«

On Jul 6, 7:31*am, tony cooper <tony_cooper...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 23:47:13 -0700 (PDT), otter
>
>
>
>
>
> <bighorn_b...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >On Jul 6, 12:46*am, Chris Malcolm <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> >> In rec.photo.digital otter <bighorn_b...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > Those are points of "interest", not random points. *I think the point
> >> > of the mandate is to try to take interesting pictures at uninteresting
> >> > (random) locations.
>
> >> If the locations are truly random then some of them will be
> >> interesting by lucky accident. Which would seem to be unfair to
> >> unlucky photographers.
>
> >So, anything goes?
>
> >I have some interesting pictures (at least I think so) that I took
> >over the weekend that were within 10 miles of my pin holes. *Can I use
> >those?
>
> It's OK with me. *If you are comfortable with it, then I'm not going
> to object. * A ten mile radius is perfectly acceptable to me if it
> takes a ten mile radius for you to find an interesting subject. *
>
> What you have to decide is not what the "official" radius of the zone
> is, but how challenged you want to be. *

Nah, I'll try to get something at the locations. After all, that was
the challenge.

On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 06:19:22 -0700 (PDT), otter <>
wrote:

>On Jul 6, 7:31*am, tony cooper <tony_cooper...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 23:47:13 -0700 (PDT), otter
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <bighorn_b...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Jul 6, 12:46*am, Chris Malcolm <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>> >> In rec.photo.digital otter <bighorn_b...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > Those are points of "interest", not random points. *I think the point
>> >> > of the mandate is to try to take interesting pictures at uninteresting
>> >> > (random) locations.
>>
>> >> If the locations are truly random then some of them will be
>> >> interesting by lucky accident. Which would seem to be unfair to
>> >> unlucky photographers.
>>
>> >So, anything goes?
>>
>> >I have some interesting pictures (at least I think so) that I took
>> >over the weekend that were within 10 miles of my pin holes. *Can I use
>> >those?
>>
>> It's OK with me. *If you are comfortable with it, then I'm not going
>> to object. * A ten mile radius is perfectly acceptable to me if it
>> takes a ten mile radius for you to find an interesting subject. *
>>
>> What you have to decide is not what the "official" radius of the zone
>> is, but how challenged you want to be. *
>
>Nah, I'll try to get something at the locations. After all, that was
>the challenge.

I don't understand all this whining. When I am teaching an apprentice I
give them a little contest and exercise. Using this simple challenge
several times during their learning experience to see how they are
progressing. I will point out (for example) that tree, that rock, that
fence-post, that weed. Then say, "Okay, you and I both have 5 minutes to
find a printable image somewhere within those boundaries. GO!"

It's never a challenge to find a subject worth printing. It's just a
challenge to see if you can find something better than the other guy. When
I can be outdone by my apprentice then I know I've taught well. It ****es
me off to no end when outdone by them, but also proud of and pleased they
are now doing so well--they finally "get it!"

In article <>,
Bill T. <> wrote:

> On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 06:19:22 -0700 (PDT), otter <>
> wrote:
>
> >On Jul 6, 7:31*am, tony cooper <tony_cooper...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 23:47:13 -0700 (PDT), otter
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> <bighorn_b...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >On Jul 6, 12:46*am, Chris Malcolm <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> >> >> In rec.photo.digital otter <bighorn_b...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >> > Those are points of "interest", not random points. *I think the point
> >> >> > of the mandate is to try to take interesting pictures at uninteresting
> >> >> > (random) locations.
> >>
> >> >> If the locations are truly random then some of them will be
> >> >> interesting by lucky accident. Which would seem to be unfair to
> >> >> unlucky photographers.
> >>
> >> >So, anything goes?
> >>
> >> >I have some interesting pictures (at least I think so) that I took
> >> >over the weekend that were within 10 miles of my pin holes. *Can I use
> >> >those?
> >>
> >> It's OK with me. *If you are comfortable with it, then I'm not going
> >> to object. * A ten mile radius is perfectly acceptable to me if it
> >> takes a ten mile radius for you to find an interesting subject. *
> >>
> >> What you have to decide is not what the "official" radius of the zone
> >> is, but how challenged you want to be. *
> >
> >Nah, I'll try to get something at the locations. After all, that was
> >the challenge.
>
> I don't understand all this whining. When I am teaching an apprentice I
> giv.....

