Subject | Re: converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D |
From | Floyd L. Davidson |
Date | 12/03/2013 02:09 (12/02/2013 16:09) |
Message-ID | <87y542g2q0.fld@apaflo.com> |
Client | |
Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
Follows | Savageduck |
Followups | nospam (2h & 32m) Savageduck (4h & 33m) |
SavageduckThese are Sandman/nospam/Tony Cooper/Savageduck centric fables for the most part. Other than tacking my name to it, most has very little to do with anything I've ever said. It has more to do with what I *don't* say and you all then imagine.
On 2013-12-02 15:14:38 +0000, Sandman <mr@sandman.net>said:SandmanSavageduck
In article <016p99ljucsvm9d5l1h0gucsv84m2tjgqh@4ax.com>, Tony Cooper wrote:
There are several Floyd centric elements to this sub-thread:
1. Floyd has knowledge & experience in the technical World in areas few of us could challenge."Without admitting" does not mean no exposure. It is hilarious to see the bunch of you claim I made these decisions you worry about by refusing to learn and without ever testing.
2. Floyd has been outspoken on his choice of OS and the tools he uses for image post processing. He holds negative opinions based on misinformation regarding at least one alternative OS, OSX, opinions he has formulated without admitting having ever been exposed to, or having used OSX.
3. Floyd claims he can do all that can be done in Photoshop and ACR using his methods,When you have to fabricate a statement like that it's very telling. Just another of many fabrication on your part...
and yet he remains ignorant of what can actually be achieved with other than his methods, because he has not(or claims he has not) ever made the comparison between his methods and alternative graphics software such as Photoshop.Your conclusion is based on another fabrication. Why do you find it necessary to cook up things I've never said and attribute them to me?
Even with my strong opinions I have attempted to use and compare GIMP with my other choices. It is Floyd who claims his method is superior to all others, it certainly gets the job done to his satisfaction. I suppose that is all that matters.If you have merely "attempted" to use GIMP, it appears your ability to critique anything about it is invalid based on lack of necessary skills or background. Since some people are quite able to use it at least as well as anything you can do, if you can't even get past an "attempt" then perhaps some other area is where you should expound on your expertise?
4. We know that Floyd actually owns and uses some very good photographic equipment. Some of Floyd's kit mirrors equipment used by Sandman (a selection of Nikon cameras and lenses). He uses this equipment to shoot images in some of the harshest conditions on the planet. However he is not exactly producing NatGeo qualifying images, he is certainly not producing any better work than most of the regulars contributing to this NG.A very poor observation on your part.
5. He maintains a web page where a selection of his images can viewed by any of us. What is evident is the images Floyd produces and shows us are not much better than many shown here by others, and many are forSo it's "not *much* better"; but your evaluation is that it is better.
reasons beyond the equipment used, not particularly special. The environment and many of his subjects are unique to his locale. His images range from "great capture" to an "OK snapshot", to "why did he bother with that?" In that He has produced much the same quality of images that most of us have, some great, but most ordinary and not particularly special other than the lock he has on location.Did you take note of the title to that web page? "Images of Barrow Alaska", and there is no place where I suggest these are intended to be Fine Fotos, or anything other than an album of snapshots meant to show what Barrow Alaska is.
So the conclusion that I have come to is Floyd can talk circles around me when it comes to Linux and writing scripts, an obvious void in my knowledge and experience.You aren't necessarily very credible as an art critic... You might well know what you like, but that is not what defines good photography.
He owns and uses some very good Nikon equipment, much of which I would own if I could afford it. He uses a personalized image processing method which produces images which are in some cases very good, and in others not particularly good. Pretty much what the rest of us come up with.
He has no working knowledge of OSX and bases his biases against it on mythology he has developed. The same applies to his opinion of choices regarding mainstream digital image editing software.Why do you say things like that? How do you know what level of knowledge I might have about OSX, or Windows, or even Linux? Even more hilarious is applying your fabrication to imaging software.
I have no idea if he would get better post processed results using Photoshop over his custom methods, but he has never made that comparison.Purely fabrication on your part.
It is quite possible he is the best photographer in Barrow and he is abled to produce work that those around him are in awe of. I doubt that he gets much criticism of his work of any type in Barrow.More abject ignorance. It is also gratuitous and intended to be insulting. Shame on you.
He takes criticism of his methods as "gratuitous insults" where they never existed.Criticism, and even just obnoxious comments, are *not* gratuitous insults.
...and finally Floyd discounts the knowledge & experience that any of the rest of us have (including knowledge that nospam undeniably has) to the point of issuing insults of his own. If you disagree with him you have no credibility, or integrity.Disagreement has nothing to do with it. When you add 2 + 2 and claim the answer is 15...