A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #771  
Old December 20th 13, 10:45 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Sandman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,467
Default An Apology - Was converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D

In article , Eric Stevens wrote:

Sandman:
Incorrect. The conclusion that you are lying is based on your
inability to provide substantiation, period.


Well, when you ask for the engineering certificates of racing
drivers I know you are not seriously looking for evidence of their
technical competence: either that or you think that all skills can
engrained by training. Either way, there is no point in trying to
satisfy you.


You'd have a point if you had provided another, equally viable, support.
Which of course you didn't. I even told you that I just wanted to share in
on the source of your intel, the information you used when you made the
explicit claim of *ALL* "successful" drivers. You weren't able to provide
*ANY* support for this claim. This was an *assumption* on your part and
should have been phrased as such.

However, when you first started telling me I was lying you never
even asked for evidence or gave me the chance to produce it.


Incorrect. I spent some two weeks asking you to back up your claims. You
failed.

Sandman:
Which would be a viable option, if what you said was true. Since
what you said concerned knowledge on my part, I knew for a fact
from the outset that your claim was untrue, so there was no
possible scenario where you said something true and then were
unable to support it.


So, from the beginning, you prejudged my veracity.


No, I knew you were wrong, I didn't "prejudge" you. You made a claim about
me that was false, full stop. I asked you to support the claim in a vain
attempt to show you that you CAN'T support it because it is false, and a
normal person would have promptly admitted to his error. But you're no
normal person.

This was obvious and I am glad you have made it unnecessary for me to go
round and round in circles to establish the point. Maybe that's why you
never asked me for supporting evidence.


Apart from the multitude of times I explicitly told you to support your
claim, that is.

Sandman:
And even if we hypothetically say that your claim WAS true and you
couldn't support it, an honest person would retract his claim
nonetheless. If you can't support it, don't make the claim. It's
as easy as that.


That's not how the real world works. If I know my claim is right I'm
not going to withdraw it, even if I can't come up with supporting
evidence at this instant.


This is exactly how the world works. If you make statements as facts, you
will be asked to support them. Failure to do so doesn't make them false,
but it means they're not facts. Facts need proof, full stop. Without proof
they are not facts, then they are assumptions, theories and guesses and
should always be presented as such.

Eric Stevens:
What you are saying is that the reality of any part of the
universe stands or falls with my ability to substantiate it.
Things can be true even if you cannot prove it at the time.


Sandman:
They can - but one should not state them as facts if one cannot
substantiate them. You may make claims about your opinions and
guesses and assumptions as much as you like and no one would hold
you to prove them. But when you continually make explicit claims
and state them as facts, whilst failing to support them with
anything, that makes you an idiot or a liar. Take your pick.


If only that was an accurate statement of the situation ...


It is. You made a statement as a fact, and failed to support it, and then
failed to retract or reword your statement.

Eric Stevens:
I thought that at the very least that was
worth at least a wry grin.

Sandman:
I thought it was you needlessly dragging up old
arguments in an effort to spite me - i.e. troll.

Eric Stevens:
You are unduly sensitive.


Sandman:
How so? You are a troll and a proven liar. Why would I give you
ANY leeway? I'd say I was *duly* sensitive towards your game
playing, trolling and lying and you utter inability to read and
comprehend written English.


Humph! I will pit my understanding of English against yours at any
time, but not with you as the judge.


Haha, of course not. You'd enlist the help of your illiterate troll buddy
Andreas Skitsnack. Perhaps Peter will join you to misrepresent the English
language as well?



--
Sandman[.net]
  #772  
Old December 21st 13, 12:46 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default An Apology - Was converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D

On 20 Dec 2013 09:45:51 GMT, Sandman wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens wrote:

Sandman:
Incorrect. The conclusion that you are lying is based on your
inability to provide substantiation, period.


Well, when you ask for the engineering certificates of racing
drivers I know you are not seriously looking for evidence of their
technical competence: either that or you think that all skills can
engrained by training. Either way, there is no point in trying to
satisfy you.


You'd have a point if you had provided another, equally viable, support.
Which of course you didn't. I even told you that I just wanted to share in
on the source of your intel, the information you used when you made the
explicit claim of *ALL* "successful" drivers. You weren't able to provide
*ANY* support for this claim. This was an *assumption* on your part and
should have been phrased as such.

