STAREDOWN WITH THE 40D !

Mostly offtopic, just chomping on our troll. I know one shouldn't make
fun of someone with a disability, but this ****** is just *too* funny,
and I'm bored. Thanks for the entertainment, 'russ', aka Mr CHKDK..

Here's my favorite bits:

If you people can't see the 5+% magenta cast in the mid-tones of that animal's
We can see a *very* slight magenta tinge in a few tiny areas. So
insignificant that a tiny, easy tweak would fix it, and it's
completely irrelevant in the scheme of things. Only an obsessive ****
would be concerned about it, and then actually be bothered to
(incorrectly) measure it. Clearly an amateur, pretending to have
experience, and with an obsessed, unhealthy interest in attacking
images the likes of which he is completely unable to create.

Not
only do the midrange tones have a magenta cast but the whites are decidedly too
blue (-Y).
I love it - he thinks putting the (-Y) there will impress us!!! Again
the cast is not "decidedly" too blue, except in Mr Obsessive's
tortured head. But I guess we could dial in some +Y to fix it (see
how impressive I sound!!)...

I even detect a bit of a blue-green cast in some of the white in the
ear tuft.
Oh My God!! That would take, like, *microseconds* of anyone's time to
correct, and it's in his *ear tuft*???? - absolutely unthinkable!!!!
This is just AWFUL, oh what shall we do??!!!!!!

That camera has some nasty color-channel problems.
No, it's more easily explained by noting that 'russ' is a lunatic
without a clue. And what 'russ' thinks are nasty problems are exactly
what I would expect from overcast conditions like those, and of course
such minor casts are able to be corrected in a moment.

My monitor displays perfect..
Perfect, eh? That's a very big word for a little mind. Well, we
can't dispute this - we can't see his monitor, and have only
completely non-existent evidence to go on. So I guess it's true,
'russ' has the ONLY perfect monitor in the universe. (O:
FTR, no truly experienced imager would ever dream of saying their
screen was 'perfect'.

It will even show an
intensity difference between 0 and 1 and 244 and 255.
Well, I'm *extremely* glad you can spot the diff between 244 and
255!!! I don't wanna brag, but I can easily spot 254 - 255 - that's a
ten-fold improvement over your meagre claim...

But you have a little credibility problem at the *other* end. Most of
the folks here would know why, but... does 'russ'? Before I go on,
perhaps he should verify that claim.
'russ', would you care to verify that you can clearly see the
difference between, say 0,0,0 and 2,2,2 (I'm even giving you an extra
rgb level, just for the hell of it..), and that it wasn't a typing
error?
And is your monitor calibrated for printing?
If so, name the printer/s.
If not, do elaborate what it is calibrated *for*.

Maybe 'russ' should do a little reading before he continues down this
path - he should remember there are folks here that actually know what
they are doing... (O;

I have tested it with every method known
So it's *perfect*, and he has tested it with *everything*. 'russ' is
obviously not one for using stupidly inappropriate superlatives..

I found they couldn't compete with my own ability to detect slight
color shifts.
Again, I'm sure someone is impressed. I mean other than you.

I spent 25 years of my life in a darkroom manually adjusting
colorhead enlargers for the slightest color corrections needed.
More impressive words. We believe you, russ, yes we truly do.
(That darkroom work must have done serious damage, if you can only
pick 244 to 255...)

I can detect as little as a
1% color shift in any one channel easily
Oh, if only *I* could brag like this...!!

In fact, I find
incandescent color shifts so annoying
My GOD!! You can pick the difference between incandescent and
daylight??? That's astonishing!!!

I just built my own filter stacks for
my yard flood-lights so they put out pure daylight at night because that nasty
yellow-orange cast on white snow at night was driving me up a wall.

That is just too funny! I can (sadly) imagine 'russ' obsessively
staring at his slightly yellowish outdoor lights, and then setting up
his 'filter stack'. Anyone like to live next to this loony?
By the way, he's *very* clever indeed to be able to create a pure
daylight spectrum by filtering incandescents. Almost unbelievable...
Nobel prize on the way, methinks..

Seriously 'russ', if you believe even a smidgeon of this crap is true,
you need to see a... no actually, it's too late. Just resign yourself
to the fact that you are now simply an entertainer...

You're just more losers proving that fact to the world.
If everyone in the world is mad except you, 'russ', what do you reckon
that should be telling you?

If it isn't proved in the images you post
Well it aint proved by anything *you've* posted, you gutless,
talentless coward.

Oh, sorry, that should be "****ingly gutless", I guess.

Keep it up, 'russ', you're hilarious!


By the way, why *do* you keep changing names? Is it:
A. Fear of your past crap being recognised (you *should* be afraid of
that)
B. The (sadly mistaken) belief that people might think there is more
than one who thinks like you
C. Genuine schizophrenia

Considering those options may help in the healing process.

On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 03:53:40 -0800 (PST), wrote:



mark.thomas's useless misinformation based on a life of virtual-only experience
snipped


How about that. The useless **** of a resident troll and armchair photographer
is still desperate for my attention and expertise.

Isn't it about time for you to look over the reviews and pick out a new
imaginary camera for all your posting advice?

What a useless psychotic ****.

russ templeton wrote:
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 09:52:35 -0600, Neil Ellwood
wrote:

On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 02:02:36 -0600, russ templeton wrote:

You could have at least done something about that rotten white-balance
that your camera created. A deer's coat isn't magenta. Get your monitor
adjusted, or get a better camera, or something. How about some talent,
see if you can buy that somewhere while you're at it.
I think you need a new monitor or lessons in setting it up.

What a waste of time.
At least you realise you are.

