Camera Change (Page 7): Wet photography as you call it had 100 years of improvement plus another 20 years. Why should it need more today?----It went through improvements in dry...

OldSchool-WI Loc: Brandon, Wisconsin 53919

User ID wrote:

Exactly. Image quality has absolutely nothing to d... (show quote)

Wet photography as you call it had 100 years of improvement plus another 20 years. Why should it need more today?----It went through improvements in dry emulsions---speed---quality---color sensitivity---color reproduction---high ISO---Instant Polaroid---slides---movies---three dimentional---view camera adjustments---radiographic---aerial---Have I forgotten any?----Digital is a mere sensor--with software from some techies. It does have more hurdles to jump---even the FoveonX3.-------

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

OldSchool-WI wrote:

Half correct----"sounds like a half correct r... (show quote)

Yeah and an old bicycle is lighter and smaller than your SUV and more craftsman ship as well.

FreddB Loc: PA - Delaware County

OldSchool-WI wrote:

As I just posted---SuperFly-------let's see yours----I showed you mine with my point and shoot and not my other two dozen cameras---half digital---which includes the 46 megapixel Sigma SD1 Merrill. The Mikado photos---posted were damned sharp---and from a 5 megapixel Sony DSC P93 of twenty years ago. Try to top those and show us your stuff instead of your mouth through your postings of snarkyness?--Let your gong show appearance begin---I throw down the gauntlet.----ew

“At long last sir, have you no shame?”
You hijacked another user’s thread to rerun your boasting about your two dozen cameras (just in case you weren’t paying attention to anyone but yourself before - NO ONE CARES HOW MANY CAMERAS YOU OWN). You post images in the “critic” section, and tear into anyone who dared to offer…
What was it? Oh yeah, CRITICISM.
Grow up, get a life, chill, see a shrink, or do whatever it takes to GET OVER YOURSELF. YOU’RE NOT AS IMPORTANT AS YOU THINK YOU ARE.
Good night, God bless, and Slainte!
🙋🏼🙋🏼🙋🏼🙋🏼🙋🏼🙋🏼🙋🏼🙋🏼🙋🏼🙋🏼🙋🏼🙋🏼🙋🏼🙋🏼🙋🏼

OldSchool-WI Loc: Brandon, Wisconsin 53919

Architect1776 wrote:

Yeah and an old bicycle is lighter and smaller than your SUV and more craftsman ship as well.

As my grandfather used to say---"So what has that to do with the school question in Bolivia?"-----

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

FreddB wrote:

Maybe it’s just me, but I’ve never gotten the point of owning and rotating usage of all of those cameras. When I felt the need/urge to move on from each one, I either gave it away or traded in on the next one. For me, one is enough. Never wanted to say, “Damn, I should’ve used the other one.”

Well, they all serve different purposes for me. Even when I get my Z9 I’ll still have uses for my other cameras.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

OldSchool-WI wrote:

As I just posted---SuperFly-------let's see yours----I showed you mine with my point and shoot and not my other two dozen cameras---half digital---which includes the 46 megapixel Sigma SD1 Merrill. The Mikado photos---posted were damned sharp---and from a 5 megapixel Sony DSC P93 of twenty years ago. Try to top those and show us your stuff instead of your mouth through your postings of snarkyness?--Let your gong show appearance begin---I throw down the gauntlet.----ew

Well this really isn’t about mine. It’s about you claiming how great that camera is and how it compares to top cameras while posting results that are less than stellar. Now you’re making excuses for it, saying it’s just a point & shoot while still saying those photos are “damned sharp”. They’re not. But here. I’ll play. I don’t post to the gallery often but here’s a link to my last post there. I’ll admit that the first egret shot could be sharper. And the heron in the back during the chase was a little out of my DOF.
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-668483-1.html

OldSchool-WI Loc: Brandon, Wisconsin 53919

SuperflyTNT wrote:

Well this really isn’t about mine. It’s about you... (show quote)

First of all-----I said from the beginning my 20 year old point and shoot is not a $10K Nikon? I said exactly what it was and that it took good pictures--You might expect me now to trash your photo---but I am not that sort. Quite an extraordinary shot---but as you say---your camera focused on the wrong spot on the bird--or you did? And maybe the wrong shutter speed for a moving head. But then you admitted to "less than sharp on the bird's head." I expect my Sony DSC-P93 would have had a hard time doing better. But I am posting your soft focus head wondering why you posted this shot in a focus disagreement. Maybe Canon can instruct you on focus as he did for me?-------attached

Cropped photo by SuperFly
Cropped photo by SuperFly...

