Re: PUG Comments March 2007

[Gianfranco Irlanda]

Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> " X " by  Gianfranco Irlanda
> 
> http://pug.komkon.org/07mar/binariox.html
> 
> Strong composition with the X of the rails and camera at
ground level.  
> Bravery award for risking life, camera, and limb in front of
that oncoming 
> car that is much closer than it appears.

Hi Tom,

Thanks for the award! :-) Yeah, the car was much closer but not
*that* close...

Ciao,

Gianfranco

_


 

It's here! Your new message!  
Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: PUG Comments March 2007

[Kenneth Waller]

Looks like the Palouse region to me.

Very nice shot but for my money, I want it in color.

Kenneth Waller
- Original Message - 
From: "Harald Rust" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Subject: PUG Comments March 2007


> Hi Tom,
> Thanks for the kind comment, much appreciated.
> Harald
>
> Tom C. wrote:
>
> " Tree and Hills " by Harald Rust
>
> http://pug.komkon.org/07mar/palubw.html
>
> Wonderful classic composition.  Shot sure to a be a
> winner in color or grayscale.  My personal favorite of
> the month.
>
>
>
>
> 
> Get your own web address.
> Have a HUGE year through Yahoo! Small Business.
> http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/domains/?p=BESTDEAL
>
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: PUG Comments March 2007

[Tom C]

>Tom C wrote:
> > ---
> >
> > " Running in the Rain " by  Boris Liberman
> >
> > http://pug.komkon.org/07mar/pug00526.html
> >
> > Boris! No fair cheating with such a good image that you've already shown 
>as
> > a PESO.  That is strictly against the rules.  I suggest you read them.
> >
> > 
>
>Tom, is there a smiley or a link that you have forgotten?
>
>;-)
>
>Boris
>

No.  Because then it wouldn't be funny. :-)

Tom C.



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: PUG Comments March 2007

[Boris Liberman]

Tom C wrote:
> ---
> 
> " Running in the Rain " by  Boris Liberman
> 
> http://pug.komkon.org/07mar/pug00526.html
> 
> Boris! No fair cheating with such a good image that you've already shown as 
> a PESO.  That is strictly against the rules.  I suggest you read them.
> 
> 

Tom, is there a smiley or a link that you have forgotten?

;-)

Boris


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Pug Comments

[Joseph Tainter]

"As stated, well done people."

Thanks, Dave, for all your comments.

Joe

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Pug Comments

[P. J. Alling]

Hey, I made it to the top of somebodies favorites list.  Thanks, 
appreciate it.

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

>   Just a few that caught my eye. They were/are 
> all lovely shots btw.
>
>-Flatirons come in all Sizes-PJ Alling.
>
>Nicely exposed and interesting building. Nice sky.
>
>-Kirk in the Hills-P Stenquist.
>
>Good framing, and a "Haunted House" effect.
>
>-Orvieto Cathedral-G. Irlanda
>
>Love the blacked buildings as frames. Nice lines and colours on the main 
>building.
>
>-Pueblo Bonito-J Tainter.
>
>Well exposed and the brick detail is great. I love the off setting wall lines. 
>Sort of a
>"Beetle Juice"  effect.
>
>As stated, well done people.
>
>Dave
>
>   
>   
>
>
>
>  
>


-- 
When you're worried or in doubt, 
Run in circles, (scream and shout).


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Pug Comments

[Paul Stenquist]

Thanks Dave. And thanks for looking at the PUG.
Paul
On Aug 6, 2006, at 4:33 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

>   Just a few that caught my eye. They were/are 
> all  
> lovely shots btw.
>
> -Flatirons come in all Sizes-PJ Alling.
>
> Nicely exposed and interesting building. Nice sky.
>
> -Kirk in the Hills-P Stenquist.
>
> Good framing, and a "Haunted House" effect.
>
> -Orvieto Cathedral-G. Irlanda
>
> Love the blacked buildings as frames. Nice lines and colours on the  
> main building.
>
> -Pueblo Bonito-J Tainter.
>
> Well exposed and the brick detail is great. I love the off setting  
> wall lines. Sort of a
> "Beetle Juice"  effect.
>
> As stated, well done people.
>
> Dave
>
>   
>   
>
>
>
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

RE: PUG comments, part 1

[Sandra Hermann]

Tim,

Thank you for the comments on my picture.  I think I agree with you that I 
am not happy with the centering of the pine ball. I will try again.

sandy



http://www.fotocommunity.com/pc/pc/mypics/698154






From: Tim Øsleby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: 
Subject: PUG comments, part 1
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 19:20:54 +0100

First: I have been many posts behind for some time. Now I am looking at an
empty in-box. A wonderful feeling.
May I ask for a moment of list silence to let me celebrate the event? ;-)

Another way of celebrating is to comment the pugs. My favourites and almost
favourites are:

" I que es la veritat? " by  Lucas Rijnders. At first glanse this did say
much. When I notice the line that stands out, it changes. A pleasant image.

" MBD " by  Patrick Rendulic. I guess there are some message here. Sorry, 
it

does not reach me.

" Ripples " by  Henk Terhell. Really like this one. The perspective is
perfect. Myself may have ruined this using a wide angle, you didn't. My 
only

nit is about the top. There are some ripples that just starts, that annoyes
me a bit. Cropping of tiny bit would have improved it.

" Field " by  Jens Bladt. This is one of your best shots Jens. Simple and
well done.

" Dew " by  Dag Thrane. The idea is good, but something is missing.
Something about the composition makes it fall apart.

" Metal Landscape " by  Gianfranco Irlanda. Interesting approach on a daily
life item. Well executed.

" Gords " by  Bob Sullivan. Well seen. A funny picture. I'm not convinced
about the framing. Something tells me you had other options that would have
given a better composition.

" Green Light " by  Francis. Interesting  use of colours. Good light.

" Pine Ball " by  Sandy Hermann. Well seen. Like the background. I'm not to
happy with the centred composition.

" Anti Pattern " by  Boris Liberman. I like the title.

" Webs " by  Catherine Wilson. Good idea. I wish it was sharper.

" Marshal St, Scottsdale, Az " by  Ann Sanfedele. One more time Ann show us
a very good eye for lines. The moon (or whatever it is) makes this little
extra.

Think I'll stop here, I feel a bit negative. More to come, I hope.


Tim

Re: PUG comments, part 1

[Mark Roberts]

<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>> fra: Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> 
>> On 13/3/06, Tim Øsleby, discombobulated, unleashed:
>> 
>> >God dag mann, økseskaft"
>> 
>> Slikkepott!!!
>
>Nå tøyser dere fælt!

My, the Klingons are chatty today!
 

Re: PUG comments, part 1

[Ann Sanfedele]

Tim Øsleby wrote:
> 
> The moon adds something.
> It makes the picture slightly less clinical. Making it less surreal.

ah!

> 
> Hope you understand me this time. My English tend to fail me now and then.
> Why don't you folks learn proper Norwegian? That would make list life a lot
> easier.
> 

There's a thought!

ann

> 
> Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds
> (Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ann Sanfedele [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: 12. mars 2006 23:38
> > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> > Subject: Re: PUG comments, part 1
> >
> > Tim Øsleby wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > > " Marshal St, Scottsdale, Az " by  Ann Sanfedele. One more time Ann show
> > us
> > > a very good eye for lines. The moon (or whatever it is) makes this
> > little
> > > extra.
> > >
> > > Think I'll stop here, I feel a bit negative. More to come, I hope.
> > >
> > > Tim
> > > Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
> > >
> > >
> > Hmmm ... Tim did you mean you thought the moon "added a
> > little extra"  or
> > didn't? add anything?  oh and yes, that is the moon.
> >
> > I think I took the shot with a tripod and very slow - the
> > moon actually moved during it.
> > OTOH, I may be making that up.
> >
> > Anyway, glad you liked it
> >
> > ann
> >

Re: PUG comments, part 1

[Cotty]

On 13/3/06, Cotty, discombobulated, unleashed:

> It's in daily use
>here at the Greystones ranch.

The word, not the cake mixture ;-)




Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_

RE: PUG comments, part 1

[Tim Øsleby]

Even I Rhino can be elegant in its own way ;-)

Since you are the one who invites to battle, I believe it is my right to
choose weapon. 
Being 1/4 Scottish I choose highland pipes. I know how you southern creeps
feel about pipes. 
BTW. Line, is that Josteins?


Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
 
Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds 
(Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)

> -Original Message-
> From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 13. mars 2006 19:23
> To: pentax list
> Subject: Re: PUG comments, part 1
> 
> On 13/3/06, Tim Øsleby, discombobulated, unleashed:
> 
> >Nice photo. BTW. Your getting things on subject manoeuvre was very
> elegant.
> 
> Thanks. I have been called many things over the years - never elegant!
> 
> Being half-Klingon, I will take that as an insult and invite you to draw
> blood in battle :-)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers,
>   Cotty
> 
> 
> ___/\__
> ||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
> ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
> _
> 
> 
> 

Re: PUG comments, part 1

[Cotty]

On 13/3/06, Tim Øsleby, discombobulated, unleashed:

>Nice photo. BTW. Your getting things on subject manoeuvre was very elegant.

Thanks. I have been called many things over the years - never elegant!

Being half-Klingon, I will take that as an insult and invite you to draw
blood in battle :-)




Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_

RE: PUG comments, part 1

[Tim Øsleby]

You are absolutely right Cotty, it is a spatula. 
But what do you use, when the spatula is in the dishwasher? If your hands
are clean. Right, you use your index finger. That’s why the index finger is
called slikkepott (among other names) in Norway.

Enough ranting about nothing. Lets talk about økseskaft ;-) 

When repeating økseskaft continuously on an ad-hoc tune, you may also get
photogenic facial expressions. Or you may get a kick in your lower back
region.
Nice photo. BTW. Your getting things on subject manoeuvre was very elegant.


Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
 
Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds 
(Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)

> -Original Message-
> From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 13. mars 2006 17:53
> To: pentax list
> Subject: Re: PUG comments, part 1
> 
> On 13/3/06, Tim Øsleby, discombobulated, unleashed:
> 
> >Once Jostein learned Cotty this Norwegian jingle. For some reason Cotty
> >responded using this when I complained about my English. It was funny but
> a
> >bit out of context, so I replied with "God dag mann, økseskaft".
> >In short; online farting.
> 
> 'Slikkepott' *is an excellent word, when repeated continuously to an
> ad-hoc tune, you get responses like this:
> 
> <http://www.cottysnaps.com/snaps/portraits/images/pic20.html>
> 
> * it means 'spatula' - kitchen utensil - rubbery spade thing for
> scraping the last bit of cake mixture out of the bowl. It's in daily use
> here at the Greystones ranch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers,
>   Cotty
> 
> 
> ___/\__
> ||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
> ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
> _
> 
> 
> 

Re: PUG comments, part 1

[Cotty]

On 13/3/06, Tim Øsleby, discombobulated, unleashed:

>Once Jostein learned Cotty this Norwegian jingle. For some reason Cotty
>responded using this when I complained about my English. It was funny but a
>bit out of context, so I replied with "God dag mann, økseskaft". 
>In short; online farting.

