Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Creation of an ice hole  (Read 5471 times)

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16027
Re: Creation of an ice hole
« Reply #20 on: January 03, 2017, 05:18:34 AM »

Tony, you simply don't read. You represent my comments in the same misread manner all the time in this debate, and appear:

1. unable to grasp the difference, or;

2. imagine that persistent misrepresentation will convince anyone left reading this of your altruistic, proletarian love and huge respect for the photographic opinion of someone who, by admission through asking, knows little about the medium.

It's the other side of Alice's mirror. I shall remain on this one.

Rob C

Tony Jay

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2837
Re: Creation of an ice hole
« Reply #21 on: January 03, 2017, 05:50:08 AM »

I grasp plenty!!

I grasp that you obviously had no respect for the people who actually gave you a living once!
The very people that you now dismiss as photographic and artistic savages actually paid your salary.
It was not the art directors and magazine editors etc etc because they could only use what the public wanted.
No matter how good they thought an image was it was irrelevant if it meant that joe public did not buy the publication!

So, the same proletariat (your term, not mine), that you so abusively dismiss, are the people who ultimately judged your work and decided whether you were worth a dime or not!

You may not want to believe it but I actually have a very good grasp of English, whether that be the more formal version or the more vernacular kind, so I don't think I have misunderstood you at all.

Logged

Sharon VL

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 194
Re: Creation of an ice hole
« Reply #22 on: January 03, 2017, 03:43:06 PM »


I think that for neophytes in particular, posting pictures here is not a brilliant idea.

It's terribly easy for folks without much history to think others know better than they do, which is often the case, but hardly always. Listening to anyone else discuss aesthetics quickly shows up the failure to find a common standard: it's either herd mentality or some way out choice from another galaxie not so near us.

For learners, I still believe the answer is to study lots of other people's work, and find what pleases; that done, one gets a sense of self, oddly enough, from which to go onwards to wherever the muse leads.

The above used to be difficult and expensive before the Internet: one had to buy magazines and books. Today, you get all the images you could ever want to look at for nothing more than the trouble of consulting Google.

All another person can teach you is how to do the mechanics. It was ever so.

But I think that over-processing in digital is somewhat pointless unless for some specific commercial purpose, in which case, do what has to be done. As long as nobody tells you it's real if you ask, and it's not, who cares?

Rob

Agree with this 100%.

LesPalenik

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1024
    • advantica blog
Re: Creation of an ice hole
« Reply #23 on: January 03, 2017, 05:26:10 PM »

I find the idea behind the image great, and the learning that comes with the processing steps to achieve the visualization are good. Personally, I don't like the "greyish band" around the image, it makes it a bit flat; especially given the rich blue tones in the rest of the ice.

Looking again at the original picture, I agree with Paulo that the greyish band / border doesn't help. Maybe the image could be cropped tighter or the gray area could be changed to the similar blue as the inner walls of the ice block.
 

Tony Jay

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2837
Re: Creation of an ice hole
« Reply #24 on: January 03, 2017, 07:00:41 PM »

Agree with this 100%.
Do you really agree with all that Rob has said Sharon?

If you do your POV flies in the face of every known precept of education and learning.

One does not learn well in a vacuum whether this be a technical skill or artistic expression.

I agree with Rob that spending plenty of time looking at other peoples images is a good idea.
Deciding whether they work or not and why they work is all good.

I totally disagree with the sweeping statement that all that anyone can be taught is the "mechanics".
It was never ever so!
Every endeavour that is worthwhile has a "mechanical" component to it, however, it quickly elevates to the philosophical and artistic level. This is true of fine art and it is true with mathematics and it is true with medicine and law. And it is true for every other worthwhile endeavour.

Almost nobody will reach the pinnacle of any of these endeavours on their own.
Even if they are exceptionally naturally talented it just does not happen that way.
Even if they claim that they did it on their own they are not telling the truth.

It is true that one cannot make an artist out of someone who has no aptitude for art.
It is also true that it is difficult (impossible?) to achieve any level of real expertise in any endeavour that one does not also have a passion for.
However, it is most decidedly false to extrapolate from the above two statements that if one has talent and passion for a particular thing then one can just be left to get on with it once the "mechanics" have been taught.
I will say it again: it was never ever so!

