Agreed again.
A charming and delicious deprecation it is!
Thanks for putting it on my RADAR.
With no PC baggage, no coarseness, and no explicit sexual freighting.
Our current vernacular, "retard" is problematic weak tea in comparison.
Rongnongno wrote:
If you pull french on me you know the connotation of 'debile' in modern language.
If someone is called a 'debile' it implies 'debile mental' (mentally deficient ~ usually on purpose so no excuse). There is no direct translation that expresses the disdain, dismissal, contempt implied when using this term. 'Con' does not even come close when it comes to being an insult... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Could not stop myself. Worse: did not want to stop. I'm horrible. Never stop, this is how we learn.
If you pull french on me you know the connotation ... (
show quote)
Well, photography can be accidentally important.
And, photography can be political expression.
And, it can blend with other arts.
And it can be history and propaganda and fraud and commerce and click bait...
Actually, the word is more ancient than OE: Lat.
debilis; conceivably via Norman French, if not continuously directly borrowed across time from Latin.
Cf. debeo; Could not stop myself. Worse: did not want to stop. I'm horrible.
Anyway, the word choice for "retards" is great: Dessin débile, dessin qui manque de vigueur. http://www.littre.org/definition/d%C3%A9bile
Rongnongno wrote:
Neither, I do not care (signature).
Point of view:
You can 'create' 'art' out of garbage and/or out of a skilled use of technology.
One can pretend to be an 'artist' (many do) but reality says otherwise, skilled or unskilled. This concerns everything and not exclusive to photography.
The problem is not about what 'it' is but how 'it' is perceived. From there, eye of the beholder and all that poopy stuff.
'Creativity' exists only in 'young' untrained minds that do not know any limit, are not influenced by habits, social mores and technology. Creativity is often accompanied with insanity because it does not fit any norm and refuses to accepts walls. Some lucky 'creators' do not 'grow up' and stay 'insane'. Most build their own walls to protect their insanity and become stale and boring inside the enclosure created* **. The lucky ones who stay free evolve in time or more likely than not their vision becomes more extreme with time.
The truly debiles*** in all that are those who try to associate themselves with the 'insane' using $$$ and influence to collect 'art'. A 'con artist' knows that and will create 'art' in order to access an acceptance and social status as 'artist', knowing they are frauds. Barnum infamous quote comes to mind here.
IRL I am more interested in 'fools' and 'originals' than anyone else. I owe them.
-----
* This creates folks only able to produce the same thing over and over, unable to move on, that is the case of 90% of 'originals'.
** Usually against 'outside elements' who want, demand conformity.
*** Old english = feeble (implies 'of mind' in this context).
Neither, I do not care (signature). br br u Poin... (
show quote)
Rendering
-Nice separation of subject and background.
-I like the texture detail, with no need for reflections in this subject; depth is helped by the grays in the round holes.
Cropping
-The shaft at left is shown completely, not chopped off at an arbitrary point. Good.
-A square frame for this composition might have made it possible to include all of the screw mount at the top.
-A square frame could reinforce the subject's inherent idleness.
Storytelling
-The equipment is not decayed but it is idle. Why? Perhaps the answer lives in history and innovation -- or is it lost in the mists of time?
-Powerful. I have to linger.
Well, I wanted what they promise but the documentation was too sparse for my 40+ years of computer experience to handle. Actually, I could have figured it out but I had to postpone it -- lack of time.
Anyway, this should be a valuable capability; if anyone here wants to team up and crack this, I will write up the "missing manual" for UHH, using examples from the team which the team could test.
Maybe the new Portfolio is more usable. I'd want to start there.
BTW, I recall that there was some smallish cost for the earlier capability, unless like me you have CC.
jerryc41 wrote:
Have any of you used Adobe's Portfolio and Behance? I've heard the terms, but I don't know what that software does. Now they will let you "create a website in minutes."
And a wonderful use of square frame, suggesting the interesting capability of these birds to hover.
Uuglypher wrote:
the neat thing about hammers is that they aren't necessarily moving in the direction their bill is pointing...he may , in fact, be stock-still. and you've no worry about composition with that diagonal so perfectly utilized!
Dave
I commit to buy any/all of these, as available now:
Composition
Exposure
Lighting
Try a square frame, using post.
The EM was designed for women! and youth in Japanese camera clubs, using, for the first time, plastic, to reduce weight and to take out cost from the camera. The named Series E (not Nikkor) lenses were intended to be used with the EM camera, and they introduced plastic in lenses. As I recall, the 50mm was initially paired with the EM.
A Nikon prerequisite for deploying plastic in Nikon these Nikon products was the creation of a watchdog department to ensure that plastic did not compromise quality.
The Series E lenses had AI-S technology before it appeared elsewhere and before it was named, AI-S. This feature contributed strongly to simplification of the EM+Series E system, important to the audiences named above.
We can all envy the posting person his purchase.
shagbat wrote:
This was Nikons most crappy, cheap, film camera, it never saw the inside of a Nikon plant, possibly by Cosina, (I stand to be corrected). Try it and have some fun. Both the lenses are generally thought to be optically excellent. You got a bargain!
John N wrote:
And better still with sun at 45° elevation.
And it is seldom noted, Peterson being an exception, that the noon sun is at 90 degrees.
I bought a B+W Nano-class circular-polarizing filter.
I'm having second thoughts, for a surprising reason.
I've recently realized, reading lots of old Nikon publications, that Nikon has seen its offerings as a system of components for decades. If I had it to do over, I'd get Nikon's filter, to go with my Nikon lenses and cameras.
Think about it. In the computer industry, you are inviting trouble if you mix manufacturers. In cosmetics, your cleanser, toner, and moisturizer are designed to work as a system, Chanel being a case in point.
There is probably more to a polarizer than polarity -- type of glass, unhelpful redundancy of coatings, transmissivity -- I could keep going. Nikon has not, however, marketed differentiators of their polarizer, so far as I know.
Nikon considers the D810 most suitable for product photography, among other uses.
Kudos. Never have I seen "fast" explained so clearly: "A fast lens ... means it's aperture opens wide enough to allow a faster shutter speed."
Mac wrote:
Were you in release priority or focus priority? Release priority allows the shutter to release whether or not the subject is in focus. Focus priority requires the subject to be in focus before the shutter will release.
The lens itself has no impact on the shutter releasing. Things like release and focus priority are set in the camera menu.
A fast lens doesn't mean that the lens itself is fast. It means it's aperture opens wide enough to allow a faster shutter speed. f/1.4 is faster than f/1.8 because f/1.4 is wider than f/1.8 the wider the aperture, the more light which allows for a faster shutter speed.
The 50mm f/1.8G lens is very good.
Have fun.
Were you in release priority or focus priority? Re... (
show quote)
Programmers work with me.
Coders work for somebody else.