Re: Macro/Closeup

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by RichA, May 30, 2012.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    On May 29, 8:21 pm, SI Committee <>
    wrote:
    > http://www.pbase.com/shootin/macrocloseup
    >
    > --
    > The Committee


    I don't get it. Some of the shots are not close-ups in any form and
    some of the close-ups and pseudo-macros have no composition that is
    discernible.
    RichA, May 30, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    RichA <> wrote:
    >On May 29, 8:21 pm, SI Committee <>
    >wrote:
    >> http://www.pbase.com/shootin/macrocloseup
    >>
    >> --
    >> The Committee

    >
    >I don't get it. Some of the shots are not close-ups in any form and
    >some of the close-ups and pseudo-macros have no composition that is
    >discernible.



    'Twas ever thus. ;-)
    Bruce, May 30, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >On 2012-05-30 14:17:51 -0700, Bruce <> said:
    >> RichA <> wrote:
    >>> On May 29, 8:21 pm, SI Committee <>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>> http://www.pbase.com/shootin/macrocloseup
    >>>>
    >>>> --
    >>>> The Committee
    >>>
    >>> I don't get it. Some of the shots are not close-ups in any form and
    >>> some of the close-ups and pseudo-macros have no composition that is
    >>> discernible.

    >>
    >>
    >> 'Twas ever thus. ;-)

    >
    >Why take Rich's word for the work submitted?



    Because I have seen the submissions and I agree entirely with Rich's
    comments. Once again the SI plumbs the depths of mediocrity and
    incompetence. But y'all seem to enjoy it, and it never gets any
    better no matter what is said, so who cares? ;-)
    Bruce, May 30, 2012
    #3
  4. RichA

    Huuter Guest

    On 2012-05-30 18:36 , Bruce wrote:
    > Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:


    >> Why take Rich's word for the work submitted?

    >
    >
    > Because I have seen the submissions and I agree entirely with Rich's
    > comments.


    Here's a Tony "Bruce" Polson professional product shot:

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/all6e7aqk8zs8vt/TP TEAC.jpg

    Then there are the choo-choo shots...

    So, really, you don't have much to contribute... as usual.
    Huuter, May 31, 2012
    #4
  5. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

    >On 2012-05-30 15:36:12 -0700, Bruce <> said:
    >
    >> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >>> On 2012-05-30 14:17:51 -0700, Bruce <> said:
    >>>> RichA <> wrote:
    >>>>> On May 29, 8:21 pm, SI Committee <>
    >>>>> wrote:
    >>>>>> http://www.pbase.com/shootin/macrocloseup
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> --
    >>>>>> The Committee
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I don't get it. Some of the shots are not close-ups in any form and
    >>>>> some of the close-ups and pseudo-macros have no composition that is
    >>>>> discernible.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> 'Twas ever thus. ;-)
    >>>
    >>> Why take Rich's word for the work submitted?

    >>
    >>
    >> Because I have seen the submissions and I agree entirely with Rich's
    >> comments.
    >> Once again the SI plumbs the depths of mediocrity and
    >> incompetence. But y'all seem to enjoy it, and it never gets any
    >> better no matter what is said, so who cares? ;-)

    >
    >However all you have done is sprout blanket condemnation without one
    >word of constructive criticism.



    They are all "nice" shots. You are all doing "so well". Keep up the
    "good" work ...

    And keep taking the tablets so the Alzheimers (which seems to be a
    qualifying requirement for the SI) won't make you *too* cross. ;-)
    Bruce, May 31, 2012
    #5
  6. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    Huuter <> wrote:

    >On 2012-05-30 18:36 , Bruce wrote:
    >> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

    >
    >>> Why take Rich's word for the work submitted?

    >>
    >>
    >> Because I have seen the submissions and I agree entirely with Rich's
    >> comments.

    >
    >Here's a Tony "Bruce" Polson professional product shot:
    >
    >https://www.dropbox.com/s/all6e7aqk8zs8vt/TP TEAC.jpg
    >
    >Then there are the choo-choo shots...
    >
    >So, really, you don't have much to contribute... as usual.



    Funny how Alan Browne can fake a Usenet post so it appears to come
    from somewhere exotic but still cannot produce a decent shot for the
    SI after nine years of not trying?

    To learn absolutely nothing about photography in NINE YEARS is quite a
    non-achievement.

    A non-award winner for a lifetime of non-achievement and failure.
    Bruce, May 31, 2012
    #6
  7. RichA

    RichA Guest

    On May 30, 5:18 pm, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    > On 2012-05-30 13:52:07 -0700, RichA <> said:
    >
    > > On May 29, 8:21 pm, SI Committee <>
    > > wrote:
    > >>http://www.pbase.com/shootin/macrocloseup

    >
    > >> --
    > >> The Committee

    >
    > > I don't get it.  Some of the shots are not close-ups in any form and
    > > some of the close-ups and pseudo-macros have no composition that is
    > > discernible.

