinion. It may or may not be shared. But, that is what I like to do. I also did things like that in the darkroom. I made pin registration masks and spent hours. I find it relaxing. You obviously don't. BTW the second has done fairly well in competitions. This one has done very well. It would be highly impractical unless I cropped. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/test/snow%20leopard22%20larger.jpg No one says you have to like it, but I do, and that's what counts. Yes, it is extremely sharp, it needs to be. It "needs" to be? Why does it "need" to be? Because you say so? Nothing "needs" to be anything. You may "like" it to be but it does not "need" to be. Because that's what the image tells ME it want to be. I do not criticise somebody else's taste because tastes do, indeed, differ including mine. I will say if I like or do not like something but I will never be critical of someone else's taste if it differs to my own. You just did. However, I will criticise someone's skill, especially when they continually ignore suggestions designed to help said person to improve that skill. Many times you have been given advice (not necessarily mine), many times you have ignored it and continued posting images with the same technical errors. You are in constant denial that your images are often flawed and you blame anything, including your tools, other than the one thing you need to improve, basic technique. Yes there is always room for improvement in my skills. But I usually, not always, get the essential look I want. -- PeterN |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Risked a pot pie
On 8/3/2015 8:58 PM, MC wrote:
PeterN wrote: I forgot to add. When the Duck makes a comment, he is intending to be helpful, and it comes across to me that way And yet rather than accept he may have a point you continue to try and justify why your images do not need improving and that you deliberately made them that way (either that or your equipment was to blame for any flaws). You are alway posting and asking for critique but are never willing to learn from any of it. I don't recall you making a helpful comment. If I am wrong, I apologize. I have often reiterated what others have said, in the hope it may get through. I also say what I see and it is no skin of my nose how you take it. Also I could not find the word: "sunbustance" in any dictionary. What language is that word in. Ah, the obligatory clutch at staws in an attempt to discredit my words. I can't remember asking for critique on my keyboard skills but thanks anyway and as I am not in denial that my skills in using a keyboard are, it seems, lacking I shall try and remember to type the word "substance" better next time. Well then, don't use them. Wait until you have the tools to work properly, not blame your own inadequecies because your tools are broken. You need a lesson in reality. scratchesheadWhat?/scratcheshead Watch out for splinters -- PeterN |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Risked a pot pie
On 8/3/2015 9:09 PM, MC wrote:
PeterN wrote: If you have images that you have posted, we would like to see them. For some reason I am beginning to question your qualifications to judge work. Why do you think I care? You are quite free not to read my posts, it's no skin of my nose. If you are an event photographer, you must be aware that event photography is totally different from what I do. Eh? Where did event photography come into it? We await your qualifications with bated breath. Ho hum. MC That's what I thought. -- PeterN |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|