If there's no shake, I can't be responsible

I really wasn't too concerned about the background. I was just practicing
getting the subject framed fairly centrally.

I would get Mich sitting beside me; then I'd take two steps forward, turn
180 degrees, and take a shot with the camera positioned about waste
height. If I got the turn just right and held the camera fairly straight,
I'd get Mich pretty decently framed.

It's kind of muscle memory training. If I do it enough, it becomes
routine when I get him in a better setting. And, it never fails at 35mm,
or something pretty close. If I use the XSi, with the 28mm lens, it's
only about 1 1/2 step, and I have to hold the camera a bit lower. It's
one of the routine shots I like to do, and it works with anything about
the size of Mich sitting pretty...


And, it helps a lot with Mich's obedience training. After I take the shot,
I give him the "heel" command, and he comes running over to sit at my left
side. I give him a few pats and "Good Boy!" rewards, sometimes followed
with a treat. Then, a couple of "puppy push-ups," followed by some more
pats and ear tousling, and I step forward a couple of steps after giving him
the "stay" command. Then, I take a few shots again, and we repeat. Some
shots with flash, some without. It also helps to keep him comfortable
around the flash.

He loves the game, and I end up with some good shots of him looking all
playful and perky, although it sounds like he looked a little too perky in
that shot...

What can I say, Mich LOVES his food rewards...

Later this summer, I hope to take him to a nice scenic spot on a hot day,
and, with a little luck, I should be able to get a nice portrait of him.

It's just one of the techniques I use to help keep Mich in top form, and my
photography on an upward progression...

Take Care,
Dudley

"Dudley Hanks" wrote in message
news:JadSn.6890$Z6.4431@edtnps82...
for LOL's actions ...

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...tingPretty.jpg (Full Size)

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...rettySmall.jpg (Fast
Loading)

Handheld @ 1/3 sec...

If it's clean, LOL's gonna flip his lid ...

I think he has an ear missing, mich that is rather than LOL who seems to be
missing a brain. ;-)

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
news:hvd4j4$bnf$1@qmul...

"Dudley Hanks" wrote in message
news:JadSn.6890$Z6.4431@edtnps82...
for LOL's actions ...

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...tingPretty.jpg (Full Size)

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...rettySmall.jpg (Fast
Loading)

Handheld @ 1/3 sec...

If it's clean, LOL's gonna flip his lid ...

I think he has an ear missing, mich that is rather than LOL who seems to
be missing a brain. ;-)





One of the other shots I took, Mich was doing that cocked head thing
shpherds do when they find something interesting.

I was making a funny noise to get his attention, and apparently, he had his
head so twisted, it was almost upside down.

He's a crazy dog...

Take Care,
Dudley

"Dudley Hanks" wrote in message
news:XFdSn.6891$Z6.5070@edtnps82...

"LOL!" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 23:32:57 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
wrote:

for LOL's actions ...

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...tingPretty.jpg (Full Size)

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...rettySmall.jpg (Fast
Loading)

Handheld @ 1/3 sec...

If it's clean, LOL's gonna flip his lid ...


Why? I tested my own handheld skills on IS equipped cameras. I can shoot
a
tack-sharp image at a full 1-second long exposure with a 432mm lens. Just
to see where my and its limits lie. But it requires knowing how IS works,
its limitations, using the proper IS setting, and having exceptional
handheld skills to begin with.

In your image you're not so skilled, nor even lucky. Everything
illuminated
by available light is blurred. Only those features stopped by the higher
speed of the fill-flash burst are clearer. Not to mention the focus is
off,
the camera focused on the oven behind the randomly placed, badly tilted,
and aroused dog. Is your spatial acuity and motor-control so poor that
you
can't even tell when you are holding a camera level? Apparently so.
You're
not going to make a very good blind person. You'll even suck at that.

LOL!


LOL, why don't you try blind-folding yourself and doing that one second
exposure, and post the result?

You'll find that it's a bit tricky with no visual cues to orient
yourself...

Besides, I'm a blind photographer, my pics should look the part, should
they not?

This is what you'll never understand. I'm not after traditional pics;
I'm after pics that depict the world as a blind photographer interacts
with it. What else could it be?

You don't even know how to interact properly with the sighted world as a
sighted person, so I guess I should not be surprised...

Take Care,
Dudley

Just curious, Dudley -- how blind are you? How do you view the images you
capture, and how do you read the posts in this newsgroup?

