Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Re: Stepping out a panorama (the method that can't be done!)

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: Stepping out a panorama (the method that can't be done!)

 
 
Rita Berkowitz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-07-2008
Jeff R. wrote:

> As Mark has pointed out, Doug, don't you think you should either:
> (1) defend your stance, or


Why? What does he have to gain?

> (2) apologise to those you insulted?


Why? You really can't insult people that have no self-respect and are an
insult to themselves.

> Really - common decency demands an answer here. Your web page was
> pretty caustic.


God! You guys are pathetic! You really must have missed Doug? I know
Mark's life is now complete.





Rita

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Jeff R.
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-07-2008

"Rita Berkowitz" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...


Did anybody else hear an annoying buzzing sound?
I think I might need to spray my motherboard.

--
Jeff R.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Atheist Chaplain
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-07-2008
"Rita Berkowitz" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Jeff R. wrote:
>
>> As Mark has pointed out, Doug, don't you think you should either:
>> (1) defend your stance, or

>
> Why? What does he have to gain?
>
>> (2) apologise to those you insulted?

>
> Why? You really can't insult people that have no self-respect and are an
> insult to themselves.
>
>> Really - common decency demands an answer here. Your web page was
>> pretty caustic.

>
> God! You guys are pathetic! You really must have missed Doug? I know
> Mark's life is now complete.
>
>
>
>
>
> Rita
>

Well you just gave us all a good example of your measure

--
God made me an atheist. Who are you to question his wisdom?


 
Reply With Quote
 
mark.thomas.7@gmail.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-07-2008
Off topic. (Gee, this is going down sooo well for you Rita - you're
on a winner with Dougie! (O

On Feb 7, 9:44 pm, "Rita Berkowitz" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Jeff R. wrote:
> > As Mark has pointed out, Doug, don't you think you should either:
> > (1) defend your stance, or

>
> Why? What does he have to gain?


Absolutely nothing - his position is indefensible.
Which is why he has run like a coward.
Rita likes cowards, we don't.
Everyone may post their opinion, and there you have it - why is Rita
so upset about this?.

Rita seems to be getting a little hot and bothered lately, with all
this cross-posting and attention seeking... You can tell when she gets
a little upset, because the insults come thick and fast.

> > (2) apologise to those you insulted?

>
> Why? You really can't insult people that have no self-respect and are an
> insult to themselves.


See - you can picture the fingers flying and spittle flying onto the
screen.

> > Really - common decency demands an answer here. Your web page was
> > pretty caustic.

>
> God! You guys are pathetic! You really must have missed Doug? I know
> Mark's life is now complete.


Actually, I pick on *all* folk who lie, and don't contribute. So
enjoy!

Anyway, for anyone new to usenet that has found this isolated thread
and is feeling a little puzzled by Rita's incompetent cross-posting,
the thread she has jumped from may be found here on GG:

http://groups.google.com.au/group/au...d1c0259d43619f
Judge for yourself. If you want to see Doug's images, you won't be
able to click on his link (mine still works however). Like I said, he
cowardly pulled them from view. If you want to see them, just ask me
or refer to Jeff R's cropped examples here:
http://faxmentis.org/html/jpg/walking-pano-stereo.jpg

Reckon they were shot from a different 'stepped out' viewpoint as Doug
suggested?

cheers, Rita/Doug.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Rita Berkowitz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-07-2008
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) wrote:

>> Jeff R. wrote:
>>> As Mark has pointed out, Doug, don't you think you should either:
>>> (1) defend your stance, or

>>
>> Why? What does he have to gain?

>
> Absolutely nothing - his position is indefensible.
> Which is why he has run like a coward.


And as I suspected your life is so empty that you have to be part of the
problem. Sad thing is *YOU* have control over *YOU* and yet you only
demonstrate you want to posture and make noise.

> Rita likes cowards, we don't.
> Everyone may post their opinion, and there you have it - why is Rita
> so upset about this?.


Upset? How do you figure? Not me. I don't have an emotional or financial
investment in either of you. I have nothing to gain or lose except a good
laugh.

> Rita seems to be getting a little hot and bothered lately, with all
> this cross-posting and attention seeking... You can tell when she gets
> a little upset, because the insults come thick and fast.


It would seem you'd be happy to let everyone else have a great time laughing
at you. Your entertainment value is priceless and shouldn't be restricted
to one group.

>>> (2) apologise to those you insulted?

>>
>> Why? You really can't insult people that have no self-respect and
>> are an insult to themselves.

>
> See - you can picture the fingers flying and spittle flying onto the
> screen.


No, just waiting for you to post a picture better than Doug's. Only thing
you're posting is jealous rants.

>>> Really - common decency demands an answer here. Your web page was
>>> pretty caustic.

>>
>> God! You guys are pathetic! You really must have missed Doug? I
>> know Mark's life is now complete.

>
> Actually, I pick on *all* folk who lie, and don't contribute. So
> enjoy!


And your contribution here is what, exactly? You create noise and offer
nothing photography related. I guess your entertainment value could be
considered a contribution. So carry on.





Rita

 
Reply With Quote
 
mark.thomas.7@gmail.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-07-2008
On Feb 7, 10:44 pm, "Rita Berkowitz" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> And as I suspected your life is so empty
> Sad thing is *YOU* have control over *YOU*

Ooh, capitals. No, you're not upset... (O;

> > You can tell when she gets
> > a little upset, because the insults come thick and fast.

