It only happens when you attempt to deflect any sort of criticism by "demanding" one be pulled into a semantic quagmire. My mistake was in thinking that the descriptive terms used would lead you to a fix without my help. Thanks for emphasizing my misspelling "feigning".
Jack --- Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jack, you're such a pill. I don't "feign" ignorance ... don't have > to > <LOL> You'll note that Paul and Godders made comments that I could > understand. They commented in photographic terms that meant > something to > me, were precise wrt what they meant, and suggested possible ways to > fix > what they saw. While I don't expect you to be as knowledgeable as > either > of them, simple photographic terms like contrast, hue, saturation, > curves, > and the like, should, by now, be second nature to you. You've been > photographing for quite some time, and have been on this list long > enough, > to be able to explain what you see, and make criticisms or offer > suggestions in a way that others can more readily understand you. > > Not only do I frequently not understand you, but when I ask for an > explanation or a clarification of what you said or meant, you respond > with > some wise ass remark as you did here. This is the second or third > time > you've done that after I asked for more info from you. > > > > Shel > > > > > [Original Message] > > From: Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> > > You may find faining misunderstanding easier than defending your > work. > > If so, enough said. > > > > Jack > > > > --- Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > No, I don't understand what you mean ... I often don't understand > > > your > > > comments, jack. "Film over the image?" What are you trying to > say? > > > Lack > > > of contrast? Muddy? Colors of low saturation? Not bright > enough? > > > Not > > > sharp enough? What do you mean by "check the mugger person's > mocha?" > > > Is > > > that a joke, or do you mean something more? Sorry Jack, you're > not > > > being > > > precise enough for me to understand you. > > > > > > Shel > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Original Message] > > > > From: Jack Davis > > > > > > > I'm certain you "understand" the words. Your point has to be > that > > > you > > > > just don't agree with them. Right? > > > > > > > > Jack > > > > > > > > --- Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I don't understand your comments, but thank you for > commenting. > > > > > > > > > > Shel > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Original Message] > > > > > > From: Jack Davis > > > > > > > > > > > Honestly appears to have a sort of film over the image. > > > > > > Makes me want to clean my glasses. > > > > > > Best check the mugger person's mocha. > > > > > > > > > > istDS, A50/1.4 @ F/2.8, ISO 3200, 1/40 sec > > > > > http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/zocalao.html > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > > [email protected] > > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > [email protected] > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
