[SI] Dusk or Dawn is available mid day!

In article , Bruce
wrote:

Elliott Roper wrote:
Your comments about cameras and the industry are very welcome. It would
be great if you would continue to post them. But please consider
whether your sneering about the Shoot-in is increasing your reputation.


Please do not think, not even for a single second, that I care whether
or not my comments meet with your approval.

Thank you for taking the time to reply.

--
To de-mung my e-mail address:- fsnospam$elliott$$
PGP Fingerprint: 1A96 3CF7 637F 896B C810 E199 7E5C A9E4 8E59 E248

On 9/21/2011 5:55 AM, Elliott Roper wrote:
In , Bruce
wrote:

tony wrote:
snip

On the contrary, I have pointed out many times that a proportion of
the early SIs included some excellent images. Those days have long
gone, however.

Bruce, I'm a newbie here, so I was interested in your assertion that
the SI has gone downhill. It's all there for the last 8 years, so I had
a look.

There are some good shots in the early days. There is also a lot of
rubbish. Some of the early contributors are still contributing. It is
hard to say whether an individual contributor has "improved'. You would
expect change over such a long period regardless. It's hard to make a
sweeping generalisation on such a small sample of one person's work.
Some of the early birds who are no longer seen put some excellent
images up there. Some of the others might have fled in embarrassment.

There is no evidence of the latter part of your assertion "On the
contrary, I have pointed out many times that a proportion of the early
SIs included some excellent images. Those days have long gone,
however."

I do note the weasel worded first sentence however. Why do you bother?

Recent SI's have had some excellent pictures. As far as I can tell, and
I don't claim to be a great photographer or critic, so go ahead and
sneer if it makes you feel superior, some of the very best are very
recent.

Despite your mealy-mouthed sniping, recent comments on the SI's have
been helpful and constructive. Taken together with the pictures they
are useful for someone trying to get better at it.

Your comments about cameras and the industry are very welcome. It would
be great if you would continue to post them. But please consider
whether your sneering about the Shoot-in is increasing your reputation.


His comments are definitely increasing his reputation for ..............

--
Peter

On Wed, 21 Sep 2011 11:29:39 +0100, Bruce wrote:
: Elliott Roper wrote:
: Your comments about cameras and the industry are very welcome. It would
: be great if you would continue to post them. But please consider
: whether your sneering about the Shoot-in is increasing your reputation.
:
:
: Please do not think, not even for a single second, that I care whether
: or not my comments meet with your approval.

I'm starting to believe that that's true. Your diatribes against the SI make
no sense as comments aimed at us. They contain no substantive criticism and
make no actionable suggestions. So the only sensible explanation is that
they're largely aimed at yourself, their purpose apparently being to reassure
you, in the absence of actual evidence, that you're a better photographer than
we are. If I'm wrong, feel free to prove it; but common sense tells me that
I'm not.

Elliott may consider himself a newbie, but I think he's hit the nail on the
head. Most of us find your comments on photographic equipment and the
machinations of the industry to be interesting and informative. But your
continuing bull**** about the SI is as embarrassing to read as it should be to
write, and serves only to make you come across as a crackpot. If that doesn't
bother you, fine. I guess it shouldn't bother us either.

Bob

On 2011-09-23 08:44 , Robert Coe wrote:
On Wed, 21 Sep 2011 11:29:39 +0100, wrote:
: Elliott wrote:
:Your comments about cameras and the industry are very welcome. It would
:be great if you would continue to post them. But please consider
:whether your sneering about the Shoot-in is increasing your reputation.
:
:
: Please do not think, not even for a single second, that I care whether
: or not my comments meet with your approval.

I'm starting to believe that that's true. Your diatribes against the SI make
no sense as comments aimed at us. They contain no substantive criticism and
make no actionable suggestions. So the only sensible explanation is that
they're largely aimed at yourself, their purpose apparently being to reassure
you, in the absence of actual evidence, that you're a better photographer than
we are. If I'm wrong, feel free to prove it; but common sense tells me that
I'm not.
But your
continuing bull**** about the SI is as embarrassing to read as it should be to
write, and serves only to make you come across as a crackpot. If that doesn't
bother you, fine. I guess it shouldn't bother us either.


Tony "Bruce" Polson is pathetic. His remarks of course are on a par
with his photos:
http://abpr.railfan.net/abprphoto.cg...-98/d9000a.jpg

--
gmail originated posts filtered due to spam.

On 2011-09-23 15:00:01 -0700, Alan Browne
said:

On 2011-09-23 08:44 , Robert Coe wrote:
On Wed, 21 Sep 2011 11:29:39 +0100, wrote:
: Elliott wrote:
:Your comments about cameras and the industry are very welcome. It would
:be great if you would continue to post them. But please consider
:whether your sneering about the Shoot-in is increasing your reputation.
:
:
: Please do not think, not even for a single second, that I care whether
: or not my comments meet with your approval.