You teaching! You with an apprentice!
This is all very funny. The poor guy must be quite star struck once he
leaves your shadow.

--
Just another troll tracker

"tony cooper" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 17:37:52 -0700 (PDT), otter
> <> wrote:
>
>>On Jul 5, 9:59 am, Robert Coe <b...@1776.COM> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 06:35:57 -0700 (PDT), otter
>>> <bighorn_b...@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> : On Jul 5, 8:21 am, Robert Coe <b...@1776.COM> wrote:
>>> : > On Sun, 04 Jul 2010 08:07:54 -0700, Paul Furman
>>> <pa...@-edgehill.net> wrote:
>>> : > : Bowser wrote:
>>> : >
>>> : > : > First Rerun: The Pinhole Photo, Due July 18th, 2010
>>> : > : > This is a looser rerun of the very first mandate, which requires
>>> the
>>> : > : > shooter to flip a map upside down, stick a pin in it, and then
>>> grab a
>>> : > : > shot at that location on the map. However, I've expanded the
>>> mandate
>>> : > : > to "your area," which can be town, city, state, etc. Use the
>>> whole
>>> : > : > earth, if you dare. Drive to Yosemite, stick a pin in a map of
>>> the
>>> : > : > park, and see if need to hike to the Diving Board. And, with the
>>> new
>>> : > : > rules about submissions, you can use three pins for three
>>> locations
>>> : > : > and submit three photos.
>>> : > :
>>> : > : Here's one way to choose your map pin spot:
>>> : > :
>>> : >
>>> :http://irc.peeron.com/xkcd/map/map.h...&lat=37&long=-...
>>> : > :
>>> : > : explanation:
>>> : > :http://wiki.xkcd.com/geohashing/Main_Page
>>> : >
>>> : > I've recently been assigned to photograph all the points of interest
>>> in the
>>> : > city for which I work. So I've been visiting a variety of locations,
>>> some of
>>> : > them pretty obscure, that I've never seen before. For me the
>>> assignment
>>> : > functions as the pin. ;^)
>>> :
>>> : That is a liberal interpretation of the mandate.
>>> :
>>> : Those are points of "interest", not random points. I think the point
>>> : of the mandate is to try to take interesting pictures at uninteresting
>>> : (random) locations.
>>>
>>> A few observations on that:
>>>
>>> - Some of those "points of interest" are not, in themselves,
>>> particularly
>>> interesting. The challenge is to go there and find a shot that makes the
>>> site
>>> as interesting as it can be. Whether the site was chosen at random or by
>>> some
>>> other method that's effectively beyond the photographer's control is not
>>> that
>>> relevant, arguably.
>>>
>>> - By their nature, SI mandates favor those in the group who are retired
>>> or
>>> otherwise blessed with a lot of free time over those of us who are not.
>>> In my
>>> case it's often find a way to incorporate the mandate into my normal
>>> activities or sit this month out. And I have sat out several mandates
>>> because
>>> I simply didn't have the time to get involved in a type of photography
>>> that I
>>> normally don't do.
>>>
>>> - An overly narrow interpretation of the mandate lessens participation
>>> and
>>> reduces everyne's enjoyment of the process. I'd claim that the recent
>>> Wallpaper mandate is a case in point. While some very nice pictures were
>>> submitted, participation was much lower than I would have anticipated,
>>> with
>>> several highly competent regulars absent. I suspect that two factors
>>> were
>>> primarily to blame: (1) The required aspect ratio accommodated a screen
>>> shape
>>> that many of us rarely see, forcing us to omit or modify pictures that
>>> we were
>>> actually using as wallpapers; and (2) Several people had weighed in with
>>> their
>>> idiosyncratic opinions on what constituted a good (or even acceptable)
>>> wallpaper, effectively narrowing the mandate and practically assuring
>>> that
>>> some entries would be dismissed or ridiculed for not meeting those
>>> criteria.
>>>
>>> The Shoot-In's strength is its inclusiveness, and the point of a mandate
>>> shouldn't be to exclude those who have trouble meeting it. Rather it
>>> should be
>>> to challenge participants to take a broader view of their photographic
>>> horizons and to use the mandate to see their work in a different light.
>>> I
>>> think Bowser understands that and usually allows a broad interpretation
>>> of the
>>> mandates he issues. I believe the only time I've ever seen him reject a
>>> picture was when it was too big.
>>>
>>> Bob
>>
>>I don't mean to be judgemental, but do you guys golf or fish?
>>
>>Since it is not any kind of real competition, I won't raise any more
>>stink. But maybe people should indicate how closely they followed the
>>rules when they submit.
>
> If you follow the comments after the Shoot-In is made available, many
> people provide information about how they got the shot.
>>
>>As for someone saying the pin would have put them in a bad
>>neighborhood, hey at least there might have been something interesting
>>to shoot there. Better than the housing development or empty field
>>that I ended up with. But maybe I should just keep sticking more
>>pins.
>
> I made that comment. Most of what I shoot is candid "street"
> photography. I do a lot of shooting in not-so-nice neighborhoods.
>
> However, there are neighborhoods where I'm not welcome. I know these
> neighborhoods, and I know when not to be intrusive and when not to go
> into an area where there might be trouble. I can get away with taking
> candids in some situations, but it's not a good thing to walk into a
> project and start snapping photos. The more people around, the more
> likely it is that someone will object. When one person objects, the
> crowd follows.
>
> This was taken not far from the pin, but in an area not so crowded. I
> took prints of this picture to the two players a few days later, and
> several other people wanted their photo taken. I'm now welcome in
> this area.
>
> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Sports...2_edxmV-XL.jpg
>