'Slikkepott' *is an excellent word, when repeated continuously to an
ad-hoc tune, you get responses like this:



* it means 'spatula' - kitchen utensil - rubbery spade thing for
scraping the last bit of cake mixture out of the bowl. It's in daily use
here at the Greystones ranch.




Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_

RE: PUG comments, part 1

[Tim Øsleby]

Nothing really. 
Once Jostein learned Cotty this Norwegian jingle. For some reason Cotty
responded using this when I complained about my English. It was funny but a
bit out of context, so I replied with "God dag mann, økseskaft". 
In short; online farting.


Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
 
Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds 
(Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)

> -Original Message-
> From: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 13. mars 2006 16:25
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: RE: PUG comments, part 1
> 
> So, Slikkepot means the index finger.
> What is going on...???
> 
> Jens Bladt
> http://www.jensbladt.dk
> 
> -Oprindelig meddelelse-
> Fra: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sendt: 13. marts 2006 09:55
> Til: pentax list
> Emne: Re: PUG comments, part 1
> 
> 
> On 13/3/06, Tim Øsleby, discombobulated, unleashed:
> 
> >Why don't you folks learn proper Norwegian? That would make list life a
> lot
> >easier.
> 
> Tommeltott,
> Slikkepott,
> Langemann,
> Gullebrand,
> og Lille Petter Spillemann.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers,
>   Cotty
> 
> 
> ___/\__
> ||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
> ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
> _
> 
> 
> 
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.2.1/279 - Release Date: 03/10/2006
> 
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.2.1/279 - Release Date: 03/10/2006
> 

RE: PUG comments, part 1

[Jens Bladt]

In English: G'day, man axe handle!
Meaning talk at cross purposes.
Regards
Jens
http://www.jensbladt.dk

-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Tim Øsleby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 13. marts 2006 12:21
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: RE: PUG comments, part 1


That's good Cotty. Next lesson is to put this into context.
On second thought, do you know what context is?
Think I have a better one for you.
God dag mann, økseskaft"


Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)

Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds
(Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)

> -Original Message-
> From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 13. mars 2006 09:55
> To: pentax list
> Subject: Re: PUG comments, part 1
>
> On 13/3/06, Tim Øsleby, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
> >Why don't you folks learn proper Norwegian? That would make list life a
> lot
> >easier.
>
> Tommeltott,
> Slikkepott,
> Langemann,
> Gullebrand,
> og Lille Petter Spillemann.
>
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>   Cotty
>
>
> ___/\__
> ||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
> ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
> _
>
>
>




--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.2.1/279 - Release Date: 03/10/2006

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.2.1/279 - Release Date: 03/10/2006

RE: PUG comments, part 1

[Jens Bladt]

So, Slikkepot means the index finger.
What is going on...???

Jens Bladt
http://www.jensbladt.dk

-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 13. marts 2006 09:55
Til: pentax list
Emne: Re: PUG comments, part 1


On 13/3/06, Tim Øsleby, discombobulated, unleashed:

>Why don't you folks learn proper Norwegian? That would make list life a lot
>easier.

Tommeltott,
Slikkepott,
Langemann,
Gullebrand,
og Lille Petter Spillemann.




Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_



--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.2.1/279 - Release Date: 03/10/2006

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.2.1/279 - Release Date: 03/10/2006

Re: PUG comments, part 1

[dagt]

> fra: Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> On 13/3/06, Tim Øsleby, discombobulated, unleashed:
> 
> >God dag mann, økseskaft"
> 
> Slikkepott!!!

Nå tøyser dere fælt!

DagT

Re: PUG comments, part 1

[Dario Bonazza]

Dubej tlhlngan wo'

Dario

- Original Message - 
From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "pentax list" 
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 3:10 PM
Subject: Re: PUG comments, part 1



On 13/3/06, Tim Øsleby, discombobulated, unleashed:


God dag mann, økseskaft"


Slikkepott!!!




Cheers,
 Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_

Re: PUG comments, part 1

[Cotty]

On 13/3/06, Tim Øsleby, discombobulated, unleashed:

>God dag mann, økseskaft"

Slikkepott!!!




Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_

Re: PUG comments, part 1

[Lucas Rijnders]

On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 12:17:19 +0100, Tim Øsleby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Yeah. There should be a "not" there.


Oh good.


The stand out thing is what makes it for me.


The stand out thing is what made me trip the shutter, so I'm glad it's  
working :o)



On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 19:20:54 +0100, Tim Øsleby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> " I que es la veritat? " by  Lucas Rijnders. At first glanse this did
say
> much. When I notice the line that stands out, it changes. A pleasant
> image.

Hi Tim,

Thanks for commenting. I'm glad you like the image. Just curious, did  
you

leave out a 'not' in the first glance part, or am I misinterpreting your
comment?


--
Regards, Lucas

RE: PUG comments, part 1

[Tim Øsleby]

That's good Cotty. Next lesson is to put this into context. 
On second thought, do you know what context is? 
Think I have a better one for you.
God dag mann, økseskaft"


Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
 
Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds 
(Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)

> -Original Message-
> From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 13. mars 2006 09:55
> To: pentax list
> Subject: Re: PUG comments, part 1
> 
> On 13/3/06, Tim Øsleby, discombobulated, unleashed:
> 
> >Why don't you folks learn proper Norwegian? That would make list life a
> lot
> >easier.
> 
> Tommeltott,
> Slikkepott,
> Langemann,
> Gullebrand,
> og Lille Petter Spillemann.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers,
>   Cotty
> 
> 
> ___/\__
> ||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
> ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
> _
> 
> 
> 

RE: PUG comments, part 1

[Tim Øsleby]

Yeah. There should be a "not" there.
The stand out thing is what makes it for me.


Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
 
Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds 
(Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)

> -Original Message-
> From: Lucas Rijnders [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 13. mars 2006 09:05
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: PUG comments, part 1
> 
> On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 19:20:54 +0100, Tim Øsleby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > " I que es la veritat? " by  Lucas Rijnders. At first glanse this did
> say
> > much. When I notice the line that stands out, it changes. A pleasant
> > image.
> 
> Hi Tim,
> 
> Thanks for commenting. I'm glad you like the image. Just curious, did you
> leave out a 'not' in the first glance part, or am I misinterpreting your
> comment?
> 
> --
> Regards, Lucas
> 

Re: PUG comments, part 1

[Sylwester Pietrzyk]

Cotty wrote on 13.03.06 9:54:

> Tommeltott, 
> Slikkepott, 
Camelott? King Arthur came from Norway? :-P

-- 
Balance is the ultimate good...

Best Regards
Sylwek

Re: PUG comments, part 1

[Cotty]

On 13/3/06, Tim Øsleby, discombobulated, unleashed:

>Why don't you folks learn proper Norwegian? That would make list life a lot
>easier.

Tommeltott, 
Slikkepott, 
Langemann, 
Gullebrand,
og Lille Petter Spillemann.




Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_

Re: PUG comments, part 1

[Lucas Rijnders]

On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 19:20:54 +0100, Tim Øsleby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


" I que es la veritat? " by  Lucas Rijnders. At first glanse this did say
much. When I notice the line that stands out, it changes. A pleasant  
image.


Hi Tim,

Thanks for commenting. I'm glad you like the image. Just curious, did you  
leave out a 'not' in the first glance part, or am I misinterpreting your  
comment?


--
Regards, Lucas

Re: PUG comments, part 1

[Rick Womer]

Heck, Paul, it's a =lot= better than the writing of
most native English speakers!

Rick

--- Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Your English is excellent. I'm frequently amazed at
> how well-spoken 
> some of our non-English-speaking members are when
> writing  in a 
> language that's not their own.
> 
> On Mar 12, 2006, at 8:14 PM, Tim Øsleby wrote:
> 
> > The moon adds something.
> > It makes the picture slightly less clinical.
> Making it less surreal.
> >
> > Hope you understand me this time. My English tend
> to fail me now and 
> > then.
> > Why don't you folks learn proper Norwegian? That
> would make list life 
> > a lot
> > easier.
> >
> >
> > Tim
> > Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
> >
> > Never underestimate the power of stupidity in
> large crowds
> > (Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other
> clever guy)
> >
> >> -----Original Message-
> >> From: Ann Sanfedele [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Sent: 12. mars 2006 23:38
> >> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> >> Subject: Re: PUG comments, part 1
> >>
> >> Tim Øsleby wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>> " Marshal St, Scottsdale, Az " by  Ann
> Sanfedele. One more time Ann 
> >>> show
> >> us
> >>> a very good eye for lines. The moon (or whatever
> it is) makes this
> >> little
> >>> extra.
> >>>
> >>> Think I'll stop here, I feel a bit negative.
> More to come, I hope.
> >>>
> >>> Tim
> >>> Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Hmmm ... Tim did you mean you thought the moon
> "added a
> >> little extra"  or
> >> didn't? add anything?  oh and yes, that is the
> moon.
> >>
> >> I think I took the shot with a tripod and very
> slow - the
> >> moon actually moved during it.
> >> OTOH, I may be making that up.
> >>
> >> Anyway, glad you liked it
> >>
> >> ann
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: PUG comments, part 1

[Paul Stenquist]

Your English is excellent. I'm frequently amazed at how well-spoken 
some of our non-English-speaking members are when writing  in a 
language that's not their own.


On Mar 12, 2006, at 8:14 PM, Tim Øsleby wrote:


The moon adds something.
It makes the picture slightly less clinical. Making it less surreal.

Hope you understand me this time. My English tend to fail me now and 
then.
Why don't you folks learn proper Norwegian? That would make list life 
a lot

easier.


Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)

Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds
(Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)


-Original Message-
From: Ann Sanfedele [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 12. mars 2006 23:38
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: PUG comments, part 1

Tim Øsleby wrote:





" Marshal St, Scottsdale, Az " by  Ann Sanfedele. One more time Ann 
show

us

a very good eye for lines. The moon (or whatever it is) makes this

little

extra.

Think I'll stop here, I feel a bit negative. More to come, I hope.

Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)



Hmmm ... Tim did you mean you thought the moon "added a
little extra"  or
didn't? add anything?  oh and yes, that is the moon.

I think I took the shot with a tripod and very slow - the
moon actually moved during it.
OTOH, I may be making that up.

Anyway, glad you liked it

ann

RE: PUG comments, part 1

[Tim Øsleby]

The moon adds something. 
It makes the picture slightly less clinical. Making it less surreal. 

Hope you understand me this time. My English tend to fail me now and then. 
Why don't you folks learn proper Norwegian? That would make list life a lot
easier.


Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
 
Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds 
(Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)

> -Original Message-
> From: Ann Sanfedele [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 12. mars 2006 23:38
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: PUG comments, part 1
> 
> Tim Øsleby wrote:
> >
> >
> >>
> > " Marshal St, Scottsdale, Az " by  Ann Sanfedele. One more time Ann show
> us
> > a very good eye for lines. The moon (or whatever it is) makes this
> little
> > extra.
> >
> > Think I'll stop here, I feel a bit negative. More to come, I hope.
> >
> > Tim
> > Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
> >
> >
> Hmmm ... Tim did you mean you thought the moon "added a
> little extra"  or
> didn't? add anything?  oh and yes, that is the moon.
> 
> I think I took the shot with a tripod and very slow - the
> moon actually moved during it.
> OTOH, I may be making that up.
> 
> Anyway, glad you liked it
> 
> ann
> 

Re: PUG comments, part 1

[Ann Sanfedele]

Tim Øsleby wrote:
> 
>
>> 
> " Marshal St, Scottsdale, Az " by  Ann Sanfedele. One more time Ann show us
> a very good eye for lines. The moon (or whatever it is) makes this little
> extra.
> 
> Think I'll stop here, I feel a bit negative. More to come, I hope.
> 
> Tim
> Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
> 
>
Hmmm ... Tim did you mean you thought the moon "added a
little extra"  or
didn't? add anything?  oh and yes, that is the moon.

