Flower macros

A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize).

They might do well in the Wallpaper Shootin too, especially 4 and 5.
But I already submitted a different shot.

http://www.arumes.com/temp/macro/

--
Regards, Robert http://www.arumes.com

On Sun, 30 May 2010 12:20:56 +0200, Robert Spanjaard
wrote:

A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize).

They might do well in the Wallpaper Shootin too, especially 4 and 5.
But I already submitted a different shot.

http://www.arumes.com/temp/macro/

Crap, blurry crap, and more blurry crap.

I guess you need to buy a better camera, eh?

Not really. What's needed here is a PHOTOGRAPHER!

LOL!

"Robert Spanjaard" wrote in message
el.net...

A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize).

They might do well in the Wallpaper Shootin too, especially 4 and 5.
But I already submitted a different shot.

http://www.arumes.com/temp/macro/

--
Regards, Robert http://www.arumes.com

I like number 4 the most. Nice forms/colors/massing/composition/
color-distribution/balance/choice-of-limited-plane-of-focus/etc.
Nice!
--DR

Robert Spanjaard wrote:

A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize).

They might do well in the Wallpaper Shootin too, especially 4 and 5.
But I already submitted a different shot.

http://www.arumes.com/temp/macro/

You should first ask yourself, as should every photographer who wishes
to put their photos on public dispaly (let alone unashemedly publicise
the websites containing said pictures), are they really worthy of
public scrutiny? You must, firstly, be your own harshest critic and
then (and only then) allow others to critcise.

May I ask why you think these are worthy?

MC

On 30/05/2010 12:20, Robert Spanjaard wrote:
A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize).

They might do well in the Wallpaper Shootin too, especially 4 and 5.
But I already submitted a different shot.

http://www.arumes.com/temp/macro/

A good wallpaper should be bland to avoid being distracting. hence
instresting photos ans wallapers are in two different universes. Which
one are you aiming at?

--
Bertrand

"MC" wrote in message
...
Robert Spanjaard wrote:

A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize).

They might do well in the Wallpaper Shootin too, especially 4 and 5.
But I already submitted a different shot.

http://www.arumes.com/temp/macro/

You should first ask yourself, as should every photographer who wishes
to put their photos on public dispaly (let alone unashemedly publicise
the websites containing said pictures), are they really worthy of
public scrutiny? You must, firstly, be your own harshest critic and
then (and only then) allow others to critcise.

May I ask why you think these are worthy?

MC

No. If you have to ask permission to ask a question, you are not worthy of
asking the question.

Richard

Richard wrote:


"MC" wrote in message
...
Robert Spanjaard wrote:

A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize).

They might do well in the Wallpaper Shootin too, especially 4 and
5. But I already submitted a different shot.

http://www.arumes.com/temp/macro/

You should first ask yourself, as should every photographer who
wishes to put their photos on public dispaly (let alone unashemedly
publicise the websites containing said pictures), are they really
worthy of public scrutiny? You must, firstly, be your own harshest
critic and then (and only then) allow others to critcise.

May I ask why you think these are worthy?

MC

No. If you have to ask permission to ask a question, you are not
worthy of asking the question.

Richard

Hmm... I was not asking permission in the context of asking permission
but merely as vehicle of politeness.

MC

On Sun, 30 May 2010 17:26:08 GMT, "MC" wrote:
: Richard wrote:
:
: "MC" wrote in message
: ...
: Robert Spanjaard wrote:
:
: A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize).
:
: They might do well in the Wallpaper Shootin too, especially 4 and
: 5. But I already submitted a different shot.
:
: http://www.arumes.com/temp/macro/
:
: You should first ask yourself, as should every photographer who
: wishes to put their photos on public dispaly (let alone unashemedly
: publicise the websites containing said pictures), are they really
: worthy of public scrutiny? You must, firstly, be your own harshest
: critic and then (and only then) allow others to critcise.
:
: May I ask why you think these are worthy?
:
: MC
:
: No. If you have to ask permission to ask a question, you are not
: worthy of asking the question.
:
: Richard
:
: Hmm... I was not asking permission in the context of asking permission
: but merely as vehicle of politeness.

Politeness? You were sneering at the man's photos. Where's the politeness in
that?

Bob

"Robert Coe" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 30 May 2010 17:26:08 GMT, "MC" wrote:
: Richard wrote:
:
: "MC" wrote in message
: ...
: Robert Spanjaard wrote:
:
: A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize).
:
: They might do well in the Wallpaper Shootin too, especially 4 and
: 5. But I already submitted a different shot.
:
: http://www.arumes.com/temp/macro/
:
: You should first ask yourself, as should every photographer who
: wishes to put their photos on public dispaly (let alone unashemedly
: publicise the websites containing said pictures), are they really
: worthy of public scrutiny? You must, firstly, be your own harshest
: critic and then (and only then) allow others to critcise.
:
: May I ask why you think these are worthy?
:
: MC
:
: No. If you have to ask permission to ask a question, you are not
: worthy of asking the question.
:
: Richard
:
: Hmm... I was not asking permission in the context of asking permission
: but merely as vehicle of politeness.

Politeness? You were sneering at the man's photos. Where's the politeness
in
that?

Bob

Perhaps, before posting a criticism to a public group for scrutiny, the
critic should ask himself whether or not the grammar, spelling, syntax,
tone, etc of his message is worthy of public attention...

He really should be his own harshest critic...

Take Care,
Dudley

Robert Coe wrote:

On Sun, 30 May 2010 17:26:08 GMT, "MC" wrote:
: Richard wrote:
:
: "MC" wrote in message
: ...
: Robert Spanjaard wrote:
:
: A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize).
:
: They might do well in the Wallpaper Shootin too, especially 4
and : 5. But I already submitted a different shot.
:
: http://www.arumes.com/temp/macro/
:
: You should first ask yourself, as should every photographer who
: wishes to put their photos on public dispaly (let alone
unashemedly : publicise the websites containing said pictures),
are they really : worthy of public scrutiny? You must, firstly,
be your own harshest : critic and then (and only then) allow
others to critcise. :
: May I ask why you think these are worthy?
:
: MC
:
: No. If you have to ask permission to ask a question, you are not
: worthy of asking the question.
:
: Richard
:
: Hmm... I was not asking permission in the context of asking
permission : but merely as vehicle of politeness.

Politeness? You were sneering at the man's photos. Where's the
politeness in that?


In what context was I "sneering". I think you need to read my post
again then re read it and tell me where I was impolite, because I
certainly was not "sneering.

MC