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

OldSchool-WI wrote:

First of all-----I said from the beginning my 20 y... (show quote)

It's rather poor online behavior to litter on another person's thread. And, I noted another request from the UHH community for you to just grow up, will it go unheeded too? How many community members have offered a helping hand at this point? Tried to guide you in a better direction? Personally, I've now given two links to improve your photography results and how to share them. I think to every offer so far you've given the back of your hand. How much more does the community have to put with?

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

OldSchool-WI wrote:

First of all-----I said from the beginning my 20 y... (show quote)

Now that’s hilarious. You take a very small section of an image, enlarge it beyond pixel peeping and trash it after saying you’re not gonna trash it. Nothing is gonna stand up to that extent of pixel peeping. You should take the same approach when reviewing your own work. I’m not saying your 20 year old camera can’t take good photos, I just haven’t seen any yet that support that. I didn’t have to pixel peep to see your photo isn’t sharp. I dunno, maybe mine has some flaws, but it did win color print of the year in my camera club that has many award winning photographers. And who knows, maybe those photos are better than I can see, but after several attempts to tell you that you that you should check the “include original” box so we can see the true resolution of those photos you just can’t seem to do it. Maybe then I’d change my mind. Or maybe you purposely don’t check the box because you don’t think your work will hold up.

OldSchool-WI Loc: Brandon, Wisconsin 53919

CHG_CANON wrote:

It's rather poor online behavior to litter on another person's thread. And, I noted another request from the UHH community for you to just grow up, will it go unheeded too? How many community members have offered a helping hand at this point? Tried to guide you in a better direction? Personally, I've now given two links to improve your photography results and how to share them. I think to every offer so far you've given the back of your hand. How much more does the community have to put with?

I am not into the MUD AND GAMES in your playpen, Cannon. Maybe You are the one beyond the age of learning decorum? As for photos---have I ever seen one of yours, done as your bragged about mirrorless Canon output?-----

OldSchool-WI Loc: Brandon, Wisconsin 53919

SuperflyTNT wrote:

Now that’s hilarious. You take a very small sectio... (show quote)

I didn't see any Pixels in the crop. I merely cropped what you put up. I didn't enlarge it that I know of. I merely cropped the definitely out of focus head. If you won a prize it was for content---not camera tool skill. You better check with your buddy---the instructor in all things---CANON?-----

OldSchool-WI Loc: Brandon, Wisconsin 53919

OldSchool-WI wrote:

I didn't see any Pixels in the crop. I merely cropped what you put up. I didn't enlarge it that I know of. I merely cropped the definitely out of focus head. If you won a prize it was for content---not camera tool skill. You better check with your buddy---the instructor in all things---CANON?-----

P.S----interesting you call the bird's head in a photo of a large bird and a young bird---"a very small section?"---- Whereas you criticized my photo of a giant Mikado steam locomotive-(full size representation) -as having the engineer soft--next to sharp as tack lettering?

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

FreddB wrote:

“At long last sir, have you no shame?” br You hija... (show quote)

Perhaps oldschool defines his life and worth by the number of cameras that he owns and not by his good works for others and making their lives better.

User ID

OldSchool-WI wrote:

Half correct----"sounds like a half correct r... (show quote)

You speak of a masterpiece. I spoke of commerce. You invent a disagreement where there is none by changing topics.
Masterpieces and commerce are light years apart.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If I need a view camera for commerce then I’ll simply use my digital versions.

Film is absolutely out of the picture. No clients want to deal with it. It’s not for commerce. For artisans and hobbyists film has its loyal adherents. My old film gear is keeping several of them verrrry happy. But you can’t take happiness to the bank.

OldSchool-WI Loc: Brandon, Wisconsin 53919

Architect1776 wrote:

Perhaps oldschool defines his life and worth by the number of cameras that he owns and not by his good works for others and making their lives better.

Keep it up guys---I expect this from the four or so of you. As I say---that is why more don't participate---maybe I can help resurrect this dormant website by shining light on the idiots who post and boast and insult? I only mention my two dozen cameras to reinforce there is a camera for everybody and for every planned occasion. (They are all different and different purposes) But none of you four understand that until you are making the same statement---that cameras have different purposes for different occasions. But then sense is beyond all four. And that goes in spades for those who fly off the handle like Architect of 1776. As many contributors have already said---they gave up UHH because of the rude, insulting, snarkiness. I can tell you whom they meant.-----As for the "good works"---how does that include the snarkies? Maybe Canon instructing on camera focus? Tell me a member who does not know how to focus a camera? Maybe, though the article was a revelation to Canon and he had to share his "good works?"------