Photography is a visual medium, and as such, by definition, requires an audience.
Photography, unlike the visual arts of the past where the audience of a particular work may have been extremely small and exclusive, is a mass medium.
Both Dave and Rob have expressed doubts about how constructive it is having "unqualified" individuals judging one's work, especially it seems, if one is apparently in a formative stage with one's photography.
The suggestion is not to post on LuLa because the comments and critiques may not always be helpful.
Dave seems particularly concerned that individuals may feel that they have to produce and post only work that elicits a positive response from others on the forum.

However there are lots of problems with this.
Firstly, we live in the real world.
I get unconstructive input every day of my life just trying to live day-to-day!
If I cannot deal with someone posting a less that helpful comment about an image I post then NOT posting an image is unlikely to solve anything.
It is false premise that one can protect anyone in this way.
Also, because photography needs an audience, if someone does not post images on LuLa they will be seen elsewhere.
What if that audience is even less constructive?

The suggestion is that, particularly as an amateur, one should shoot for oneself.
The idea is to pursue those genres and ideas that interest one - in other words go after your passions.
Not bad advice within a certain context.

However, when this translates into a prescriptive "suggestion" that one should not post images on LuLa because you may be so influenced by the feedback that you abandon your interests and passions and instead pursue a quest merely to please others then the whole theory falls apart.
As far as I am concerned if this happens to you then the issue is not LuLa, it is not whatever comments have been posted, the problem is internal to the individual concerned surely.
Not posting solves nothing apart from possibly allowing someone to indulge in a degree of self-delusion.
If you are passionate about something yet can be easily swayed then then the natural question to be posed is: how passionate are you really if you are so easily swayed.
And, as previously stated, if someone is so bent on external reassurance then they will seek it out anyway.

Furthermore, how does one define a neophyte?
What are the criteria?
Who qualifies as a non-neophyte?
Who is qualified to give constructive input and critique to an image and who is not?
Who decides who is who?
And, finally, who enforces this whole apartheid-like system?

Frankly, the whole suggestion that limits should be placed on who posts what is philosophically misplaced and practically unworkable (This statement should be interpreted within the limits of the agreement one made with LuLa when one became a member of the forum in the first place.)
The apparent motive to protect the novice from himself is completely unhelpful and almost certainly counterproductive.
Logged

Sharon VL

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 194
Re: Creation of an ice hole
« Reply #25 on: January 03, 2017, 07:24:17 PM »

I have found that most internet critique is worthless and often harmful. Lots of advice to conform to that group's aesthetic, which is often rather limited. Some of the best photography I've seen is technically flawed but the subject so interesting, it moves you and fascinates you. Why subject that pure intent to a forum which will tell you to crop a third of the sky, etc.?

That's my opinion, Tony, and you can post another 1,000 word post and it will still be my opinion.

Tony Jay

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2837
Re: Creation of an ice hole
« Reply #26 on: January 03, 2017, 09:29:29 PM »

I have found that most internet critique is worthless and often harmful. Lots of advice to conform to that group's aesthetic, which is often rather limited. Some of the best photography I've seen is technically flawed but the subject so interesting, it moves you and fascinates you. Why subject that pure intent to a forum which will tell you to crop a third of the sky, etc.?

That's my opinion, Tony, and you can post another 1,000 word post and it will still be my opinion.
Why limit your thoughts to merely critiquing images then?
As far as I am concerned there is lot more harmful things written every day on forums - just like this one - that have nothing to do with the critique of images.

Yet, here you are...

Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9655
Re: Creation of an ice hole
« Reply #27 on: January 03, 2017, 09:59:53 PM »


When I post an image I understand that those viewing it, and potentially commenting on it, will represent a spread of expertise and experience as both photographers and judges of the merits of photographic images. I would need to carefully analyse their comments - some would ultimately be valid and others not. Either way, I would encourage the comments because the whole process is a learning one. How does one become a better photographer, and, how does one become a better critic - simple, lots of practice.