I think I took the shot with a tripod and very slow - the
moon actually moved during it.
OTOH, I may be making that up.

Anyway, glad you liked it

ann

Re: PUG comments, part 1

[DagT]

Thanks Tim, and Tom C earlier.

Yes, I agree that something is missing.  I was just too lazy to make  
a new picture this time .-(


DagT

Den 11. mar. 2006 kl. 19.20 skrev Tim Øsleby:


" Dew " by  Dag Thrane. The idea is good, but something is missing.
Something about the composition makes it fall apart.

Re: PUG comments

[Harald Rust]

Scott and Lucas,
Just wanted to thank you both for the pug comments you
made a few days ago. 
I really enjoyed this month's pug, and it was great to
see the increase in participation. 
Also much appreciation to Adelheid and Jostein for
putting it altogether.
Harald
MZ-S, still enjoying film

Scott wrote:
Collapsed Barn:  Combining the mountain and the barn
concurrently imparts feelings of timelessness and the
passing of time.  The color is nice and the
composition is very strong.  Excellent, IMHO.

Lucas wrote:
Harald: I like the shape of the barn, and I really
love how the colors of this picture pull the
background and foreground together, while the trees
still seperate them. It gives 
a 'unified' look without loosing depth.




__ 
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 
http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: PUG comments

[Ann Sanfedele]

Mark Roberts wrote:
> 
> Ann Sanfedele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> >Having the blank and a balanced rack with lots of
> >possibilities is desirable.
> >having no vowels at all is not -
> 
> You gotta pick up that Welsh version of Scrabble, Ann ;-)
> 
>
LOL!  There _have_ been discussions of the like on
my Scrabble list
I can assure you :)

Re: PUG comments

[Mark Roberts]

Ann Sanfedele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Having the blank and a balanced rack with lots of
>possibilities is desirable.
>having no vowels at all is not -

You gotta pick up that Welsh version of Scrabble, Ann ;-)
 
 
-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: PUG comments

[Ann Sanfedele]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 11/2/2005 12:58:41 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I was kinda saying that with this rack the blank
> was useless because there
> was no bingo to be had.
> 
> Okey, dokey. These guys play at a much higher level than me or my friends do,
> if not getting a bingo is bad news.
> 
> Marnie aka Doe :-)

well, it was the National Championship :)

Having the blank and a balanced rack with lots of
possibilities is desirable.
having no vowels at all is not -

The rack as a whole was useless at that time, and
the blank didn't help.

I know if I point the picture out to the Scrabble
list there will be some
jerk who wants to know the words on the board, the
score, etc...

and yes, having a blank for more than one or two
turns with no bingo to play
is considered bad news.  any play made with a
blank that was less than 50 points would probably
make the op think the player had both blanks.

ann

Re: PUG comments

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 11/2/2005 12:58:41 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I was kinda saying that with this rack the blank
was useless because there
was no bingo to be had.  

Okey, dokey. These guys play at a much higher level than me or my friends do, 
if not getting a bingo is bad news.

Marnie aka Doe :-)

Re: PUG comments

[Ann Sanfedele]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 11/2/2005 9:25:43 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL 
> PROTECTED]
> writes:
> thanks, Scott - glad you got a chuckle...
> funny thing is, I sent the link to the friend of
> mine who is dating now
> the guy in the picture... she got so fixated on
> the rack (she IS a Scrabble player)
> that she overlooked why I sent her the link - and
> didn't recognize him!
> And I thought it was a match made in heaven :):)
> 
> a
> ==
> Hehehehe. Okey, dokey, I am lurking and all that, but I got to ask WHY is it
> a bad rack?
> 
Even if he could use his blank to play hex he
would be left with GRRR.
He wouldn't use his blank for anything less than
say 40 points - depending on
how many tiles were left in the bag, what the
score is, etc, etc...
the way the board is set up (during that game) he
had no play.

The fellow who has the bad rack was the writer I
was working with on
an article about the tourney... so he kind flashed
the rack at me.

had there been a B open on the board he could play
BRRR and hope for
a great play next time... but that wasn't in the
1978 dictionary

I was kinda saying that with this rack the blank
was useless because there
was no bingo to be had.  



> For a bingo, sure. But he has a blank so he could make hex and stuff. Placed
> right that X could still get some high points. I am missing something. I play
> scrabble online occasionally with friends (sort of a hoot, I am a terrible
> speller, but the online web page has a built in spell checker so it enables 
> me to
> play. It tells you before you play if it is even a word -- scrabble is still
> hard that way and I win rarely, although occasionally I pull off two bingos
> and win. But not when I am up against the guy that usually does four a game.
> :-)).
> 
There is a better site --
www.isc.ro

Internet Scrabble club 
check it out :)

> Anyway, I am missing something. I suspect that rack could actually spell a
> word. Or something like that. Probably an illegal word. But it has me 
> scratching
> my head about the three r's. I couldn't figure it out.
> 
> I give in, tell us.
> 
> Marnie aka Doe :-)

see above - it is a terrible rack and no clear way
to make it really nice the NEXT time.
You always have to think one rack ahead, as well
as merely making a play.

xo,
ann

Re: PUG comments

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 11/2/2005 9:25:43 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED] 
writes:
thanks, Scott - glad you got a chuckle...
funny thing is, I sent the link to the friend of
mine who is dating now
the guy in the picture... she got so fixated on
the rack (she IS a Scrabble player)
that she overlooked why I sent her the link - and
didn't recognize him!
And I thought it was a match made in heaven :):)

a
==
Hehehehe. Okey, dokey, I am lurking and all that, but I got to ask WHY is it 
a bad rack?

For a bingo, sure. But he has a blank so he could make hex and stuff. Placed 
right that X could still get some high points. I am missing something. I play 
scrabble online occasionally with friends (sort of a hoot, I am a terrible 
speller, but the online web page has a built in spell checker so it enables me 
to 
play. It tells you before you play if it is even a word -- scrabble is still 
hard that way and I win rarely, although occasionally I pull off two bingos 
and win. But not when I am up against the guy that usually does four a game. 
:-)).

Anyway, I am missing something. I suspect that rack could actually spell a 
word. Or something like that. Probably an illegal word. But it has me 
scratching 
my head about the three r's. I couldn't figure it out.

I give in, tell us.

Marnie aka Doe :-)

Re: PUG comments

[E.R.N. Reed]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


(among other things)

Also I included the bit about not being able to sort anymore to maybe 
increase one's understanding of dementia. I am not sure everyone realizes that that 
goes too. A lot may know that the ability to read goes (to make sense out of 
the letters, putting them together into words, although the person may still be 
able to do small, short words), but not that the ability to sort goes also.


It first starts with being unable to distinguish between white objects (did 
some research and found that was fairly common). Dementia not only affects 
memory it also starts affecting higher level cognitive functions. I wasn't really 
aware myself, until it started happening, that sorting was a higher level 
cognitive function. But think about it, tons of work depends on sorting. Filing in 
an office, sorting out a sock drawer, folding laundry, most paper work in an 
office, doing one's taxes, looking at old photos, filing old letters, well, 
the list is endless. So if you can't sort anymore you can't do much anymore. You 
can get along without reading if you have to, but you cannot get along 
without the ability to sort.



Well, *I* didn't know -- so you educated at least one person. :)

ERNR

Re: PUG comments

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 11/2/2005 9:04:21 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think the importance of the description is that it clarifies who 
thinks the lady is useless. Without it, and without knowing Marnie, a 
viewer might draw the awful and incorrect conclusion that "useless" is 
the photographer's perception of the subject, not the subject's 
perception of herself.

ERNR
=
Thanks. That is exactly why I included a description. When I asked Mom about 
it, describing the theme as useless, she first reacted that I meant she was 
useless. I had to explain it was about her feeling useless -- which she got. So 
I didn't want anyone else doing the same thing.

One thing for her to feel that, another for me to imply I feel that.

Also I included the bit about not being able to sort anymore to maybe 
increase one's understanding of dementia. I am not sure everyone realizes that 
that 
goes too. A lot may know that the ability to read goes (to make sense out of 
the letters, putting them together into words, although the person may still be 
able to do small, short words), but not that the ability to sort goes also.

It first starts with being unable to distinguish between white objects (did 
some research and found that was fairly common). Dementia not only affects 
memory it also starts affecting higher level cognitive functions. I wasn't 
really 
aware myself, until it started happening, that sorting was a higher level 
cognitive function. But think about it, tons of work depends on sorting. Filing 
in 
an office, sorting out a sock drawer, folding laundry, most paper work in an 
office, doing one's taxes, looking at old photos, filing old letters, well, 
the list is endless. So if you can't sort anymore you can't do much anymore. 
You 
can get along without reading if you have to, but you cannot get along 
without the ability to sort.

Thanks again. (I am sure in scientific circles it's got a fancier name.)

Marnie aka Doe :-)

Re: PUG comments

[Ann Sanfedele]

Scott Loveless wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Bad Rack:  I really like Ann's choice for the plane of focus.  The
> look of exasperation on the player's face combined with the rack
> itself made me laugh.  Ann's sense of humor is present in many of her
> photographs, and is something I look forward to.
> 
thanks, Scott - glad you got a chuckle...
funny thing is, I sent the link to the friend of
mine who is dating now
the guy in the picture... she got so fixated on
the rack (she IS a Scrabble player)
that she overlooked why I sent her the link - and
didn't recognize him!
And I thought it was a match made in heaven :):)

a

Re: PUG comments

[Ann Sanfedele]

"E.R.N. Reed" wrote:
> 
> Scott Loveless wrote:
> 
> >(among other things)
> >
> >Untitled:  Quite a bit has already been said of this absolutely
> >amazing photograph.  I'm not sure I can add much more.  Even without
> >the description, the intent comes across very clearly.  This is by far
> >the best photograph of Marnie's I've seen.
> >
> I think the importance of the description is that it clarifies who
> thinks the lady is useless. Without it, and without knowing Marnie, a
> viewer might draw the awful and incorrect conclusion that "useless" is
> the photographer's perception of the subject, not the subject's
> perception of herself.
> 
> ERNR

what she said

ann

Re: PUG comments

[E.R.N. Reed]

Scott Loveless wrote:


(among other things)

Untitled:  Quite a bit has already been said of this absolutely
amazing photograph.  I'm not sure I can add much more.  Even without
the description, the intent comes across very clearly.  This is by far
the best photograph of Marnie's I've seen.

I think the importance of the description is that it clarifies who 
thinks the lady is useless. Without it, and without knowing Marnie, a 
viewer might draw the awful and incorrect conclusion that "useless" is 
the photographer's perception of the subject, not the subject's 
perception of herself.


ERNR

Re: Pug comments Part Deux

[Joseph Tainter]

Thanks for the nice comment, Dave. Actually, what nailed the exposure 
was center-weighted average metering.

