 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / November 2005My humble submission...
from my humble, cheap, plastic camera: http://www.pbase.com/slack/sunsets I need to adjust the clock...pix were actually taken last night. _____ Slack From: "Slack" <xxxxx@xxxxx.org> | from my humble, cheap, plastic camera: http://www.pbase.com/slack/sunsets | | I need to adjust the clock...pix were actually taken last night. | _____ | Slack Please read the rec.photo.digital.slr-systems News Group Charter http://groups.google.ca/group/rec.photo.digital.slr-systems/msg/79a603edf0dc8ddc ?as_q=Charter%20group&safe=images&as_umsgid=378rk4F56cj85U1@individual.net&lr=&h l=en What Is Considered Off-Topic: - Discussion of pure film cameras - Discussion of digital point-and-shoot, ZLR, rangefinder, or any other non-SLR digital cameras - Discussion of any cameras with non-detachable lenses - Discussion of digital rangefinders - Discussion of scanners - Discussion of printers - Posting links to personal photo galleries or images, not in the context of DSLR photography  SignatureDave http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm > From: "Slack" <xxxxx@xxxxx.org> > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > of DSLR > photography He was being facetious -- they were taken with a 350D Tom From: "Tom" <tgmurrxxx@excite.com> | He was being facetious -- they were taken with a 350D | | Tom What Is Considered Off-Topic: - Posting links to personal photo galleries or images, not in the context of DSLR photography http://groups.google.ca/group/rec.photo.digital.slr-systems/msg/79a603edf0dc8ddc ?as_q=Charter%20group&safe=images&as_umsgid=378rk4F56cj85U1@individual.net&lr=&h l=en SignatureDave http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm How are those not in the context of DSLR photography? They were taken with a DSLR... I don't get it. > From: "Tom" <tgmurrxxx@excite.com> > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > http://groups.google.ca/group/rec.photo.digital.slr-systems/msg/79a603edf0dc8ddc ?as_q=Charter%20group&safe=images&as_umsgid=378rk4F56cj85U1@individual.net&lr=&h l=en From: "Nicholas Wittebol" <nicholas.wittebol@rogers.com> | How are those not in the context of DSLR photography? They were taken | with a DSLR... | | I don't get it. There was no context. There was no discussion. It was just a link to personal photo gallery. That's the reason the Off Topic line "- Posting links to personal photo galleries or images, not in the context of DSLR photography" is in there so people just don't post their web sites. Now if Slack was discussing; lighting, contrast, histogram, white balance, lenses, or other aspects of digital photography and pointed to the web site as part of his discussion then it would be different. I have been in this News Group since just after it was created and I have seen it grow in size. I have also seen the quality degraded. This isn't just another; alt.photography . It is specifically for discussing the technology and periphery of dSLR photography. It is about showing off pictures which is all Slack's post amounts to. SignatureDave http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm > From: "Nicholas Wittebol" <nicholas.wittebol@rogers.com> > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > aspects of digital photography and pointed to the web site as part of his discussion then it > would be different. He's countering all the crap here that consumer DSLR's can't capture decent images. Pretty on-topic dickhead. Greg From: "G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com> | He's countering all the crap here that consumer DSLR's can't capture | decent images. | | Pretty on-topic dickhead. | | Greg Where in that post does it state ANY of that ? Without explicitly stating that or any discussion points in the post it is therefore OT ! SignatureDave http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm > From: "G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com> > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Where in that post does it state ANY of that ? Re-read his post. It's subtle but clearly there. Greg > From: "G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com> > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Without explicitly stating that or any discussion points in the post it is > therefore OT ! I would go as far to state "charter discussion" is off charter and therefor off topic. The resulting netkopping has increased the bandwidth on the newsgroup... " It is about showing off pictures which is all Slack's post amounts to." D'oh !! || From: "Tom" <tgmurrxxx@excite.com> || [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] || the context of DSLR || photography http://groups.google.ca/group/rec.photo.digital.slr-systems/msg/79a603edf0dc8ddc ?as_q=Charter%20group&safe=images&as_umsgid=378rk4F56cj85U1@individual.net&lr=&h l=en || -- || Dave || http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html || http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm I suspect net-cop posts are off topic. I recently purchased a used 350D for my wife to replace an old Minolta film camera (SRT-101). What would be a good general purpose lens covering the 55-200mm range? BJ Signature"Troll motto #27: If you repeat things often enough, they become true. If you repeat things often enough, they become true. If you repeat things often enough, they become true." -- Internet Wisdom From: "BJ in Texas" <bjtexas@hotmale.con> | I suspect net-cop posts are off topic. | [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] | | BJ Making sure posts