Pages: 1 ... 62 63 [64] 65 66 ... 75   Go Down

Author Topic: Without Prejudice  (Read 321063 times)

kikashi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5375
Re: Without Prejudice
« Reply #1260 on: September 23, 2012, 02:25:18 AM »

P.S. I didn't enjoy the cartoon in the link; I don't like insulting or treading on anyone's religious beliefs. Who knows: they may even be correct. There's certainly something bigger than any of us out there or, even, inside each one of us.

The cartoon isn't intended to insult or tread on anyone's beliefs, Rob! Its sole aim is to ridicule the reaction. I'm astonished by your comment.

Jeremy
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 14469
Re: Without Prejudice
« Reply #1261 on: September 23, 2012, 04:46:30 AM »

The cartoon isn't intended to insult or tread on anyone's beliefs, Rob! Its sole aim is to ridicule the reaction. I'm astonished by your comment.

Jeremy


Jeremy, I realise perfectly well its why; that in no way means that I think it's acceptable to ridicule or make obscene pictures of anyone, never mind anyone's religious symbols. It shares the morality of the newspaper industry publishing images of a distressed Diana under the guise of objecting to others doing exactly the same thing.

Simply to produce further caricatures and disrespect under the heading of satire in no way alters the content; it just pastes on additional layers of cyncism and, possibly, hypocricy.

No, I wouldn't officialy ban such things; I'd hope that people wouldn't seize upon the freedoms we enjoy in order to do what this new cartoon does. And in my opinion, what it does is add fuel to a fire and offend yet more people, myself included. I dislike mocking people's beliefs; as long as they don't impinge upon my life in some negative manner, I feel they should be respected. What defence can there be for the new cartoon? Not one religion but many are mocked and insulted within it; where the improvement, the saving grace? I think the drawing would be offensive regardless of the nature of the specific characters depicted.

If that makes me appear a prig, then so be it.

Rob C

Chris Calohan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2526
  • Editing Allowed
Re: Without Prejudice
« Reply #1262 on: September 24, 2012, 07:53:33 AM »

Gee, what a cracker capture of a cracker moment there Doug.  Is it the fruit of thoughtful planning or are you the beneficiary of happenstance.

My curiosity is sparked by the flag at half-mast.  Was that for the shuttle or somebody else's demise?

Cheers,

W

It was and still is for Neil Armstrong, and fittingly so for this image, the first man to step foot on the moon.
Logged
What! Me Worry?

WalterEG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1155
Re: Without Prejudice
« Reply #1263 on: September 24, 2012, 09:01:58 AM »

Thanks for the info Chris,

Vexillology is such a strange and pedantic discipline.  Each country has its own regulations, but it seems strange to leave a flag at half-mast for as long as this seems to suggest.

Logged

Chris Calohan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2526
  • Editing Allowed
Re: Without Prejudice
« Reply #1264 on: September 24, 2012, 10:01:04 AM »

30 days is the general rule for dignitaries such as presidents, ten days for VP's, members of congress, etc. However, there are always those we hold in very high esteem who get equal honor as would a president but this can only be through an executive presidential order. You have to be in high cotton to get a full month. Most half-mast events are one day only.
Logged
What! Me Worry?

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 14469
Re: Without Prejudice
« Reply #1265 on: September 26, 2012, 05:10:35 AM »

I took this shot at the end of the local public carpark.

I think it probaby illustrates what's basically amiss with cheap digital (never owned MFD so can't comment on that score) for subjects such as this, and also seems to show the problems that some of the Merrill images of like subjects do: sand-like texture where no sand exists. This shot doesn't look any the more smooth on the monitor pre-posting here.

It strikes me that even my venerable 40s/early 50s Kodak Brownie Reflex (127 film?) would, at such a size, have given a superior rendering of the picture. To be fair, the cellphone doesn't cope too badly with smooth subjects such as car bodies. But small, complex detail: forget it.

;-(

Rob C
« Last Edit: January 13, 2013, 01:37:21 PM by Rob C »
Logged

WalterEG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1155
Re: Without Prejudice
« Reply #1266 on: September 26, 2012, 05:47:00 AM »

Resolving fine detail is never a strongpoint with small devices - especially in a formal array (grid) of light sensitive points.  Aaah, for the joys of a random array.