I goofed when I submitted it to PUG. The film was E100VS -- hence the 
dark shadows.

One of my favorites from that trip
Joe

Re: Pug comments Part Deux

[brooksdj]

> Dave, 
> Thanks for the comment. Enjoyed your pug critiques.
> Maybe I'll have to visit Mount Robsin in B.C.
> sometime.
> Haven't been there yet. 
> Btw Paradise Meadows at Mount Rainier are naturally
> that way without many big trees, because of the high
> elevation. It's a nature park, and no clear cutting up
> there. Anyways, thanks again.
> Harald

Thanks for the clarification Harald

Dave

Re: Pug comments Part Deux

[Harald Rust]

Dave, 
Thanks for the comment. Enjoyed your pug critiques.
Maybe I'll have to visit Mount Robsin in B.C.
sometime.
Haven't been there yet. 
Btw Paradise Meadows at Mount Rainier are naturally
that way without many big trees, because of the high
elevation. It's a nature park, and no clear cutting up
there. Anyways, thanks again.
Harald
Dave wrote:
"Paridise Autumn"
by Harold Rust
If the peak were a bit taller,i would have thought,at
first thumbnail glance, it was Mount Robsin,in British

Columbia.
Nice sky and snow.The forground looks typical of a
clear cut,but does have that Autumn feel to it.
Nicely done.





__ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. 
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

Re: Pug comments Part1

[frank theriault]

On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 14:03:50 US/Eastern, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>   
> "Warehouse in Winter"
> by Frank Theriault
> 
> I like how the right angle lines work in this photo Frank. Good contrast 
> between the drift
> and the wall.
> Only thing is i'm torn between liking,then not liking, the wires. After a few 
> looks,they
> stopped bothering
> me and think they belong. Adds somemore depth to it is suppose.
> Now if it would only snow abit so we can do our winter scenes,eh Frank


Thanks, Dave!  I hear ya about those damned wires!!  I don't
particularly like them there, but given my vantage point, there really
wasn't much I could do about them.  I've learned to live with them,
but I think it would have been a stronger photo without them there.

As far as the snow, personally, I love it.  BUT, given what I've
chosen to do for a living, I'd prefer not to slog around in it.

I like those winters when it snows north of Number 7, rains south of
it .  I get to see lots of snow when I visit the kids in Kingston
(man, they got lots last year!).  It is fun shooting in the snow,
though, that's for sure.

Thanks again for your kind words.

cheers,
frank

-- 
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: Pug comments Part1

[Ann Sanfedele]

Thanks, Dave!
I still haven't looked at anything but thumbnails -
slow machining here

I liked that Adelheid put My shot next to Fred's - now that was
what we call ironic juxtaposition :)
Was kinda surprised there were not more people shots - especially
since mine so seldom are.

annsan


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

>
> "Jeannie & Oscar"
> by Ann Sanfedele
>
> Nice summer day with a loved one at an ice cream parlour. I like the red wall 
> and the drip
> effect. Having
> both looking the same way,seemingly at nothing,gives it that pause to refresh 
> feel.
>
> Thats it for now. I'll try and comment on somemore later. Hopefully them all 
> this month.
>
> Keep up the great work. Time for me to fix up my calendar so i dont miss 
> another
> submittion.
>
> Dave Brooks
>
>

Re: PUG comments part IV

[Harald Rust]

Frank, Thanks for the kind review.
A photo series of vegetables, good idea.
Btw the peppers are from British Columbia, Canada;
perhaps that's the reason they're so good looking.;-)
Harald 
Frank wrote: 
Triad in Color by Harald Rust - Edward Weston eat your
heart out .  Okay, it looks nothing like a
Weston, but every time I see a pepper...  I like this
one.  Nice colours, I like the "natural" look
of the ice as a backdrop (if fruit markets are
natural, I guess...). 
Nice placement/framing of the fruits (or are they
vegetables?) - that pattern seems to work very nicely.
 Again, the droplets of moisture are a nice touch. 
That would make one of a nice series, nicely framed
and on the wall of a restaurant.  Very nice!



__ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. 
www.yahoo.com 
 

Re: PUG comments part IV

[Daniel J. Matyola]

Thanks for the comment, Frank.
Part of the problem may be the adjustment I did -- or didn't do  -- in 
Photoshop.  I adjusted the lighting for my laptop, and it looks better 
to me there than when I view it on the PUG using my desktop.  I did try 
one with fill flash, but I was traveling light and only had the *ist D's 
built-in flash.  The result was quite washed out, and the bees had flown 
the coop, so the shot wasn't as good in my view as the one I submitted.  
It's always tough exposing a dark object on a bright sunny day in Maui, 
but that's a very small price to pay for being in Maui!

Dan
frank theriault wrote:
Protea and Bees by Dan Matyola - A real tough exposure situation. 
Were you doing it in B&W, the old "expose for the shadows and lengthen
developing time" (which I recently learned from Shel, but haven't used
yet) might have helped.  As is, the centre of the bloom, and more
importantly the bee, are a bit underexposed, while the top petals and
leaves are pretty bright - maybe even blown out a bit in the case of
those top petals.  Too bad, because it's a wonderful photo otherwise. 
Nice composition and cropping, lovely subject, and of course those
bees make it.  Other thing that might have helped would be fill-flash,
but it's too late for that now, isn't it?  I don't want to make too
big a deal about the exposure, as it was a very difficult one, and you
did well in the way it was dealt with.  Plus, the rest of the photo
makes up for it, IMHO.  Well done.  Interesting photo.
 

Re: PUG - comments from the PUGmeister

[Steve Desjardins]

As always, Adelheid, thanks to you and Jos for all your work.

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 8/7/2004 2:35:08 PM >>>
Hi folks,

I saw this discussion about PUG vs PAW.
I think Bernd put it very nicely, saying that PUG lasts as a gallery
where
you can enjoy the pics and the PAWs are short lived and are gone after
some
days. Both should be there.

On the technical side, the komkon server is back, so i put the gallery
back
where it belongs. 
But i keep a copy of the last two months on my own website. So if the
komkon
server goes down again you can go there and have at least the two last
months. That's the idea for the time being.

Jostein and I are working on the "new" PUG, but this needs some time,
espacially since we can't work fulltime on this project. 

As soon as we get results we'll let you know. 

Cheers
Adelheid

RE: PUG - comments from the PUGmeister

[Nick Clark]

Isn't it also the case that PUGs must be taken with Pentax gear, whereas PAWs can be 
anything?

Nick

-Original Message-
From: "Adelheid v. K."<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: 07/08/04 19:35:08
To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: PUG - comments from the PUGmeister

Hi folks,

I saw this discussion about PUG vs PAW.
I think Bernd put it very nicely, saying that PUG lasts as a gallery where
you can enjoy the pics and the PAWs are short lived and are gone after some
days. Both should be there.

On the technical side, the komkon server is back, so i put the gallery back
where it belongs. 
But i keep a copy of the last two months on my own website. So if the komkon
server goes down again you can go there and have at least the two last
months. That's the idea for the time being.

Jostein and I are working on the "new" PUG, but this needs some time,
espacially since we can't work fulltime on this project. 

As soon as we get results we'll let you know. 

Cheers
Adelheid

Re: PUG - comments from the PUGmeister

[Kenneth Waller]

Adelheid, (& Jostein) thanks for all your thankless efforts on behalf of the
PUG.

Kenneth Waller

- Original Message -
From: "Adelheid v. K." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: PUG - comments from the PUGmeister


> Hi folks,
>
> I saw this discussion about PUG vs PAW.
> I think Bernd put it very nicely, saying that PUG lasts as a gallery where
> you can enjoy the pics and the PAWs are short lived and are gone after
some
> days. Both should be there.
>
> On the technical side, the komkon server is back, so i put the gallery
back
> where it belongs.
> But i keep a copy of the last two months on my own website. So if the
komkon
> server goes down again you can go there and have at least the two last
> months. That's the idea for the time being.
>
> Jostein and I are working on the "new" PUG, but this needs some time,
> espacially since we can't work fulltime on this project.
>
> As soon as we get results we'll let you know.
>
> Cheers
> Adelheid

Re: PUG Comments for January 14

[Paul Stenquist]

Thanks for the nice words, Frank. I like this pic because I shot it with a lens that's 
worth about 50 cents: an early seventies vintage
200/3.5 Vivitar with a severely scratched front element. (Back in those days I shot a 
lot of drag racing. and I would wipe the rubber
and dirt off the lens with the old sock that I stored the lens in.)
frank theriault wrote:

>
>
> "GTP Beast" by Paul Stenquist:
>
> Well, Paul, I've already mentioned this shot in another post.  I like the
> liberal interpretation of the theme.  And, you know I like cars, especially
> racing cars.  This is another tremendous shot from this month's gallery.
> Panned perfectly, I especially like the way the front and back corners of
> the car are blurred, yet the middle is nice and sharp (you really locked in
> the car number!).  Nice tight framing.  I only now noticed the solid white
> line of the track boundary disects the frame, just off horizontal, about 1/3
> way down - stunning touch!  Again, great shot, Paul.  Thanks.
>
> _
> Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
> http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/bcomm&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca

Re: PUG Comments for January 14

[brooksdj]

 > Knarf penned:
> "Me and the Wind" by Dave Brooks:
> 
> I love this one, Dave!  It deserved the prize that it won, IMHO.  Lovely 
> patterns and proportions by the open gate, the fences, the shadows of those 
> - it just all comes together in a most pleasing way.  The horse off in the 
> distance, out to the side of the image really "snaps it all in" for me.  
> It's in ~just~ the right place, not too conspicuous, but there, if you know 
> what I mean.  And, your choice of b&w was perfect - it wouldn't have worked 
> in colour.  Terrific shot, this.  Did you develop it yourself, Dave?

Thanks for that Frank.
I had another photo that i was toying with sending but this one kept calling me 
back.
It was shot as part of 6 themed B&W catagories for Markham Fair,thus the B&W,but your
right,i dont 
think it would work in colour.(btw it was for the shadow's catagory)I think the 
horse,as
you say,in the 
corner adds a bit of depth and breaks up the lines just enough,but does not take away 
from
the idea of 
the picture.
Yes i developed the roll in the class last year,and did the print there.One of a few 
that
were 
square,exposed correctly and NO dust.LOL

Dave

Re: PUG Comments for January 14

[Ann Sanfedele]

frank theriault wrote:
 > 
> "Stripes" by Ann Sanfedele:
> 
> The unusual angle of the zebras is what makes it.  I'm so used to seeing
> them from the side, seeing them from the front with those stripes "curving"
> around their bodies like that is quite surreal.  And, what serendipity,
> getting all three of them looking right at you!  Again, this could ~only~ be
> a b&w shot - Tri-X is the perfect (only?) choice for this one.  As an aside,
> "We're No Angels" (the Humphrey Bogart, Peter Ustinov, Aldo Ray version) is
> one of my favourite movies of all time!  Took me a while to get the joke
> (prison uniforms with stripes - striped zebras ) - sometimes I'm slow
> on the uptake.  Oh yeah, before I forget, I love the bokeh on this one!
> It's mesmerizing.  Thanks for this one, Ann!
> 
>
You're Welcome, Frank :)  Thanks for getting the
joke!
(The specific joke, as opposed to the general
prison suit one :))
 Glad you like shot...