conform to a FAQ and/or Charter is never OT. SignatureDave http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm > From: "BJ in Texas" <bjtexas@hotmale.con> > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Making sure posts conform to a FAQ and/or Charter is never OT. It is off-topic, as the netkopping has nothing to do with dSLR cameras. Where in the FAQ is netcopping permitted. > From: "Slack" <xxxxx@xxxxx.org> > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Please read the rec.photo.digital.slr-systems News Group Charter > http://groups.google.ca/group/rec.photo.digital.slr-systems/msg/79a603edf0dc8ddc ?as_q=Charter%20group&safe=images&as_umsgid=378rk4F56cj85U1@individual.net&lr=&h l=en Not really off-topic, dear Usenet Nanny. Pretty good shots! From: "223rem" <223rem@sbcglobal.com> | Not really off-topic, dear Usenet Nanny. | | Pretty good shots! It sure was ! Read the Charter ! There was no discussion and there was no context. It was just a post to show off a photo gallery. That is Off Topic unless the photographs pointed to are part of a discussion. Just posting a URL is not a discussion. Lets keep this New Group focused ! SignatureDave http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm > From: "223rem" <223rem@sbcglobal.com> > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > There was no discussion and there was no context. There's plenty of context. You must not be following r.p.d.s-s. much other than to be supreme netcop. Greg >> From: "223rem" <223rem@sbcglobal.com> >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > There's plenty of context. You must not be following r.p.d.s-s. much > other than to be supreme netcop. I appreciate what Dave is trying to do. Educating a newcomer is not being a "supreme netcop", it's just being neighborly. >>> From: "223rem" <223rem@sbcglobal.com> >>> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > I appreciate what Dave is trying to do. Educating a newcomer is not > being a "supreme netcop", it's just being neighborly. First, Slack isn't a newcomer. Second, his post was an obvious attempt to counter those who maintain that prosumer DSLRs are currently unusable. His post was completely on-topic. If he just said "here are some of my photos" I would agreed with the supreme netcop. I think Dave needs to start reading r.p.d.s-s. more before he performs his supreme netcop duties. Greg From: "G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com> | First, Slack isn't a newcomer. Second, his post was an obvious attempt | to counter those who maintain that prosumer DSLRs are currently [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] | | Greg I have been here since just after the NG creation. If this post in in reference to an existing thread then Slack's post belongs under that thread such that the subject matter is contiguous and intact. SignatureDave http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm > From: "G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com> > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > belongs under that > thread such that the subject matter is contiguous and intact. I have been here since there was only rec.photo. I voted on the first split. > >> From: "223rem" <223rem@sbcglobal.com> > >> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > I appreciate what Dave is trying to do. Educating a newcomer is not > being a "supreme netcop", it's just being neighborly. Nobody controls usenet, which is why it is the ultimate space in time for exchange of ideas. Trolls will come and go, but usenet will always be usenet. I personally have never read a newsgroup charter and I have no plans to read one either. Its a case of put up and shut up. SignatureDD www.dallasdahms.com Central Scrutinizer > I personally have never read a newsgroup charter and I have no plans to > read one either. Its a case of put up and shut up. Child. Iain > From: "Slack" <xxxxx@xxxxx.org> > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > - Posting links to personal photo galleries or images, not in the context of DSLR > photography Wah! Wah! Wah! Does baba want his diaper changed? SignatureDD www.dallasdahms.com Central Scrutinizer > Please read the rec.photo.digital.slr-systems News Group Charter David, I was wondering if you would you be so good as to consider changing the subject line of your "read the charter" posts. Being unrelated to digital photography - and hence of no interest - I'd like to be able to easily identify them so that they can be quickly deleted. Kindest regards, Colin > From: "Slack" <xxxxx@xxxxx.org> > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Please read the rec.photo.digital.slr-systems News Group Charter http://groups.google.ca/group/rec.photo.digital.slr-systems/msg/79a603edf0dc8ddc ?as_q=Charter%20group&safe=images&as_umsgid=378rk4F56cj85U1@individual.net&lr=&h l=en > What Is Considered Off-Topic: Dave: Good troll. Your net-cop post (and its responses) consumed much more bandwidth than Slack's original post. Slack: The 350D is "cheap"? I must be living in a different dimension. Nice shots, BTW. -- Jeff R. [] > Slack: The 350D is "cheap"? I must be living in a different > dimension. Nice shots, BTW. Do Canon make any cheaper DSLR? > [] > > Slack: The 350D is "cheap"? I must be living in a different > > dimension. Nice shots, BTW. > > Do Canon make any cheaper DSLR? Hehe "Cheap" is a relative term. My Pentax is cheaper than said 350D. ...but... All my seven Canons put together wouldn't be worth one 350D -- Jeff R. (still can't believe the price differential for DSLRs) >"Cheap" is a relative term. Well, that's