    >
    > Aah! The rewind.
    >
    > You do understand that your level of credibility took a massive dive
    > with your earlier "preemptive strike" post, don't you?
    >
    > Next time just comment on the individual submissions, and see if you
    > can provide some constructive criticism.
    >
    > --
    > Regards,
    >
    > Savageduck


    Apologies, I didn't think the first post posted.
    RichA, May 31, 2012
    #7
  8. RichA

    RichA Guest

    On May 30, 5:19 pm, Alan Browne <>
    wrote:
    > On 2012-05-30 16:52 , RichA wrote:
    >
    > > no composition that is
    > > discernible.

    >
    > http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/143651823
    >
    > --
    > "Civilization is the limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessities."
    >              -Samuel Clemens.


    Again, for whatever reason, I didn't see it posted.
    RichA, May 31, 2012
    #8
  9. RichA

    alan1browne Guest

    On 2012-05-31 06:22 , Bruce wrote:
    > Huuter <> wrote:
    >
    >> On 2012-05-30 18:36 , Bruce wrote:
    >>> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

    >>
    >>>> Why take Rich's word for the work submitted?
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Because I have seen the submissions and I agree entirely with Rich's
    >>> comments.

    >>
    >> Here's a Tony "Bruce" Polson professional product shot:
    >>
    >> https://www.dropbox.com/s/all6e7aqk8zs8vt/TP TEAC.jpg
    >>
    >> Then there are the choo-choo shots...
    >>
    >> So, really, you don't have much to contribute... as usual.

    >
    >
    > Funny how Alan Browne can fake a Usenet post so it appears to come
    > from somewhere exotic but still cannot produce a decent shot for the
    > SI after nine years of not trying?
    >
    > To learn absolutely nothing about photography in NINE YEARS is quite a
    > non-achievement.
    >
    > A non-award winner for a lifetime of non-achievement and failure.


    Isn't this what psychologists refer to as projection? Polson is so
    predictably vindictive.

    Ever since I called out Polson to "Walk the walk" and show his implied
    photographic prowess, he has been on my ass.

    So be it - good for a wry laugh if little else.
    alan1browne, May 31, 2012
    #9
  10. RichA

    Tim Conway Guest

    "alan1browne" <> wrote in message
    news:jq8mit$mbi$...
    > On 2012-05-31 06:22 , Bruce wrote:
    >> Huuter <> wrote:
    >>
    >>> On 2012-05-30 18:36 , Bruce wrote:
    >>>> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>> Why take Rich's word for the work submitted?
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Because I have seen the submissions and I agree entirely with Rich's
    >>>> comments.
    >>>
    >>> Here's a Tony "Bruce" Polson professional product shot:
    >>>
    >>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/all6e7aqk8zs8vt/TP TEAC.jpg
    >>>
    >>> Then there are the choo-choo shots...
    >>>
    >>> So, really, you don't have much to contribute... as usual.

    >>
    >>
    >> Funny how Alan Browne can fake a Usenet post so it appears to come
    >> from somewhere exotic but still cannot produce a decent shot for the
    >> SI after nine years of not trying?
    >>
    >> To learn absolutely nothing about photography in NINE YEARS is quite a
    >> non-achievement.
    >>
    >> A non-award winner for a lifetime of non-achievement and failure.

    >
    > Isn't this what psychologists refer to as projection? Polson is so
    > predictably vindictive.
    >
    > Ever since I called out Polson to "Walk the walk" and show his implied
    > photographic prowess, he has been on my ass.
    >
    > So be it - good for a wry laugh if little else.


    Wow, what is it with him? Is he jealous or something? Granted, as stated,
    my shots are out of focus or washed out---my fault poor camera - technique
    etc. But what is it that drives him nuts about the SI, but yet doesn't
    contribute?!
    Tim Conway, May 31, 2012
    #10
  11. RichA

    PeterN Guest

    On 5/30/2012 6:36 PM, Bruce wrote:
    > Savageduck<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >> On 2012-05-30 14:17:51 -0700, Bruce<> said:
    >>> RichA<> wrote:
    >>>> On May 29, 8:21 pm, SI Committee<>
    >>>> wrote:
    >>>>> http://www.pbase.com/shootin/macrocloseup
    >>>>>
    >>>>> --
    >>>>> The Committee
    >>>>
    >>>> I don't get it. Some of the shots are not close-ups in any form and
    >>>> some of the close-ups and pseudo-macros have no composition that is
    >>>> discernible.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> 'Twas ever thus. ;-)

    >>
    >> Why take Rich's word for the work submitted?

