As such discussions will not lead us anywhere- *this topic is closed for any further discussion*. May I request everybody to pl. cooperate with me.
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 2:23 PM, Adesh Shivkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > I think Padminiji has made very good suggestion but in an extremely harsh > and sarcastic tone (marvels of composition,wall hangings et.al)............the > comment on "not a primarily a photographic site" is also quite > amusing....... > > I for one got hooked to wildflowers ONLY after seeing some amazing images > (artistic and well composed etc..etc..)and from the work in > Indiatreepix...and I am extremely indebt to this group and the people who so > enthusiastically and regularly keep this group alive.....I have gained > immense knowledge and interest thro' this group. > > There are certain restrictions for a photographer which Mr.Satish Phadke > has nicely explained in one of the earlier mails.....Agreed that we should > capture different parts (particularly of trees) when seeking IDs or > otherwise.....but for many wild flowers (not all offcourse) , the flower > images are sufficient to ID it......and I believe this forum is not just > about Iding, but also sharing the visually appealing images of Indian > flora.....that REALLY goes a long way to inculcate interest in flora among > those who otherwise feel bored (and I know many of my friends who have good > interested in flora through photography)....... there has to be an effort to > bring out the beauty of flowers through the images and I am happy to see > that this is happening here..... > > Why should all the images be only about identifications? why not also about > creating interest thro' good images ? > > Secondly a photographer shares the specification of lens and camera and > exposure details, so that people who want to take up or learn to take good > photographs could definately learn from this... > > Offcourse, I have started posting both types of images (A close-up as well > as the whole plant) after Padminiji's suggestion sometime > back......whereever possible....and will continue to do so... > > But to sarcastically negate the wonderful and visually appealling images of > the photographers (that they have taken wih great efforts) and to make it > look thrash by saying that the content is not suitable to this site > ......... is something which is really annoying ..... > > Regards, > Adesh Shivkar > > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 12:19 PM, Anand Kumar Bhatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > >> Padminiji. Your point is well taken. But the name of the site is >> 'indiantreepix'. Now pix can have only one meaning. I don't kow how you >> assume that it is not primarily a photography site (for trees, and its >> various parts). But yes, what you say is correct. The view of the whole tree >> as well would a better idea of the tree, and make it more identifiable to >> the members. >> akbhatt >> >> On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 10:57 PM, Padmini Raghavan <[EMAIL >> PROTECTED]>wrote: >> >>> I am afraid it is becoming a fashion to send photos which are marvels of >>> composition and colour and which would make stunning wall hangings. However >>> as this is not primarily a photography site ( with exposure and lens details >>> etc) maybe it would be better to show the whole plant or tree followed by >>> it's individual parts so that everyone is able to enrich their knowledge of >>> flora. >>> I, for one, have had the thrill of recognising many previously unnamed >>> plants and trees from the detailed views shown of the different parts of the >>> plant or tree. >>> This is not to detract from the artistic value of the pictures shown but >>> to hope that the content would be more suitable to this site. >>> Padmini Raghavan. >>> >>> >>> On 9/26/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Recently several photos appeared showing only flowers or the >>>> inflorescens of the plants. Pl. try to include at least the leaves, if >>>> the whole plant can not be accommodated >>>> >>>> On Sep 26, 9:26 pm, "satish phadke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> > Dipkadi montanum >>>> > A Liliaceae family member seen amongst a lot of Strbilanthus bushes on >>>> Kas >>>> > plateau. >>>> > Satish Phadke >>>> > >>>> > Dipkadi montanum.jpg >>>> > 189KViewDownload >>>> >>> >>> >>> > > > > -- With regards, J.M.Garg "We often ignore the beauty around us" Creating Awareness about Indian Flora & Fauna: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jmgarg1 For learning about our trees & plants, please visit/ join Google e-group (Indiantreepix) http://groups.google.co.in/group/indiantreepix?hl=en --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "indiantreepix" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.co.in/group/indiantreepix?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