However, when you first started telling me I was lying you never
even asked for evidence or gave me the chance to produce it.


Incorrect. I spent some two weeks asking you to back up your claims. You
failed.


Rubbish.

On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 21:09:19 +1200 in
Message-ID: I wrote

"I've used operating systems that worked with magnetic drum storage
right through virtually the entire range of both floppy and hard
discs. I bought and used a microcomputer system with one of the
first such hard discs in captivity.

I've set up and written databases using Cromemco DBR (SQL),
Informix (SQL), Basic, C, dBXL, Paradox and one or two others I
can't remember.

I've used file systems including Cromix, Unix, CP/M, PC-DOS and all
flavours of NTFS since version 3.5 (except 8)."

You responded to this saying:

"This I can't believe. *EVERYTHING* you've said leads to the logical
conclusion that you know NOTHING about databases. So I am assuming
that this is just a plain out lie."

See. No request for me to back up my claims. Just an immediate denial
of the truth of my claim and the labeling of it as a lie.

You've gone on from there, disputing everything I say and calling me a
liar at every opportunity.

Had you given me the benefit of the least amount of doubt I could have
given you https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...3/_DSC6945.jpg
which is a link to a corner of my book shelves. You will see *nine*
Paradox manuals covering two generations. In fact the Word Perfect
Office 2002 manual describes Paradox 10. I haven't been collecting
these as a hobby.

Subscribers to this news group will know that I have several times
mentioned the use of a Cromemco computer.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...co%20dBase.jpg is a
screen clip of a most unfortunately coloured catalogue of Cromemco
software. (The original file can be found on page 11 of the 28 slow
loading pages at
http://www.thecomputerarchive.com/ar...20Software.pdf
or http://tinyurl.com/m9w8ct4 )
This page describes the Data Base Management System. At the bottom
there is mention of the 'DBR report writing package'. Although it was
not described as such, this was basically SQL, some time around 1980.

The Cromemco data base software was written by Roger Sippl and Laura
King who previously worked at Cromemco and were responsible for their
database software. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informix_Corporation

So, when I later bought an AT&T 3B2-700 (?) it was natural that I
should buy the Informix package which came with it. It was shortly
after that, that Informix introduced their SQL version which, of
course, I bought.

I'm not going any further along this line. I don't now really care
whether you believe me or not, but please stop pretending you are
virtuous in this matter.

--- snip ---
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #773  
Old December 21st 13, 04:00 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Sandman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,467
Default An Apology - Was converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D

In article , Eric Stevens wrote:

Eric Stevens:
However, when you first started telling me I was lying you never
even asked for evidence or gave me the chance to produce it.


Sandman:
Incorrect. I spent some two weeks asking you to back up your
claims. You failed.


Rubbish.


100% true.

Message-ID: I wrote


"I've used operating systems that worked with magnetic drum storage
right through virtually the entire range of both floppy and hard
discs. I bought and used a microcomputer system with one of the
first such hard discs in captivity.


I've set up and written databases using Cromemco DBR (SQL), Informix
(SQL), Basic, C, dBXL, Paradox and one or two others I can't
remember.


I've used file systems including Cromix, Unix, CP/M, PC-DOS and all
flavours of NTFS since version 3.5 (except 8)."


This has nothing to do with the weeks I spent asking you to back up your
claim about me not understanding the word "Protocol". You are using a
common troll technique called diversion.

You responded to this saying:


"This I can't believe. *EVERYTHING* you've said leads to the logical
conclusion that you know NOTHING about databases. So I am assuming
that this is just a plain out lie."


Indeed. I didn't trust you. Never will trust anything you say at face
value.

See. No request for me to back up my claims. Just an immediate
denial of the truth of my claim and the labeling of it as a lie.


Indeed - this has nothing to do with the FACT that I spent weeks asking you
to back your incorrect claim about me not understanding the word
"protocol", troll boy.

You've gone on from there, disputing everything I say and calling me
a liar at every opportunity.


Incorrect, lie boy.

Had you given me the benefit of the least amount of doubt I could
have given you
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...3/_DSC6945.jpg which is a
link to a corner of my book shelves. You will see *nine* Paradox
manuals covering two generations. In fact the Word Perfect Office
2002 manual describes Paradox 10. I haven't been collecting these as
a hobby.