Also, I don't know why you bother replying to "LOL" -- he's just a pest and
a complete waste of time.

"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...

"Dudley Hanks" wrote in message
news:XFdSn.6891$Z6.5070@edtnps82...

"LOL!" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 23:32:57 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
wrote:

for LOL's actions ...

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...tingPretty.jpg (Full Size)

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...rettySmall.jpg (Fast
Loading)

Handheld @ 1/3 sec...

If it's clean, LOL's gonna flip his lid ...


Why? I tested my own handheld skills on IS equipped cameras. I can shoot
a
tack-sharp image at a full 1-second long exposure with a 432mm lens.
Just
to see where my and its limits lie. But it requires knowing how IS
works,
its limitations, using the proper IS setting, and having exceptional
handheld skills to begin with.

In your image you're not so skilled, nor even lucky. Everything
illuminated
by available light is blurred. Only those features stopped by the higher
speed of the fill-flash burst are clearer. Not to mention the focus is
off,
the camera focused on the oven behind the randomly placed, badly tilted,
and aroused dog. Is your spatial acuity and motor-control so poor that
you
can't even tell when you are holding a camera level? Apparently so.
You're
not going to make a very good blind person. You'll even suck at that.

LOL!


LOL, why don't you try blind-folding yourself and doing that one second
exposure, and post the result?

You'll find that it's a bit tricky with no visual cues to orient
yourself...

Besides, I'm a blind photographer, my pics should look the part, should
they not?

This is what you'll never understand. I'm not after traditional pics;
I'm after pics that depict the world as a blind photographer interacts
with it. What else could it be?

You don't even know how to interact properly with the sighted world as a
sighted person, so I guess I should not be surprised...

Take Care,
Dudley

Just curious, Dudley -- how blind are you? How do you view the images you
capture, and how do you read the posts in this newsgroup?

Also, I don't know why you bother replying to "LOL" -- he's just a pest
and a complete waste of time.


Regarding my sight:

I see only gross light perception, which means I can tell if there is light,
but I can't make out any detail other than gross shapes.

For instance, If there is a large plant in front of a window, I would see a
bright area where the window is, but I probably wouldn't see the plant in
front -- except maybe if it were a very large and bulky one. On the other
hand, If a person is standing in front of the window, I would see a dark
rather ill-defined silhouette, as the person would block enough light to
negate part of the window

As for what I see in my pictures, usually not much.

In the pic I posted a while back of the $1 coin on a keyboard, I just saw a
bright circle carved out of the remaining darkness. I couldn't see anything
in the last flower pics I posted, or the shot of Mich sitting pretty. And,
I saw a dark blog where the fig newton was in that shot of the treat sitting
on a plate.

There are some exquisite moments, where the light is just right, when I can
see enough to actually compose the shapes I see in the viewfinder / display,
but those seem to get fewer and farther between all the time.

Regarding why I bother with LOL, you might say it's "force of habit."

I've come across people like him in real life, and I haven't backed down.
Why would I back down to some one not even brave enough to step out of the
shadow of anonymity?

If other disabled people read these posts, I want them to get the message
that blindness is just one more feature of their day they need to cope with.
It isn't anything they need be ashamed of, nothing that others can use
against them, not a freakish deformity that should cause them to shrink into
the murky background, definitely not a force strong enough to keep them from
achieving their goals -- regardless of what their goals might be.

I regard giving the silent treatment to LOL / Jeff / Jerry / etc much like
trying to appease Hitler; it just doesn't work, at least not so far as
LOL's comments about how blindness should limit my options.

You'll notice I usually don't say too much when he's just spouting off about
cams and other equipment. In that area he's harmless. But, when it comes
to his bigoted, narcissistic, self-aggrandisement of himself through the
debasement of another's physical, emotional or mental limitation simply
because he's intent on destroying another's soul in order for him to feel a
warm fuzzy glow where his heart should be, I say my piece.

It may not help him, or further my pursuit of progress, but I hope it serves
as an example to other blind people to step up and try to hit their home
run, in whatever art / sport / business venture they have chosen...

Take Care,
Dudley

On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 19:13:02 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
wrote:


"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
m...

"Dudley Hanks" wrote in message
news:XFdSn.6891$Z6.5070@edtnps82...

"LOL!" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 23:32:57 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
wrote:

for LOL's actions ...

