Google| Subject | Re: converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D |
| From | Floyd L. Davidson |
| Date | 12/02/2013 05:03 (12/01/2013 19:03) |
| Message-ID | <87eh5vhpbb.fld@apaflo.com> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Tony Cooper |
| Followups | Tony Cooper (1h & 45m) > Floyd L. Davidson |
Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com>wrote:
Tony CooperNobody said you have never provided a sufficient body of work either.
On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 17:34:06 -0900, floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote:Floyd L. DavidsonTony Cooper
Lets do keep things straight. "Useful examples of work" is not generally speaking what gets posted to this newsgroup, by anyone.
Lets see a small body of work as at a minimum. It has to be a sample large enough to show what a person does.
And listing everyone who has ever posted one link to an image here is just obfuscation. The vast majority of those listed are not posting the rants that you are.
Many of the people listed, myself included, have been submitting images to the Shoot-In for quite some time. At 3 images per Shoot-In, that's a number of images a year. I haven't counted, but I'd guess I've submitted well over 300 images including the Shoot-In.
Also, I've linked to my SmugMug site a few times.
I don't brag that I'm a great, or even good, shooter, but I'm not hesitant to show what I do shoot. I also participate in the Digital Grin forums where I post a few shots every week.
Your work is exactly the kind of sample that I was refering to though. Others would be people who post to smugmug, or flickr, or some other photo archive gallery. Or who have their own web page. Or even if the commonly post to some forum where a Google search will find them.
The point is that it can't be only 10 pictures and it has to be something we can readily find. Somebody who posts images under one name and does not regularly identify themselves by that name here would not qualify.
But, I would also argue that images are not everything, and may not make much difference at all in some cases. It only means something in relation to what they say. If the first thing they say is they are new to photography, that is very different than someone claiming to be advanced enough to pontificate on the philosophy of good photography.
I read what people say (and read it for what they mean, not to see if it can be twisted), and just how credible they are is based almost exclusively on that.
Even if somebody has a fabulous online gallery of great photography but they post intentional misunderstandings of what others say, with gratuitous personal insults, they lose credibility fast. Another way is with repeated bullying where as an example they go through somebody's post and just say things like:
"nonsense", "leftbrained", "you're wrong", "incorrect", "whoosh"
but never provide reasoning for such statement. Another is the inability to read and analyze anything logically. An example of that is when and exchange starts off with something to the effect of:
"My program can jump over the moon."
And the response is:
"The moon is made of green cheese and you are a rat."
The discussion is about the program, not the moon even though that is explicit in the statemtn, and certainly not rats eating cheese which are erroneously implied.
But a valid response might be something like:
"Very similar to how the cow jumped over the moon."
Which is valid... but an inappropriate further followup might be:
"You called my program a cow, and it's not!"
Totally missing the point of the comparison, and believing it is an assignment instead.
Those are, heh heh, VERY CLEAR EXAMPLES! And I'm willing to bet that many people cannot see the relationship between the examples and what I've described! They actually are clear, but they are not "good examples" because most people's ability to analyze such things is not very good. That is particularly true of artistic or creative people. On the other hand people who are good at problem solving or trouble shooting will see exactly what the point is.
It takes all kinds, but the kinds that have to post gratuitous insults don't get any respect from my direction.
-- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/ Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@apaflo.com
11/30/2013-
-