I didn't click the link, nor do I care about what you claim about anything.
You are a proven liar and every single claim you ever make will be assumed
to be a lie. I will no longer ask you to support your claims since I know
most of them are lies. Neither am I intrested in this attempt at you
dragging up subjects in your normal troll-fashion from months ago.



--
Sandman[.net]
  #774  
Old December 21st 13, 09:56 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default An Apology - Was converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D

On 21 Dec 2013 15:00:34 GMT, Sandman wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens wrote:

Eric Stevens:
However, when you first started telling me I was lying you never
even asked for evidence or gave me the chance to produce it.

Sandman:
Incorrect. I spent some two weeks asking you to back up your
claims. You failed.


Rubbish.


100% true.

Message-ID: I wrote


"I've used operating systems that worked with magnetic drum storage
right through virtually the entire range of both floppy and hard
discs. I bought and used a microcomputer system with one of the
first such hard discs in captivity.


I've set up and written databases using Cromemco DBR (SQL), Informix
(SQL), Basic, C, dBXL, Paradox and one or two others I can't
remember.


I've used file systems including Cromix, Unix, CP/M, PC-DOS and all
flavours of NTFS since version 3.5 (except 8)."


This has nothing to do with the weeks I spent asking you to back up your
claim about me not understanding the word "Protocol". You are using a
common troll technique called diversion.

You responded to this saying:


"This I can't believe. *EVERYTHING* you've said leads to the logical
conclusion that you know NOTHING about databases. So I am assuming
that this is just a plain out lie."


Indeed. I didn't trust you. Never will trust anything you say at face
value.

See. No request for me to back up my claims. Just an immediate
denial of the truth of my claim and the labeling of it as a lie.


Indeed - this has nothing to do with the FACT that I spent weeks asking you
to back your incorrect claim about me not understanding the word
"protocol", troll boy.

You've gone on from there, disputing everything I say and calling me
a liar at every opportunity.


Incorrect, lie boy.

Had you given me the benefit of the least amount of doubt I could
have given you
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...3/_DSC6945.jpg which is a
link to a corner of my book shelves. You will see *nine* Paradox
manuals covering two generations. In fact the Word Perfect Office
2002 manual describes Paradox 10. I haven't been collecting these as
a hobby.


I didn't click the link, nor do I care about what you claim about anything.
You are a proven liar and every single claim you ever make will be assumed
to be a lie. I will no longer ask you to support your claims since I know
most of them are lies. Neither am I intrested in this attempt at you
dragging up subjects in your normal troll-fashion from months ago.


... from where it all started.

You are no doubt technically more than competent but in your personal
relationships you leave a great deal to be desired. I've had enough of
you. Into the 'kill' file you go.

I hope you enjoy the company of people such as 'Legally insane', 'Matt
Giwer' (holocaust-denier extraordinaire), and Archimedes Plutonium.
Look them up if you want to know your proper place.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #775  
Old December 22nd 13, 09:53 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Sandman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,467
Default An Apology - Was converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D

In article , Eric Stevens wrote:

Sandman:
I didn't click the link, nor do I care about what you claim about
anything. You are a proven liar and every single claim you ever
make will be assumed to be a lie. I will no longer ask you to
support your claims since I know most of them are lies. Neither am
I intrested in this attempt at you dragging up subjects in your
normal troll-fashion from months ago.


... from where it all started.


That's not where it all started.

You are no doubt technically more than competent but in your
personal relationships you leave a great deal to be desired.


That's nothing buit a compliment coming from the groups biggest troll and
liar.



--
Sandman[.net]
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
converting 35 mm slides to digital images LeighWillaston Digital Photography 30 June 18th 07 10:46 AM
Converting 35mm Slides to Digital Images Jim[_9_] Digital Photography 0 June 2nd 07 02:18 PM
Are you converting your RAW images to DNG? JC Dill Digital Photography 140 November 10th 06 05:07 PM
QuickTake 150 images - Converting on PC [email protected] Digital Photography 5 April 21st 06 03:00 PM
Tool for converting 12-bit TIFF images to 16-bit TIFF-images? Peter Frank Digital Photography 23 December 13th 04 03:41 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.