If you people can't see the 5+% magenta cast in the mid-tones of that animal's
coat you sorely need some time in a darkroom, or at least some decent eye
examinations that will reveal your inability to detect colors adequately. Not
only do the midrange tones have a magenta cast but the whites are decidedly too
blue (-Y). I even detect a bit of a blue-green cast in some of the white in the
ear tuft. That camera has some nasty color-channel problems.

My monitor displays perfect gray levels from blacks to whites, smoothly without
even one minor range of values getting a color cast in it. It will even show an
intensity difference between 0 and 1 and 244 and 255. I have tested it with
every method known, some of those methods even revealing their own inherent
flaws when I found they couldn't compete with my own ability to detect slight
color shifts. I spent 25 years of my life in a darkroom manually adjusting
colorhead enlargers for the slightest color corrections needed. I can adjust any
video display better than any technician doing his rote benchwork by the book.
When doing photomicrography I can hand-stack a layer of filters to provide a
purer daylight light source for incandescent lights than filters that come from
laboratories specifically designed for the purpose. I can detect as little as a
1% color shift in any one channel easily, sometimes even 0.5%. In fact, I find
incandescent color shifts so annoying that I just built my own filter stacks for
my yard flood-lights so they put out pure daylight at night because that nasty
yellow-orange cast on white snow at night was driving me up a wall. If you can't
see those color problems in those images no wonder companies like Canon and
Nikon can get away with selling overpriced crap like that to people like you.
You're hopelessly color blind.

[snip]

Since this newsgroup is suppose to discuss photography, please share
your technique, tools and workflow you utilize. I have been looking for
a good color management workflow to obtain prints which match my display
to your level of quality.

--

Len

On Dec 30, 11:37 pm, russ templeton wrote:
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 03:53:40 -0800 (PST), wrote:
mark.thomas's information snipped
abuse removed, leaving...

...nothing.

So that's 2-0, troll bats zero.

How about posting that information about your colour management
regime, 'russ'. I'm keen to hear about why you can only just detect
the difference between 244 and 255, and how it is that you *can* see
0,0,0 against 1,1,1.

I'm sooo desperate to listen to your 'expertise'....

On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 14:10:57 -0800 (PST), wrote:

I'm keen to hear about why you can only just detect
the difference between 244 and 255, and how it is that you *can* see
0,0,0 against 1,1,1.

Oh, but it's much more fun watching a useless **** of a resident troll trip over
a 244 vs. 254 typo as the only thing that it can pleadingly latch onto for its
desperate need for attention.

LOL

Damn, are you ever a useless and insignificant ****.

On Dec 31, 8:46 am, russ templeton wrote:
Oh, but it's much more fun watching a useless **** of a resident troll trip over
a 244 vs. 254 typo as the only thing that it can pleadingly latch onto for its
desperate need for attention.

So now he admits the typo... *Who* tripped? (grin)


3-0.

On Dec 30, 9:53 pm, wrote:
Mostly offtopic, just chomping on our troll. I know one shouldn't make
fun of someone with a disability, but this ****** is just *too* funny,
and I'm bored. Thanks for the entertainment, 'russ', aka Mr CHKDK..

Here's my favorite bits:

If you people can't see the 5+% magenta cast in the mid-tones of that animal's

We can see a *very* slight magenta tinge in a few tiny areas. So
insignificant that a tiny, easy tweak would fix it, and it's
completely irrelevant in the scheme of things.


Fanboi, fanboi, fanboi!
You are one quick draw mouth, dude. Like when it comes to putting
other people's images down but all of a sudden... Fanboi of Bret
Douglas!

Wow, the ranks are forming. Those with experience, skill and knowledge
are bypassed for mythologists who imagine up their skills and invent
an unprovable history in the industry. How is it you claim to have a
Medium format camera but like the magic you give yourself in bed, it
never works? God will help you if you help yourself, but God help you
when you get caught doing it. Give up on the critique Mark. You have
no ability to carry it off.

It's a sickening thought that those lies on your web site about where
you got your mythical ability from and in fact your claim to have any
ability at all, only come from your over active imagination which
gives you those gooey wet dreams. To you wetting agent is your own
sperm when you wake up from the dream.

Relax Russ, he's already 'selected' his next camera. An Olympus 35mm
SLR. LOL!

PQOTD

On Dec 31, 9:56 am, wrote:
On Dec 31, 8:46 am, russ templeton wrote:

Oh, but it's much more fun watching a useless **** of a resident troll trip over
a 244 vs. 254 typo as the only thing that it can pleadingly latch onto for its
desperate need for attention.

So now he admits the typo... *Who* tripped? (grin)

3-0.

Do you really believe yourself? Only an idiot would.

PQOTD

Hi, DOUGLAS.

Prisilla, Queen of the Desert wrote:
(crap)

Off Topic.

On Dec 31 2007, 7:00 pm, "Prisilla, Queen of the Desert"
AKA Douglas MacDonald wrote:
On Dec 31, 9:56 am, wrote:

On Dec 31, 8:46 am, russ templeton wrote:

Oh, but it's much more fun watching a useless **** of a resident troll trip over
a 244 vs. 254 typo as the only thing that it can pleadingly latch onto for its
desperate need for attention.

So now he admits the typo... *Who* tripped? (grin)

3-0.

Do you really believe yourself? Only an idiot would.

PQOTD

Can I give you a small tip, Douglas? (No? Too bad!)

Your style is just too distinctive for you to post *normally*, let
alone an abusive message aimed at me. If you really want to sneak back
onto usenet after the incredable (heh!) embarrassment of the Sarina
and Susana busted identities, you really need to *avoid old foes*.

By the way, I just *loved* it when you signed off for Susana as
"Douglas" - that was WAY COOL!
http://groups.google.com.au/group/au...8042f41e0a3f01

You *meant* to do that, right?

(O;