Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Olympus refusal to add an AF-assist light (cost-cutting lunacy)

Reply
Thread Tools

Olympus refusal to add an AF-assist light (cost-cutting lunacy)

 
 
RichA
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-29-2010
Instead, they stick with that ridiculous strobbing flash in order to
assist AF. This is perhaps the stupidest add-on any camera ever had.
Yet they refuse to shell-out for an amber LED worth about $0.03.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Rich
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-29-2010


George Kerby wrote:
> On 12/29/10 12:17 PM, in article
> 2010122910172011272-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, "Savageduck"
> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>
> > On 2010-12-29 10:12:59 -0800, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>
> > said:
> >
> >> On 2010-12-29 07:17:44 -0800, RichA <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
> >>
> >>> On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 02:10:57 -0500, tony cooper
> >>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> In an earlier post I mentioned that there were some photographs where
> >>>> those ominous, dark skies with swirling black clouds do work.
> >>>
> >>> This is a photo of a scene that could have been shot differently and
> >>> processed with the sky effect. Unfortunately, it was taken from an
> >>> angle where sky couldn't be included. I was on the road, and the road
> >>> was quite a bit higher than the barn door. I had to shoot down.
> >>>
> >>> http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f2...9-11-30-02.jpg
> >>>
> >>> An ominous sky would have tied in with the horses staying in the
> >>> shelter of the doorway. Not enough sky in image to work with, though,
> >>> to add anything to this.
> >>>
> >>> I don't oppose the treatment entirely. I just think there should be a
> >>> connection with the treatment and the subject.
> >>>
> >>> As you can tell, I have no objection to dull, dead grass in a photo or
> >>> dull, leaden sky. That was Virginia (near the Blue Ridge Parkway) in
> >>> November, and that's what the scene was.
> >>
> >> That is a nice shot regardless of the sky. Certainly some deepening of
> >> shadows and contrast could add some dramatic effect. I am sure you
> >> could make some adjustment to the clouds without too much trouble.

> >
> > WTF happened to this post?
> > I was responding to Tony, and I have no idea how the Rich subject line
> > got co-mingled???

>
> Since Rich has never shown anything that he shot


Lying asshole.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Rich
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-30-2010
On Dec 29, 8:59*pm, George Kerby <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On 12/29/10 1:04 PM, in article
> (E-Mail Removed), "Rich"
>
>
>
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> > George Kerby wrote:
> >> On 12/29/10 12:17 PM, in article
> >> 2010122910172011272-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, "Savageduck"
> >> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

>
> >>> On 2010-12-29 10:12:59 -0800, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>
> >>> said:

>
> >>>> On 2010-12-29 07:17:44 -0800, RichA <(E-Mail Removed)> said:

>
> >>>>> On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 02:10:57 -0500, tony cooper
> >>>>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
> >>>>>> In an earlier post I mentioned that there were some photographs where
> >>>>>> those ominous, dark skies with swirling black clouds do work.

>
> >>>>> This is a photo of a scene that could have been shot differently and
> >>>>> processed with the sky effect. *Unfortunately, it was taken from an
> >>>>> angle where sky couldn't be included. *I was on the road, and the road
> >>>>> was quite a bit higher than the barn door. *I had to shoot down.

>
> >>>>>http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f2...9-11-30-02.jpg

>
> >>>>> An ominous sky would have tied in with the horses staying in the
> >>>>> shelter of the doorway. *Not enough sky in image to work with, though,
> >>>>> to add anything to this.

>
> >>>>> I don't oppose the treatment entirely. *I just think there should be a
> >>>>> connection with the treatment and the subject.

>
> >>>>> As you can tell, I have no objection to dull, dead grass in a photo or
> >>>>> dull, leaden sky. *That was Virginia (near the Blue Ridge Parkway) in
> >>>>> November, and that's what the scene was.

>
> >>>> That is a nice shot regardless of the sky. Certainly some deepening of
> >>>> shadows and contrast could add some dramatic effect. I am sure you
> >>>> could make some adjustment to the clouds without too much trouble.

>
> >>> WTF happened to this post?
> >>> I was responding to Tony, and I have no idea how the Rich subject line
> >>> got co-mingled???