> It would seem you'd be happy to let everyone else have a great time laughing
> at you. Your entertainment value is priceless and shouldn't be restricted
> to one group.


Did the irony of that not strike you as you wrote it? No, I guess
not.

> And your contribution here is what, exactly?

I'll let others judge. Strangely it's only you and Doug that I seem
to get up the noses of.
That tells me I'm on the right road... Before you continue to
embarrass yourself, have you actually read this thread, by the way?

> You create noise and offer nothing photography related.

You mean like all those critiques you have supplied, and like how you
have addressed the issues in this thread?

Where *exactly* are your ontopic comments about 'stepped out
panoramas', Ms Hypocrite-I-must-cross-post-this-to-get-more-attention?

Did *you* post images showing what parallax problems would exist when
you use this approach? *I* did.
Did *you* point out what type of subjects you *could* use this
approach for? *I* did.

So when you post something ontopic here, I'll listen. You're on a
score of sub-zero to date. At least you posted a spider pic on that
other thread - now get off your lazy butt and do something useful
*here*. Otherwise, it's hypocrite (or troll) all the way, and you
know it.


Hint - now is when you say that you are deliberately trolling. That
will fit in well on a Doug thread. He always uses the "I meant to do
that" technique, as well.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Rita Berkowitz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-07-2008
PixelPix wrote:

>> (E-Mail Removed) wrote:

>
> [CHOMP]
>
>> And your contribution here is what, exactly?

>
> Now there is a question that you should be asking yourself! lol


I did. And the answer is to stimulate the idiots and have a good time while
doing it.




Rita

 
Reply With Quote
 
Rita Berkowitz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-07-2008
(E-Mail Removed) wrote:

>> And as I suspected your life is so empty
>> Sad thing is *YOU* have control over *YOU*

> Ooh, capitals. No, you're not upset... (O;


LOL! No, I'm just waiting for you to reduce yourself to pointing out
spelling errors since you're one step away from that.

>>> You can tell when she gets
>>> a little upset, because the insults come thick and fast.

>> It would seem you'd be happy to let everyone else have a great time
>> laughing at you. Your entertainment value is priceless and
>> shouldn't be restricted to one group.

>
> Did the irony of that not strike you as you wrote it? No, I guess
> not.


What irony? You are just a play thing for my amusement.

>> And your contribution here is what, exactly?

> I'll let others judge. Strangely it's only you and Doug that I seem
> to get up the noses of.
> That tells me I'm on the right road... Before you continue to
> embarrass yourself, have you actually read this thread, by the way?


What thread?

>> You create noise and offer nothing photography related.

> You mean like all those critiques you have supplied, and like how you
> have addressed the issues in this thread?
>
> Where *exactly* are your ontopic comments about 'stepped out
> panoramas', Ms Hypocrite-I-must-cross-post-this-to-get-more-attention?


Oh, I thought your version of being ontopic is to bash Doug?

> Did *you* post images showing what parallax problems would exist when
> you use this approach? *I* did.
> Did *you* point out what type of subjects you *could* use this
> approach for? *I* did.


Good for you. You get a gold star next to your name and a cookie.

> So when you post something ontopic here, I'll listen. You're on a
> score of sub-zero to date. At least you posted a spider pic on that
> other thread - now get off your lazy butt and do something useful
> *here*. Otherwise, it's hypocrite (or troll) all the way, and you
> know it.


You have this over inflated notion of value and self worth. Hint, your
opinion really doesn't mean anything.

> Hint - now is when you say that you are deliberately trolling. That
> will fit in well on a Doug thread. He always uses the "I meant to do
> that" technique, as well.


No, this is when I get to laugh at you yet again.




Rita

 
Reply With Quote
 
PixelPix
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-07-2008
On Feb 8, 12:28*am, "Rita Berkowitz" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> PixelPix wrote:
> >> (E-Mail Removed) wrote:

>
> > [CHOMP]

>
> >> And your contribution here is what, exactly?

>
> > Now there is a question that you should be asking yourself! *lol

>
> I did. *And the answer is to stimulate the idiots and have a good time while
> doing it.
>
> Rita


In other words.... being a useless f'n TROLL who offers little value
to this photography NG, if any at all.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Rita Berkowitz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-07-2008
PixelPix wrote:

>> I did. And the answer is to stimulate the idiots and have a good
>> time while doing it.

>
> In other words.... being a useless f'n TROLL who offers little value
> to this photography NG, if any at all.


Hey, if you really feel that way please, by all means, feel free to killfile
me. I won't shed a tear if you do. I'm still trying to figure out exactly
what your contribution here is?





Rita

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
problem in running a basic code in python 3.3.0 that includes HTML file Satabdi Mukherjee Python 1 04-04-2013 07:48 PM
AMD's new cpu with b3 stepping is out! thingy NZ Computing 9 03-21-2008 03:56 AM
How do we find out stepping over somebody else' memory NewToCPP C++ 5 12-09-2005 08:11 PM
Stepping through Code in ASP.NET Stephen Noronha ASP .Net 2 09-14-2005 01:33 PM
Netbeans Debugger - Stepping in Java API ? Steve Webb Java 3 04-06-2004 06:18 PM



Advertisments