That image that you posted was just a self-fulfilling prophecy. If one posts an image that is completely uninterpretable without an extensive explanation about the image and why it was taken, and that explanation is not given, one should not be surprised if comments and analysis are offered that are completely irrelevant and asinine. In the case of the image that you posted, with the explanation, one can now view this image on an emotional level, and ask the question, "Does this image succeed in conveying the emotion that Rob was feeling when he made this image?" Now, because one is asking better questions about the image, perhaps, just perhaps, one can offer a better analysis of whether that image succeeds at this level.


Tony Jay

I agree with your view on this issue, Tony. You've become unusually vocal on the forum recently.  ;)

Expanding on the cliche,'Beauty is in the mind of the beholder', I would add that all the emotional appeal  and meaning of any photograph is in the mind of the beholder, whether the beholder is part of an audience or simply the person who took the shot.

I think it is reasonable to presume that any photograph can appeal to someone, with the exception, perhaps, of a photo which is presented by the photographer as an example of an image which is boring and meaningless. However, even then, there might be someone in an audience who disagrees and claims he finds the image has some sort of emotional appeal, whether abstract or symbolic.

Even the most mundane, poorly processed, out-of focus snapshot with blown highlights and blocked shadows, might have a significant emotional appeal to the person who took the shot because of the personal associations with the subject. (Not that I'm implying that Rob's recent photos, as an amateur, are that bad, of course.  ;)  )
Logged

Tony Jay

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2837
Re: Creation of an ice hole
« Reply #28 on: January 03, 2017, 10:46:52 PM »

I agree with your view on this issue, Tony. You've become unusually vocal on the forum recently.  ;)

Expanding on the cliche,'Beauty is in the mind of the beholder', I would add that all the emotional appeal  and meaning of any photograph is in the mind of the beholder, whether the beholder is part of an audience or simply the person who took the shot.

I think it is reasonable to presume that any photograph can appeal to someone, with the exception, perhaps, of a photo which is presented by the photographer as an example of an image which is boring and meaningless. However, even then, there might be someone in an audience who disagrees and claims he finds the image has some sort of emotional appeal, whether abstract or symbolic.

Even the most mundane, poorly processed, out-of focus snapshot with blown highlights and blocked shadows, might have a significant emotional appeal to the person who took the shot because of the personal associations with the subject. (Not that I'm implying that Rob's recent photos, as an amateur, are that bad, of course.  ;)  )
Hi Ray,

Well the converse is actually the reason.
I was practically inactive on the forum through most of 2016.
2016 was a less that stellar year for me.
On many levels I was struggling to keep my head above water and the day-to-day stress I was experiencing just meant that photography, and anything associated with it, just became an impossible mountain to climb.
2016 was a much worse year for me than 2001 when I lost both my parents back in South Africa.
My Dad was murdered and my mom died from ill-health a few months after that.
Yet 2016 was much worse for me.

I am actually feeling a better about things - hence my increased activity.
At least I feel I can venture an opinion about things.
I have also begun shooting again - something almost completely lacking through most of 2016.
Photography has always been a great stress reliever for me but if I am too stressed then the creativity just evaporates from me like a drop of water in a hot desert, and then trying to shoot actually adds to the stress, because, although I can still press the shutter, I am just not "seeing" anything.
In that situation the results are beyond mediocre and that does nothing positive for my state of mind.

As far as the forum went, I did log in and read quite a lot - just didn't feel up to participating.
The world, photographically speaking, is continuing to barrel along at a high pace - it seems the only constant is change!
Some of what I have posted on deals with, what I feel, are the inevitable consequences of the trajectory of the last few years.
Really though, I do still get great joy out of viewing the work of others on the forum - that didn't stop during last year - but now I at least feel that I might be able to participate constructively if I do choose to comment on an image.

