Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > The Judges House Photo

Reply
Thread Tools

The Judges House Photo

 
 
mmyvusenet
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-04-2010
Hello:

Yesterday I had the opportunity to take this photo, with some activities
around:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmyv/4549198813/

Thanks for your technical comments about photography.

--
MMYV
http://www.mmyv.com


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Mark L
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-04-2010
On Fri, 04 Jun 2010 10:29:01 +0100, bugbear
<bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote:

>mmyvusenet wrote:
>> Hello:
>>
>> Yesterday I had the opportunity to take this photo, with some activities
>> around:
>>
>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmyv/4549198813/

>
>Can you please give a little commentary on your photos
>instead of just posting them with "Thanks for your technical comments about photography."
>
>If you told us what you're trying to achieve
>in terms of colour, shape, texture, composition, lighting or
>subject, you might get more useful responses.
>
>Just doing the same damn thing over and over is pointless.
>
> BugBear


But it's working, isn't it? How is this any different than what blind
Dudley does?



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Martin Brown
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-04-2010
On 04/06/2010 11:15, bugbear wrote:
> Mark L wrote:
>> On Fri, 04 Jun 2010 10:29:01 +0100, bugbear
>> <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote:
>>
>>> mmyvusenet wrote:
>>>> Hello:
>>>>
>>>> Yesterday I had the opportunity to take this photo, with some
>>>> activities around:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmyv/4549198813/
>>> Can you please give a little commentary on your photos
>>> instead of just posting them with "Thanks for your technical comments
>>> about photography."
>>>
>>> If you told us what you're trying to achieve
>>> in terms of colour, shape, texture, composition, lighting or
>>> subject, you might get more useful responses.
>>>
>>> Just doing the same damn thing over and over is pointless.
>>>
>>> BugBear

>>
>> But it's working, isn't it? How is this any different than what blind
>> Dudley does?

>
> For the moment, I'm assuming that mmyvusenet is genuine,
> but misguided.
>
> BugBear


This one does seem to be an attempt to get just about every possible
foreground distraction and clutter into a single architectural picture.
The road markings look like they could actually be interesting in an
Abbey Road sort of way.

I had assumed the photos were a front for selling and smuggling parrots.
But I can't see anyone wanting to buy the Lima courthouse.

Regards,
Martin Brown
 
Reply With Quote
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-04-2010
On Fri, 4 Jun 2010 00:43:01 -0500, "mmyvusenet"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Hello:
>
>Yesterday I had the opportunity to take this photo, with some activities
>around:
>
>http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmyv/4549198813/
>
>Thanks for your technical comments about photography.




Should that have been "The Judge's Horse"?

Either way, it's atrocious.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Peter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-04-2010
"Mark L" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Fri, 04 Jun 2010 10:29:01 +0100, bugbear
> <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote:
>
>>mmyvusenet wrote:
>>> Hello:
>>>
>>> Yesterday I had the opportunity to take this photo, with some activities
>>> around:
>>>
>>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmyv/4549198813/

>>
>>Can you please give a little commentary on your photos
>>instead of just posting them with "Thanks for your technical comments
>>about photography."
>>
>>If you told us what you're trying to achieve
>>in terms of colour, shape, texture, composition, lighting or
>>subject, you might get more useful responses.
>>
>>Just doing the same damn thing over and over is pointless.
>>
>> BugBear

>
> But it's working, isn't it? How is this any different than what blind
> Dudley does?
>



What's working?

The comments made here are ignored, for all practical purposes. His shots
continue without even token respect for the time some of us have taken to
comment.
Miguel is an intelligent professional who should be able to understand. I
strongly suspect that his training and background in consistency, which is
sometimes a good quality for an accountant, is antithetical to creative art
and acceptance of change.

The following anecdote will illustrate my point. I was in a car with an
accountant. There was several inches of snow on the roof of his car and he
had the heat turned way up. When I asked him why it was so hot he stated
that he liked to drive with the sun roof open in cold weather and wanted to
stay warm. We came to a red light, I opened his sunroof and we both were
covered with the results of my expected mini blizzard. He never understood
my point.

If I start to see at least consideration of the expressed comments, I will
also comment. Otherwise, why bother. YMMV



--
Peter

 
Reply With Quote
 
Peter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-04-2010
"bugbear" <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) o.uk...
> Mark L wrote:
>> On Fri, 04 Jun 2010 10:29:01 +0100, bugbear
>> <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote:
>>
>>> mmyvusenet wrote:
>>>> Hello:
>>>>
>>>> Yesterday I had the opportunity to take this photo, with some
>>>> activities around:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmyv/4549198813/
>>> Can you please give a little commentary on your photos
>>> instead of just posting them with "Thanks for your technical comments
>>> about photography."
>>>
>>> If you told us what you're trying to achieve
>>> in terms of colour, shape, texture, composition, lighting or
>>> subject, you might get more useful responses.
>>>
>>> Just doing the same damn thing over and over is pointless.
>>>
>>> BugBear

>>
>> But it's working, isn't it? How is this any different than what blind
>> Dudley does?

>
> For the moment, I'm assuming that mmyvusenet is genuine,
> but misguided.



A valid assumption. See my comment below.

--
Peter

 
Reply With Quote
 
Peter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-04-2010
"Martin Brown" <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4D4On.566$(E-Mail Removed)...