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...tingPretty.jpg (Full Size)

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...rettySmall.jpg (Fast
Loading)

Handheld @ 1/3 sec...

If it's clean, LOL's gonna flip his lid ...


Why? I tested my own handheld skills on IS equipped cameras. I can shoot
a
tack-sharp image at a full 1-second long exposure with a 432mm lens.
Just
to see where my and its limits lie. But it requires knowing how IS
works,
its limitations, using the proper IS setting, and having exceptional
handheld skills to begin with.

In your image you're not so skilled, nor even lucky. Everything
illuminated
by available light is blurred. Only those features stopped by the higher
speed of the fill-flash burst are clearer. Not to mention the focus is
off,
the camera focused on the oven behind the randomly placed, badly tilted,
and aroused dog. Is your spatial acuity and motor-control so poor that
you
can't even tell when you are holding a camera level? Apparently so.
You're
not going to make a very good blind person. You'll even suck at that.

LOL!


LOL, why don't you try blind-folding yourself and doing that one second
exposure, and post the result?

You'll find that it's a bit tricky with no visual cues to orient
yourself...

Besides, I'm a blind photographer, my pics should look the part, should
they not?

This is what you'll never understand. I'm not after traditional pics;
I'm after pics that depict the world as a blind photographer interacts
with it. What else could it be?

You don't even know how to interact properly with the sighted world as a
sighted person, so I guess I should not be surprised...

Take Care,
Dudley

Just curious, Dudley -- how blind are you? How do you view the images you
capture, and how do you read the posts in this newsgroup?

Also, I don't know why you bother replying to "LOL" -- he's just a pest
and a complete waste of time.


Regarding my sight:

I see only gross light perception, which means I can tell if there is light,
but I can't make out any detail other than gross shapes.

For instance, If there is a large plant in front of a window, I would see a
bright area where the window is, but I probably wouldn't see the plant in
front -- except maybe if it were a very large and bulky one. On the other
hand, If a person is standing in front of the window, I would see a dark
rather ill-defined silhouette, as the person would block enough light to
negate part of the window

As for what I see in my pictures, usually not much.

In the pic I posted a while back of the $1 coin on a keyboard, I just saw a
bright circle carved out of the remaining darkness. I couldn't see anything
in the last flower pics I posted, or the shot of Mich sitting pretty. And,
I saw a dark blog where the fig newton was in that shot of the treat sitting
on a plate.

There are some exquisite moments, where the light is just right, when I can
see enough to actually compose the shapes I see in the viewfinder / display,
but those seem to get fewer and farther between all the time.

Regarding why I bother with LOL, you might say it's "force of habit."

I've come across people like him in real life, and I haven't backed down.
Why would I back down to some one not even brave enough to step out of the
shadow of anonymity?

If other disabled people read these posts, I want them to get the message
that blindness is just one more feature of their day they need to cope with.
It isn't anything they need be ashamed of, nothing that others can use
against them, not a freakish deformity that should cause them to shrink into
the murky background, definitely not a force strong enough to keep them from
achieving their goals -- regardless of what their goals might be.

I regard giving the silent treatment to LOL / Jeff / Jerry / etc much like
trying to appease Hitler; it just doesn't work, at least not so far as
LOL's comments about how blindness should limit my options.

You'll notice I usually don't say too much when he's just spouting off about
cams and other equipment. In that area he's harmless. But, when it comes
to his bigoted, narcissistic, self-aggrandisement of himself through the
debasement of another's physical, emotional or mental limitation simply
because he's intent on destroying another's soul in order for him to feel a
warm fuzzy glow where his heart should be, I say my piece.

It may not help him, or further my pursuit of progress, but I hope it serves
as an example to other blind people to step up and try to hit their home
run, in whatever art / sport / business venture they have chosen...

Take Care,
Dudley


Let's all watch the paraplegic psychotic believing he's going to be a
famous ballet-dancer one day while he's flopping around on the floor. While
fools just as twisted by their misplaced pity urge him on for their own
sick form of entertainment. There is absolutely NO difference between those
two situations. In scenarios like that, just as yours, they are all
pitiable and disgusting humans.

This has NOTHING to do with bigotry you ****ingly demented, psychotic, and
pathetic ass--all the while playing your glaringly transparent
self-victimizing routine to manipulate others. It has to do with REALITY.
Ever hear of it?

