Just wondering...has GP posted any "Pro" images yet online?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Bay Area Dave, Jun 23, 2004.

  1. I haven't been following GP closely for a while. Has he
    posted any images that appear to be his own?

    dave
     
    Bay Area Dave, Jun 23, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Nope George Preddy aka Orville Wright aka a dozen sock puppets has not...
     
    Darrell Larose, Jun 23, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. What about his SI contributions?
     
    Richard Cockburn, Jun 24, 2004
    #3
  4. Sports Illustrated uses Canon workflow exclusively due to a
    sponsorship deal. SI recently said 14,999 out of 15,000 Canon DSLR
    images they get are "crap." They are furious with Canon.
     
    Georgette Preddy, Jun 24, 2004
    #4
  5. Sports Illustrated uses Canon workflow exclusively due to a
    sponsorship deal. SI recently said 14,999 out of 15,000 Canon DSLR
    images they get are "crap." They are furious with Canon.
     
    Georgette Preddy, Jun 24, 2004
    #5
  6. Sport Illustrated uses Canon workflow exclusively due to a sponsorship
    contract. SI was quoted recently as saying 14,999 of 15,000 images
    they get from their Canon DSLR's "are crap." They were furious.
     
    Georgette Preddy, Jun 24, 2004
    #6
  7. Bay Area Dave

    Lionel Guest

    Kibo informs me that (Georgette Preddy)
    stated that:
    He meant the Shoot-In, you complete moron.

    And where are those 'professional' photos you claimed to have sold?
     
    Lionel, Jun 24, 2004
    #7
  8. Sport Illustrated uses Canon workflow exclusively due to a sponsorship
    contract. SI was quoted recently as saying 14,999 of 15,000 images
    they get from their Canon DSLR's "are crap." They were furious.
     
    Georgette Preddy, Jun 24, 2004
    #8
  9. Bay Area Dave

    tekfull Guest

    still no pics from you gp
     
    tekfull, Jun 24, 2004
    #9
  10. << Snipped bits out >>

    The person posting under the name of George or Georgette Preddy (and
    other pseudonyms) has an ungrounded but zealous faith that current
    implementation of the Foveon chip is superior to all other chip
    technologies. He will cite portions of reviews to ostensibly support his
    claims, and will repeat, ad naseum, complete lines of out-of-context
    material.

    His claims may well be ignored, or at the very least verified since most
    of them are extreme distortions and some are out and out fabrications."


    Moreover, "Mr." "Preddy" has claimed to be a photographer (pro!), but
    cannot bring himself to post a single picture with EXIF info that he
    shot himself, in spite of repeated requests and challenges to do so.

    Apparently he loathes anything related to Canon and loves everything
    about Sigma cameras and lenses. His "claims" may be ignored, and he is
    doing Sigma, and anyone related to the Foveon chip, no good at all by
    arousing ire, increasing the N/S ratio, and generally spamming this
    newsgroup.
     
    John McWilliams, Jun 24, 2004
    #10
  11. Bay Area Dave

    Big Bill Guest

    I read that article, and that's not what they said.
    Mabe you need to get someone else to read for you. Someone who will
    take the time to explain the big (over 5 letters) words for you.

    Bill Funk
    Change "g" to "a"
     
    Big Bill, Jun 25, 2004
    #11
  12. Exactly, the problem was not the quantity or quality of the results,
    but that one defining shot where the subject was deemed to be just
    right, and also in the original reference this was for the cover shot.
     
    Jonathan Wilson, Jun 26, 2004
    #12
    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.