>
> I had assumed the photos were a front for selling and smuggling parrots.
> But I can't see anyone wanting to buy the Lima courthouse.


It's not for sale. I bought it together with a bridge in Brooklyn.



--
Peter

 
Reply With Quote
 
Mark L
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-04-2010
On Fri, 04 Jun 2010 11:15:08 +0100, bugbear
<bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote:

>Mark L wrote:
>> On Fri, 04 Jun 2010 10:29:01 +0100, bugbear
>> <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote:
>>
>>> mmyvusenet wrote:
>>>> Hello:
>>>>
>>>> Yesterday I had the opportunity to take this photo, with some activities
>>>> around:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmyv/4549198813/
>>> Can you please give a little commentary on your photos
>>> instead of just posting them with "Thanks for your technical comments about photography."
>>>
>>> If you told us what you're trying to achieve
>>> in terms of colour, shape, texture, composition, lighting or
>>> subject, you might get more useful responses.
>>>
>>> Just doing the same damn thing over and over is pointless.
>>>
>>> BugBear

>>
>> But it's working, isn't it? How is this any different than what blind
>> Dudley does?

>
>For the moment, I'm assuming that mmyvusenet is genuine,
>but misguided.
>
> BugBear


Hmm.... "misguided" ... after having been "guided", for ... what? Three
years or more now?

Who's "misguided"??

There's a reason some people once came up with the phrases, "you can't make
a silk-purse out of a sow's ear", or "casting pearls before swine".

They are what they are, they is what they is, expect no more than
that--ever. And don't be fooled by the stopped clock that is correct twice
a day either. Judge their viability on the rest of the day.



 
Reply With Quote
 
Mark L
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-04-2010
On Fri, 04 Jun 2010 11:15:08 +0100, bugbear
<bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote:

>Mark L wrote:
>> On Fri, 04 Jun 2010 10:29:01 +0100, bugbear
>> <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote:
>>
>>> mmyvusenet wrote:
>>>> Hello:
>>>>
>>>> Yesterday I had the opportunity to take this photo, with some activities
>>>> around:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmyv/4549198813/
>>> Can you please give a little commentary on your photos
>>> instead of just posting them with "Thanks for your technical comments about photography."
>>>
>>> If you told us what you're trying to achieve
>>> in terms of colour, shape, texture, composition, lighting or
>>> subject, you might get more useful responses.
>>>
>>> Just doing the same damn thing over and over is pointless.
>>>
>>> BugBear

>>
>> But it's working, isn't it? How is this any different than what blind
>> Dudley does?

>
>For the moment, I'm assuming that mmyvusenet is genuine,
>but misguided.
>
> BugBear


Hmm.... "misguided" ... after having been "guided", for ... what? Three
years or more now?

Who's "misguided"??

There's a reason some people once came up with the phrases, "you can't make
a silk-purse out of a sow's ear", or "casting pearls before swine".

They are what they are, they is what they is, expect no more than
that--ever. And don't be fooled by the stopped clock that is correct twice
a day either. Judge their viability/efficacy on the rest of the day.



 
Reply With Quote
 
Mark L
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-04-2010
On Fri, 04 Jun 2010 08:34:32 -0500, George Kerby <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>
>
>
>On 6/4/10 6:02 AM, in article http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed),
>"Mark L" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 04 Jun 2010 11:15:08 +0100, bugbear
>> <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote:
>>
>>> Mark L wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 04 Jun 2010 10:29:01 +0100, bugbear
>>>> <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> mmyvusenet wrote:
>>>>>> Hello:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yesterday I had the opportunity to take this photo, with some activities
>>>>>> around:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmyv/4549198813/
>>>>> Can you please give a little commentary on your photos
>>>>> instead of just posting them with "Thanks for your technical comments about
>>>>> photography."
>>>>>
>>>>> If you told us what you're trying to achieve
>>>>> in terms of colour, shape, texture, composition, lighting or
>>>>> subject, you might get more useful responses.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just doing the same damn thing over and over is pointless.
>>>>>
>>>>> BugBear
>>>>
>>>> But it's working, isn't it? How is this any different than what blind
>>>> Dudley does?
>>>
>>> For the moment, I'm assuming that mmyvusenet is genuine,
>>> but misguided.
>>>
>>> BugBear

>>
>> And don't be fooled by the stopped clock that is correct twice
>> a day either. Judge their viability/efficacy on the rest of the day.
>>
>>
>>

>And the same post twice has the same effect...


You should learn to read instead of continuously failing at trolling. Minus
this one time in an attempt to ameliorate half of your problems. They are
not "the same post twice".

 
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
Why do some judges hand exhibits back after a trial? Rocky Computer Support 10 04-25-2010 11:43 AM
Re: A Call for MIS Judges Rhonda Lea Kirk Digital Photography 3 10-24-2006 12:18 PM
! It's Time To STOP Feeding USA Judges & Lawyers Canobull Righteous Computer Support 8 04-16-2005 04:55 AM
OT: They have idiot judges in Canada too! T-Bone MCSE 30 02-01-2005 06:22 PM
(US) Judges rule file sharing software is legal steve NZ Computing 11 08-22-2004 08:48 AM



Advertisments