You caught the intensity of the game and their characters seem to have come
out.

Once you gave away the print, you became accepted. By giving became viewed
as a person who gives and not only takes. Smart thing to do..

--
Peter

"otter" <> wrote in message
news:a1ab48c8-3f16-4623-8311-...
On Jul 5, 8:42 pm, Robert Coe <b...@1776.COM> wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 17:37:52 -0700 (PDT), otter <bighorn_b...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
> : I don't mean to be judgemental, but do you guys golf or fish?
>
> How would a serious photographer possibly have time to golf or fish? :^|
>
> : Since it is not any kind of real competition, I won't raise any more
> : stink. But maybe people should indicate how closely they followed the
> : rules when they submit.
> :
> : As for someone saying the pin would have put them in a bad
> : neighborhood, hey at least there might have been something interesting
> : to shoot there. Better than the housing development or empty field
> : that I ended up with. But maybe I should just keep sticking more
> : pins.
>
> In the empty field, get out your macro lens and shoot weeds. No, I'm
> serious.
> The Boston Globe did an article a few weeks ago on how biologists are
> starting
> to take an entirely different view of weeds, even some previously
> considered
> invasive, seeing them now as useful contributors to the ecology of a city.
> This may be your chance to be in the forefront of a new trend! ;^)

The empty lot does have the most potential. I don't have a macro
lens, but maybe I'll take one of my dogs out there and photograph it.


You don't need a macro lens. Most P&S cameras have a close focus mode. If
you use a DSLR, try an extension tube to allow closer focusing.

--
Peter

"Chris Malcolm" <> wrote in message
news:...
> In rec.photo.digital otter <> wrote:
>
>> Those are points of "interest", not random points. I think the point
>> of the mandate is to try to take interesting pictures at uninteresting
>> (random) locations.
>
> If the locations are truly random then some of them will be
> interesting by lucky accident. Which would seem to be unfair to
> unlucky photographers.


