What next when the hyperfocal is wrong?

Tony Polson wrote:
"Tony Parkinson" wrote:


"Tony Polson" wrote ...

Circle of Confusion


Circle of confusion ? Isn't that another name for certain users on this
forum (who have, collectively, a double digit IQ) getting together to
discuss "Depth of Field" ?



Yes, you clearly have them in sharp focus. g

In the 19th century, Australia was regarded by the English as a final
destination for the criminally insane. It is interesting to note
that, judging by the contributions of dear old Doug, absolutely
nothing has changed in all the years since.

;-)

Yet you escaped the sweep?

Tony Polson wrote:


of the issues involved. After what you claim has been a lifetime of
producing third rate shots with second rate equipment, one would have
hoped that you would have learnt something about depth of field.


Well, that's better than your fourth rate shots regardless of the
quality of the equipment.

http://abpr.railfan.net/abpr.cgi?/september98/09-24-98 refers.

Cheers,
Alan


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

Bandicoot wrote:
"Tony Polson" wrote in message
...

"Bandicoot" wrote:

Well, we started at about 8pm and after almost 150 applicants got to my
prints at about 2am. The standard had been very high, and about a dozen
people had been told they could expect to be given their LBIPP if they
applied formally, and about half that actually awarded it there and then
subject only to references - each time that this happened there was
enthusiastic applause. So, to cut a long story short they looked at my
pictures last but one, said some very flattering things about them, and
offered me the Licentiate there and then, advising me to apply for an
Associateship (the next step up) in a couple of years time.

I was rather taken aback, but of course it was the perfect way to 'apply',
since I'd been spared all the stress beforehand of thinking that I was
actually making a serious application. I still haven't got round to putting
together a panel for the ABIPP though, that's even more daunting...



Peter


Looking at some examples of ABIPP members web sites leads me to the
conclusion membership to this elitist organization - or associate
membership, is no assurance of any particular skills the half a dozen
members I checked out have as Photographers. How much does it cost to
join, Peter?

Tony Parkinson wrote:

"Tony Polson" wrote ...
Circle of Confusion

Circle of confusion ? Isn't that another name for certain users on this
forum (who have, collectively, a double digit IQ) getting together to
discuss "Depth of Field" ?

;^)

No, no, Tony P, one significant digit is enough.

Colin D.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Alan Browne wrote:
Dmac wrote:

So tell us now Tony...
About the cover shots you claim to have done for Paris Match magazine
which oddly enough, the editors have no knowledge of you ever having
submitted. It's up to issue 2976 now. Which one(s) did you supply the
cover photos for? Speak French Tony? Try this; Votre recherche "Tony
Polson" a renvoyé. Got it? you are a complete and utter fraud.


Tony Polson wrote in reply to the above:

As usual, you resort to personal abuse


Oh Tony, answer the question. You made the claim, now prove your
"fame". For those in doubt, here is a Tony Polson quotation from the past:

One of my shots taken with this lens was on the cover of "Paris
Match" in the late 1970s.

Tony Polson, North Yorkshire, UK

( link to above: http://tinyurl.com/bdlzb )

So, Dmac ___called you a fraud___. Now, if you are not a fraud, then
call HIM out and sue him. No? Yeah thought so. Nothing to backup your
claim that you shot anything for Paris Match, cover or otherwise.

Tony, you have abused more people on this and other NG's than we can
tolerate. That is why, given your claims of cover photos on Paris
Match, and a shooting pace of 50 rolls per average *week* demands some
shred of proof in light of your condescending attacks on people.

Your moments of confusion regarding sharpness and aperture as well as
claiming to "own" a Minola 5400 II in one post and renting it in another
post leave a lot of doubt about the veracity of your many claims.

That YOU resort to personal attacks on those who have called on you to
walk-the-walk indicates that you are a very small man.

For those who are curious about Tony Polson's "prowess" with
photography, there are a few of his famous shots right he

http://abpr.railfan.net/abpr.cgi?/september98/09-24-98

Just look for polson@news posts on that page and learn what you can from
the "great master". (Not that I saw those photos in or on Paris Match!)
If this is what he "publishes", imagine what he doesn't. Oh MY!

Cheers,
Alan



Now you've done it Alan. I was saving that lot for his next outburst.
You know, when he gets to the part of pointing out the bad composition
and poor focus... Oh, well. They had to surface sooner or later. I'm
glad it was you and not a stranger who burst my bubble.

ColinD wrote:

Tony Parkinson wrote:

"Tony Polson" wrote ...
Circle of Confusion

Circle of confusion ? Isn't that another name for certain users on this
forum (who have, collectively, a double digit IQ) getting together to
discuss "Depth of Field" ?

;^)

No, no, Tony P, one significant digit is enough.

Colin D.

Dammit, I left off the {:-)

Colin D.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Dmac wrote:

Now you've done it Alan. I was saving that lot for his next outburst.
You know, when he gets to the part of pointing out the bad composition
and poor focus... Oh, well. They had to surface sooner or later. I'm
glad it was you and not a stranger who burst my bubble.

Sorry about that. It happens though, time zones and all...

Tony Polson wrote:


He is seeing the effect of his own wilful ignorance, and 40 years of
placing blind trust in a mathematical equation without ever having the
faintest idea about the principles and assumptions that lie behind it,
and the reasons for, and effects of, varying those assumptions.

Tony, you're quick to attack but very slow to offer useful, clear,
concise advice.



--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

Tony Parkinson wrote:


Circle of confusion ? Isn't that another name for certain users on this
forum (who have, collectively, a double digit IQ) getting together to
discuss "Depth of Field" ?

Odd how you come around whenever Polson is on one of his rants designed
to elevate himself through insults on others...

The CoC is a fairly basic concept and Polson tries to shroud it in
mysteries that only somebody who claims 50 rolls per average *week* and
Paris Match covers can understand. Yet he has failed to show a single
image that reflects his claimed and implied prowess. So, who's confused?

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

Alan Browne wrote:
Tony Polson wrote:


He is seeing the effect of his own wilful ignorance, and 40 years of
placing blind trust in a mathematical equation without ever having the
faintest idea about the principles and assumptions that lie behind it,
and the reasons for, and effects of, varying those assumptions.


Tony, you're quick to attack but very slow to offer useful, clear,
concise advice.



You basic presumption that he actually has any to offer is flawed in the
extreme, Alan.

--
From Douglas...
My photographic site: http://www.douglasjames.com.au
Canvas and Metallic Prints: http://www.canvasphotos.com.au