I did see the later DeNiro film, thinking it
really was going to be a remake
of the other one, disappointed it wasn't.  

BTW, I deleted everything in PUG earlier today
after looking at your
lady cyclist, before I had a chance to hit reply
and 
say I didn't think you needed to crop at all... I
liked that one 
quite a lot just as it is.

annsan

Re: PUG Comments

[Steve Desjardins]

Jeez, what a great shot.  Next time get the dragonfly to hold his wings
up so they'll be in the DOF range ;-)

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/26/03 01:27PM >>>
At 12:43 AM 9/23/2003 -0600, William Robb wrote:

>" Whistful Dragon " by  Mark Cassino
>
>Pretty much every picture I see of Mark's annoys me, and this one is
no
>different.
>I can never get close enough to a live bug to get a picture of it, and
this
>guy churns them out seemingly routinely, and always with nice
composition.
>Having said this, the out of focus flower mid left is distracting, as
is the
>just not quite enough DOF.

Thanks, Bill.

Here's another crack at it:

http://www.markcassino.com/temp/df_redo.jpg 

It was the first shot in the series and the only one where the
dragonfly's 
wings are up and out.  To improve the background I cleared out all of
the 
background distractions (a couple of buds and flowers), move the flower

from the left to the right and added a small flower to the lower left
to 
try to balance the composition a bit more (it's a little top heavy) and

also to create a little tension along the diagonal (as the eye tries to

link the purple spots.)

The tip of the tail still slips out of the DOF, and I'm tempted to take
out 
the leaf to the right of the main flower but an obvious imperfection
like 
that tends to derail speculation that the shot has somehow been 
manipulated.  This shot hopefully presents the appearance of the
dragonfly 
looking up and away at the distant flower in the upper right - of
course, 
with compound eyes that cover almost a full spherical field of vision,
they 
really don;t have to move their heads to look at things...

Hopefully it's an improvement!

- MCC
-
Mark Cassino
Kalamazoo, MI
-

Photography:

http://www.markcassino.com 

Re: PUG Comments

[Mark Cassino]

At 12:43 AM 9/23/2003 -0600, William Robb wrote:

" Whistful Dragon " by  Mark Cassino

Pretty much every picture I see of Mark's annoys me, and this one is no
different.
I can never get close enough to a live bug to get a picture of it, and this
guy churns them out seemingly routinely, and always with nice composition.
Having said this, the out of focus flower mid left is distracting, as is the
just not quite enough DOF.
Thanks, Bill.

Here's another crack at it:

http://www.markcassino.com/temp/df_redo.jpg

It was the first shot in the series and the only one where the dragonfly's 
wings are up and out.  To improve the background I cleared out all of the 
background distractions (a couple of buds and flowers), move the flower 
from the left to the right and added a small flower to the lower left to 
try to balance the composition a bit more (it's a little top heavy) and 
also to create a little tension along the diagonal (as the eye tries to 
link the purple spots.)

The tip of the tail still slips out of the DOF, and I'm tempted to take out 
the leaf to the right of the main flower but an obvious imperfection like 
that tends to derail speculation that the shot has somehow been 
manipulated.  This shot hopefully presents the appearance of the dragonfly 
looking up and away at the distant flower in the upper right - of course, 
with compound eyes that cover almost a full spherical field of vision, they 
really don;t have to move their heads to look at things...

Hopefully it's an improvement!

- MCC
-
Mark Cassino
Kalamazoo, MI
-
Photography:

http://www.markcassino.com

Re: PUG Comments

[Chris Brogden]

Well, they're really guidelines more than anything, but I don't mind
writing something a little clearer for a webpage.  I don't have one of my
own, but if someone wants to host it, let me know.

chris



On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Chris,
>
> Could you put your critique suggestions up on a web page? Maybe with John
> Francis' additions? I've printed them out. And I'll keep them, but who knows how
> long that will last? I mislay papers all the time. And knowing how I handle my
> email (no real handling), eventually the originals will be lost in my file
> cabinet (archived email).
>
> I gather you don't want to be "official" and sort an authority or
> critiquemaster (critimeister :-)) or anything, but I don't think throwing them on a 
> web
> page would necessarily lay that mantle on you. Anyway, on a web page they could
> be available for reference for scattered people like myself and others who
> may come along later, like newbies.
>
> Just an idea. Take with salt.
>
> Marnie aka Doe
>

Re: PUG comments-was:Re: Evaluating Photographs

[John Francis]

Quite easily doable, technically.  In fact it would be fairly straightforward
to automate the procedure, and use dynamic HTML scripting to add sliders and
a button you could click on to submit your ratings to a PUG database.

But it still might not be all that good an idea.  If you rate my image 6/10
is that because you don't like this sort of image, or because you *do* like
them but feel I didn't execute well on the concept?  The number doesn't tell
me, but a freeform comment does.  Even more important, though, would be to
hear what you might have done differently.  I may or may not agree with you.
But if I don't hear your ideas I'll never get to improve my photography.

I'm not "qualified" to comment on the photographs, either.  And you'll rarely
see me comment on some types of photographs (such as street candids) because
I don't have any alternative suggestions to make.  But there are usually more
than enough images I *could* comment on, if only I could overcome my inertia.



> I love looking at all of the PUG monthly photos, but I do not feel qualified
> to comment on the photos insofar as offering praise, criticism, or
> suggestions for improvement.  What I think would work, if it would be
> possible, is if there were some sort of a rating system (number 1-5, 5 being
> the best) for the technical components such as composition that one could
> rate each photo as they viewed it.  Perhaps there could be 2 or 3 different
> technical things, and then there could be a place for people to check if the
> photo is one of their top 3 or 5 favorite photos.  This would not take long
> and could be done while viewing the photos.  Probably that would be hard to
> set up.  The scoring would be something that just PUG members could access,
> and the end of each month, the ratings for the top 10 or so could be posted.
> Just a thought . . . probably not doable.
> 
> Kathy L.
> 
> 

Re: PUG comments-was:Re: Evaluating Photographs

[Dag T]

Why not, it is important that only follow the advices you agree with.  
Otherwise, you become the slave of everybody else, and loose any 
personal expression.

DagT

På tirsdag, 23. september 2003, kl. 17:34, skrev Herb Chong:

mostly by leaving and ignoring anything others say.

Herb
- Original Message -
From: "Chris Brogden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 9:45 AM
Subject: Re: PUG comments-was:Re: Evaluating Photographs

The opposite could happen, though.  While some people will gradually
change their style to accomodate the criticisms of others (and 
probably
never succeed), others will come to appreciate the existence and 
merits of
their own style.

Re: PUG Comments

[Eactivist]

Chris, 

Could you put your critique suggestions up on a web page? Maybe with John 
Francis' additions? I've printed them out. And I'll keep them, but who knows how 
long that will last? I mislay papers all the time. And knowing how I handle my 
email (no real handling), eventually the originals will be lost in my file 
cabinet (archived email).

I gather you don't want to be "official" and sort an authority or 
critiquemaster (critimeister :-)) or anything, but I don't think throwing them on a 
web 
page would necessarily lay that mantle on you. Anyway, on a web page they could 
be available for reference for scattered people like myself and others who 
may come along later, like newbies.

Just an idea. Take with salt.

Marnie aka Doe 

Re: PUG Comments

[Boris Liberman]

Now I am talking to myself. I had a little driving round trip today 
that was rather pleasant. So I had some time in solitude to think 
through whatever I have to think through.

On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 11:26:23 +0400
 "Boris Liberman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
2. The picture that does not really work for me: " Gums "
by  John Coyle. First, looking around the frame I noticed that trees 
on the right are not exactly sharp. There is indeed some symmtery 
between the trees, but it does not work for me. Light, trees, 
shadows, all the elements do not combine, do not click together. 
Personally I think I would have kept driving if I were driving by.

Naturally, I mean neither offence nor defence. I just chose two 
photos and wrote what I thought about them.
I kept asking myself how could I improve this shot. Let's say that I 
was given an assignment to go to that location on that time and take a 
shot with the lens that John used. Actually, I think I wouldn't know 
what to do. I really wouldn't know how to make that shot.

So, I would drive by just because I would have no idea how to shoot 
the scene.

Having said that, I suppose my critique gets lower rating .

Thanks.

Boris

Re: PUG comments-was:Re: Evaluating Photographs

[Herb Chong]

like camera clubs, continued critique leads pretty soon to polarization and
conformity. the ones that don't conform will stop going/participating. an
experienced and successful photo director learns to avoid this, but inviting
random critique invites conformity. i was in a photo contest once where at
the last moment, the participants in the contest were asked to be the
judges. it was done by blind judging where no-one else could see the
rankings of anyone else, but the results were predictable.

Herb
- Original Message - 
From: "frank theriault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 7:20 AM
Subject: Re: PUG comments-was:Re: Evaluating Photographs


> I don't know how comfortable I feel with that.  I've never liked "scoring"
art.
> It's hard, for instance, to score composition, since no one seems to be
able to
> agree if there are even rules of composition, and even those who say there
are
> such rules admit that sometimes they have to be or can be broken.

Re: PUG comments-was:Re: Evaluating Photographs

[frank theriault]

I don't know how comfortable I feel with that.  I've never liked "scoring" art.
It's hard, for instance, to score composition, since no one seems to be able to
agree if there are even rules of composition, and even those who say there are
such rules admit that sometimes they have to be or can be broken.

I like subjective comments.  If anyone making such comments wants to take it
upon themselves to use their own scoring system, then so be it.  But, if we have
scoring for everyone, then we have "winners and losers", and I don't think PUG's
about that.

If someone wants their photo rated that way, they can submit it to photo.net.

My 2 cents, anyway...

cheers,
frank

Kathleen wrote:

> I love looking at all of the PUG monthly photos, but I do not feel qualified
> to comment on the photos insofar as offering praise, criticism, or
> suggestions for improvement.  What I think would work, if it would be
> possible, is if there were some sort of a rating system (number 1-5, 5 being
> the best) for the technical components such as composition that one could
> rate each photo as they viewed it.  Perhaps there could be 2 or 3 different
> technical things, and then there could be a place for people to check if the
> photo is one of their top 3 or 5 favorite photos.  This would not take long
> and could be done while viewing the photos.  Probably that would be hard to
> set up.  The scoring would be something that just PUG members could access,
> and the end of each month, the ratings for the top 10 or so could be posted.
> Just a thought . . . probably not doable.
>
> Kathy L.

--
"Hell is others"
-Jean Paul Sartre

Re: PUG comments-was:Re: Evaluating Photographs

[Kathleen]

I love looking at all of the PUG monthly photos, but I do not feel qualified
to comment on the photos insofar as offering praise, criticism, or
suggestions for improvement.  What I think would work, if it would be
possible, is if there were some sort of a rating system (number 1-5, 5 being
the best) for the technical components such as composition that one could
rate each photo as they viewed it.  Perhaps there could be 2 or 3 different
technical things, and then there could be a place for people to check if the
photo is one of their top 3 or 5 favorite photos.  This would not take long
and could be done while viewing the photos.  Probably that would be hard to
set up.  The scoring would be something that just PUG members could access,
and the end of each month, the ratings for the top 10 or so could be posted.
Just a thought . . . probably not doable.

