I gave my honest reaction to the crude first half dozen words of your first sentence. I read no further nor do I intend to. You're obviously still stinging from the dressing down you receive some time ago.
Jack --- On Mon, 4/5/10, Joseph McAllister <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Joseph McAllister <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Define "blown out" :-) > To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <[email protected]> > Date: Monday, April 5, 2010, 2:38 PM > On Apr 5, 2010, at 14:36 , Godfrey > DiGiorgi wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 1:28 PM, Jack Davis <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Well the conversation went on for several posts > and finally I invited posters to define what they consider a > "blown out" image. IOW, how featureless must the image be to > meet your criteria of "blown out." > >> Thought it might explain why the disparity of > opinions beyond the monitor's contribution. > > > > And I gave you a precise answer ... said yet another > way, "An image is > > 'blown out' when the detail you are trying to retain > is no longer > > visible." > > > > It's a testament to your inability to articulate an > intelligible > > question if you don't understand what I said. But of > course, you > > probably don't want to learn or read anything that > disagrees with your > > nebulous notions. > > > Another Lude, Sir Godfrey? > > > Joseph McAllister > Pentaxian > > http://gallery.me.com/jomac > http://web.me.com/jomac/show.me/Blog/Blog.html > > > --PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link > directly above and follow the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
