Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Wet bugs

Reply
Thread Tools

Wet bugs

 
 
Nervous Nick
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-30-2010
Some very cool bedewed insect photos here. I thought it was an
interesting idea:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...rning-dew.html

--
YOP...
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Twibil
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-30-2010
On Mar 29, 5:40*pm, Nervous Nick <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
> Some very cool bedewed insect photos here. *I thought it was an
> interesting idea.


It is.

I just wish there had been some basic tecnical info included about
what camera, lens, strobe, etcetera were being used.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Richard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-30-2010

"Twibil" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
On Mar 29, 5:40 pm, Nervous Nick <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Some very cool bedewed insect photos here. I thought it was an
>> interesting idea.


> It is.


> I just wish there had been some basic tecnical info included about
> what camera, lens, strobe, etcetera were being used.


Being an amateur, nothing too expensive:
http://photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=5928980



 
Reply With Quote
 
Richard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-30-2010

"bugbear" <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Richard wrote:
>> "Twibil" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> On Mar 29, 5:40 pm, Nervous Nick <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Some very cool bedewed insect photos here. I thought it was an
>>>> interesting idea.

>>
>>> It is.

>>
>>> I just wish there had been some basic tecnical info included about
>>> what camera, lens, strobe, etcetera were being used.

>>
>> Being an amateur, nothing too expensive:
>> http://photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=5928980

>
> *some* amateurs have day jobs that allow
> "quite high" spending on their hobby.
>
> BugBear


*perhaps*, but this particular amateur lives with his wife and teenage son
in Jaroszow, a village in Poland around 30 miles from the city of Wroclaw.
His day job is being a physiotherapist.

HTH.



 
Reply With Quote
 
Twibil
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-30-2010
On Mar 30, 1:22*am, "Richard" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
> >>> I just wish there had been some basic tecnical info included about
> >>> what camera, lens, strobe, etcetera were being used.

>
> >> Being an amateur, nothing too expensive:
> >>http://photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=5928980

>
> > *some* amateurs have day jobs that allow
> > "quite high" spending on their hobby.

>
> > * *BugBear

>
> *perhaps*, but this particular amateur lives with his wife and teenage son
> in Jaroszow, a village in Poland around 30 miles from the city of Wroclaw..
> His day job is being a physiotherapist.


Which, like your previous answer, is very Holmesian. I.E. full of
what the author thinks are very clever deductions, but, like the
novels, reaching entirely fictional conclusions that leave readers no
wiser than they were before.

We still have no idea what equipment was used to take the photos *or*
how expensive it was, Sherlock.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Richard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-30-2010

"Twibil" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
On Mar 30, 1:22 am, "Richard" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
> >>> I just wish there had been some basic tecnical info included about
> >>> what camera, lens, strobe, etcetera were being used.

>
> >> Being an amateur, nothing too expensive:
> >>http://photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=5928980

>
> > *some* amateurs have day jobs that allow
> > "quite high" spending on their hobby.

>
> > BugBear

>
> *perhaps*, but this particular amateur lives with his wife and teenage son
> in Jaroszow, a village in Poland around 30 miles from the city of Wroclaw.
> His day job is being a physiotherapist.


Which, like your previous answer, is very Holmesian. I.E. full of
what the author thinks are very clever deductions, but, like the
novels, reaching entirely fictional conclusions that leave readers no
wiser than they were before.

We still have no idea what equipment was used to take the photos *or*
how expensive it was, Sherlock.

Follow the link I posted and READ....
OK?



 
Reply With Quote
 
Richard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-30-2010

"Richard" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:4bb23cd2$0$2538$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "Twibil" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Mar 30, 1:22 am, "Richard" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >>> I just wish there had been some basic tecnical info included about
>> >>> what camera, lens, strobe, etcetera were being used.

>>
>> >> Being an amateur, nothing too expensive:
>> >>http://photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=5928980

>>
>> > *some* amateurs have day jobs that allow
>> > "quite high" spending on their hobby.