Did you get another donation to buy a Leica while you stick the money in
some other bank account because the Leica will do you absolutely no good?
Even a Barbie-Cam would be no different than the results that you would get
with a Leica. You know it, everyone that knows you knows it. But someone
online that you would be able to scam would be too stupid to know it. How
about it, scam-artist? Because that's all and exactly what you really are.
An online scammer and scam artist, nothing more, nothing less. You're most
definitely not any kind of photographer. Your photographs wouldn't even
beat those of a 2 year-old snapshooter with his very first Fisher-Price
"Toddler's 1st Camera".


BTW: how the hell would something like you know if I am giving worthwhile
advice about cameras and photography, when you can't even see anything in
photographs, and your own skills stink to high heaven. Your comments about
others' advice is just as obviously empty as your photography skills.

LOL!

On 6/18/10 2:54 PM, in article ,
"LOL!" wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 19:13:02 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
wrote:


"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...

"Dudley Hanks" wrote in message
news:XFdSn.6891$Z6.5070@edtnps82...

"LOL!" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 23:32:57 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
wrote:

for LOL's actions ...

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...tingPretty.jpg (Full Size)

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...rettySmall.jpg (Fast
Loading)

Handheld @ 1/3 sec...

If it's clean, LOL's gonna flip his lid ...


Why? I tested my own handheld skills on IS equipped cameras. I can shoot
a
tack-sharp image at a full 1-second long exposure with a 432mm lens.
Just
to see where my and its limits lie. But it requires knowing how IS
works,
its limitations, using the proper IS setting, and having exceptional
handheld skills to begin with.

In your image you're not so skilled, nor even lucky. Everything
illuminated
by available light is blurred. Only those features stopped by the higher
speed of the fill-flash burst are clearer. Not to mention the focus is
off,
the camera focused on the oven behind the randomly placed, badly tilted,
and aroused dog. Is your spatial acuity and motor-control so poor that
you
can't even tell when you are holding a camera level? Apparently so.
You're
not going to make a very good blind person. You'll even suck at that.

LOL!


LOL, why don't you try blind-folding yourself and doing that one second
exposure, and post the result?

You'll find that it's a bit tricky with no visual cues to orient
yourself...

Besides, I'm a blind photographer, my pics should look the part, should
they not?

This is what you'll never understand. I'm not after traditional pics;
I'm after pics that depict the world as a blind photographer interacts
with it. What else could it be?

You don't even know how to interact properly with the sighted world as a
sighted person, so I guess I should not be surprised...

Take Care,
Dudley

Just curious, Dudley -- how blind are you? How do you view the images you
capture, and how do you read the posts in this newsgroup?

Also, I don't know why you bother replying to "LOL" -- he's just a pest
and a complete waste of time.


Regarding my sight:

I see only gross light perception, which means I can tell if there is light,
but I can't make out any detail other than gross shapes.

For instance, If there is a large plant in front of a window, I would see a
bright area where the window is, but I probably wouldn't see the plant in
front -- except maybe if it were a very large and bulky one. On the other
hand, If a person is standing in front of the window, I would see a dark
rather ill-defined silhouette, as the person would block enough light to
negate part of the window

As for what I see in my pictures, usually not much.

In the pic I posted a while back of the $1 coin on a keyboard, I just saw a
bright circle carved out of the remaining darkness. I couldn't see anything
in the last flower pics I posted, or the shot of Mich sitting pretty. And,
I saw a dark blog where the fig newton was in that shot of the treat sitting
on a plate.

There are some exquisite moments, where the light is just right, when I can
see enough to actually compose the shapes I see in the viewfinder / display,
but those seem to get fewer and farther between all the time.

Regarding why I bother with LOL, you might say it's "force of habit."

I've come across people like him in real life, and I haven't backed down.
Why would I back down to some one not even brave enough to step out of the
shadow of anonymity?

If other disabled people read these posts, I want them to get the message
that blindness is just one more feature of their day they need to cope with.
It isn't anything they need be ashamed of, nothing that others can use
against them, not a freakish deformity that should cause them to shrink into
the murky background, definitely not a force strong enough to keep them from
achieving their goals -- regardless of what their goals might be.

I regard giving the silent treatment to LOL / Jeff / Jerry / etc much like
trying to appease Hitler; it just doesn't work, at least not so far as
LOL's comments about how blindness should limit my options.