I think it's challenging and intriguing to try to find an interesting shot
in a drab location. Besides, the prize is not so great that I worry about
fairness.

--
Peter

On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 14:53:48 -0500, Bill T. <> wrote:
: On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 06:19:22 -0700 (PDT), otter <>
: wrote:
:
: >On Jul 6, 7:31*am, tony cooper <tony_cooper...@earthlink.net> wrote:
: >> On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 23:47:13 -0700 (PDT), otter
: >>
: >>
: >>
: >>
: >>
: >> <bighorn_b...@hotmail.com> wrote:
: >> >On Jul 6, 12:46*am, Chris Malcolm <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
: >> >> In rec.photo.digital otter <bighorn_b...@hotmail.com> wrote:
: >>
: >> >> > Those are points of "interest", not random points. *I think the point
: >> >> > of the mandate is to try to take interesting pictures at uninteresting
: >> >> > (random) locations.
: >>
: >> >> If the locations are truly random then some of them will be
: >> >> interesting by lucky accident. Which would seem to be unfair to
: >> >> unlucky photographers.
: >>
: >> >So, anything goes?
: >>
: >> >I have some interesting pictures (at least I think so) that I took
: >> >over the weekend that were within 10 miles of my pin holes. *Can I use
: >> >those?
: >>
: >> It's OK with me. *If you are comfortable with it, then I'm not going
: >> to object. * A ten mile radius is perfectly acceptable to me if it
: >> takes a ten mile radius for you to find an interesting subject. *
: >>
: >> What you have to decide is not what the "official" radius of the zone
: >> is, but how challenged you want to be. *
: >
: >Nah, I'll try to get something at the locations. After all, that was
: >the challenge.
:
: I don't understand all this whining. When I am teaching an apprentice I
: give them a little contest and exercise. Using this simple challenge
: several times during their learning experience to see how they are
: progressing. I will point out (for example) that tree, that rock, that
: fence-post, that weed. Then say, "Okay, you and I both have 5 minutes to
: find a printable image somewhere within those boundaries. GO!"
:
: It's never a challenge to find a subject worth printing. It's just a
: challenge to see if you can find something better than the other guy. When
: I can be outdone by my apprentice then I know I've taught well. It ****es
: me off to no end when outdone by them, but also proud of and pleased they
: are now doing so well--they finally "get it!"

In a similar vein, I believe that the way to teach cropping is to assign the
student to find the best picture possible in every image (s)he shoots. Once
you've learned to make a bad picture mediocre, it's a lot easier to make a
good picture better.

Bob

On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 16:36:13 -0700, NGBarfart <>
wrote:
: In article <>,
: Bill T. <> wrote:
:
: > On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 06:19:22 -0700 (PDT), otter <>
: > wrote:
: >
: > >On Jul 6, 7:31*am, tony cooper <tony_cooper...@earthlink.net> wrote:
: > >> On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 23:47:13 -0700 (PDT), otter
: > >>
: > >>
: > >>
: > >>
: > >>
: > >> <bighorn_b...@hotmail.com> wrote:
: > >> >On Jul 6, 12:46*am, Chris Malcolm <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
: > >> >> In rec.photo.digital otter <bighorn_b...@hotmail.com> wrote:
: > >>
: > >> >> > Those are points of "interest", not random points. *I think the point
: > >> >> > of the mandate is to try to take interesting pictures at uninteresting
: > >> >> > (random) locations.
: > >>
: > >> >> If the locations are truly random then some of them will be
: > >> >> interesting by lucky accident. Which would seem to be unfair to
: > >> >> unlucky photographers.
: > >>
: > >> >So, anything goes?
: > >>
: > >> >I have some interesting pictures (at least I think so) that I took
: > >> >over the weekend that were within 10 miles of my pin holes. *Can I use
: > >> >those?
: > >>
: > >> It's OK with me. *If you are comfortable with it, then I'm not going
: > >> to object. * A ten mile radius is perfectly acceptable to me if it
: > >> takes a ten mile radius for you to find an interesting subject. *
: > >>
: > >> What you have to decide is not what the "official" radius of the zone
: > >> is, but how challenged you want to be. *
: > >
: > >Nah, I'll try to get something at the locations. After all, that was
: > >the challenge.
: >
: > I don't understand all this whining. When I am teaching an apprentice I
: > giv.....
:
: You teaching! You with an apprentice!
: This is all very funny. The poor guy must be quite star struck once he
: leaves your shadow.