how it often winds up being used, but it is not meant to be a relative term. "Cheaper" and "Cheapest" are relative terms, or the phrase, "Relatively Cheap". Signature<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm> ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< >>"Cheap" is a relative term. > > Well, that's how it often winds up being used, but it is not meant to be > a relative term. "Cheaper" and "Cheapest" are relative terms, or the > phrase, "Relatively Cheap". If you can get a 300D they are great. Not as fast but image quality is said to be slightly better. > [] >> Slack: The 350D is "cheap"? I must be living in a different >> dimension. Nice shots, BTW. > > Do Canon make any cheaper DSLR? I expect Canon will announce a Rebel Jr. in February, just before the PMA show. The Rebel XT is currently the most expensive entry-level dSLR around here. In Ottawa, Canada the D50 with 18~55 is $899.99 CDN, the *ist DL 18~55 is $949.99 CDN, both Olympus E cameras with kit lens are under $1000 CDN. The KM D5 is not available in Canada. The XT with 18~55 is $1,049.99. I don't know if Canon has any more room to drop the XT/350D price which is why I expect a XT Jr. Currently the D50 is the sales leader around here, followed by the D70s ($1,399.99 CDN). I tend to sell more 20D's ($1,5,49.99) than XT's > from my humble, cheap, plastic camera: http://www.pbase.com/slack/sunsets > > I need to adjust the clock...pix were actually taken last night. > _____ > Slack Very nice shots ! Tom > from my humble, cheap, plastic camera: http://www.pbase.com/slack/sunsets > > I need to adjust the clock...pix were actually taken last night. And to make this [more] on topic [i should've included this in the orig post anyway], any all criticism will be appreciated. Also, I have some rather severe barrel distortion on some of my pictures. What's the best solution to fix them (I don't have PS, too expensive for me)? _____ Slack >> from my humble, cheap, plastic camera: http://www.pbase.com/slack/sunsets >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > _____ > Slack Assuming you use a program that uses plugins you could try DCE Tools. > Also, I have some >rather severe barrel distortion on some of my pictures. What's the best >solution to fix them (I don't have PS, too expensive for me)? PTLens is available as standalone program and is free and excellent http://epaperpress.com/ptlens/ >>Also, I have some >>rather severe barrel distortion on some of my pictures. What's the best >>solution to fix them (I don't have PS, too expensive for me)? > > PTLens is available as standalone program and is free and excellent > http://epaperpress.com/ptlens/ Thank you very much now if they would just add my lens :-( _____ Slack >>>Also, I have some >>>rather severe barrel distortion on some of my pictures. What's the best [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Thank you very much My pleasure. >now if they would just add my lens :-( If you will make some jpegs as directed by the PTLens author and send them to him he will compute the proper profile and add it to the database, usually within a week of receiving the jpegs. He used to have the instructions on how to shoot the required jpegs on his website, but he has moved them to a separate Instruction Manual. He wants a small donation for the manual (he suggests $5, but would likely accept less). Click on the Manual link on the home page for more information. If you can't or don't want to get the manual, maybe someone in the group has it and will send it to you by email if you ask. > from my humble, cheap, plastic camera: http://www.pbase.com/slack/sunsets > > I need to adjust the clock...pix were actually taken last night. > _____ > Slack I like 'em. Thanks for posting them. >>from my humble, cheap, plastic camera: http://www.pbase.com/slack/sunsets >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I like 'em. Thanks for posting them. Thanks for looking, and for the feedback. _____ Slack > from my humble, cheap, plastic camera: http://www.pbase.com/slack/sunsets > > I need to adjust the clock...pix were actually taken last night. You need to also be more careful about what you post here. David H. Lipman does not like your post ... I guess it was the implied suggestion that cheap plastic cameras can rival DSLRs. Shame on you for trolling and shame on David for being so sensitive. So, anyway, they are nice shots. Cheap cameras can indeed do nice work (often to the chagrin of those who have spent kilobucks!). I viewed some cell-phone camera shots posted on UseNet that were surprisingly good. They received many negative responses and even shrill comments, by the way. Again ... if you want to piss off a high-end consumer, toss out evidence that much can be accomplished with less. Slack, my advice is to keep shooting with your cheap, plastic junk and yet produce good stuff, and to David, my advice is to lighten up. Have a happy Thanksgiving! >>from my humble, cheap, plastic camera: http://www.pbase.com/slack/sunsets >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Have a happy Thanksgiving! Thank you very much... I think I'll take your advice :-) And a very Happy Thanksgiving to you and yours... and everyone else here, including Mr. Lipman. _____ Slack > You need to also be more careful about what you post here. David H. Lipman > does not like your post ... I guess it was the implied suggestion that cheap > plastic cameras can rival DSLRs. Shame on you for trolling and shame on > David for being so sensitive. I thought David was the troll ;) |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.