Re: PAW: Too Much PAW
On 23/2/04, SHEL disgorged: I've also noticed that some of the more tech oriented people haven't participated in the PAW yet ... after all their talk about how valuable the technical and high tech side of gear and peripherals is to making a good photo, I haven't seen any of those good, high-tech produced pics. C'mon guys, join the party, show us your stuff. [snipped] I haven't participated because I have a web site with galleries on it, and the link is on every one of my emails. I could PAW a link once a week but - and I'm not trying to be a party-pooper here - and with all due respect - this is a Pentax discussion list, and there's a lot of list traffic already. I see no point in cluttering up peoples' in-boxes with my pics *that may not be shot using Pentax gear anyway*. That said, I've got no right to talk - I'm as guilty as sin when it comes to off-topic postings, so I'll just go flagellate myself. To PAW or not to PAW ? Doesn't really bother me one way or the other. I suppose on balance, taking into account that this list is a bit of an anomaly WRT email lists (in that it's *more* that just an email list - it's a community, a gathering, a bar - call it what you will), then I would say that anything that encourages photography must be a positive thing. It's all academic anyway - it's an unmoderated list and so there are no rules. Post PAWs or not, every day or just Friday. .02, Cheers, Cotty (off for some more flagellation) ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: PAW: Too Much PAW
Hi, Why not make the URL to your site more noticeable by making it, what do you call it, a dynamic link ... y'know, with the http in front of it. I agree about the community feel to this list. shel Cotty wrote: I haven't participated because I have a web site with galleries on it, and the link is on every one of my emails. [...] this list is a bit of an anomaly WRT email lists (in that it's *more* that just an email list - it's a community, a gathering, a bar - call it what you will), then I would say that anything that encourages photography must be a positive thing. www.macads.co.uk/snaps
OT - Dynamic links (was:Re: PAW: Too Much PAW)
On 24/2/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: Why not make the URL to your site more noticeable by making it, what do you call it, a dynamic link ... y'know, with the http in front of it. Will this make a difference? In my plain text email application (Powermail 4.2), anything beginning with 'www' becomes highlighted in blue and if clicked on, opens the web browser and goes to that site. Does this mean that some email applications need the 'http://' preceding the 'www' ? Sorry, I'm an infant WRT html... Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: PAW: Too Much PAW
On Mon, 23 Feb 2004, Shel Belinkoff wrote: I've also noticed that some of the more tech oriented people haven't participated in the PAW yet ... after all their talk about how valuable the technical and high tech side of gear and peripherals is to making a good photo, I haven't seen any of those good, high-tech produced pics. C'mon guys, join the party, show us your stuff. I haven't posted because I really haven't shot much with the *ist D yet. I tend to shoot the most while I'm hiking or travelling and I haven't done either since purchasing it. Everything else that I've shot in the last 3 years has been on a Sony camera, so I didn't think that this would be appropriate for PAW. Here is a picture from a Sony that I like: http://phred.org/~alex/pictures/pdx-japanese-garden/reduced/DSC00491.JPG I like this one, but wish I could go back and recompose it. I like the boat in the water, but find the bush to the right a little distracting. http://phred.org/~alex/pictures/east-coast/reduced/DSC01233.JPG A few decent *ist D shots: http://phred.org/~alex/pictures/hiking/snow-lake-10-5-03/ I wish I had a longer lens with me for IMGP1391.JPG I'm not crazy about the framing on IMGP1405.JPG, but it is the best of the group. Shel, I admire your street photography. I really like good street photography, but I'm pretty lousy at it myself. I feel very self concious when taking photographs of others and that makes it difficult to concentrate on taking good photographs. alex
PAW: Too Much PAW
Rob Studdert commented that the PAW postings are becoming too much, and suggested that we only post PAW pics on Friday. Phtooey! I say. The pics should come as the mood strikes you, when you have a good one you want to share, or when you have one you're looking for comments about. And why just one a week? This is a photography list, pictures, images, photographs ... call 'em what you will, we communicate through our photos. I've noticed that people who rarely post messages have presented us with some photos. Perhaps some of those people find it hard to express themselves for one reason or another ... this list can be intimidating some times, the discussions technical in nature and hard to follow, so the posting of pictures is a great way for some people to communicate and share their thoughts and feelings with the list. I've also noticed that some of the more tech oriented people haven't participated in the PAW yet ... after all their talk about how valuable the technical and high tech side of gear and peripherals is to making a good photo, I haven't seen any of those good, high-tech produced pics. C'mon guys, join the party, show us your stuff. Again, I'm not the moderator of the PAW, but my opinion is to let the photos flow LOL. If they are going to be restricted to being posted only on a specific day of the week, then I suggest that discussions about digital gear and technical discussions, and discussions about flash, or film, and even OT discussions, be limited to but one designated day per week. Anyway, Rob's comment was in response to Raimo's comment that the list traffic was a bit heavy and that he was going to unsubscribe for a while. I don't believe Raimo said anything specific about the PAW being the reason for his decision ... don't have the message handy so I'm not sure. But, regardless, this has always been a heavy traffic list, and over the years many people have dropped off because of the message count. That's just the way it is. So, let's not pick on the PAW, especially since it's in its infancy. It'll develop its own place on the list in time ... and I bet it will still be overshadowed by tech talk. Just my dos centavos ... shel
Re: PAW: Too Much PAW