Think of it this way, Clyde: It's like when your headshrinker brings in a
newly minted psychiatric resident to observe your lunatic gibberings.

All kidding aside, what might give me nightmares, if my kids weren't already
grown, is the thought of what it must be like to be your parents. And if I'm
brutally honest, I guess it's what makes the best case for ignoring you,
rather than ridiculing or arguing with you. If, as is certainly possible, your
parents read what you send and receive, it must be painful for them to see
what we say about you, as objectively justified as it may be.

Bob

In article <>,
Robert Coe <> wrote:

> On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 14:53:48 -0500, Bill T. <> wrote:


> :
> : I don't understand all this whining. When I am teaching an apprentice I
> : give them a little contest and exercise. Using this simple challenge
> : several times during their learning experience to see how they are
> : progressing. I will point out (for example) that tree, that rock, that
> : fence-post, that weed. Then say, "Okay, you and I both have 5 minutes to
> : find a printable image somewhere within those boundaries. GO!"
> :
> : It's never a challenge to find a subject worth printing. It's just a
> : challenge to see if you can find something better than the other guy. When
> : I can be outdone by my apprentice then I know I've taught well. It ****es
> : me off to no end when outdone by them, but also proud of and pleased they
> : are now doing so well--they finally "get it!"
>
> In a similar vein, I believe that the way to teach cropping is to assign the
> student to find the best picture possible in every image (s)he shoots. Once
> you've learned to make a bad picture mediocre, it's a lot easier to make a
> good picture better.
>
> Bob

Bob, you did understand that "Bill T." is none other than yet another
sock of the resident P&S troll, didn't you?
He is posing as the professor of all that is photography, and he is not
worth wasting your time on. The likelihood that he has ever had an
"apprentice" of any type is slim to nothing.
As far as him being any kind of educator, perish the thought.
--
Just another P&S troll hunter.

On Wed, 07 Jul 2010 19:04:57 -0700, MothboyHunter
<> wrote:

>In article <>,
> Robert Coe <> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 14:53:48 -0500, Bill T. <> wrote:
>
>
>> :
>> : I don't understand all this whining. When I am teaching an apprentice I
>> : give them a little contest and exercise. Using this simple challenge
>> : several times during their learning experience to see how they are
>> : progressing. I will point out (for example) that tree, that rock, that
>> : fence-post, that weed. Then say, "Okay, you and I both have 5 minutes to
>> : find a printable image somewhere within those boundaries. GO!"
>> :
>> : It's never a challenge to find a subject worth printing. It's just a
>> : challenge to see if you can find something better than the other guy. When
>> : I can be outdone by my apprentice then I know I've taught well. It ****es
>> : me off to no end when outdone by them, but also proud of and pleased they
>> : are now doing so well--they finally "get it!"
>>
>> In a similar vein, I believe that the way to teach cropping is to assign the
>> student to find the best picture possible in every image (s)he shoots. Once
>> you've learned to make a bad picture mediocre, it's a lot easier to make a
>> good picture better.
>>
>> Bob
>
>Bob, you did understand that "Bill T." is none other than yet another
>sock of the resident P&S troll, didn't you?

You act as if that somehow discounts what I say.

Troll much?

LOL!!!!!!!!