DSLRUsers.com

Gstark,

Sorry to say that, but again, when it comes to something more then empty words you dont have a balls and give a field back. I really dont like your attitude. It seems to me that you like to disrespect people. Not only with my person, but also with others, looking by your other posts.

You might be an admin here, but this should make you even more sensitive to friendly and supportive attitude. You still havent learnt your lesson. Good luck for the future.

I would like to ask you - please, do not answer any of my posts anymore. I dont want to waste my, your or anybody else time. I hope you understand that.


Aussie Dave,

It is not anymore issue of your exersice and I agree that this thread turn into pointless arguing, thankfully to Gstark. Sorry again. It wasnt my intention.

For me that will be end of this topic.


Regards,

K.Polak

Holy frickin' over analysis!!!

Dave - good ldea.

krpolak - sorry kr, it comes down to this....
1. the one shot idea would be available to everyone
2. if your one shot isn't correctly exposed, it will either make it better, or worse, than it would have otherwise been
3. if you don't have any metering capability and having perfect exposure is essential for you, I reckon you would give the one shot shoot a huge miss.
4. you are a very serious man. Relax. This is supposed to be fun.

Dave,

keep the ideas coming, it's ideas like this that will make us improve our skills in the end.

I think it is a great idea. As suggested earlier, why don't we make it the first ES topic for 2006? We are due for one in Feb.

As any exercise, it is optional, those that don't want to take part or can't, sorry, or change the rules later on.

If it proves to be winner, it could either replace the ES or have a life of its own.

Cheers,

André
OT: as for the TV aerial, it is just a matter of geography. Put your Hills Hoist on the roof, and I'm sure you'll get great reception on your washing machine, probably better programs too. But then it becomes a safety issue for the person putting the clothes on the line

Krystian,

krpolak wrote:Gstark,

Sorry to say that, but again, when it comes to something more then empty words you dont have a balls and give a field back. I really dont like your attitude.

I have no problems with you not liking my attitude. That fact bothers me not at all. Sorry.

But I will ask you once, and once only, to not make any personal comments ever again this forum. If you are unable to respond within a discussion without resorting to such personal invective, you are, very simply, not welcome here.

In the future, any such flaming, as I believe you have now engaged in, will lead to, at the very least, your suspension here.

You might be an admin here, but this should make you even more sensitive to friendly and supportive attitude. You still havent learnt your lesson. Good luck for the future.

Actually, I am not just "an admin" here. But that is not ther point, and as DaveB has complained, you have dragged this thread way, way, way off topic.

If you don't like the fact that I am rejecting your test as being largely irrelevant, then I'm afraid that that's too bad.

For you.

I guess you will need to learn that not everyone here shares your personal photographic ideals, but again, not everybody here shares mine either.

That's how it is, that's how it always has been, and that's how it always will be. I've learned to accept that; I would respectfully suggest you do likewise.

But the simple fact is that the test you are trying to impose upon us here is an exercise in futility. If you cannot accept that some of us - perhaps who might have a tad more (or maybe, somewhat less) photographic experience than you might have, are able to assess a given EV by simply looking aat and judging a scene, then that is your problem, not mine.

I've been doing it for about 30+ years now, and it's no big deal. Trust me.

But it's something that I assess, based upon the lighting conditions that I am actually seeing, not some theoretical scene based upon some imaginary lightbulb that may or may not exist, and that may be described by one person in terms that may not be 100% objective.

I would like to ask you - please, do not answer any of my posts anymore.

And you call others arrogant?

ROTFLMAO!!!!

I will choose to answer any post that I feel I can. I'd strongly suggest that you keep any similar recommendations to yourself.

KRPolak,

What are you on about with words like asking for a "real photographer" to come and give you settings?

It doesn't work like that.

Are we fake photographers? Are we real photographers?

It seems that if you take your photos and put your name on them, you're a real photographer, compared to some artists who have other people take the photos and then put their names on them, they must be the fake photographers.

Moreso, if you can't work out light settings from a given situation yourself then that is your problem and is something you will have to learn.

And with respect, a digital sensor is more than likely to respond, yes unlike silver gelatin, but more like slide film, and if you've ever shot in slide film, you know how unforgiving it is.

Whilst I won't deny that my Dad does have an attitude, it appears that you do, too.

The cockiness you're displaying here for a technique and skill which most certainly can and does work is slightly concerning as it makes me wonder if you really do intend to learn anything about photography, as a photographer, or if whether you think you're a pro already, which you certainly don't come off as being.

Not to offend you of course, this is just one mods opinion.

holy moley
i think i fueled this whole argument up with krystian
Krystian i suggest you settle down a little rememebr this is just a simple excercise challenge idea, I know your all so passionate about your work and it shows, I don't think you should take it so seriously if your not able to obtain optimal expsoure in 1 shot without the benefit of metering, there are other very strong aspects of your photography that will far outweigh a mere miss of optimal exposure, like composition, choice of subject etc

if you were trying to win a world photography prize with the same 1 shot stipulation i can see how you could argue for fairness but in this case your just too passionate.

This thread is so off topic it is at risk of closing...

Lets get back on track...

MHD wrote:This thread is so off topic it is at risk of closing...

Lets get back on track...

Mod dared to close the thread on Admins

I've split this topic because this was getting pointless and I'm locking this thread on all that was off-topic.

Stay on-topic in the other thread please gentlemen.

Leigh, thanks for this, none of the above have anything to do with why the pics stop at the TV aerial and not the Hills Hoist

Indeed, Glen. Indeed.