>>
>> > BugBear

>>
>> *perhaps*, but this particular amateur lives with his wife and teenage
>> son
>> in Jaroszow, a village in Poland around 30 miles from the city of
>> Wroclaw.
>> His day job is being a physiotherapist.

>
> Which, like your previous answer, is very Holmesian. I.E. full of
> what the author thinks are very clever deductions, but, like the
> novels, reaching entirely fictional conclusions that leave readers no
> wiser than they were before.
>
> We still have no idea what equipment was used to take the photos *or*
> how expensive it was, Sherlock.
>
> Follow the link I posted and READ....
> OK?


And if you are indeed too lazy to do that:
FujiFilm FinePix S6500fd
Canon EOS 40D, Tamron SP 90mm/2.8 1:1 Macro
for starters.

HTH

Regards,
Sherlock



 
Reply With Quote
 
Twibil
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-30-2010
On Mar 30, 11:02*am, "Richard" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:
> "Twibil" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Mar 30, 1:22 am, "Richard" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > >>> I just wish there had been some basic tecnical info included about
> > >>> what camera, lens, strobe, etcetera were being used.

>
> > >> Being an amateur, nothing too expensive:
> > >>http://photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=5928980

>
> > > *some* amateurs have day jobs that allow
> > > "quite high" spending on their hobby.

>
> > > BugBear

>
> > *perhaps*, but this particular amateur lives with his wife and teenage son
> > in Jaroszow, a village in Poland around 30 miles from the city of Wroclaw.
> > His day job is being a physiotherapist.

>
> Which, like your previous answer, is very Holmesian. *I.E. full of
> what the author thinks are very clever deductions, but, like the
> novels, reaching entirely fictional conclusions that leave readers no
> wiser than they were before.
>
> We still have no idea what equipment was used to take the photos *or*
> how expensive it was, Sherlock.
>
> Follow the link I posted and READ....
> OK?


Try reading MY post again, OK? I was referring to the info -or lack
of same- in *your* posts.

Giving a URL while not stating what might be found there in reference
to the question at hand is about as useful as puttings tits on a boar
hog.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Richard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-31-2010

"Twibil" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
On Mar 30, 11:02 am, "Richard" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:
> "Twibil" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Mar 30, 1:22 am, "Richard" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> > *perhaps*, but this particular amateur lives with his wife and teenage
>> > son
>> > in Jaroszow, a village in Poland around 30 miles from the city of
>> > Wroclaw.
>> > His day job is being a physiotherapist.

>>
>> Which, like your previous answer, is very Holmesian. I.E. full of
>> what the author thinks are very clever deductions, but, like the
>> novels, reaching entirely fictional conclusions that leave readers no
>> wiser than they were before.
>>
>> We still have no idea what equipment was used to take the photos *or*
>> how expensive it was, Sherlock.
>>
>> Follow the link I posted and READ....
>> OK?


>Try reading MY post again, OK? I was referring to the info -or lack
>of same- in *your* posts.


Right. Where exactly is ther information lacking in this?
"Being an amateur, nothing too expensive:
http://photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=5928980 "

in response to your:
"I just wish there had been some basic tecnical info included about
what camera, lens, strobe, etcetera were being used."

>Giving a URL while not stating what might be found there in reference
>to the question at hand is about as useful as puttings tits on a boar
>hog.


So, if I saw you respond to a query with a link, I should expect it to go
somewhere totally unrelated?!! WTF?

According to our hog sex fetishist, I should provide instructions to click
the links.
OK, specifically for Twibil (but also anyone else who wants to whine) :

1. When someone posts a link in response to your question;
1a) Click it. Good move, as someone you have probably never met before has
bothered to respond to your question. (Goto 2)
1b) Ignore it.... don't whine... go away.

2. Having clicked the link;
2a) Look around a bit. Good move, as someone who has the knowledge you seek
has bothered to put it up on the internet. You will find what you wanted and
be satisfied. (Goto 3)
2b) Look. See no flashing personalised neon sign saying "Here is the
information you seek"... don't whine... go away.

