NO this was not a general discussion that I responded to harshly, he specifically stated the the M85 F2.0 lens which the thread was originally written about "has just about the smoothest bokeh of any lens I have seen" and suggested that the reason was most likely bad digital processing completely ignoring the fact that I had already stated teh M85 F2.0 lens had very bad bokeh visible IN THE VIEWFINDER which should have been a clue for him as well as the photos I posted. If he suspected that sharpening or processing might be causing the problem he should have asked about it, not assumed it must be, implying that I dont know what bad bokeh is when I see it or cant do basic digital image processing.
Regarding "taking my side" on that other thread, continuing that thread by posting replies without bothering to change the thread header containing JCO and the offensive "A-word" right in the subject header was NOT taking my side the way I see/saw it, it only made it far worse & I found it hard to believe it wasnt being done intentionally at the time. The whole point of my complaint was that was being said in the headers and you all just continued to do it at the time... jco -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shel Belinkoff Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 5:33 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: RE: More 85mm f2.0 smc-M bokeh Looks like I'm going to need tighter filtering, but, as long as I saw this ... JCO, the thread has moved from your specific comment through the general rendering of the 85mm lens bokeh to some general comments about bokeh. It's no longer about YOUR specific comments. Threads and discussions on the PDML, as well as other mail lists, tend to wander. Further, you are now making a personal attack by calling a contributor to the thread "clueless." True, it's only a mild attack, but one that's going to leave you open to some negative comments and possibly start another flame war, more than likely causing you to, once again, use abusive language and post your messages using lots of upper case letters, and get any number of people here to the point where they'll start responding in kind, as which already seems to be the case. I just don't understand you. A couple of days ago Norm and I apologized for contributing to the last outburst, and Tim strongly took your side of that issue, and your response was "fuck you" in three separate posts, one to Norm, one directed at me, and least understandable, one to Tim. Relax, chill out, enjoy your camera, or your DVD player, or your HDTV ... vent your anger in other ways - go out and take a walk, get some exercise, cut back on the sugar intake. LIGHTEN UP - not every comment is about you or directed to you. Kind regards, Shel > -------------- Original message ---------------------- > From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Secondly, this WR guy's posts, really show > > he is completely clueless. His deductions make > > no sense because he either doesnt understand > > or never noticed how unsharp mask works > > or he doesnt read the posts in entirety because I clearly stated > > that this bokeh problem is easily visible in the viewfinder. Either > > or both ways its just plain bad to be posting completely wrong stuff > > like that based on lack of knowledge in the manner in which he posts > > it. -- 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