Kathy L.

Re: PUG Comments

[Boris Liberman]

Hi!

I also support the idea of critique. And here is my share for the 
latest PUG:

1. The picture that I particularly liked: " No Title "
by  Arthur Hsu. First of all, for me at least, the all white 
background makes it stand out of the crowd. The play of colors and 
light on the vase is fascinating, although on my monitor it is a 
little too bright together with the backgound. Finally, the piece of 
leave on the top adds to the overall sense of fragility that this 
photograph makes me feel.

2. The picture that does not really work for me: " Gums "
by  John Coyle. First, looking around the frame I noticed that trees 
on the right are not exactly sharp. There is indeed some symmtery 
between the trees, but it does not work for me. Light, trees, shadows, 
all the elements do not combine, do not click together. Personally I 
think I would have kept driving if I were driving by.

Naturally, I mean neither offence nor defence. I just chose two photos 
and wrote what I thought about them.

Thanks.

Boris

Re: PUG comments

[Dag T]

OK, me too.

Actually, if you take the time, commenting photos is interesting.  You 
have to put words to you feelings about a picture, and thus you get 
more aware of you own thoughts and preferences.  In the long run, your 
own pictures get better.

DagT

På tirsdag, 23. september 2003, kl. 06:36, skrev Simon King:

Hi Chris,
Good idea, count me in too.
Simon
-Original Message-
From: Chris Brogden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, 23 September 2003 9:29 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PUG comments


There's been at least a couple of people who've mentioned the PUG 
comments
since I got back on the list.  I've been thinking about them, too, but 
it
seems to me that there were some problems with the old format.  People
often didn't really have feelings either way about the photos they were
assigned, or they didn't have time to post critiques in the first few 
days
of the month, or they felt that it was too much like homework and 
didn't
grant them enough individual freedom.  So, taking those criticisms into
account, why don't we start up the comments again, but with some 
changes:

First, participation is completely voluntary on a month by month basis.
You don't have to comment every month, though it's probably good to 
push
yourself to do so.  I'm not going to be keeping track of names, or
assigning specific photos to specific people, or anything like that.  
This
means less work on my part and more freedom on everyone else's.  If you
want to comment, do so.  If not, don't.  Your choice.  There are no
deadlines, so you don't have to have something written 30 minutes after
the photos go up.  If it takes you most of the month to talk about all 
the
photos you want to mention, no problem.

Each month you participate, try to comment on at least 5 photos.  If 
you
use the following guide, we'll establish some sort of consistency in 
the
comments:

1. The most interesting lighting, either natural or artificial.  Which
photo do you think makes the best use of light/shadow?  How so?  
What's so
good about it?

2. The most interesting composition.  Pretty self-explanatory.  Pick a
photo where the composition goes a long way toward making the shot and
talk about it.  What's so great about the composition?  Why does it 
work?

3. One that doesn't quite work for you.  Pick a photo which could have
been so much better if... and then explain why and how you think it 
could
be improved.  Constructive criticism, please.

4. Another 1, 2 or more photos that you like.  Pick a couple more 
photos
that you like, and try to figure out why you like them.  Talk about 
what
makes them good in your eyes, what appeals to you, why you like them, 
etc.

If you don't like some or all of these approaches, great!  Come up with
some yourself.  The important thing is to try and talk about some 
photos
each month, however you want to approach it.

I see this as being a self-organizing thing, so I'll be just another
commentator.  If you want to try and commit to talking about some PUG
photos each month, then reply to this email and let the PDML know.
There's still no pressure to follow through each month, but at least
you're saying publically that you want to give it a try, which will
hopefully be enough motivation to do it.
You don't have to submit to the PUG to do this, or even consider 
yourself
a great photographer or art critic.  You're just giving your 
opinions...
no big deal.

The PUG is a pretty cool gallery, and it's a shame we don't talk more
about our photographs, given the amount of time we spend discussing
equipment.  Let's get a bunch of people who actually want to try and 
talk
about photographs once a month, and we'll see if it makes a difference.
Put "PUG" in the subject line if you remember, so people who only care
about equipment can filter the posts if they want, and so it's easier 
to
find in the archives.  Something like "PUG: October 2003 comments" 
would
be good.

Should be interesting to see if this goes anywhere.  I'll do my 5 
comments
when the October gallery is up.

chris



On Mon, 22 Sep 2003, frank theriault wrote:

I too, miss PUG comments, but I'm in the same boat as you.  My shots
rarely get mentioned, except for by those who take the time to comment
on ~every~ shot (and then the comments have always been good), and 
back
when Brogden organized the little critique circle a year or more ago -
again, never a bad comment that I can remember.

Re: PUG comments

[frank theriault]

I like your ideas, Chris!

October will be bad, because I'm going to be moving October 1 or shortly
before.  Unfortunately, I don't know exactly where yet (not that I may end up
on the street, I have a fallback if my preference doesn't work out), but
either way, I'll be in a house with a computer.  I just may not be able to do
anything until November PUG.

But, the informal thing you mention is a good thing.  Since your little thing
fell apart a while ago (I guess that's when you more or less went off list to
complete your studies), no one picked up the ball, but I got the feeling
things more or less fell apart just before you left anyway.  Like several
others, I've critiqued my favourites from time to time, and one or two months
I think I did the whole bunch.  But, I've done nothing for many months now,
largely because my computer moniter is all but history, only working in b&w,
and being ~very~ fuzzy, so it's really hard to properly criticize a photo that
one can hardly see!

I say, let's give your idea a shot.  I'm in!

cheers,
frank

Chris Brogden wrote:

> There's been at least a couple of people who've mentioned the PUG comments
> since I got back on the list.  I've been thinking about them, too, but it
> seems to me that there were some problems with the old format.  People
> often didn't really have feelings either way about the photos they were
> assigned, or they didn't have time to post critiques in the first few days
> of the month, or they felt that it was too much like homework and didn't
> grant them enough individual freedom.  So, taking those criticisms into
> account, why don't we start up the comments again, but with some changes:
>
> First, participation is completely voluntary on a month by month basis.
> You don't have to comment every month, though it's probably good to push
> yourself to do so.  I'm not going to be keeping track of names, or
> assigning specific photos to specific people, or anything like that.  This
> means less work on my part and more freedom on everyone else's.  If you
> want to comment, do so.  If not, don't.  Your choice.  There are no
> deadlines, so you don't have to have something written 30 minutes after
> the photos go up.  If it takes you most of the month to talk about all the
> photos you want to mention, no problem.
>
> Each month you participate, try to comment on at least 5 photos.  If you
> use the following guide, we'll establish some sort of consistency in the
> comments:
>
> 1. The most interesting lighting, either natural or artificial.  Which
> photo do you think makes the best use of light/shadow?  How so?  What's so
> good about it?
>
> 2. The most interesting composition.  Pretty self-explanatory.  Pick a
> photo where the composition goes a long way toward making the shot and
> talk about it.  What's so great about the composition?  Why does it work?
>
> 3. One that doesn't quite work for you.  Pick a photo which could have
> been so much better if... and then explain why and how you think it could
> be improved.  Constructive criticism, please.
>
> 4. Another 1, 2 or more photos that you like.  Pick a couple more photos
> that you like, and try to figure out why you like them.  Talk about what
> makes them good in your eyes, what appeals to you, why you like them, etc.
>
> If you don't like some or all of these approaches, great!  Come up with
> some yourself.  The important thing is to try and talk about some photos
> each month, however you want to approach it.
>
> I see this as being a self-organizing thing, so I'll be just another
> commentator.  If you want to try and commit to talking about some PUG
> photos each month, then reply to this email and let the PDML know.
> There's still no pressure to follow through each month, but at least
> you're saying publically that you want to give it a try, which will
> hopefully be enough motivation to do it.
>
> You don't have to submit to the PUG to do this, or even consider yourself
> a great photographer or art critic.  You're just giving your opinions...
> no big deal.
>
> The PUG is a pretty cool gallery, and it's a shame we don't talk more
> about our photographs, given the amount of time we spend discussing
> equipment.  Let's get a bunch of people who actually want to try and talk
> about photographs once a month, and we'll see if it makes a difference.
> Put "PUG" in the subject line if you remember, so people who only care
> about equipment can filter the posts if they want, and so it's easier to
> find in the archives.  Something like "PUG: October 2003 comments" would
> be good.
>
> Should be interesting to see if this goes anywhere.  I'll do my 5 comments
> when the October gallery is up.
>
> chris
>
> On Mon, 22 Sep 2003, frank theriault wrote:
>
> > I too, miss PUG comments, but I'm in the same boat as you.  My shots
> > rarely get mentioned, except for by those who take the time to comment
> > on ~every~ shot (and then the comments have always been good), and back
> > when Brog

Re: PUG comments

[John Francis]

First of all let me say that I think it's a great idea to get more comments,
although my more cynical side points out that this isn't the first time this
topic has been raised.
 
> Each month you participate, try to comment on at least 5 photos.

That semmed to be about the right number in the past.  More than 5-8 and it
can become quite an effort someties to find enough images to comment on;
in general people won't make comments one way or another for images that
are in a completely different style from their own images.

>  If you use the following guide, we'll establish some sort of consistencyd
>in the comments:
> 
> 1. The most interesting lighting.
> 2. The most interesting composition.
> 3. One that doesn't quite work for you.
> 4. Another 1, 2 or more photos that you like.

If we're going to single out lighting and composition, we need something
equivalent for the "photograph as record" school; something along the
lines of "most thought provoking" or "best capture of the moment".  And,
of course, there's always "best technique" for those unusual images.

(think of the wedding photograph discussed recently; the lighting was
definitely not of the best, and the composition wasn't exceptional.
But the choice of technique made this a wonderful record of the event)

I'm not sure it's possible to apply one set of guidelines to a whole
gallery of images - different photographers have very different styles
(and often very different intents :-)

Re: PUG comments

[Chris Brogden]

There's been at least a couple of people who've mentioned the PUG comments
since I got back on the list.  I've been thinking about them, too, but it
seems to me that there were some problems with the old format.  People
often didn't really have feelings either way about the photos they were
assigned, or they didn't have time to post critiques in the first few days
of the month, or they felt that it was too much like homework and didn't
grant them enough individual freedom.  So, taking those criticisms into
account, why don't we start up the comments again, but with some changes:

First, participation is completely voluntary on a month by month basis.
You don't have to comment every month, though it's probably good to push
yourself to do so.  I'm not going to be keeping track of names, or
assigning specific photos to specific people, or anything like that.  This
means less work on my part and more freedom on everyone else's.  If you
want to comment, do so.  If not, don't.  Your choice.  There are no
deadlines, so you don't have to have something written 30 minutes after
the photos go up.  If it takes you most of the month to talk about all the
photos you want to mention, no problem.

Each month you participate, try to comment on at least 5 photos.  If you
use the following guide, we'll establish some sort of consistency in the
comments:

1. The most interesting lighting, either natural or artificial.  Which
photo do you think makes the best use of light/shadow?  How so?  What's so
good about it?

2. The most interesting composition.  Pretty self-explanatory.  Pick a
photo where the composition goes a long way toward making the shot and
talk about it.  What's so great about the composition?  Why does it work?