3. Having looked around the site;
3a) Leave comments for the photographer (in this particular case). Good
move, as he may actually appreciate the fact that his efforts are serving
some useful purpose. (Goto 4)
3b) Be satisfied.

4. Entirely optional;
4a) Respond to poster with a hint of appreciation. Perhaps invite
discussion. Good move
4b) Respond to poster with a terse "Thanks for that" (or similar). Good move
4c) Don't bother to respond. Good move, but others may do so, possibly
showing you to be a bit of an ingrate.
4d) Blame your stupidity on everyone else. It's NEVER your fault. Way to
go...

HTH.
Regards,
Sherlock (aka Richard)

as a P.S. The pics at the link I provided are not too shabby considering
that they were done by an amateur using not too expensive equipment. It
really is the skills which matter most of all.



 
Reply With Quote
 
Richard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-31-2010

"George Kerby" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:C7D7F298.41F92%(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>
>
> On 3/30/10 1:10 PM, in article 4bb23e95$0$2489$(E-Mail Removed),
> "Richard" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Richard" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:4bb23cd2$0$2538$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>
>>> "Twibil" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> On Mar 30, 1:22 am, "Richard" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> I just wish there had been some basic tecnical info included about
>>>>>>> what camera, lens, strobe, etcetera were being used.
>>>>
>>>>>> Being an amateur, nothing too expensive:
>>>>>> http://photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=5928980
>>>>
>>>>> *some* amateurs have day jobs that allow
>>>>> "quite high" spending on their hobby.
>>>>
>>>>> BugBear
>>>>
>>>> *perhaps*, but this particular amateur lives with his wife and teenage
>>>> son
>>>> in Jaroszow, a village in Poland around 30 miles from the city of
>>>> Wroclaw.
>>>> His day job is being a physiotherapist.
>>>
>>> Which, like your previous answer, is very Holmesian. I.E. full of
>>> what the author thinks are very clever deductions, but, like the
>>> novels, reaching entirely fictional conclusions that leave readers no
>>> wiser than they were before.
>>>
>>> We still have no idea what equipment was used to take the photos *or*
>>> how expensive it was, Sherlock.
>>>
>>> Follow the link I posted and READ....
>>> OK?

>>
>> And if you are indeed too lazy to do that:
>> FujiFilm FinePix S6500fd
>> Canon EOS 40D, Tamron SP 90mm/2.8 1:1 Macro
>> for starters.
>>
>> HTH
>>
>> Regards,
>> Sherlock
>>
>>
>>

> In regards to that. The page you referenced didn't have that info on it.
> However, a click on any of the photographs listed will describe such...


Thanks George.
Good to see that you bothered to click through and actually meet the
specification of IQ>=100.

Stupidly, I did the decent thing by not directly linking to a specific
thing. It's one of those annoying habits I have, realising that some
websites exist solely through revenue from viewing stats. I always figure
it's best to post the link to the frontmost page. Often, I will post the
additional links to pages of specific interest.
However, in this particular case, Twibil asked a specific question. I
responded with a link to the photographer's pages (which I found using a
search after reading his pondering). I found pertinent information and
posted the link. I assumed any NORMAL person who had sought the information
would follow the link and explore.

Regards,
Richard (sometimes confusingly, aka Sherlock)



 
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
Bugs and Bugs...get rid of them Jason Computer Security 1 01-31-2006 10:47 PM
Still use 'ruby-bugs' for Ruby bugs? Josef 'Jupp' Schugt Ruby 2 11-04-2004 10:10 PM
Mower for wet grass? Shel-hed Computer Support 6 09-27-2004 11:47 PM
xp pro, oe slow as a wet w/end jils Computer Support 8 02-26-2004 01:49 PM
CANON XL-1 MAKES ME WET !!! Annika1980 Digital Photography 4 08-16-2003 11:49 PM



Advertisments