PORTRAITS LOVE THE 20D !

On Apr 3, 4:58 pm, "\(The real\) Douglas"
wrote:
"joe mama" wrote in message

...
:: "Annika1980" wrote in message

oups.com...
: On Apr 1, 10:23 pm, "joe mama" wrote:
: http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/76509239/original
:
: Is this a hard and fast rule like the Rule of Thirds?
: The trouble with rules like that is that they limit what you can
: shoot.
:
: standard cop out from bad shooters. of course rules are meant to be
broken,
: but usually for effect, and good effect. hardly what i'd say was going on
: here. one slight twist to your right could have solved the problem.
:
: There is no way to get both the eyes in focus shooting @ f/1.8 unless
: I am equidistant from both eyes (the cat is looking right at me).
:
: the other poster already explained other alternatives. look, it's a
: snapshot, and a rather pedestrian one at that. if you really wanted to
show
: the beauty of the lens, then shoot something that would have allowed for
it.
:
: you can't post twenty things in here (incorrectly placed posts too) a day,
: and not expect any criticism. i sense you have a regular group of buddies
: that give you the proper ego massage, but that's not always going to be
the
: case. did you actually post this in a relevant newsgroup as well?
:
:
------------------------------------
You're being a bit hard Joe.
In his own words he's "just an amateur and has nothing to lose".
Anyone who thinks F/1.8 is a "Portrait" specific aperture is most definitely
an amateur.

You are entirely right about the picture. Just a happy snap that is sharply
presented, thanks to expensive gear. If it amuses the child to take pics of
his cat, he just joins with every kid who gets a digicam for Christmas.
Those who fawn over him are probably like minded individuals with nothing
else to do but massage each other with cyber sex.

FWIW. The rule of thirds is impossible to adhere to. It is a concept rather
than a rule. The concept being that one tries to accommodate elements in a
picture which comprise quantity rather than measurement. With portraiture of
a single creature (human or feline), for example, there is some support for
breaking up the features of the subject into thirds rather than the whole
picture itself. In such case, having a third eye would produce a
technically correct "rule of thirds" compliant picture. Do you get a monthly
nose bleed, by any chance Bret?

Douglas

* * *

"Do you get a monthly
nose bleed, by any chance Bret?"

Douglas, even if your life depended on it, you couldn't even be half
the man Bret is!

"\(The real\) Douglas" wrote:

if you do not have art in your heart, all you do is take
happy snaps.


That would look good on your gravestone.

At least it would make people smile. ;-)

wrote:

Douglas, even if your life depended on it, you couldn't even be half
the man Bret is!


And you would know, Helen.

"Tony Polson" wrote in message
...
: "\(The real\) Douglas" wrote:
:
: if you do not have art in your heart, all you do is take
: happy snaps.
:
:
: That would look good on your gravestone.
:
: At least it would make people smile. ;-)
:
Bored tonight, are we?
Tell you what Tony... Send me some of your pictures and I'll post 'em for ya
and take the heat of you when the trolls get stuck into you. The longer you
leave it the worse it's gonna get!

There ya go. What better way to "test the waters"?

"Tony Polson" wrote in message
...
: wrote:
:
: Douglas, even if your life depended on it, you couldn't even be half
: the man Bret is!
:
:
: And you would know, Helen.
:

Ahhh the joy of a kill file!

On Apr 4, 3:52 am, Tony Polson wrote:
wrote:

Douglas, even if your life depended on it, you couldn't even be half
the man Bret is!

And you would know, Helen.

As a matter of fact Tony, yes I do. Bret is a great friend.
Helen

(The real) Douglas wrote:
"Tony Polson" wrote in message
...
: wrote:
:
: Douglas, even if your life depended on it, you couldn't even be half
: the man Bret is!
:
:
: And you would know, Helen.
:

Ahhh the joy of a kill file!


Yes, killfiles are great. The only problem is that some spammers and
worse use multiple email addresses. For instance, yesterday you were
. Now you have two entries in my killfile, but
I'm sure there will be more in the future.

Allen wrote:
(The real) Douglas wrote:
"Tony Polson" wrote in message
...
wrote:

Douglas, even if your life depended on it, you couldn't even be
half the man Bret is!


And you would know, Helen.


Ahhh the joy of a kill file!


Yes, killfiles are great. The only problem is that some spammers and
worse use multiple email addresses. For instance, yesterday you were
. Now you have two entries in my killfile, but
I'm sure there will be more in the future.

You might want to set up a Hamster (freeware for Windows,
http://www.arcorhome.de/newshamster/tgl/). Bit of a learning curve to
set it up, once it's up and you see how the filters work it's easy to
filter on _any_ field including the body of the message and fields that
are unique to a particular provider. Can also filter by score. A lot
of morphing trolls can be filtered by their posting host.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On Apr 3, 7:18 pm, "\(The real\) Douglas"
wrote:
"Draco" wrote in message

oups.com...
: The (real) Douglas wrote:

:
:
: This is what I was taught and it has done me well for many years. Of
: course it is just my opinion. No matter how stinky others find it to
: be.
:
:
: Draco
:
I too was taught in a rigid school. So rigid that any deviation from the
teachings meant loss of exam points. This does not mean that because our
teachers were inflexable in their interpretation of a thousand year old
basis for composure, it is absolute.

There are only a few rules that are "absolute".
Gravity: step off the edge of anything and you will go down.
Death: is the final equalizer
Taxes: They do get blood from stone

Being able to understand the rules allows one to bend them till they
squeek.


The rule of thirds does not divide an image into segments as some would
have.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_thirds

Directly out of the source quoted:"The rule states that an image can
be divided into nine equal parts by two equally-spaced horizontal
lines and two equally-spaced vertical lines."



The concept is a lot more subdued and flexible that that. Bret did not use
the compositional concept of thirds although he did use a deviation of the
rule. This is why it is such a long lasting means of assessing a scene, it
can be squeezed and twisted and broken into it's own segments to suit the
artist.

Understanding the rule allows the photogrpaher to choose a
deviation of the composition.

After all, if you do not have art in your heart, all you do is take
happy snaps.

All happy snaps can be art. It all depends on your view.


Draco

On Apr 4, 9:39 am, "Draco" wrote:
On Apr 3, 7:18 pm, "\(The real\) Douglas"
wrote:

(SNIP)



Understanding the rule allows the photogrpaher to choose a
deviation of the composition.

Ooops, I meant photographer


After all, if you do not have art in your heart, all you do is take

happy snaps.

All happy snaps can be art. It all depends on your view.


Some artist are understood, some never are. It does depend on your
view and how you enjoy the world. You even said the Bret used "...a
deviation of the rule..." for his image. Either he is a snap-shooter
or an artist. Which is it? Either way you both are very good
photographers. You both are able to capture the moment.


Draco




Getting even isn't good enough.


Doing better does.