This site, and the forum, to me, remains an important resource for anyone interested in photography.
It is not just a refuge for landscape photographers and I, for one, am profoundly grateful that people post images representing all sorts of diverse genres.
This site is almost unique across the web (I don't actually know of another site anywhere like it, but who knows...) and what it represents needs to be maintained, expanded, and protected.
The best way is to participate!
And so, my response to what I perceive to be suggestions that arbitrarily limit participation on this forum is most definitely to vigorously question what I think is a highly flawed POV, not least because it seriously harms the business case underpinning this site.

Tony Jay
Logged

Sharon VL

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 194
Re: Creation of an ice hole
« Reply #29 on: January 04, 2017, 12:20:36 AM »

Why limit your thoughts to merely critiquing images then?
As far as I am concerned there is lot more harmful things written every day on forums - just like this one - that have nothing to do with the critique of images.

Yet, here you are...

That makes no sense. Can we not discuss a specific thing like critiquing photos? Why should how I feel about image critique on Internet forums have to include every word posted on this forum? You are saying that there is no value to context. That's just silly.

Tony Jay

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2837
Re: Creation of an ice hole
« Reply #30 on: January 04, 2017, 02:15:09 AM »

That makes no sense. Can we not discuss a specific thing like critiquing photos? Why should how I feel about image critique on Internet forums have to include every word posted on this forum? You are saying that there is no value to context. That's just silly.
I agree totally that context is important.
How harmful exactly is a worthless critique of an image?
How dangerous is a suggestion to crop half of a sky?

Surely the worst that can happen is one gives the suggestion a try and then one finds it doesn't work.
Perhaps it might work.
Doing whatever edit may change the feel and emotion of an image. While it could be a good or a bad thing, it could also just be different.
One might perhaps learn something.

If it does not work post the reasons why.
Maybe the individual who gave the suggestion refuses to accept it, but maybe they do and then they can also learn something.

All the above is predicated on an assumption - that everyone uses a bit of common-sense (not as common as we all would wish for but then again the world is not a perfect place).
If someone posting images is really going to be harmed by a bit of wayward advice, or, dare I say it, even an attempt at bullying over the web (I certainly do not condone bullying), then NOT posting images will not protect them either.
If they really are that gullible or sensitive, as the case may be (and I am referring to an adult here), then any number of other types of life's interactions are certainly going to harm them.
No need to single out photographic fora.
It has always been a case of "buyer beware" and nothing has changed.

There are several sub-fora on LuLa where images are posted and comments, observations, and critiques are offered.
There is rather a large spread of individuals who post images and also comment.
Yes, some are newbies to photography and some, from what I can tell, are world-renowned award-winning photographers, and everything in-between.
And not everyone gets it right all the time, but who cares.
Also I cannot recollect personally any comment or critique of an image that I have ever read on this forum that was maliciously inspired.
Unhelpful, plain wrong sometimes, Yes, plenty of those.
But again, also plenty of very helpful comments and critiques and lots of food for thought.

Like yourself I am very interested in the emotional impact of an image.
I tend to look at abstract themes that may be suggested by the image,
If I can I limit my critique to how well the image succeeds at an emotional level.
Sometimes though, technicalities of focus, composition, colour and other things intrude into the image to the point where the abstractions that the image might otherwise be communicating are lost or muddled.
I will make a comment about that if that is the case.
If I don't think an image works but am struggling to put my finger on what I think the problem might be then I don't post a comment.
When I post a comment critiquing an image I try to avoid using phraseology that suggests that I am an AUTHORITY or I AM RIGHT.
Like everyone else I don't always "get" what is going on.
I try , in fact, to be as friendly and supportive as I can be when commenting on the work of others and hopefully I haven't fallen short too many times in trying to maintain the standards outlined above.
I am very cognizant of the fact that for some people a lot of courage is required to post an image, anywhere, never mind to this particular forum, and I don't actually wish to be responsible for ensuring that they never attempt to post an image again.

Perhaps, collectively (go back and read my first post again) we do need to do a better job on this forum than is currrently the case.
But, that is a VERY different discussion to one dealing with suggestions that certain categories of individuals should be limited or discouraged from posting images on this forum particularly if that categorization is based on one's apparent ability or reputation as a photographer.