You'll notice I usually don't say too much when he's just spouting off about
cams and other equipment. In that area he's harmless. But, when it comes
to his bigoted, narcissistic, self-aggrandisement of himself through the
debasement of another's physical, emotional or mental limitation simply
because he's intent on destroying another's soul in order for him to feel a
warm fuzzy glow where his heart should be, I say my piece.

It may not help him, or further my pursuit of progress, but I hope it serves
as an example to other blind people to step up and try to hit their home
run, in whatever art / sport / business venture they have chosen...

Take Care,
Dudley



BTW: how the hell would something like you know if I am giving worthwhile
advice about cameras and photography, when you can't even see anything in
photographs, and your own skills stink to high heaven. Your comments about
others' advice is just as obviously empty as your photography skills.

LOL!


Dudley may not have the sight that you have, in a sense.

However, you, you bloated mass of pathetic protoplasm, have no sense -
whatsoever.

Dudley sees the world around him in a way that you are incapable of ever
perceiving. Not even close, little twit.

Do us all a favor and poke yourself with a body-piercing by Glock...

On 6/18/10 2:55 PM, in article
, "Twibil"
wrote:

On Jun 18, 12:13*pm, "Dudley Hanks" wrote:


I've come across people like him in real life, and I haven't backed down.
Why would I back down to some one not even brave enough to step out of the
shadow of anonymity?

If other disabled people read these posts, I want them to get the message
that blindness is just one more feature of their day they need to cope with.
It isn't anything they need be ashamed of, nothing that others can use
against them, not a freakish deformity that should cause them to shrink into
the murky background, definitely not a force strong enough to keep them from
achieving their goals -- regardless of what their goals might be.

I regard giving the silent treatment to LOL / Jeff / Jerry / etc much like
trying to appease Hitler; *it just doesn't work, at least not so far as
LOL's comments about how blindness should limit my options.

You'll notice I usually don't say too much when he's just spouting off about
cams and other equipment. *In that area he's harmless. *But, when it comes
to his bigoted, narcissistic, self-aggrandisement of himself through the
debasement of another's physical, emotional or mental limitation simply
because he's intent on destroying another's soul in order for him to feel a
warm fuzzy glow where his heart should be, I say my piece.

It may not help him, or further my pursuit of progress, but I hope it serves
as an example to other blind people to step up and try to hit their home
run, in whatever art / sport / business venture they have chosen...

You're a good man, Dudley. And that's something that one doesn't get
the opportunity to say very frequently; on Usenet or anywhere else.

Keep up the good work.

~Pete

100% agreed!

Happy Father's Day, Dudley.

On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 17:26:48 -0500, George Kerby
wrote:


Dudley sees the world around him in a way that you are incapable of ever
perceiving. Not even close, little twit.

Au contraire mon idiot. Three decades ago I used to volunteer for an
organization that would take disabled people into wilderness treks for
weeks or a month at a time, places so remote that you wouldn't even cross
paths with other humans during the whole adventure. They needed able-bodied
people like me with my survival skills to help those with blindness,
paralysis, lost limbs, and other missing functions. Have you ever tried to
portage a wheelchair through 5 miles of scrub and swamp? Have you ever
backpacked a paraplegic for miles? I used to enjoy leading the blind
adventurers and helping them to imagine what the seeing world is like.
Because of my high spatial IQ I could describe it to them in a way they
would understand. Even being able to help "visualize" things in the minds
of those who were born blind, things that they could never touch, like
clouds in the sky. Colors can even be visualized in temperatures by a blind
person. Often they would exclaim, "Wow! I GET IT NOW!" when describing
visuals to them in their spatial terms. Did you even know that they dream
in only tactile-shapes and motions? Just like the world they were born
into.

This is why I know what a hopeless pathetic piece of **** that Dud-ley is.
Trying to pawn off his scam-act as some joke attempt at being a
photographer makes him even a more disgusting human. I know people with
handicaps and I'm proud to know them and respect them. They aren't
manipulating people with some poor-pitiful-me carnival sideshow act to try
to make a buck off the less aware fools just like you.

"LOL!" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 19:13:02 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
wrote:


"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
om...

"Dudley Hanks" wrote in message
news:XFdSn.6891$Z6.5070@edtnps82...

"LOL!" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 23:32:57 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
wrote:

for LOL's actions ...

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...tingPretty.jpg (Full Size)

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...rettySmall.jpg (Fast
Loading)

Handheld @ 1/3 sec...

If it's clean, LOL's gonna flip his lid ...


