Image: D2X, SB800 & 70-200mm

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Dean S. Lautermilch, Jul 21, 2005.

  1. Dean S. Lautermilch, Jul 21, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Dean S. Lautermilch

    Ed Ruf Guest

    Are you sure about the lens? Looks more like the 80-200, not at all like my
    70-200mm VR
     
    Ed Ruf, Jul 21, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Dean S. Lautermilch

    kz8rt3 Guest

    This is why I think DSLR is going to ruin film photography. C'mon Dean.
    3265 images on your site? All digital does is enable more people to put
    more crap on the internet so the public ends up getting artistically
    dumbed down. And since it is so easy to post them, they do not critique
    before showing them.

    You have some good images but they are totally drowned out but the
    buckets full of crap. Please, that is a compliment.

    This belongs in "rec.stuff.digital". It's not photography.
     
    kz8rt3, Jul 21, 2005
    #3
  4. Dean S. Lautermilch

    [BnH] Guest

    That's a handful ? nah ... try adding a Quantum battery pack and RRS flash
    bracket in this picture.
    btw as Ed typed , its a AF-S 80-200 f/2.8 ED glass I believe.

    =bob=
     
    [BnH], Jul 22, 2005
    #4
  5. Dean S. Lautermilch

    Mike Guest


    So, artsy preoccupation is definitely your bug?
    It is a recurrent problem in your posts!!!!
    Ahahahah!




    Please, don't define for others what should be photography.
    Even if you were asked for.


    Mike
     
    Mike, Jul 22, 2005
    #5
  6. Dean S. Lautermilch

    GTO Guest

    I like the image. I hope the weight of his D2X will help this photographer
    to get in shape ;-)

    Gregor
     
    GTO, Jul 22, 2005
    #6
  7. Dean S. Lautermilch

    kz8rt3 Guest

    Yes, it is. I am to minimize crap like yours being exhibited.

    Your such a mindless twit. You do not even understand one can have
    different nyms on usenet. You think I have to pony up something in order
    for opinion to be worthwhile. Jackass. It doesn't change anything. You
    are still showing too many crappy images.
    Don't define for others what they can and can't define.
    You asked for it by posting that crap.

    I say this for your own good. Ask Buddha.
     
    kz8rt3, Jul 22, 2005
    #7
  8. Am Thu, 21 Jul 2005 16:07:23 -0400 schrieb Dean S. Lautermilch:
    You have much too many images on your pBase site, not only the best. It
    looks like you put each and every shot witout carefully selecting the best.
    If you would do this your gallery would look much better and professional.

    Regards,
    Andi
     
    Andreas Buchner, Jul 22, 2005
    #8
  9. Dean S. Lautermilch

    Frank ess Guest

    It took me several decades to realize we are not all the same, that we
    don't all have the same goals. It's the only way to explain the
    persistence of behavior that is at odds with what we consider usual,
    normal, desirable, _etc_.

    In this case you must decide Mr. Lautermilch has his own vision of
    what photography is, does, should do, _etc_. You, too, have some ideas
    in that line, an implication of your "...look better and professional"
    assertion. The recipient of your advice might look at _your_ choices
    for gallery inclusion and suggest you should include more photos, a
    wider range of quality in included images, in order to "...look better
    and professional".

    For my part, I agree with you, and suspect that more than 90% of the
    population paying attention to photography in general and Mr.
    Lautermilch's efforts in particular, would also support your
    contention; however, this aspect of human endeavor (deciding what is
    "better and professional") is not determined by vote. It is determined
    by an individual's choice.

    One good thing about Mr. Lautermilch's galleries, and something I
    appreciate deeply, is that I get to look at his stuff and contemplate
    the interesting items (form and content, and relationships to the
    world-as-I-see-it) and scan&skip the remainder. Or deride the
    remainder for my own pleasure, if nothing else.

    Maybe it's a language thing: to me "Gallery" _does_ mean a selection
    based on elevated standards of composition, content, and execution. To
    others, it may mean throwing everything you can lay your hands on
    against the wall, and not even removing the stuff that doesn't stick.
    Substitute "_Melange_" and maybe your objection evaporates?

    Pays you money and makes you choice.
     
    Frank ess, Jul 22, 2005
    #9
  10. Dean S. Lautermilch

    Kitt Guest

    First, let me say that I like most of what Dean has posted on PBase,
    even though I wasn't invited to comment or even look. It may not all
    be 'art', but it's certainly photography. Furthermore, he paid for it
    and he didn't invite me to look at anything other than the one shot he
    posted a link to and he certainly didn't invite a gripe session about
    his work. Maybe it's primary function is for the pleasure of family
    and friends? Maybe just storage? He linked to one shot he thought
    would interest the group.

    Having said all that, I would ask that in the future when shooting a
    fat photographer, you choose a more flattering angle. I can't seem to
    get my wife to grasp that concept, either. All her shots make me
    look.... you don't suppose...? ;o)
     
    Kitt, Jul 22, 2005
    #10
  11. Dean S. Lautermilch

    ASAAR Guest

    "Melange" doesn't seem quite right unless there's a real lack of
    order to the images. Something between "Gallery" and "Archive",
    like maybe "My zzz Collection".
     
    ASAAR, Jul 23, 2005
    #11
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.