« Last Edit: January 04, 2017, 02:22:36 AM by Tony Jay »
Logged

Sharon VL

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 194
Re: Creation of an ice hole
« Reply #31 on: January 04, 2017, 03:14:53 AM »

I agree totally that context is important.
How harmful exactly is a worthless critique of an image?
How dangerous is a suggestion to crop half of a sky?

 

After a while in photography forums, what you see is a bunch of photographs that look like they were taken by the same person. Thats the harm of it.

I believe in getting critiques- but rarely ask for it from an Internet forum. The best critiques I get are from watching a client go through our portfolio. When they stop and tell you about a photograph as if you were unfamiliar with it - you know you have something with that shot.

Tony Jay

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2837
Re: Creation of an ice hole
« Reply #32 on: January 04, 2017, 04:24:12 AM »

After a while in photography forums, what you see is a bunch of photographs that look like they were taken by the same person. Thats the harm of it.

I believe in getting critiques- but rarely ask for it from an Internet forum. The best critiques I get are from watching a client go through our portfolio. When they stop and tell you about a photograph as if you were unfamiliar with it - you know you have something with that shot.
With regard to the first point I see images, on this site anyway, that cover so many different genres often posted by individuals who do have a particular style, and probably a highly individualistic streak anyway, that that is rarely an issue.

As for the second point that is fine for you, but your situation is NOT generalisable. This is particularly the case since the whole debate came about suggesting that newbies should not post images. Not too many of them have clients to do their critiques, do they?
Logged

kikashi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6003
Re: Creation of an ice hole
« Reply #33 on: January 04, 2017, 04:35:46 AM »

I have found that most internet critique is worthless and often harmful. Lots of advice to conform to that group's aesthetic, which is often rather limited. Some of the best photography I've seen is technically flawed but the subject so interesting, it moves you and fascinates you. Why subject that pure intent to a forum which will tell you to crop a third of the sky, etc.?

Of course it is. Most of the stuff one can find on the Net, about anything, satisfies that description.

Lula is different. There are knowledgeable people here, professionals and amateurs. I post a lot of my photos here and I have learned a huge amount from the comments people make about them, critical and (occasionally) adulatory. I don't always agree with what is said: some comments I take with a pinch of salt because it's clear that the vision of the maker differs from mine, but they're all interesting. I judge the weight to be given, in part, by my views on the photos I have seen taken by those making the comments. I like to think that I'm a reasonably intelligent chap, able to distinguish useful technical and aesthetic comment from baseless opinion (not that the two are separated by a sharp line, of course).

Jeremy
Logged

sdwilsonsct

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2646
Re: Creation of an ice hole
« Reply #34 on: January 04, 2017, 04:44:22 AM »

Of course it is. Most of the stuff one can find on the Net, about anything, satisfies that description.

Lula is different. There are knowledgeable people here, professionals and amateurs. I post a lot of my photos here and I have learned a huge amount from the comments people make about them, critical and (occasionally) adulatory. I don't always agree with what is said: some comments I take with a pinch of salt because it's clear that the vision of the maker differs from mine, but they're all interesting. I judge the weight to be given, in part, by my views on the photos I have seen taken by those making the comments. I like to think that I'm a reasonably intelligent chap, able to distinguish useful technical and aesthetic comment from baseless opinion (not that the two are separated by a sharp line, of course).

Jeremy

Well said.

LesPalenik

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1024
    • advantica blog
Re: Creation of an ice hole
« Reply #35 on: January 04, 2017, 06:58:49 AM »


Expanding on the cliche,'Beauty is in the mind of the beholder', I would add that all the emotional appeal  and meaning of any photograph is in the mind of the beholder, whether the beholder is part of an audience or simply the person who took the shot.

I think it is reasonable to presume that any photograph can appeal to someone, with the exception, perhaps, of a photo which is presented by the photographer as an example of an image which is boring and meaningless. However, even then, there might be someone in an audience who disagrees and claims he finds the image has some sort of emotional appeal, whether abstract or symbolic.