Why? I tested my own handheld skills on IS equipped cameras. I can
shoot
a
tack-sharp image at a full 1-second long exposure with a 432mm lens.
Just
to see where my and its limits lie. But it requires knowing how IS
works,
its limitations, using the proper IS setting, and having exceptional
handheld skills to begin with.

In your image you're not so skilled, nor even lucky. Everything
illuminated
by available light is blurred. Only those features stopped by the
higher
speed of the fill-flash burst are clearer. Not to mention the focus is
off,
the camera focused on the oven behind the randomly placed, badly
tilted,
and aroused dog. Is your spatial acuity and motor-control so poor that
you
can't even tell when you are holding a camera level? Apparently so.
You're
not going to make a very good blind person. You'll even suck at that.

LOL!


LOL, why don't you try blind-folding yourself and doing that one second
exposure, and post the result?

You'll find that it's a bit tricky with no visual cues to orient
yourself...

Besides, I'm a blind photographer, my pics should look the part, should
they not?

This is what you'll never understand. I'm not after traditional pics;
I'm after pics that depict the world as a blind photographer interacts
with it. What else could it be?

You don't even know how to interact properly with the sighted world as
a
sighted person, so I guess I should not be surprised...

Take Care,
Dudley

Just curious, Dudley -- how blind are you? How do you view the images
you
capture, and how do you read the posts in this newsgroup?

Also, I don't know why you bother replying to "LOL" -- he's just a pest
and a complete waste of time.


Regarding my sight:

I see only gross light perception, which means I can tell if there is
light,
but I can't make out any detail other than gross shapes.

For instance, If there is a large plant in front of a window, I would see
a
bright area where the window is, but I probably wouldn't see the plant in
front -- except maybe if it were a very large and bulky one. On the other
hand, If a person is standing in front of the window, I would see a dark
rather ill-defined silhouette, as the person would block enough light to
negate part of the window

As for what I see in my pictures, usually not much.

In the pic I posted a while back of the $1 coin on a keyboard, I just saw
a
bright circle carved out of the remaining darkness. I couldn't see
anything
in the last flower pics I posted, or the shot of Mich sitting pretty.
And,
I saw a dark blog where the fig newton was in that shot of the treat
sitting
on a plate.

There are some exquisite moments, where the light is just right, when I
can
see enough to actually compose the shapes I see in the viewfinder /
display,
but those seem to get fewer and farther between all the time.

Regarding why I bother with LOL, you might say it's "force of habit."

I've come across people like him in real life, and I haven't backed down.
Why would I back down to some one not even brave enough to step out of the
shadow of anonymity?

If other disabled people read these posts, I want them to get the message
that blindness is just one more feature of their day they need to cope
with.
It isn't anything they need be ashamed of, nothing that others can use
against them, not a freakish deformity that should cause them to shrink
into
the murky background, definitely not a force strong enough to keep them
from
achieving their goals -- regardless of what their goals might be.

I regard giving the silent treatment to LOL / Jeff / Jerry / etc much like
trying to appease Hitler; it just doesn't work, at least not so far as
LOL's comments about how blindness should limit my options.

You'll notice I usually don't say too much when he's just spouting off
about
cams and other equipment. In that area he's harmless. But, when it comes
to his bigoted, narcissistic, self-aggrandisement of himself through the
debasement of another's physical, emotional or mental limitation simply
because he's intent on destroying another's soul in order for him to feel
a
warm fuzzy glow where his heart should be, I say my piece.

It may not help him, or further my pursuit of progress, but I hope it
serves
as an example to other blind people to step up and try to hit their home
run, in whatever art / sport / business venture they have chosen...

Take Care,
Dudley


Let's all watch the paraplegic psychotic believing he's going to be a
famous ballet-dancer one day while he's flopping around on the floor.
While
fools just as twisted by their misplaced pity urge him on for their own
sick form of entertainment. There is absolutely NO difference between
those
two situations. In scenarios like that, just as yours, they are all
pitiable and disgusting humans.

Spoken like a true, bigotted, narcissistic Nazi... You obviously haven't
realized what the true essence of life consists of...

Besides, your quad analogy doesn't hold up. I use technology to assist me
in taking photos. In your analogy, the quad would be trying to do it all on
his / her own. A better analogy would be somebody who has lost all function
to their limbs, but who is attempting to use some sort of muscle stimulation
to regain movement, and perform dance routines. Perhaps, the system could
include a computer controlled, mind activated control center, which gives
the individual a certain degree of movement again. The unfortunate person
would be striving to use that technology to perfect the dance moves of his /
her choice...

