[SI] Rulz proposal on Commentz

On 2012-08-11 09:11:50 -0700, tony cooper said:

On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 11:28:15 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Fri, 10 Aug 2012 16:04:26 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:

My camera's not working for me, either.

That happened to me too, yesterday. Fortunately its working again
today.

I did manage to catch one keeper. My mental title for it is:
Bright Bokeh.

http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/...08-10-1-X2.jpg

Why do I feel like I need a shower?


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 8/11/2012 4:16 PM, tony cooper wrote:
On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 12:54:22 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 8/11/2012 12:11 PM, tony cooper wrote:
On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 11:28:15 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Fri, 10 Aug 2012 16:04:26 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:

My camera's not working for me, either.

That happened to me too, yesterday. Fortunately its working again
today.

I did manage to catch one keeper. My mental title for it is:
Bright Bokeh.

http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/...08-10-1-X2.jpg


To my eye the picture is the people. Is it really necessary to show the
top half of the image? It keeps drawing my eye away from what I perceive
to be the story.

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/97242118/2012-08-10-1-X2%5B1%5D.jpg

(Hope that worked, it was my first attempt.

Whatever you did came out as a 404. It looks like a good link, but
doesn't work.

I did debate about the crop. If I zoom in on the people, what they
are standing in front of became less obvious for what it is. It loses
that bizarre quality and loses the drawings and keeps just the
lettering.


Fair comment. I just would have used a different interpretation.

I imagine you did something like this:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/y007cydzy2...2-08-10-1a.jpg


Yup!

I think I know what I did wrong. DB doesn't work like a Smugmug link. I
deleted the file on my computer. Sorry about that.

--
Peter

On 2012-08-11 13:17:50 -0700, tony cooper said:

On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 11:04:37 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2012-08-11 09:11:50 -0700, tony cooper said:

On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 11:28:15 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Fri, 10 Aug 2012 16:04:26 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:

My camera's not working for me, either.

That happened to me too, yesterday. Fortunately its working again
today.

I did manage to catch one keeper. My mental title for it is:
Bright Bokeh.

http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/...08-10-1-X2.jpg

Why do I feel like I need a shower?

But would you shower with her?

Did I say I needed to shower with her?

I said I needed a shower after seeing her.

She looks a little too rough for my
taste.

....and here I was thinking that this was the kind of woman who suited
your exotic tastes.



--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 16:16:23 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:

On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 12:54:22 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 8/11/2012 12:11 PM, tony cooper wrote:
On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 11:28:15 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Fri, 10 Aug 2012 16:04:26 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:

My camera's not working for me, either.

That happened to me too, yesterday. Fortunately its working again
today.

I did manage to catch one keeper. My mental title for it is:
Bright Bokeh.

http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/...08-10-1-X2.jpg


To my eye the picture is the people. Is it really necessary to show the
top half of the image? It keeps drawing my eye away from what I perceive
to be the story.

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/97242118/2012-08-10-1-X2%5B1%5D.jpg

(Hope that worked, it was my first attempt.

Whatever you did came out as a 404. It looks like a good link, but
doesn't work.

I did debate about the crop. If I zoom in on the people, what they
are standing in front of became less obvious for what it is. It loses
that bizarre quality and loses the drawings and keeps just the
lettering.

I imagine you did something like this:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/y007cydzy2...2-08-10-1a.jpg

"McAfee has blocked your computer from making a potentially risky
connection"

I still got the picture but it seems as though somewhere along the way
you may have picked up a parasite. ?????
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 8/11/2012 6:19 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2012-08-11 13:17:50 -0700, tony cooper said:

On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 11:04:37 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2012-08-11 09:11:50 -0700, tony cooper
said:

On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 11:28:15 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Fri, 10 Aug 2012 16:04:26 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:

My camera's not working for me, either.

That happened to me too, yesterday. Fortunately its working again
today.

I did manage to catch one keeper. My mental title for it is:
Bright Bokeh.

http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/...08-10-1-X2.jpg


Why do I feel like I need a shower?

But would you shower with her?

Did I say I needed to shower with her?

I said I needed a shower after seeing her.