I'm starting to believe that that's true. Your diatribes against the SI make
no sense as comments aimed at us. They contain no substantive criticism and
make no actionable suggestions. So the only sensible explanation is that
they're largely aimed at yourself, their purpose apparently being to reassure
you, in the absence of actual evidence, that you're a better photographer than
we are. If I'm wrong, feel free to prove it; but common sense tells me that
I'm not.
But your
continuing bull**** about the SI is as embarrassing to read as it should be to
write, and serves only to make you come across as a crackpot. If that doesn't
bother you, fine. I guess it shouldn't bother us either.


Tony "Bruce" Polson is pathetic. His remarks of course are on a par
with his photos:
http://abpr.railfan.net/abprphoto.cg...-98/d9000a.jpg

If I am not mistaken that was the image also to be found on the long
absent Paris Match cover.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2011-09-23 18:53 , Savageduck wrote:
On 2011-09-23 15:00:01 -0700, Alan Browne
said:

On 2011-09-23 08:44 , Robert Coe wrote:
On Wed, 21 Sep 2011 11:29:39 +0100, wrote:
: Elliott wrote:
:Your comments about cameras and the industry are very welcome. It
would
:be great if you would continue to post them. But please consider
:whether your sneering about the Shoot-in is increasing your
reputation.
:
:
: Please do not think, not even for a single second, that I care whether
: or not my comments meet with your approval.

I'm starting to believe that that's true. Your diatribes against the
SI make
no sense as comments aimed at us. They contain no substantive
criticism and
make no actionable suggestions. So the only sensible explanation is that
they're largely aimed at yourself, their purpose apparently being to
reassure
you, in the absence of actual evidence, that you're a better
photographer than
we are. If I'm wrong, feel free to prove it; but common sense tells
me that
I'm not.
But your
continuing bull**** about the SI is as embarrassing to read as it
should be to
write, and serves only to make you come across as a crackpot. If that
doesn't
bother you, fine. I guess it shouldn't bother us either.


Tony "Bruce" Polson is pathetic. His remarks of course are on a par
with his photos:
http://abpr.railfan.net/abprphoto.cg...-98/d9000a.jpg

If I am not mistaken that was the image also to be found on the long
absent Paris Match cover.

I won't point out the depths of your mistake.


--
gmail originated posts filtered due to spam.

On 2011-09-23 16:50:11 -0700, Alan Browne
said:

On 2011-09-23 18:53 , Savageduck wrote:
On 2011-09-23 15:00:01 -0700, Alan Browne
said:

Le Snip




Tony "Bruce" Polson is pathetic. His remarks of course are on a par
with his photos:
http://abpr.railfan.net/abprphoto.cg...-98/d9000a.jpg

If I am not mistaken that was the image also to be found on the long
absent Paris Match cover.

I won't point out the depths of your mistake.

At ankle deep, I could probably wade through them to safety without
much distress.

Anyway I was able to find this faint echo reverberating off the walls
of the internet.
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/Polson_01.jpg


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2011-09-23 19:56 , Savageduck wrote:
On 2011-09-23 16:50:11 -0700, Alan Browne
said:

On 2011-09-23 18:53 , Savageduck wrote:
On 2011-09-23 15:00:01 -0700, Alan Browne
said:

Le Snip




Tony "Bruce" Polson is pathetic. His remarks of course are on a par
with his photos:
http://abpr.railfan.net/abprphoto.cg...-98/d9000a.jpg

If I am not mistaken that was the image also to be found on the long
absent Paris Match cover.

I won't point out the depths of your mistake.

At ankle deep, I could probably wade through them to safety without much
distress.

Anyway I was able to find this faint echo reverberating off the walls of
the internet.
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/Polson_01.jpg

Annika made that (Bret).


--
gmail originated posts filtered due to spam.

On 9/25/11 12:08 AM, in article
,
"Annika1980" wrote:

On Sep 24, 8:09*am, Alan Browne
wrote:


Anyway I was able to find this faint echo reverberating off the walls of
the internet.
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/Polson_01.jpg

Annika made that (Bret).



Oh yeah, blame me.

Where the hell have you been?!? You KNOW that when you're away they talk
about you!

Stuffed Crust wrote:
In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Paul Furman wrote:
Stuffed Crust wrote:
and my favorite was technically awful.

Didn't stop me ;-)

Okay, okay...

http://www.peachyphotos.com/po/photo/155305:214508

I know what I was trying to accomplish, but it just didn't work....

Hmmm. I see what you mean. Tough to get sleeping people and the sun
to line themselves up right. One gets cranky and the other just
ignores you.

--
Ray Fischer | Mendocracy (n.) government by lying
| The new GOP ideal