Even the most mundane, poorly processed, out-of focus snapshot with blown highlights and blocked shadows, might have a significant emotional appeal to the person who took the shot because of the personal associations with the subject. (Not that I'm implying that Rob's recent photos, as an amateur, are that bad, of course.  ;)  )

This is the crux of the matter - whether the critic is a competition judge or another Lula member.

The image maker experienced the scene, captured it (possibly through multiple shots), selected the most appropriate frame, cropped it to his liking, processed it, and revisited it a few times before posting it to the forum. In summary, he is quite invested in the image and has good reasons why he shot it, how he processed and why he posted it to an audience. On the other hand, the reviewer, most of the time totally unfamiliar with the scene and subject, looks at it for a few seconds, and then issues his verdict. In addition, the image maker may like bold vibrant colors, fast shutter speed, and strengthening the impact by placing the subject centrally,  whereas the "more sophisticated" reviewer would prefer a monochrome conversion, blurred silky water, and of course, placing the main subject according to the rule of thirds. He would also prefer tighter cropping and positioning the camera two steps to the left.

Another factor influencing the critic's evaluation of an image is his previous experience and familiarity with the presented landscape or scene. If he has never before seen a picture of an Antelope canyon or the Bridal waterfall with February sunset light on it, he would give it a much higher score than to a muted and artistic interpretation of a fall scene of a bubbling brook in Vermont - with or without a beaver. Or maybe he didn't get enough sleep last night, or conversely his Adobe shares just moved up.

Photo competitions judged by accredited judges are best examples of the differences of what's going on in judges heads. Quite often a specific image would elicit lowest possible score from one judge and high accolades from another judge. Much worse than in figure skating.

So while image posting to the forum is a good idea, ignoring the critics can contribute to an even better experience.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2017, 07:21:49 AM by LesPalenik »
Logged

Sharon VL

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 194
Re: Creation of an ice hole
« Reply #36 on: January 04, 2017, 11:58:40 AM »

With regard to the first point I see images, on this site anyway, that cover so many different genres often posted by individuals who do have a particular style, and probably a highly individualistic streak anyway, that that is rarely an issue.

As for the second point that is fine for you, but your situation is NOT generalisable. This is particularly the case since the whole debate came about suggesting that newbies should not post images. Not too many of them have clients to do their critiques, do they?

You make the oddest arguments - because I am successful, what I say has no value to new photographers??  There are lots of ways to get your photos critiqued that don't involve posting on a forum. Some might cost you a little but will have much more value to you as they won't be influenced by whether or not you " like" the critiquer's photos.

I don't see any point in continuing this as I am sure you will find some odd argument to make.

Tony Jay

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2837
Re: Creation of an ice hole
« Reply #37 on: January 04, 2017, 07:15:05 PM »

You make the oddest arguments - because I am successful, what I say has no value to new photographers??  There are lots of ways to get your photos critiqued that don't involve posting on a forum. Some might cost you a little but will have much more value to you as they won't be influenced by whether or not you " like" the critiquer's photos.

I don't see any point in continuing this as I am sure you will find some odd argument to make.

Firstly your success, or otherwise, has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with the price of tea in this matter.
Secondly, in your previous post you made no mention of the supposed "lots of ways to get your photos critiqued."
You only mentioned one way - your clients.
I most definitely questioned this because it was such an illogical response to an issue dealing with mainly non-professional photographers.
If calling out your illogical response is "odd" - then so be it.

As for the legion of new photographers out there who apparently need your help, why don't you help them out and specify the "lots of ways to get your photos critiqued" instead of trying to assign personally insulting labels to myself.
Logged

Sharon VL

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 194
Re: Creation of an ice hole
« Reply #38 on: January 04, 2017, 08:24:57 PM »

Wow, you have taken every single thing I said and twisted it. I first said I agreed with Rob and you wrote a long response that you extrapolated from my simple statement.  I agree with a Rob. I don't agree with you. Is that clear enough?

Tony Jay

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2837
Re: Creation of an ice hole
« Reply #39 on: January 04, 2017, 09:06:27 PM »

Actually I have not twisted anything.
If anyone has indulged in that sort of play it would be you.

I think it is pretty clear that one cannot interact with you on a logical level.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up