Looking forward to your next!
Frantisek
-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PAW: Window Washers
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 15:31:47 +0200
Looking forward to your next!
Frantisek
_
MSN Premium with Virus Guard and Firewall* from McAfee® Security : 2
SB Sorry, Frank, this one just doesn't make it.
Sometimes it's better to know why it doesn't make it, like you wrote,
than just knowing it makes it :)
Nice critique Shel! I have enough of similar shots which would have
benefited from more thinking.
fra
fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer
From: Peter J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PAW: Window Washers
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 07:47:39 -0400
The flip comment would be: As well you should! But on reflection I have
to ask why. It's
The flip comment would be: As well you should! But on reflection I
have to ask why. It's not
at all bad. Not enough Camera movement? (I couldn't resist I'm sorry).
frank theriault wrote:
I despise this photo:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2457638
But I'm posting it anyway.
You've every reason to dislike it, Frank, although I do think despise may
be a little over reactive ;-))
First, it's a cliche subject. Every jamoke with a long lens has something
like this in their portfolio. There's nothing new or innovative here, and,
imo, you choice of focal length is all
Oppenheimer
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: PAW: Window Washers
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 08:23:07 -0700
You've every reason to dislike it, Frank, although I do think despise may
be a little over reactive ;-))
First, it's a cliche
7 matches
Mail list logo