W
Logged

John R

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1369
Re: Without Prejudice
« Reply #1267 on: September 28, 2012, 05:33:08 PM »

I am on what I call an Autumn Binge of shooting and travelling. Took these two just outside of Algonquin Park.





And yes I do take straight images, if one wants to call them that.

Logged

WalterEG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1155
Re: Without Prejudice
« Reply #1268 on: September 28, 2012, 05:36:16 PM »

John,

Nothing more enjoyable to see than pictures from a man marching to the beat of his own drummer and just celebrating his craft and the world that surrounds him.

Enjoy your travels, make the most of autumn and please keep posting.

Cheers,

Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11096
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: Without Prejudice
« Reply #1269 on: September 28, 2012, 11:33:56 PM »

I especially enjy your "non-straight" ones, John.
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my photo website. New images each season. Also visit my new website: http://ericneedsakidney.org

John R

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1369
Re: Without Prejudice
« Reply #1270 on: September 29, 2012, 07:01:42 PM »

Thanks Walter and Eric. I have one more, which is part luck and part skill. Bought a new wide angle zoom and of course kept in mind that such lenses are prone to flare when the light or sun creeps in. But started to notice some interesting effects when I included the flare and the rest is trial and error. I really like this one, which I slightly cropped, otherwise untouched because I notice that sharpening, or almost any adjustments cost me the wonderful ephemeral quality.

« Last Edit: September 29, 2012, 07:05:16 PM by John R »
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11096
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: Without Prejudice
« Reply #1271 on: September 29, 2012, 08:13:32 PM »

I like it, John!
Flare can indeed be useful at times.
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my photo website. New images each season. Also visit my new website: http://ericneedsakidney.org

WalterEG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1155
Re: Without Prejudice
« Reply #1272 on: September 30, 2012, 01:06:18 AM »

Verging on the greeting card.
Logged

Chris Calohan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2526
  • Editing Allowed
Re: Without Prejudice
« Reply #1273 on: September 30, 2012, 08:25:24 AM »

Verging on the greeting card.

I have a friend who regularly does the Art Show circuit. He sells about $1,000 per show in "Cards, Calendars, etc" a show. He says it's what allows him to continue as sales on actual photos can be either real good, or dismal depending on the show, but "pretty pics as postcards or greeting cards sell like hotcakes in either case. He said at one time it bothered him to solicit himself in photo whoredom, but now he just laughs all the way to the bank.

Greet away, I say!  ;D
Logged
What! Me Worry?

WalterEG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1155
Re: Without Prejudice
« Reply #1274 on: September 30, 2012, 08:31:48 AM »

Chris,

I am pretty much in concurrence with your friend.

Logged

kikashi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5375
Re: Without Prejudice
« Reply #1275 on: September 30, 2012, 01:12:05 PM »

I have a friend who regularly does the Art Show circuit. He sells about $1,000 per show in "Cards, Calendars, etc" a show. He says it's what allows him to continue as sales on actual photos can be either real good, or dismal depending on the show, but "pretty pics as postcards or greeting cards sell like hotcakes in either case. He said at one time it bothered him to solicit himself in photo whoredom, but now he just laughs all the way to the bank.

Greet away, I say!  ;D

How can anyone feel degraded by selling to people exactly what they want to buy?

Jeremy
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9365
  • When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.
    • My website
Re: Without Prejudice
« Reply #1276 on: September 30, 2012, 01:16:41 PM »

How can anyone feel degraded by selling to people exactly what they want to buy?

Jeremy

Oh, you do not want to go there, Jeremy ;D (hint: something to do with the oldest profession)

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 14469
Re: Without Prejudice
« Reply #1277 on: September 30, 2012, 01:30:37 PM »

Oh, you do not want to go there, Jeremy ;D (hint: something to do with the oldest profession)


And you certainly don't want to go there for your kicks! Or have I got that the wrong way around?

But, just before I leave this post, if you went there and didn't have to pay, would the thing be the same, from a moral perspective?

;-)

Rob C

Bruce Cox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 942
    • pbase galleries
Re: Without Prejudice
« Reply #1278 on: September 30, 2012, 07:40:52 PM »

A buck, a frank, or a yen...

Bruce
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 14469
Re: Without Prejudice
« Reply #1279 on: October 01, 2012, 04:41:54 AM »

What a lovely picture!

Rob C
Pages: 1 ... 62 63 [64] 65 66 ... 75   Go Up