Party Poopers:-)vbg I think this is great. A new rush so to speak has happened.I can finally show some of my Nikon and Yashica Mat camera pic's that i like, that cannot go on the PUG.Others have shown pic's from film and digi cameras that are non Pentax too. I find this very refreshing. The worlds to fast today.Slow down for a moment and enjoy some might fine pictures from some very nice and talented people from all 4 corners of the world,and Regina too. Dave Sorry for the dig WW but i am a Riders fan and plan to buy a share when my next pay cheque clears. Dave Again Shel said Rob Studdert commented that the PAW postings are becoming too much, and suggested that we only post PAW pics on Friday. Phtooey! I say. The pics should come as the mood strikes you, when you have a good one you want to share, or when you have one you're looking for comments about. And why just one a week? This is a photography list, pictures, images, photographs ... call 'em what you will, we communicate through our photos. I've noticed that people who rarely post messages have presented us with some photos. Perhaps some of those people find it hard to express themselves for one reason or another this list can be intimidating some times, the discussions technical in nature and hard to follow, so the posting of pictures is a great way for some people to communicate and share their thoughts and feelings with the list. I've also noticed that some of the more tech oriented people haven't participated in the PAW yet ... after all their talk about how valuable the technical and high tech side of gear and peripherals is to making a good photo, I haven't seen any of those good, high-tech produced pics. C'mon guys, join the party, show us your stuff. Again, I'm not the moderator of the PAW, but my opinion is to let the photos flow LOL. If they are going to be restricted to being posted only on a specific day of the week, then I suggest that discussions about digital gear and technical discussions, and discussions about flash, or film, and even OT discussions, be limited to but one designated day per week. Anyway, Rob's comment was in response to Raimo's comment that the list traffic was a bit heavy and that he was going to unsubscribe for a while. I don't believe Raimo said anything specific about the PAW being the reason for his decision ... don't have the message handy so I'm not sure. But, regardless, this has always been a heavy traffic list, and over the years many people have dropped off because of the message count. That's just the way it is. So, let's not pick on the PAW, especially since it's in its infancy. It'll develop its own place on the list in time ... and I bet it will still be overshadowed by tech talk. Just my dos centavos ... shel
Re: PAW: Too Much PAW
On 23 Feb 2004 at 17:59, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Anyway, Rob's comment was in response to Raimo's comment that the list traffic was a bit heavy and that he was going to unsubscribe for a while. I don't believe Raimo said anything specific about the PAW being the reason for his decision ... don't have the message handy so I'm not sure. But, regardless, this has always been a heavy traffic list, and over the years many people have dropped off because of the message count. That's just the way it is. So, let's not pick on the PAW, especially since it's in its infancy. It'll develop its own place on the list in time ... and I bet it will still be overshadowed by tech talk. I'm all for the PAW or PAD or whatever you'd like to call it however I too hope that it settles and technical talk abounds once again. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
RE: PAW: Too Much PAW
Here, here!! Shel, please bear with me as I repeat what I did a few minutes ago in another thread: In the past few days, there have been more posts about English sports cars, whiskeys, Scotches, Dodge Chargers, etc, etc, than PAW related posts. I personally don't mind the OT threads. Indeed, I have participated a bit in them (but, for a change, not much). But, let's be realistic. If one thinks the traffic is too high, let's clamp down on the non-photography stuff. I can't imagine why anyone's picking on PAW. It's not generating that much traffic, really. Everyone's been really good about having PAW in the subject line, so those who don't want to participate or don't like the volume can easily filter off PAW. And, whether we have PAW or not, I'm posting photos here. That being said, I've really been enjoying seeing the work of others who I don't see much from! I say, keep PAW alive!! cheers, frank The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: PDML [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PAW: Too Much PAW Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 17:59:14 -0800 Rob Studdert commented that the PAW postings are becoming too much, and suggested that we only post PAW pics on Friday. Phtooey! I say. The pics should come as the mood strikes you, when you have a good one you want to share, or when you have one you're looking for comments about. And why just one a week? This is a photography list, pictures, images, photographs ... call 'em what you will, we communicate through our photos. I've noticed that people who rarely post messages have presented us with some photos. Perhaps some of those people find it hard to express themselves for one reason or another ... this list can be intimidating some times, the discussions technical in nature and hard to follow, so the posting of pictures is a great way for some people to communicate and share their thoughts and feelings with the list. I've also noticed that some of the more tech oriented people haven't participated in the PAW yet ... after all their talk about how valuable the technical and high tech side of gear and peripherals is to making a good photo, I haven't seen any of those good, high-tech produced pics. C'mon guys, join the party, show us your stuff. Again, I'm not the moderator of the PAW, but my opinion is to let the photos flow LOL. If they are going to be restricted to being posted only on a specific day of the week, then I suggest that discussions about digital gear and technical discussions, and discussions about flash, or film, and even OT discussions, be limited to but one designated day per week. Anyway, Rob's comment was in response to Raimo's comment that the list traffic was a bit heavy and that he was going to unsubscribe for a while. I don't believe Raimo said anything specific about the PAW being the reason for his decision ... don't have the message handy so I'm not sure. But, regardless, this has always been a heavy traffic list, and over the years many people have dropped off because of the message count. That's just the way it is. So, let's not pick on the PAW, especially since it's in its infancy. It'll develop its own place on the list in time ... and I bet it will still be overshadowed by tech talk. Just my dos centavos ... shel _ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/viruspgmarket=en-caRU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca
Re: PAW: Too Much PAW
Hi! Shel, I agree with you - The Spice Must Flow! VBG Boris