And, yes, I would applaud the individuals efforts...

I would go so far as to applaud any attempt by that individual to do
whatever he or she could accomplish with whatever limited mobility he or she
possess. But, I doubt they'd opt for ballet, as I opted to give up my
drivers license once my vision deteriorated past the lower limit of
possibility.

The difference between you and me, and other disabled persons, is that we
think rationally, not narcissistically...

This has NOTHING to do with bigotry you ****ingly demented, psychotic, and
pathetic ass--all the while playing your glaringly transparent
self-victimizing routine to manipulate others. It has to do with REALITY.
Ever hear of it?


Yes, I've heard of reality, but you don't know how to apply it. So, indeed
it has everything to do with bigotry. A bigot always thinks that he / she
is right, and doesn't stop to think that a decision taken by others might be
right for them, in spite of any opposition the bigot might conjure up in his
/ her mind. That's bigotry, plain and simple. You are not me. You have no
idea of what my abilities are, and you certainly have no right to make
personal decisions for me; nor do you have any right to make decisions for
other, able-bodied members of the group.

If you are so intent on eliminating scams, why not get out there and phone
up all those seniors who've been taken in by telemarketing scams and tell
those poor, dementia inflicted people what suckers they are? That they
should just curl up and die? Why confine your expertise in reality to the
realm of photography, and deciding who should and who shouldn't be allowed
to pursue it?

Ever heard of freedom of choice?

No, LOL, you have no idea of what my reality is, nor will you ever make any
decision for me.

And, yes, LOL, you are a bigot of the highest order...

But, feel free to show to every one here on the group how easy it is for me
to get a reaction out of you... Pavlov...


Did you get another donation to buy a Leica while you stick the money in
some other bank account because the Leica will do you absolutely no good?
Even a Barbie-Cam would be no different than the results that you would
get
with a Leica. You know it, everyone that knows you knows it. But someone
online that you would be able to scam would be too stupid to know it. How
about it, scam-artist? Because that's all and exactly what you really are.
An online scammer and scam artist, nothing more, nothing less. You're most
definitely not any kind of photographer. Your photographs wouldn't even
beat those of a 2 year-old snapshooter with his very first Fisher-Price
"Toddler's 1st Camera".

Everyone's entitled to their opinion. But, LOL, I'll spend the donations of
anyone who chooses to donate on quality equipment. And, yes, people can
tell, as I leave the EXIF data on all pics posted...

My disability has been independently varified by an American organization
with a proven track record proven over 60 years of providing services to
blind persons in both the United States and Canada Guide Dogs for the
Blind). That should be enough for any sane person to realize I have less
than 10% vision. How much less, that's hard to quantify. But, even if you
look at the upper limit, I function with at least a 90% visual deficit. Not
easy by any measurement.

You keep criticising me for whining about my disability. But, the only time
it comes up is when you do one of your rants...

I post a pic and ask for feedback. Others respond, sometimes with words of
encouragement. And you step off the deep end. If you'd knock it off, I
wouldn't have to waste bandwidth explaining why society should not be as
hardcore as you'd like to see it. Appeasement didn't work with Hitler, and
I'll do my best to keep society as kind and gentle as I can, simply to offer
a counterweight to your bigoted, technocratic approach.


BTW: how the hell would something like you know if I am giving worthwhile
advice about cameras and photography, when you can't even see anything in
photographs, and your own skills stink to high heaven. Your comments about
others' advice is just as obviously empty as your photography skills.

You've already proven that logic isn't one of your strongest traits, so I
won't expect you to understand how the validity of any assertion can be
verified logically.

I'll just say that I take into consideration what others say about your
posts, at least I take into consideration what is said by those individuals
out there who I believe aren't your puppets... From a multitude of
statements and responses, I can get a very good idea of who knows what about
what...

You do seem to have a good eye, as is witnessed by your peers, if there is
such a thing as a peer for you...

Let's just say that the Spirit of Da Vinci lives in me, in so far as his
quest for perfection never kept him from experimenting, even when numerous
endeavors proved ineffectual. He kept on is quest, led by his desire to
progress, and his ability to learn from his mistakes...

You'll never be strong enough of character to either do the same yourself,
nor understand why anybody else might choose that route...

Take Care,
Dudley