pata

<p>Two of the best photographs I've taken were with a Pentax point and shoot. I saw immediately that the shots should be in color and I had black and white in my NikonF4. I grabbed the Pentax and used it. I wore that Pentax out and I always had color film in it. I continued to use the F4 for my "work" and I wore it out also. I'd love to have another Pentax like the one I had in the 90s. I found another Nikon so that problem is taken care of. </p>

<p>In 1986 I took an Ansel Adams workshop and David Bayles, Eugene, Oregon, was one of the instructors. David took 'selfies' with everyone there. This was 1986. Selfies aren't new. </p>

<p>I don't compare myself to others consciously. One reason is my subject matter is different from most photographers. I have photographers I like but I look at their work to learn. I have had teachers that I learned a lot from but my work wasn't like theirs. </p>

Well.......they stopped coming!

 

That is pretty funny about the candidates sending alerts from photo.net. That was a joke.

 

Thanks!

A friend is giving me one for my birthday. I spent a long time researching it and so

far am very pleased with what I've found out about that model.

 

Any suggestions? The purchase is a done deal. He is bringing it today.

 

Anyone used it yet?

Well......I could feel dumb, but won't. I feel better now.

 

Thanks so much for the input.

 

I'll go critique all of your photos now. :-)

 

Pat

I work my tush off critiquing photos here and I've only "done" 80! I've done

more than 80. Everytime I come here, it is still 80.

 

I feel slighted over that number, because I really am contributing to the site.

I am not interested in receiving the alerts. I disabled them (thought so) by

saying that I am vocation until December, 2008.

 

They just keep a'comin and are pretty much driving me nuts. It's campaign time

and I can barely keep up with the pleas from the candidates that "need" my last

$50.00 that I to use to buy some more Ilford film .

 

Thanks, Pat

First of all, I wanted to post it in sports but didn't see a box to click for

that.

 

:-( It hasn't gone to the critique forum yet? Did I do something wrong? I'm not

the sharpest tool in the shed here. :-)

 

Thanks, Pat

I actually wanted the photograph in the sports critique section.

 

Thanks!

Is it possible and permitted?

 

When I uploaded the photo, I didn't see a choice of galleries. :-(

Maybe I'm clueless, but I didn't see that much criticism in the post. He stated that he was going to proof them.

 

I read into it that he wasn't going for quality at Wal-Mart and was more or less telling his experience and probably thought he would get neutral feedback.

 

Chill.

Thanks for some good information about cleaning film.

 

Touching Wal-Mart with a ten foot pole scares the heck out of me. :-)

I meant to put my dog picture in "Pets" but it went in to the "general

population"...

 

Can I move it or get it moved? Thanks!

I have all of the security that I think I need and the only place that I had visited when the crazy spyware ad came up was here.

 

I did go through the computer and work it out and I rebooted.

 

Thanks!

I can't get rid of the "spyware" ad. It will not be cancelled and I can't get it to close so I can get it off of my computer...

 

Help!

 

I don't know how to get it to you, Josh. The content won't copy and paste and it just shows up in a small box..

My guess would be "no". "No" makes sense because then you could have trains, streetcars, etc. etc.

 

No offense to you, but my feeling is that PN would be a nightmare to navigate and critiquing could turn into too much work for busy users.

How about a "grinning" nude on a bed? What is there about being nude that calls for those looks of "I am soooooooo bored"?

 

In the case of Mr. Jenkins, I was blown away by the daffodil creations and am wondering if he has either of those prints available for shipping? Texas can't be that far from heaven.

Working fine in Texas. Not having any problems lately. You're doing something right, Josh.

I could have answered that question in the Nikon forum. I use a 70-200 for rodeos and it works fine and I get alot of detail from a long distance. No way am I seeking upon a bucking bull. :-)

Don't worry about ratings. Ask for critiques and then you'll understand where the viewer is coming from.

 

The ratings system here is way overrated in my books. People get all in a tizzy and I am wondering "what are you learning from some numbers"?

Jeff, I agree with Josh totally. Here are some of the categories that I think people could come up with immediately if he switched to your suggestion.

 

1. Black and white only. (I prefer B/W myself, but it doesn't need it's own section.)

 

2. Totally unaltered. (I hate looking at a photograph that I can't even tell what it is, due to what I think is excessive photoshopping, but that's my problem)

 

3. Domestic pets versus everything else that is an animal. (and we could have a section for birds in the wild)

 

4. Children's portraits only.

 

5. Divide up the sports.

 

I probably wouldn't even visit the site and I imagine traffic would drop considerably.

 

It would be too much trouble to critique photos and enjoy looking at someone else's work.

 

I'm here to learn.

Pat

Bigger sigh..:-)

 

Why not just do away with the rating system, altogether, so people can sleep at night?

Talk about stealing images! I was sitting in a coffee shop in Montreal and picked up a newspaper and there was an ad for a shoe store......and the photograph in the ad was an image that belonged to my friend, Douglas Kent Hall. It was the photo of the bullriders boots that kick started his career.

 

As soon as I returned to New Mexico, I called him and he came by and picked up the paper from me. His lawyer contacted the store and the owner had the "I didn't know that the photograph belonged to anyone" story. Douglas got damages from the store owner. I feel that that it was just one of those things that a photographer doesn't find out very often. I just happened to be in the right place at the right time.

I am sorry that posters won't share their knowledge with the people who rate their photographs......

 

I've taken workshops with photographers that acted as though sharing techniques would somehow damage them. Like everyone is going to take an identical photograph as they did? Annie Leibovist (sp) is the one that gave me the most bitter taste in my mouth. She was horrid and so was David Hockney. He actually had his assitant show some of his mediocre collage work. Both of those workshops were high dollar and we didn't get our money's worth from the two of them.

 

I learned the most about darkroom techniques from one of the most well-known photographer in the Southwest...he is the most generous teacher and wants every student to succeed. I honestly believe that he wouldn't care if a student went beyond his skills. My first teacher, Bernard Plossu from France, was unbelievable and taught me everything I know about composition. Both these men are fantasic and enthuiastic teachers.