I can think of several reasons for that.
Perhaps we are better off not knowing which reason. ;-)

--
Peter

On 2012-08-11 20:45 , Eric Stevens wrote:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/y007cydzy2...2-08-10-1a.jpg

"McAfee has blocked your computer from making a potentially risky
connection"

I still got the picture but it seems as though somewhere along the way
you may have picked up a parasite. ?????

Nothing to do with the image in question.

In the race of bloated, computer clogging waste it's hard to keep track
of whether Norton or McAfee is worse.

I'd suggest you remove McAfee (which can be a painful experience) and
install AVG free.

Or better, get a Mac.


--
"Civilization is the limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessities."
-Samuel Clemens.

On 2012-08-11 12:09 , tony cooper wrote:

You did misunderstand. All I want is a link to the page itself in
each poster's comments about the images. I'll jump from image to
image. I put the PBase page up on the second screen.

When posters follow a comment that contains the link, or when they add
the link, it works fine. However, some posters originate a post a
with no link.

I do my comments with links to all images. This is a help when reading
them, and moreso after replies to the comments when there are 3 images
under discussion. Once the reply comes out it's harder to gauge where
the image is in the whole set.

I'd encourage this.

--
"Civilization is the limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessities."
-Samuel Clemens.

On 2012-08-12 17:16 , wrote:
On Saturday, August 11, 2012 8:25:19 AM UTC-7, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2012-08-10 16:04 , tony cooper wrote:
It's a lot of heavy lifting, I know. Sometime I waste as much as
a full second manhandling something from one screen to another.

I shouldn't waste my time with this, but it is trivial for the OS
window manager to accept an oversized window and display it on the
other display and/or re-size it. MS don't seem to grasp that and
yet they've supported dual (or more) screens for over 10 years.
Maybe Win 8 will handle it?

On the Mac (where else?) OS X windows (say the finder
(directory)), Google Chrome and other apps re-size automatically
too. Even Thunderbird edit windows will resize down with no fuss.

Google Earth does not - but it will at least move to the smaller
display.

Whether that is enough to cause even 0.00001% of Windblows users to
see the light is doubtful.

Windows users might not appreciate having windows automatically
re-sized. That's the sort of thing pop-up spam windows do in a
browser... Sometimes I'll expand a window across both monitors to get
extra wide. The easy way to fit to another monitor is
double-click/maximize, then you preserve the original size for when
it's moved back.


Where ya been Paul?

--
"Civilization is the limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessities."
-Samuel Clemens.

On Sun, 12 Aug 2012 10:19:41 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2012-08-11 20:45 , Eric Stevens wrote:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/y007cydzy2...2-08-10-1a.jpg

"McAfee has blocked your computer from making a potentially risky
connection"

I still got the picture but it seems as though somewhere along the way
you may have picked up a parasite. ?????

Nothing to do with the image in question.

In the race of bloated, computer clogging waste it's hard to keep track
of whether Norton or McAfee is worse.

I'd suggest you remove McAfee (which can be a painful experience) and
install AVG free.

Or better, get a Mac.

Which is all very well, but does that explain why clicking on the URL
you supplied caused my computer to go seeking not only the picture but
some other site to which McAfee objected?
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 2012-08-12 14:16:29 -0700, said:

On Saturday, August 11, 2012 8:25:19 AM UTC-7, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2012-08-10 16:04 , tony cooper wrote:
It's a lot of heavy lifting, I know. Sometime I waste as much as a
full second manhandling something from one screen to another.

I shouldn't waste my time with this, but it is trivial for the OS window

manager to accept an oversized window and display it on the other
display and/or re-size it. MS don't seem to grasp that and yet they've

supported dual (or more) screens for over 10 years. Maybe Win 8 will
handle it?

On the Mac (where else?) OS X windows (say the finder (directory)),
Google Chrome and other apps re-size automatically too. Even
Thunderbird edit windows will resize down with no fuss.

Google Earth does not - but it will at least move to the smaller display.

Whether that is enough to cause even 0.00001% of Windblows users to see

the light is doubtful.

Windows users might not appreciate having windows automatically re-sized. T
hat's the sort of thing pop-up spam windows do in a browser... Sometimes I'
ll expand a window across both monitors to get extra wide. The easy way to
fit to another monitor is double-click/maximize, then you preserve the orig
inal size for when it's moved back.

Paul,
Whatever happen regarding the theft of your photo equipment?


--
Regards,

Savageduck