Subject | Re: converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D |
From | nospam |
Date | 12/07/2013 00:59 (12/06/2013 18:59) |
Message-ID | <061220131859065784%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
Client | |
Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
Follows | PeterN |
it is when it's clear you made a mistake by not understanding what was written and are desperately trying to avoid admitting it.PeterNRobert Coe
: >>Many photographers cannot write a script in PS, to automate
simplePeterNnospamPeterNnospamPeterNnospamPeterNRobert Coenospam
: >>tasks. And they don't want to. : > : >they don't have to write anything. record an action and let the : >computer do that for you. : > : >or, use many of the premade actions available for free and $. : : Whoosh!
"Whoosh!"? I thought you and nospam were more or less on the same side of this argument.
he just likes to bash at any opportunity he gets, even when he hasn't any clue.
See my reply. Your response to my statement is irrelevant, and shows a lack of grandstanding.
actually your response shows a lack of reading comprehension and as i said, wanting to bash at any opportunity.
see my other reply.
True to form, when you lose an argument, you accuse someone of bashing you. You must have a bad headache from all that bashing.
more accurately, you won't admit you fucked up.
/brilliant retort. We have yet to see some image that gives you any credibility.
more diversions.
admit you made a mistake and move on.
Without some showing that you play the game, your credibility is zero. My statement questioning your credibility is hardly a diversion.