    >
    >
    > Because I have seen the submissions and I agree entirely with Rich's
    > comments. Once again the SI plumbs the depths of mediocrity and
    > incompetence. But y'all seem to enjoy it, and it never gets any
    > better no matter what is said, so who cares? ;-)
    >

    Why do I suspect that you saw the same images as Rich saw, at the time
    of his posting/


    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Jun 1, 2012
    #11
  12. RichA

    PeterN Guest

    On 5/31/2012 6:22 AM, Bruce wrote:
    > Huuter<> wrote:
    >
    >> On 2012-05-30 18:36 , Bruce wrote:
    >>> Savageduck<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

    >>
    >>>> Why take Rich's word for the work submitted?
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Because I have seen the submissions and I agree entirely with Rich's
    >>> comments.

    >>
    >> Here's a Tony "Bruce" Polson professional product shot:
    >>
    >> https://www.dropbox.com/s/all6e7aqk8zs8vt/TP TEAC.jpg
    >>
    >> Then there are the choo-choo shots...
    >>
    >> So, really, you don't have much to contribute... as usual.

    >
    >
    > Funny how Alan Browne can fake a Usenet post so it appears to come
    > from somewhere exotic but still cannot produce a decent shot for the
    > SI after nine years of not trying?
    >
    > To learn absolutely nothing about photography in NINE YEARS is quite a
    > non-achievement.
    >
    > A non-award winner for a lifetime of non-achievement and failure.
    >


    Was that the opening of your autobiography?

    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Jun 1, 2012
    #12
  13. RichA

    PeterN Guest

    On 5/31/2012 6:00 PM, Savageduck wrote:
    > On 2012-05-31 14:07:40 -0700, alan1browne <> said:
    >
    >> On 2012-05-31 06:22 , Bruce wrote:
    >>> Huuter <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> On 2012-05-30 18:36 , Bruce wrote:
    >>>>> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>> Why take Rich's word for the work submitted?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Because I have seen the submissions and I agree entirely with Rich's
    >>>>> comments.
    >>>>
    >>>> Here's a Tony "Bruce" Polson professional product shot:
    >>>>
    >>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/all6e7aqk8zs8vt/TP TEAC.jpg
    >>>>
    >>>> Then there are the choo-choo shots...
    >>>>
    >>>> So, really, you don't have much to contribute... as usual.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Funny how Alan Browne can fake a Usenet post so it appears to come
    >>> from somewhere exotic but still cannot produce a decent shot for the
    >>> SI after nine years of not trying?
    >>>
    >>> To learn absolutely nothing about photography in NINE YEARS is quite a
    >>> non-achievement.
    >>>
    >>> A non-award winner for a lifetime of non-achievement and failure.

    >>
    >> Isn't this what psychologists refer to as projection? Polson is so
    >> predictably vindictive.
    >>
    >> Ever since I called out Polson to "Walk the walk" and show his implied
    >> photographic prowess, he has been on my ass.
    >>
    >> So be it - good for a wry laugh if little else.

    >
    > "Bruce/TonyP" has created a shell of a legend so he can function in in
    > these photo groups. He down plays his role in sales at the "camera shop"
    > establishment where he "works", saying he deals with used equipment in
    > one breath, but has all the knowledge of an owner, or store manager when
    > it comes to discussion via Usenet. I suspect that is to establish his
    > "legend" as the gallant knight errant photographer of the usenet, who is
    > never to be challenged. If challenged, he will pierce the offender with
    > his lance of pompous scorn.
    >
    > Whatever happens he has firmly lodged himself into a mythology of
    > expertise from which he cannot gracefully extricate himself. It has a
    > "Walter Mittyish" touch to it.
    > The behavior is an indication of deep insecurity and a lack of true self
    > confidence.
    >
    > I often wonder if "Bruce/TonyP" has a genetic/psychological connection
    > with the long absent "DMac" and his multiple persona.
    >
    > So much claimed, so little proven.
    >
    >


    Did you notice that at one time he talked about Olympus people, who
    worked in a department that I had friends in, he failed to provide
    additional details and quickly stated he would not respond to my postings.

    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Jun 1, 2012
    #13
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Zarko Jovanovic

    Shooting macro: wide angle lens or closeup filter?

    Zarko Jovanovic, Jun 17, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    733
    DiVenZ
    Jun 17, 2004
  2. PeterN

    Re: [SI] 2 days left (Closeup/Macro)

    PeterN, May 28, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    230
    PeterN
    May 29, 2012
  3. RichA

    Re: 2 days left (Closeup/Macro)

    RichA, May 29, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    215
    tony cooper
    May 29, 2012
  4. tony cooper

    Re: [SI] Macro/Closeup

    tony cooper, May 30, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    224
    Annika1980
    May 31, 2012
  5. tony cooper

    Re: [SI] Macro/Closeup

    tony cooper, May 30, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    230
    tony cooper
    May 30, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page