>
> >> Since Rich has never shown anything that he shot

>
> > Lying asshole.

>
> Suck-me.


Why? Does your dog have lock-jaw?
 
Reply With Quote
 
Robert Coe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-31-2010
On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 10:17:20 -0800, Savageduck
<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
: On 2010-12-29 10:12:59 -0800, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> said:
:
: > On 2010-12-29 07:17:44 -0800, RichA <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
: >
: >> On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 02:10:57 -0500, tony cooper
: >> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
: >>
: >>> In an earlier post I mentioned that there were some photographs where
: >>> those ominous, dark skies with swirling black clouds do work.
: >>
: >> This is a photo of a scene that could have been shot differently and
: >> processed with the sky effect. Unfortunately, it was taken from an
: >> angle where sky couldn't be included. I was on the road, and the road
: >> was quite a bit higher than the barn door. I had to shoot down.
: >>
: >> http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f2...9-11-30-02.jpg
: >>
: >> An ominous sky would have tied in with the horses staying in the
: >> shelter of the doorway. Not enough sky in image to work with, though,
: >> to add anything to this.
: >>
: >> I don't oppose the treatment entirely. I just think there should be a
: >> connection with the treatment and the subject.
: >>
: >> As you can tell, I have no objection to dull, dead grass in a photo or
: >> dull, leaden sky. That was Virginia (near the Blue Ridge Parkway) in
: >> November, and that's what the scene was.
: >
: > That is a nice shot regardless of the sky. Certainly some deepening of
: > shadows and contrast could add some dramatic effect. I am sure you
: > could make some adjustment to the clouds without too much trouble.
:
: WTF happened to this post?
: I was responding to Tony, and I have no idea how the Rich subject line
: got co-mingled???

Well, thank goodness for that. When I saw the garbling, I assumed that my
newsreader had gone bonkers. If you see it too, I guess that lets my reader
off the hook. ;^)

Bob
 
Reply With Quote
 
John Turco
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-12-2011
Savageduck wrote:
>
> On 2010-12-29 10:12:59 -0800, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> said:
>
> > On 2010-12-29 07:17:44 -0800, RichA <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
> >
> >> On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 02:10:57 -0500, tony cooper
> >> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >>
> >>> In an earlier post I mentioned that there were some photographs where
> >>> those ominous, dark skies with swirling black clouds do work.
> >>
> >> This is a photo of a scene that could have been shot differently and
> >> processed with the sky effect. Unfortunately, it was taken from an
> >> angle where sky couldn't be included. I was on the road, and the road
> >> was quite a bit higher than the barn door. I had to shoot down.
> >>
> >> http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f2...9-11-30-02.jpg
> >>
> >> An ominous sky would have tied in with the horses staying in the
> >> shelter of the doorway. Not enough sky in image to work with, though,
> >> to add anything to this.
> >>
> >> I don't oppose the treatment entirely. I just think there should be a
> >> connection with the treatment and the subject.
> >>
> >> As you can tell, I have no objection to dull, dead grass in a photo or
> >> dull, leaden sky. That was Virginia (near the Blue Ridge Parkway) in
> >> November, and that's what the scene was.

> >
> > That is a nice shot regardless of the sky. Certainly some deepening of
> > shadows and contrast could add some dramatic effect. I am sure you
> > could make some adjustment to the clouds without too much trouble.

>
> WTF happened to this post?
> I was responding to Tony, and I have no idea how the Rich subject line
> got co-mingled???



Somebody "hijacked" your reply, it seems. I've also seen this phenomenon,
occasionally (but, know little about it).

--
Cordially,
John Turco <(E-Mail Removed)>

Marie's Musings <http://fairiesandtails.blogspot.com>
 
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
fill light source size vs main light size oleuncleted@aol.com Digital Photography 10 12-13-2008 06:23 AM
LED flashlight (torch light) as cheap video light skarkada@gmail.com Digital Photography 5 03-13-2008 11:24 PM
PC refusal to start IG Computer Support 9 06-20-2005 07:31 AM
Mail refusal query Bob Computer Support 8 08-13-2004 05:17 AM
Re: Are there any decent indoor light (low light) digital cameras out there? ishtarbgl Digital Photography 0 04-01-2004 07:10 PM



Advertisments