View Single Post
  #7  
Old June 17th 10, 01:53 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.point+shoot,rec.photo.digital
Dudley Hanks[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,282
Default If there's no shake, I can't be responsible


"LOL!" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 00:26:22 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
wrote:


"LOL!" wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 00:06:15 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
wrote:


"LOL!" wrote in message
m...
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 23:32:57 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
wrote:

for LOL's actions ...

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...tingPretty.jpg (Full Size)

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...rettySmall.jpg (Fast
Loading)

Handheld @ 1/3 sec...

If it's clean, LOL's gonna flip his lid ...


Why? I tested my own handheld skills on IS equipped cameras. I can
shoot
a
tack-sharp image at a full 1-second long exposure with a 432mm lens.
Just
to see where my and its limits lie. But it requires knowing how IS
works,
its limitations, using the proper IS setting, and having exceptional
handheld skills to begin with.

In your image you're not so skilled, nor even lucky. Everything
illuminated
by available light is blurred. Only those features stopped by the
higher
speed of the fill-flash burst are clearer. Not to mention the focus is
off,
the camera focused on the oven behind the randomly placed, badly
tilted,
and aroused dog. Is your spatial acuity and motor-control so poor that
you
can't even tell when you are holding a camera level? Apparently so.
You're
not going to make a very good blind person. You'll even suck at that.

LOL!


LOL, why don't you try blind-folding yourself and doing that one second
exposure, and post the result?

You'll find that it's a bit tricky with no visual cues to orient
yourself...

Besides, I'm a blind photographer, my pics should look the part, should
they
not?


That's easy. Just super-glue a lens-cap over your lens. All problem
solved,
for everyone.

LOL!


You're the only one with a problem, and it's really none of your business
what I do...


Then why did you ask for my opinion specifically? You lying and
manipulative self-victimizing cretin.


I've come across some incredible bigots in my life, but, LOL, you really
take the cake ...

I'm curious, why does somebody like yourself, somebody who can't
appreciate
beauty in anybody else (and that's based on your general responses to all
the other members of the group and not just those to myself) choose to
critique a subject as subjective as photography?


Someone who professes to be as talented as Da Vinci yet can't take a
snapshot any better than a 2 year-old randomly clicking a shutter in the
general direction of something by using a fully automated camera doesn't
deserve respect. You disrespect the world by spamming and scamming
everyone
with your poor-pitiful-me carnival side-show act.


You're also very adept at misrepresenting what others say...

I never claimed to have the talent of Da Vinci... I just said it is
conceivable that a blind photographer could equal or exceed Da Vinci in
talent, yet not produce as visually pleasing works. That simply means that
the level of skill it takes for the blind person to produce even a visually
mediocre picture is quite extensive... Only somebody as bigoted as yourself
would misconstrue that as claiming to produce works that are the equal of Da
Vinci's, especially when only test pics are being posted in an attempt to
gain feedback and foster progress...

I don't care if you respect me or not, couldn't care less. And, once again,
you side-stepped the question. The question is why do you critique
photography when you clearly have no appreciation for the beauty others
produce? Not mine, not any of the other sighted members of the group. You
simply insult. That doesn't say much about your character...

Take Care,
Dudley