3. One that doesn't quite work for you.  Pick a photo which could have
been so much better if... and then explain why and how you think it could
be improved.  Constructive criticism, please.

4. Another 1, 2 or more photos that you like.  Pick a couple more photos
that you like, and try to figure out why you like them.  Talk about what
makes them good in your eyes, what appeals to you, why you like them, etc.

If you don't like some or all of these approaches, great!  Come up with
some yourself.  The important thing is to try and talk about some photos
each month, however you want to approach it.

I see this as being a self-organizing thing, so I'll be just another
commentator.  If you want to try and commit to talking about some PUG
photos each month, then reply to this email and let the PDML know.
There's still no pressure to follow through each month, but at least
you're saying publically that you want to give it a try, which will
hopefully be enough motivation to do it.

You don't have to submit to the PUG to do this, or even consider yourself
a great photographer or art critic.  You're just giving your opinions...
no big deal.

The PUG is a pretty cool gallery, and it's a shame we don't talk more
about our photographs, given the amount of time we spend discussing
equipment.  Let's get a bunch of people who actually want to try and talk
about photographs once a month, and we'll see if it makes a difference.
Put "PUG" in the subject line if you remember, so people who only care
about equipment can filter the posts if they want, and so it's easier to
find in the archives.  Something like "PUG: October 2003 comments" would
be good.

Should be interesting to see if this goes anywhere.  I'll do my 5 comments
when the October gallery is up.

chris



On Mon, 22 Sep 2003, frank theriault wrote:

> I too, miss PUG comments, but I'm in the same boat as you.  My shots
> rarely get mentioned, except for by those who take the time to comment
> on ~every~ shot (and then the comments have always been good), and back
> when Brogden organized the little critique circle a year or more ago -
> again, never a bad comment that I can remember.

Re: PUG comments-was:Re: Evaluating Photographs

[frank theriault]

Well, yeah,

That's the problem with doing it yourself, isn't it?

If you do only a few (your favourites), are you insulting those who you don't comment
upon?

If you comment on all of them, then you have to be honest with all of them, and let's
face it, the odd clunker does get in there, doesn't it?  Do you (as I tend to do)
damn with faint praise, or find ~something~ nice to say, and leave out the bad
stuff?  Either way, it ain't really honest, is it?

That of course is part of the problem with "assignments".  You end up doing ones that
you may not like.  OTOH, maybe that's a good thing.  It forces us to not just comment
on the ones we like, but the ones we may not like.  That, in and of itself, is a good
exercise.  Let's face it, "real critics" don't only go to plays or movies that they
like, do they?

And, if one's thin-skinned, all they have to do is put "no comments, please" on the
photo.  Or in the alternative, we'd only critique those that say "comments welcome".

cheers,
frank

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Why no comments:  people are busy, people are unassertive, people are afraid
> to criticize, people only have time to look, writing comments involves more
> time.
>
> Any time I've been in a "group" where it is essentially all "volunteer" it
> has had this problem. The only ones around to praise are the other volunteers.
> They are busy volunteering, ie. and don't have time to praise other volunteers
> and/or they are awaiting praise of their own efforts. Substitute photographers
> for volunteers in this context.
>
> Maybe your critique board is a good idea, someone do the first eight, someone
> do the next eight, and so forth. So everyone gets a comment.
>
> I have to admit, in complete honesty, every time I've made comments, I've
> been very, very hesitant. I wonder why are others not saying anything? Or why are
> only one or two making comments? Am I missing something? Do I just bravely
> jump in? Do I say anything negative? Do I comment on only those I like whole
> heartedly? Will I hurt someone's feelings? Do I have anything worth while to say
> -- to offer someone wanting feedback? Won't anything I say be trite or obvious?
>
> It is a bit scary. So I think fear is a lot of it too.
>
> Marnie aka Doe

--
"Hell is others"
-Jean Paul Sartre

Re: PUG comments-was:Re: Evaluating Photographs

[Eactivist]

>OTOH, I could be completely wrong here!  Wouldn't be the first time.  

>cheers,
frank

Why no comments:  people are busy, people are unassertive, people are afraid 
to criticize, people only have time to look, writing comments involves more 
time.

Any time I've been in a "group" where it is essentially all "volunteer" it 
has had this problem. The only ones around to praise are the other volunteers. 
They are busy volunteering, ie. and don't have time to praise other volunteers 
and/or they are awaiting praise of their own efforts. Substitute photographers 
for volunteers in this context.

Maybe your critique board is a good idea, someone do the first eight, someone 
do the next eight, and so forth. So everyone gets a comment.

I have to admit, in complete honesty, every time I've made comments, I've 
been very, very hesitant. I wonder why are others not saying anything? Or why are 
only one or two making comments? Am I missing something? Do I just bravely 
jump in? Do I say anything negative? Do I comment on only those I like whole 
heartedly? Will I hurt someone's feelings? Do I have anything worth while to say 
-- to offer someone wanting feedback? Won't anything I say be trite or obvious?

It is a bit scary. So I think fear is a lot of it too.

Marnie aka Doe 

Re: PUG Comments

[frank theriault]

Thanks, Cesar,

Confirms what I (and most who know me) have known for a while:  I am going
nuts!  

cheers,
frank

Cesar Matamoros II wrote:

> -- -Original Message-
> -- From: Cesar Matamoros II [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -- Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 8:29 PM
> --
> -- Frank,
> --
> --
> -- P.S.  As to the focal length, I was toying around with the
> -- 31, but I pretty much decided to take the 1.2 into the
> -- recesses of the store and use it wide open.  Yet, you have
> -- me wondering if it was the 31 I took back there.  I will
> -- have to wait until I can get back there with those lenses.
> --
>
> Frank,
>
> I stopped by my photo store to get some prints made up from a friend's
> bridal shoot.
>
> I went to the lab and the shot was taken with the 50/1.2
>
> Cesar
> Panama City, Florida

--
"The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert
Oppenheimer

Re: PUG Comments Part Deux

[Daniel J. Matyola]

Thanks for your kind comments, Frank.  I tried shots with the cars moving,
but was not happy with the result.  In the one I chose, the cars are
stopped, but it still gives the feeling of being stuck in traffic, which is
what I was after.

Dan Matyola

frank theriault wrote:

> "Rainy Road" by Dan Montoya:
> I'm almost shivering, imagining a cold rainy early spring night!  An
> example of an image where sharpness (or more precisely lack thereof)
> adds to the general feel of traffic snaking slowly on dark, wet roads.
> Terrific shot, Dan.

Re: PUG Comments Part Trois

[Peter Alling]

At 09:29 PM 6/1/03 -0400, Frank wrote:

"Alligator" by Peter J. Alling:

My only major criticism is that it would be nice were it sharper, but
you already know that .  The minor one, is that I wish the 'gator
were closer, but hell, if a 300mm won't get you any closer than that, I
wouldn't want to walk or move any closer .  Obviously, without that
sharpness, you can't really crop effectively.  Too bad you didn't have a
1000mm 
Actually the 'gator moved quite a bit closer.  Unfortunately I don't think
I could have held a 28mm acceptably steady that day.  1000mm har.
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  --Groucho Marx

Re: PUG Comments Part Deux

[Steve Larson]

Hi Frank,
 Thanks for the kind words and commenting on the whole lot!
Steve Larson
Redondo Beach, California


frank theriault wrote:
> "Calla", by Steve Larson:
> 
> Wasn't there some discussion here a while back about this lens?  Wow!
> This reminds me of those famous "pepper" photos by Weston.  It actually
> looks erotic!  Beautifully captured, Steve.

Re: PUG Comments Part Trois

[William Robb]

Sheesh, it's just a snapshot.
Thank Frank, I like to think it sort of makes up for last month.
Bill

- Original Message -
From: frank theriault
Subject: PUG Comments Part Trois


> "Dog School" by William Robb:
>
> Now, this one I like!  I think it's a wonderful photo!  And, quite
> frankly, my lack of formal art training is likely the reason I can't
> articulate why I like it so.  There's just something deceivingly
simple
> but satisfying about the composition here.  The positioning of the
dogs
> on the floor, the person walking her dog (paying rapt attention to the
> animal), the other slumped in the corner, the contrast of floor and
> wall, the window and mirror.  It's just all so, I don't know, candid,
> and pure.  I think it's stunning.  And, with a 50mm prime!  
> Thanks, Bill.

Re: PUG Comments Part Trois

[Caveman]

frank theriault wrote:
Quelles sorts des reves?  Seche ou moite?
Tu peux les alterner ;-) Et n'oublie pas les jeux de lumiere, les reves 
en noir et blanc sont les plus forts ;-)

le caveman

Re: PUG Comments Part Trois

[frank theriault]

Quelles sorts des reves?  Seche ou moite?

Je crois que tous mes reves avec la rousse sont jolies (comme elle)!


-le knarf

Caveman wrote:

>
> Je te souhaite des jolis reves avec la belle rousse ;-)
>
> Bonne nuit,
> caveman

--
"The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert
Oppenheimer

RE: PUG Comments (THX)

[Brendan]

Stuart, Frank job well done for both of you!

__ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca

Re: PUG comments

[Harald Rust]

Maciej,
Thanks for your Pug comments, and mentioning my entry.
I always enjoy reading listmember Pug comments. 
This month I've been out trying to get some snowy
winter shots, but it's mostly been raining around
these parts.
Harald Rust
Washington state

Maciej wrote:
"Pacific Twilight" by  Harald Rust
Simply great. The colors of sunset, the shapes of
rocks with the sun shining between them, the oval
shape of this little gulf in the foreground which
looks very good contrasted with the pointy rock in the
middle of it. And the reflections in the water that 
give that final touch.


__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

Re: PUG comments (august)

[Cotty]

>Tree, Lechlade 2002 by Cotty
>
>Again, asserting and denying symetry, now because of the change in 
>color in the reflection.

Thanks!

Cotty

___
Personal email traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MacAds traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Check out the UK Macintosh ads 
http://www.macads.co.uk
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.  To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .

Re: PUG comments (august)

[Bmacrae]

In a message dated 7/31/2002 7:30:33 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


> Green Boat by Brendan MacRae
> 
> Reminds me some unknown jazz tunes: Shade of Green; Kind of Green... 
> I like such unconventional framing.
> 

Thanks. Of course, I didn't notice the tie line in the slide until it was 
scanned and that kinda kills the shot for me. Still, I like the color of the 
boat in the reflection and as you say, the unusual composition, which is why 
I submitted it. Anyway, thanks for the mention!

-Brendan MacRae
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.  To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .

Re: PUG comments (august)

[Kathy L]

Thank you so much, Andre, for your kind comments on my Spring Reflections
photo.  Had the slide enlarged to a 11 x 14 (or thereabouts) print and
entered it in a local competition several weeks ago, and it took second
place.  It's really strange, isn't it, that some shots that you take lots of
time to compose just right, set the camera up properly, and use a tripod
don't turn out at all the way you pictured them in your mind . . . while the
ones that you just shoot because the scene looks kind of neat, but you're
just hurrying because you want to use up the last frame in the roll of film
(because you're exhausted and want to go home) turn out to be really awsome.
Kathy

- Original Message -
From: "andre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 10:29 PM
Subject: PUG comments (august)


> The ones that quickly grabbed my attention:
>
> http://pug.komkon.org/
>
>
> Spring Reflections by Kathleen Leickly
>
> It reminds me some impressionnist paintings by Monet.  About perfect
> as far as I'm concerned.  That last shot we just shoot without
> preparation, looking for a novelty...  There should be a PUG theme
> called "The last shot"...
>
>
>> -
> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.  To unsubscribe,
> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
> visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.  To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .

Re: PUG comments (august)

[frank theriault]

Hi, andre,

Well, the Soligor 2.5-3.5 35-70 zoom would only be rare insofar as I
doubt that many people got sucked into buying one 

Seriously, no they aren't rare at all.  I see them on eBay on a
semi-regular basis.  I'm guessing that they're around 20 or 25 years
old.  I paid $20US for mine, but it has a teeny scratch on the front
element, so it flares like crazy.  I only bought it as a stop-gap, until
I found something better, which I now have, and should receive today
(just got a delivery notice in the mail!).

Thanks for the comments!

regards,
frank

andre wrote:

> Jet Fuel Espresso by frank theriault
>
> It's true that coffee stimulates our output of reflections...
> Soligor 35-70 at 2.5...  Hmm... is it a rare lens?
>

--
"The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert
Oppenheimer
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.  To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .

Re: PUG comments (august)

[Paul Stenquist]

andre wrote:
> 
>
> 
> Reflections of His Past by Paul Stenquist
> 
> "This was shot through a restaurant window that reflected activity on
> the street."  But the man is sitted in the restaurant, right?  With a
> Liz of the past in his mind?
> 
> 
Who is to say? But thank you for mentioning my photo.
Paul
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.  To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .

Re: PUG Comments

[Pentxuser]

Thanks Bruce. The slide does have more detail. Quite a bit has been lost in 
the scanning process. As far as the lens goes, I think it was my 400mm f5.6, 
shot later in the day as the sun was going down. metered off a grey card. I'd 
like to say this guy was wild but he was actually part of a collection of 
birds of prey used to keep other birds away from airports..
Thanks Vic.

In a message dated 6/5/02 4:57:30 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

<>
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.  To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .

Re: PUG Comments

[wendy beard]

Bruce wrote:
>Loki - wendy beard
>I really like how happy and friendly Loki looks here.  Getting enough
>DOF to have the nose and eyes in focus is always tricky.  Very well
>done.  Also with both black and white, contrast is very nice - nothing
>blocked up or blown out.  Just makes you feel happy to look at this
>dog.

Thanks Bruce!

This was also my first scan out of the minolta dimage and I'm very pleased with the 
results.
I've managed to find myself a good model too - this dog's a natural in front of the 
camera!

Wendy
--
wendy beard
ottawa, canada
http://www.beard-redfern.com
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.  To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .

Re: PUG Comments

[Gianfranco Irlanda]

Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A Portrait of Laura as a Bride - Gianfranco Irlanda
> Another well executed image.  You are quite versatile and I
really
> enjoy your submissions.  I would like to see a slight
difference with
> the eyes.  As they are, they seem more distracting.  Not quite
looking
> anywhere.  Perhaps dreamily looking down or gazing out into
the
> distance.  Other than that, very nice.

Hi Bruce,

Thanks very much for the kind comment.
About the eyes: I partly agree with you (in fact I took
different shots with variations in the look and in the posture
of the head), but what I like in this shot is its statue-ish
(statuesque?) look. I had in  mind the profile you can find on
the rear of a coin.
I must confess I'm not very fond of the portraits where the
subject looks down dreamily, though... :)

Ciao,

Gianfranco
 


=
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.  To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .

RE: PUG Comments

[John Coyle]

Thanks, Bruce, for your comments.
In putting this together for the web, I did lower the contrast as much 
as possible, and adjusted levels a little.  However, it's typical of 
our indigenous people that they do have deep-set dark eyes, and it 
would have meant pushing the envelope a little too far to get them 
lighter.  In addition, it was one of our glorious Queensland days, with 
high strong sun!
It was an absolutely fascinating day, with bands of dancers doing 
traditional dances as well.  Shot a _lot_ of film!


John Coyle
Brisbane, Australia


On Thursday, June 06, 2002 7:53 AM, Bruce Dayton 
[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> Time to make some comments on photos:

> This is my story - John Coyle
> Nice shot!  The composition really makes this photo.  The subject
> sitting off center and the instrument drawing you up to his face are
> very nice.  His pointing hand adds a nice touch.  Good timing on the
> shot.  The contrast does seem a bit too high - losing some details,
> especially around the eyes.  I would have like to seen this done on a
> lower contrast film - Reala or one of the portrait films.
>

>
>  Bruce Dayton
> -
> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.  To unsubscribe,
> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
> visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.  To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .

Re: PUG Comments

[Jan van Wijk]

Hi Bruce,

Thanks a lot for your positive comment!

The 77mm really is ideal for this kind or work.


On Wed, 5 Jun 2002 14:52:38 -0700, Bruce Dayton wrote:

>
>Priorities, lunch or TV? - Jan van Wijk
>This is my favorite of the PUG this month.  Perhaps because of my own
>children, I can really relate to that look that is captured so well.
>Oblivious to anything going on around him, he is so intently watching
>that he is almost unaware of his lunch.  The direction of the
>available light plays very well here.  That 77 limited does a very
>nice job.  I could look at this one all day.

Well, I almost do :-)  

I printed it on a 8x10, and it's hanging on the wall now as grandma's favourite ...

Regards, JvW
--
Jan van Wijk;   http://www.dfsee.com/gallery
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.  To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .

Re: PUG Comments

[ERNReed]

In a message dated 6/5/2002 4:57:30 PM Central Daylight Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


> shy girl - E.R.N. Reed
> This is a great portrait!  The deep, dark eyes and the look she gives
> you really makes you stop and ponder.  The muted colors and soft
> lighting combine to accentuate her eyes.  The image seems a touch
> soft, but probably works better that way.  Nice job!
> 

Thank you! (Having forgotten to write "Comments appreciated" I was beginning 
to fear I wouldn't get any...)
As to the softness -- well, that lens is now deceased, so I'll blame it.

ERNR
My photographs hang on the virtual walls at http://members.aol.com/ernreed
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.  To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .

Re: PUG Comments

[Paul Stenquist]

Bruce Dayton wrote:
> 
>
> Another Side of Amy - Paul Stenquist
> I must say that Amy seems to be quite versatile - great sultry look!
> The lighting works well and the image is great.  She seems like she
> would be great to work with.
> 

Thanks for the kind words, Bruce. And, yes, Amy is great to work with.
We're going to do another shoot some time soon, with a "pretty and
feminine" theme. I think there's an advantage in working with someone
you know very well in that you can connect on a number of levels. It's
part of what distinguishes portraiture  from street shooting of
strangers. 
Paul
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.  To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .

Re: PUG Comments

[Cotty]

>The Hitchiker - Cotty
>The expression in the young girls face is priceless.  The mom is not
>bad either.  I like this in B&W as it is all about the faces.  Your a
>brave man to go swimming with your LX.  I know it's sealed...but

Hey Bruce,

One happy viewer - I've succeeded. Many thanks to you.

Best,

Cotty

___
Personal email traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MacAds traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Check out the UK Macintosh ads 
http://www.macads.co.uk
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.  To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .

Re: PUG Comments

[Paul Stenquist]

Bruce Dayton wrote:

> "Catching the Curl" - Paul Stenquist
> My, oh my!  Catching this kind of action with a 67!  Paul, you inspire
> me to try more things with mine.  I would love to hear more details on
> how you went about this image.  Great job!

Well, you certainly won't have to ask twice :-). Actually, action shots
with the 6x7 are no harder than they are with a 35 mm camera. And in
some ways, they're easier. To me, the heft of the camera is a steadying
force. Sort of like a built in gyroscope. I shot this off the pier at
Venice Beach, just panning with the surfers. I have another one from the
same day posted at http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=655900
   Thanks for the comments. It's always great to get a nod from the group.
Paul Stenquist
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.  To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .

Re: PUG Comments

[Joseph Tainter]

> "Statue in Berlin" - Joseph Tainter
> This is a great example of how important lighting is in making a great
> photograph.  As Joseph stated, he walked past without hardly noticing
> until the lighting was so powerful and dramatic.  The combination of
> strong lighting from the right and the direction of the statue really
> work well together.
> 
Thanks very much, Bruce. I particularly appreciate these remarks from a
photographer as accomplished as yourself.

Joe
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.  To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .

Re: PUG comments

[Jostein]

Thanks, Matjaz.
You're right. The reflections is what makes the image. I was quite
disappointed about the appearance of the frost on the straw. There was a lot
more of it than what appears on the image. That day I had forgotten my
tripod at home, so in pure panic I decided to try to push Velvia one stop to
get some extra speed working freehand. This is a nice trick when doing
forest interiors and such, but here I think the contrasts in the motif are
simply too large for the film to cope.

Jostein

- Original Message -
From: "Matjaz Osojnik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2002 11:26 PM
Subject: PUG comments


> Hi all,
>
> I finally found some time to go through PUG and below are those
photographs that
> caught my eye:
>
> "No Mail Today " by Amita Guha. I like this a lot, especially the contrast
of red details on
> mailbox against misty background. Might be wrong but it seems a bit
oversharpened to
> me.
>
> "Frost, 20th November 2001 " by Jostein Oksne, I like magical feeling of
coloured
> reflections around the plant.
>
> "The Grey " by David J Brooks, very nice cat portrait, I especially like
shallow DOF
> which creates lovely unsharpness of cat's body.
>
> "Stef On Bike, Northmoor, 2000 " by Cotty, I'm glad to see your son
support you on PUG
> assignment so much  ;-)
>
> "Anja in blue " by Edward Kreis, just love it. I like the expression on
Anja's face, I like
> shallow DOF with focus on her eyes, I like great colours as well.
>
> "Trapped !! " by Geoffrey Stevens, it enhances solitude feeling to me and
that is exactly
> why I like it.
>
> "The Event " by Gianfranco Irlanda, I love photographs like this one, full
of emotions of
> crowded people in front of the lens. I think I'd love to see man's face on
the left on the
> photo as well, to increase the depth of the photograph.
>
> "Macro-wide angle " by Dan Scott, great shot, love the idea and love the
composition.
>
> Also got attracted by "The Cat " by Karoly Kovacs, "Leaf " by Ed Keeney,
peaceful
> "Green Zen " by Flavio Minelli, family feeling of "G.G. and Mari,
Thanksgiving 2001 " by
> Mike Johnston, "White Nights " by Alexey Tikhonov.
>
> Matjaz
> -
> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.  To unsubscribe,
> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
> visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.  To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .

RE: PUG comments

[Doug Franklin]

Hi Amita,

On Mon, 4 Feb 2002 09:26:20 -0500, Amita Guha wrote:

> Thank you, Matjaz! I know what you mean about the mailbox. I worked on
> sharpening the mailbox for a long time, and I never did get it just
> right.

If you're using Photoshop 6, try duplicating the background layer, then
using the magic wand tool to select the stuff you want sharpened in the
new layer.  Then apply USM and flatten the layers.

TTYL, DougF

TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.  To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .