Jump to content


Skye

Member Since 02 Nov 2006
Offline Last Active Aug 13 2008 05:29 PM
*****

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Slander

27 July 2008 - 07:48 PM

----
[/quote]Kelly's response:

Have ro give you credit where its due "D" Your good at words.
But as I stated in your images enough is enough & I shall not lowewr myself to you (or your standards).
I could post your emails in here but I'm not like you... My husband is a lawyer (in C.A. Litigation) and read ALL what has been said... each PM you sent & received & as for slaundering your name that statement is untrue.
As I wrote in your last image in which you were so "Kind" to be you... I added this:
"Would you like me to post YOUR messages D??? It could be VERY Interesting ... couldn't it BUT then I'm not you and am NOT going to play your ohhhh favour me scenario... GROW UP! "

One more thing... this is suppose to be a Photography blog... not a spout off blog. so from now on I shall ignore you...
Your not worth my time of day nor energy!
Take care...
~Kelly
[/quote]
-----
Kelly,
Dear, I have only sent you one email that was the one I have just posted here, and I have not responded to you since. You are either confused with whom you are in correspondence, or just plain.... Fabricating The Truth...... I have not sent you another email since, and that is the truth! Please feel free to produce them!!!!!! Do you wish to take this up with Mark. I would be happy to do so. I'm sure he has a record of all email that I have sent and received.
As it is I am more than tired of your inappropriate comments to me under my photography work. What is it that you are trying to prove, dear??????? In other words, What are you playing at?????????????

That's lovely that your husband is a Lawyer. Maybe he can set you straight about slandering someone, and inappropriate behaviors in public forums. Bring him on, I'd love to chat!!!!!!!!
Respectfully Submitted,
Daenna

In Topic: Feelings

27 July 2008 - 07:39 PM

QUOTE (JasminenHoney @ Jul 27 2008, 01:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
QUOTE (Skye @ Jul 27 2008, 09:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
QUOTE (JasminenHoney @ Jul 26 2008, 03:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
QUOTE (HelenC @ Jul 14 2008, 11:24 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Chris
Thanks for the comment and feedback... useful check on the comments that I would never have worked out!

I hope I am pretty close to "normal". One thing I often suggest to people is the email version of counting to ten before responding to comments. When you read something that gets your hackles up, walk away from the computer and do something else for a few minutes before re-reading and then deciding how to reply. Has saved me from many a rash response in business smile.gif

Helen



Hi there...
Helen I agree 100% with counting to ten or even walking away before & if one decides to reply to an comment that they feel or think is just unright.
Prime example was a lastnights comment in a term someone known as D.Nerwick stated..
I don't fancy anyone being as forthright in calling any member a "Nit" or any other demeaning thing.
I don't care if that person has drunk 20 bottles of wine, that is no excuse for such nonsence in a members action of speech.
Am I hurt??? Right now anger is the word that fits but underneath it is hurt.
This is not the first time she has done this openly... nor do I feel it shall be her last.
All appealing on the outside (when it suits her) but underneath some very hostel feelings.
I guess a wolf (to a degree) in a sheeps clothing.
I must add that this comment was made lastnight & I veiwed it... (upset) walked away for 3 hrs... thought I was ok but in reality I wasn't... I slept the night thinking about my own comment I made to John's image & I felt then as I do even now, that John has always guided me with my images (as I am or was rather a newbie) and I took his insights & his positivity in to my own awareness of photography in the process of learning. Very much appreciated too, I must add. I think I know John well enough to say that with my written words as to not hurt his attempt with HDR nor take my comment to heart... meaning no harm intended rather a real honest opinion.
Something that apparently... "D" doesn't see fit in me making.
I'm at the point of really saying what I think & feel, ...no more artifical masks or ratings like so many others do.
I'm here to learn photography at its fullest and with that comes "HONESTY".
One tends to forget that when using a computer ... It lacks showing the expression other than through words and If John was by my side. I know he would have seen not a person making a judgement call on his image or HDR but rather a person with sincerity.
Okay... I need to stop this for now... too many thoughts churning.
~Kelly

----------------
Hello Kelly, ...

First of all, My name is D. Newkirk, or Daenna. If you are going to slander my name all over the blog, please spell it correctly. I would very much appreciate it. Secondly, I didn't reference your name in anyway with the word, 'nit.' I made a general statement in reference to those who made disparaging comments about anyone who was trying their creative hand at HDR, or any other creative aspect they wish to apply to their photography. If you--Kelly wish to dump yourself in that category, I can't stop you dear. Thirdly,... and flat out, Kelly it is you that has mouthed off to me more than once, since you have been on this blog, and your emails to me, have NOT been appreciated. Case in point on just one of them:

On October, 11, 2007, You wrote me with the following statement in an email:
Kelly...
QUOTE
That doesn't make you an expert in photography or fine arts.
Nor does it make you an expert EVEN with a degree besidews anyone on line can claim to be a pro, and everyone has oppinions.
Sometimes I think ppl who think they know ALL in photography & use such items or programs to enrich their subjects NEED to go back and re-think what photography is/was invented for.
Take Ansel Adams... No fancy programs needed... He by far is/was the GREATEST Photographer ever known & will be, long afte I am dead!
He is my inspirations & it is his work/skills I judge other work on.
Sorry, but that's just me... like it or not.


-My email in response to you Kelly, was as follows:

Dear JasminenHoney or Kelly,

Yes, everyone does have opinions, Kelly, but it is HOW you voice your opinions that make you respected on this site, with friends, associates and fellow human beings. We at this site and I'm sure many if not all will agree...That our purpose here mainly is this:

1. To study and appreciate each others work. Not to tear down another person's work.

2. Share constructive positive tips, advice and or suggestions, with others. These come from an international community of like minded photographers. We share our talents and love of photography with each other in a respectful way. (you may wish to check out... <www.northscape.co.uk/index.html> or
<www.luminous-landscapes.com/tutorials/hdr.shtml>)
These are just two of the many sites that come highly recomended to those perusing this site.

3. While we may be partaking in competitions, we do so by encouragement and guiding each other to achieve higher skill levels.

4. To build a portfolio so that others may view. ("Hopefully without rude critiques!")
(I'm sure that there are many other reasons indiviuals have for posting their work on this site, but I think I have covered some of the basics.)

Now to address your e-mail to me once again, Kelly...You have accused me of being a know-it-all in your e-mail to me. No Kelly I'm not a know-it-all, but I am definately not closed minded to other people's work as you have shown Stephen.

The use of items or programs???...(as you put it... "and use such items or programs to enrich their subjects NEED")...I can only gather that you are refering to the use of Photoshop, I can't even guess what else it is that you are stating here. Could it be digital cameras, what are you using, may I ask? You may wish to clairify this statement, I'm sure I would love to answer you if you had completed this thought. Please do so!

Yes most of us do use photoshop to enhance our images. You see we now live in the digital age, and we use it to clone out smudges that collect on our digital camera sensors. We use Photoshop to tweak our levels and or curves to improve the image luminance. We frame our work in Photoshop and or other imaging programs. There are no fast hard rules against it. Some photographers here even dabble in creative artistic works combining their photographs with their art abilities; which I might add, "they have the right to do so!" They also have the right to be Appreciated and respected for doing creative work. May I remind you that you are using a program to post your work, otherwise we would not be rejoicing over it here on the internet.

In your statement Kelly,you said...(re-think what photography is/was invented for.)
My answer: "The story of photography begins in 1839, with Louis-Jacques-Mandé Daguerre of France and William Henry Fox Talbot of England. They announced separately two exciting new processes that would revolutionize societies perception of reality. These processes known as Daguerreotype and calotype (Talbotype), respectively". This statement is taken from a book about the history of photography. The year is now 2007, and I believe that I would be correct in my summation...that photography continues to evolve and revolutionize societies perceptions of reality to this day.

I for one, was helping you with suggestions on how to better photograph you bottles / decanters,... I recall that these items were in color, (They are very lovely indeed, and in my correspondenc with you I stated that, I enjoyed your sharing them with us. Even now I hope you will succeed in photographing them to their highest potential)...but are you stating that only black and white photography has the right to exist??? I am not sure what your meaning is by writing me this,...?...In your statement Kelly, you said... "what photography is/was invented for." Maybe you could clue me in on your thoughts here?

Concerning your dropping Mr. Ansel Adam's name in my lap, so to speak,...Mr. Adams corresponded with my father by mail and on the phone in 1972 up to about the time he passed away in 1984. You see my father was the offset photographer for a company here in Iowa. They reproduced hard bound book covers for library edition and childrens library books. Mr. Adams maintained strict ownership copy rights that few people to this day, maintain over their artistic works. In that any and I mean any--company printing or reprinting his works, had to have his written approval and a press proof sent to him before he would consent to even reprint a cover to a book of his, for even a library edition reprinted cover. Mr. Adams gave my father exclusive rights to reproduce all of his book covers excluding all other companies after seeing my father's skills, and attention to detail in the reproduction of his book covers. Mr. Adams and my father struck up a friendship of correspondence because of their shared love of photography. (Yes, my father was and is a very proficient photographer. Without that knowledge and skill he would not have been a very good offset photographer in both black and white halftones, and high-end color work.) (I learned from the best my, father. He has and countinues to this day to share his knowledge with me, and sometimes I get to share my skills with him.) When I went to work for that same company in 1981, as a graphics technician and assistant supervisor, I also spoke with Mr. Adams, as he was my client in working out any and all details concerning the construction of his book covers. Mr. Adams was one of the nicest and most interesting people you could ever have hoped to meet. He expected high quality results for his covers and was always able to assist us with kindness and respect when working with him.

I am so glad that you hold Mr. Adams in such high regard, his work is second to no one. What I don't understand is why you are using Mr. Adams exquiste black and white photography, which is an art form unto it's self,--as a guide-post to judging someones color images. This makes no sense what-so-ever, not to me or anyone else here on the blog. Color photography really is completely different in character altogether. Most of us are able to look at and appreciate both mediums respectively. There are many books and magazines that will give you a plethora of explanations for the technical side as well as the philosophical aspects of photography.

By the way Kelly, Mr. Adams didn't use, ...as you put it, –"No fancy programs needed..." My answer: No, he did not use Photoshop, one, it wasn't invented yet, Do you understand that?
"It wasn't invented yet!" Who's to say he would not have had a great time trying it out if it had been invented. He did use an enlarger and some really nice cameras, he also sought out the best papers to use on his work and he even used the micro wave to dry his prints, in which he discussed temperature setting with my father. Mr. Adams was, incase you don't know, an environmentalist, he would have loved to find a way of producing his work without the use of caustic chemicals. He even spoke about this to my father. And the effect that photographic chemicals had on his health and the environment. (I am now facing some problems on my own hands due to chemical exposure from my enlarger days. I have to wear white cotten gloves in the summer to keep the sun from aggravating my skin, and thermal fingerless gloves in the winter for the same reason. I don't think you even realize how really inovative Mr. Adam's was. Are you seeing the bigger picture here Kelly? He made references to people working in the field of photography and printing who did not take the pride, time or the skill it took to produce good work, no mater what proceses they used. A common misconsception is that people were thinking that he felt that everone had to do things his way. Not true at all, Mr. Adams just wanted people to strive to achieve excellence in there work. Which has nothing to do with the use of photoshop.

Unfortunately, you are closing your mind to the possibilities of others as well as your own, when you trash someone elses work. What I'm getting at Kelly, is quite simple,...it comes from a Beatrix Potter book..."If you can't say something nice don't say anything at all." If you have an issue with a person's work, say something positive about what you may like about it first and foremost. Then offer a suggestion nicely and ask if they wouldn't mind trying such and such as an alternative to: In your statement Kelly, you said...
"It's very nice but the black against the flower is harsh... looks like a cut out form. I love flower's... I'm a florist by trade...." (Here in this statement, you said it's very nice then you proceeded to trash his work without offering any suggestion as to what he might try to do to bring his work up to "your standard". The fact that you love flowers, is irrelevent to the your issue at hand, Kelly. The fact that you are a florist by trade, does not have anything to do with this gentleman's photography. Are you claiming that because you're a florist, and that you know how to arrange flowers in a vase or floral foam,--you have some insite or overriding influence as to how every flower in the universe should be viewed? I don't believe your throwing your florist weight at him is any indication, that his creative skills as a photographer are lacking in anyway. Working with flowers myself, and reading many books on the subject as well as teaching others how to arrange flowers,...I can truely state that I have never once read or had it stated to me,... that I could not set an arrangement let alone a single flower against a black background.)

(or this statement of yours Kelly,)
~Jass
I have to disagree with you Nige... The outline on the petals are far too sharp for a real flower.. no matter how good you are at photography... Some program did enhancement and it looks un-natural. I do & have alot of personal experience with lots of flower's & even though the image of this flower is beautiful, the background & the sharpness of the edges make this image look in my veiw as not quite right. Even the stem is not correct.
~Jass (Now your stating that his flower is over sharpened, it may be so, I'll give you that much, but there is a good reason for sharpening and it's a difficult skill to learn not to over sharpen. When you post an image on the web especially in JPEG format you almost always NEED to sharpen your image just a touch because of what the JPEG format does to your image. You are directing a new issue at Nigel about Stephen's photo. Nigel was commenting probably on the crispness and clairity and detail of the flower. By the by, we photographers, often use term sharp when we mean crisp image.

(or this statement of yours Kelly,)
Sorry guys but if I rated this it would be very low...
Sorry Stephen it's my personal opinion as a florist... however much I like the flower the background still looks too fake. Jass

-My response,... ("Sorry guys but if I rated this it would be very low..." ...Now Kelly, that's just plain rude to someone! Once again you are throwing your weight as a florist around, and it doesn't have anything to do with a person's photographic skill. It's irrelevent to the issue of photography. Are you catching my drift?

(My response to you was...)
Sorry Kelly-Jass, but you are not a graphic and fine artist, nor have you studied photography for Thirty years. And yes, I worked in floral arranging as well. That doesn't make you an expert in photography or fine arts. ("Now obviously you did not appreciate my throwing my experience in photography and experience of floral arranging at you any more than I'm sure, Stephen, appreciated you throwing your floral arranging at him. Quid pro quo, Kelly!...But you didn't seem to get my point did you.")

Superb shot Stephen! Please don't be discouraged, (Those who can't critique rudely).
Both shots are extremely well executed, your color just pops! Daenna

(your response to me was...)
Perhaps not D... but it's ppl like us with no fancy skills that do buy the work that are produced.~ Kelly ( Actually Kelly it's people like fine art houses, galleries, museums, advertising agencies, stock image brokers, art /photography publishing houses that buy and promote work that is produced on the greater open market and we much of the time, buy from them. But I do not see to whom we buy our photography or art from, as having any rellevance to the subject at hand, Kelly.

The point that I am trying to making with you is that,..."it might be nice to work on yourself a little, concerning how you communicate to others by way of courtesy and respect to an individual and their work".

Now then It is a shame that you may not have, or like, or wish, to buy photoshop or other programs to improve your photography. I can only say that there are other programs and even what are called. lite versions of photoshop that you could try out. That is up to you. I don't think you will find to many of us here at the blog, use an enlarger or film camera's all the time. But on the other hand nor do we pull good work out from under our armpits. It's just a fact of life your going to have to deal with on your own.

Don't you dare e-mail me and throw your purist single minded florist issues at me, I don't suffer fools, Kelly. If you want to rant on and on and send me an insulting e-mail, then I suggest you try puristsareusdotcom. If you wish to take this up again with me or anyone else. I will be more than happy to publish this whole reply to you on the forum for further debate.

I'm on line here at the blog to improve my skills and help others. I enjoy there work and enjoy sharing mine. And by the by, I am who I say I am. I don't appreciate your insinuation that I am not. Also, I never told you I had a degree in anything, I am Journeyman trainned and registered, in both technical and offset camera processes. Self taught in Photoshop when 3.0 came out and I am now working in CS2. and in Illustrator 8. and many other programs related to my field. Why? It's my job as a graphic artist and Illustrator, and printing consultant.

You came up with that photography pro stuff all by yourself, Kelly, in your email to me as above stated. Yes, I have 30 years studied photography and worked in related fields with exposure to accepted styles of art. FYI setting a flower on a black background is a perfectly acceptable style of presenting images of flowers, by the way, so is a white background.

I don't consider my self a pro. I have a high skill level and expertise that you have not quite reached yet. There are many people on this site who are much closer to pro than I am. Also if you are going to quote me then do so correctly, especially when it's to my face. I'll be happy to correct any misconceptions you may have contrived.

I hope I will be looking forward to seeing your work, as a photographer and in your communications with others improve here at the blog. We are all here to support you along the way. Any questions you may have concerning photography, I will be happy to answer or guide you to a person who can or website, magazine, or book all you need do is ask.
Best wishes,
Daenna

(Kelly, after I responded to your email, you neither had the intestinal fortitude to respond and/or to apologize to me at that time.) (I have very respectfully left you alone on the blog, since your email to me. I did not wish to insight your wrath, or wish to have a conversation with you on any matter what so ever. As I did realize that you seem to take anything I would offer out of context, just as you have concerning my personal response to John's lovely photo. Once again you have attacked me and smeared me all over this blog. Why is that, Kelly????????????????????? This time I would really like an answer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
---------------------
And now you are skipping all over the blog and the forums and accusing me of: Offensive language that you feel was directed at you... you really do have some issues dear. I was talking to John, in a general sense, and made no comment to you personally. I will also invoke my freedom to give anyone I see fit a 10 for a rating, or say something nice to them when ever I wish,...(which has nothing what so ever to do with you personally, Kelly.) As far as my being God's gift,... He works in mysterious ways...LOL! In fact you must have read that statement incorrectly, (and it wouldn't be the first time that you have misconstrued something I've said, by the way,) I was poking fun at my self, in reference to my god complex, (and it had nothing, what so ever to do with you personally, Kelly.) Are you getting me dear. Are you capable of understanding anything it is that I am saying, dear??????????? By the way I'm flattered that you have been watching me so closely now for how you put it to Chris,..."For a full year!" "Really, I didn't think I was that interesting!"...LOL!


As for my artificial mask and that I'm a wolf in lambs clothing... "Wolf Wolf! ...LOL! blink.gif

If anyone else has a question or a misconception about me, please feel free to just ask me here, Thank you for your time!
Regards!
Daenna


Have ro give you credit where its due "D" Your good at words.
But as I stated in your images enough is enough & I shall not lowewr myself to you (or your standards).
I could post your emails in here but I'm not like you... My husband is a lawyer (in C.A. Litigation) and read ALL what has been said... each PM you sent & received & as for slaundering your name that statement is untrue.
As I wrote in your last image in which you were so "Kind" to be you... I added this:
"Would you like me to post YOUR messages D??? It could be VERY Interesting ... couldn't it BUT then I'm not you and am NOT going to play your ohhhh favour me scenario... GROW UP! "

One more thing... this is suppose to be a Photography blog... not a spout off blog. so from now on I shall ignore you...
Your not worth my time of day nor energy!
Take care...
~Kelly

-----
Kelly,
Dear, I have only sent you one email that was the one I have just posted here, and I have not responded to you since. You are either confused with whom you are in correspondence, or just plain.... Fabricating The Truth...... I have not sent you another email since, and that is the truth! Please feel free to produce them!!!!!! Do you wish to take this up with Mark. I would be happy to do so. I'm sure he has a record of all email that I have sent and received.
As it is I am more than tired of your inappropriate comments to me under my photography work. What is it that you are trying to prove, dear??????? In other words, What are you playing at?????????????

That's lovely that your husband is a Lawyer. Maybe he can set you straight about slandering someone, and inappropriate behaviors in public forums. Bring him on, I'd love to chat!!!!!!!!
Respectfully Submitted,
Daenna


In Topic: Feelings

27 July 2008 - 05:22 PM

QUOTE (JasminenHoney @ Jul 26 2008, 03:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
QUOTE (HelenC @ Jul 14 2008, 11:24 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Chris
Thanks for the comment and feedback... useful check on the comments that I would never have worked out!

I hope I am pretty close to "normal". One thing I often suggest to people is the email version of counting to ten before responding to comments. When you read something that gets your hackles up, walk away from the computer and do something else for a few minutes before re-reading and then deciding how to reply. Has saved me from many a rash response in business smile.gif

Helen



Hi there...
Helen I agree 100% with counting to ten or even walking away before & if one decides to reply to an comment that they feel or think is just unright.
Prime example was a lastnights comment in a term someone known as D.Nerwick stated..
I don't fancy anyone being as forthright in calling any member a "Nit" or any other demeaning thing.
I don't care if that person has drunk 20 bottles of wine, that is no excuse for such nonsence in a members action of speech.
Am I hurt??? Right now anger is the word that fits but underneath it is hurt.
This is not the first time she has done this openly... nor do I feel it shall be her last.
All appealing on the outside (when it suits her) but underneath some very hostel feelings.
I guess a wolf (to a degree) in a sheeps clothing.
I must add that this comment was made lastnight & I veiwed it... (upset) walked away for 3 hrs... thought I was ok but in reality I wasn't... I slept the night thinking about my own comment I made to John's image & I felt then as I do even now, that John has always guided me with my images (as I am or was rather a newbie) and I took his insights & his positivity in to my own awareness of photography in the process of learning. Very much appreciated too, I must add. I think I know John well enough to say that with my written words as to not hurt his attempt with HDR nor take my comment to heart... meaning no harm intended rather a real honest opinion.
Something that apparently... "D" doesn't see fit in me making.
I'm at the point of really saying what I think & feel, ...no more artifical masks or ratings like so many others do.
I'm here to learn photography at its fullest and with that comes "HONESTY".
One tends to forget that when using a computer ... It lacks showing the expression other than through words and If John was by my side. I know he would have seen not a person making a judgement call on his image or HDR but rather a person with sincerity.
Okay... I need to stop this for now... too many thoughts churning.
~Kelly

----------------
Hello Kelly, ...

First of all, My name is D. Newkirk, or Daenna. If you are going to slander my name all over the blog, please spell it correctly. I would very much appreciate it. Secondly, I didn't reference your name in anyway with the word, 'nit.' I made a general statement in reference to those who made disparaging comments about anyone who was trying their creative hand at HDR, or any other creative aspect they wish to apply to their photography. If you--Kelly wish to dump yourself in that category, I can't stop you dear. Thirdly,... and flat out, Kelly it is you that has mouthed off to me more than once, since you have been on this blog, and your emails to me, have NOT been appreciated. Case in point on just one of them:

On October, 11, 2007, You wrote me with the following statement in an email:
Kelly...
QUOTE
That doesn't make you an expert in photography or fine arts.
Nor does it make you an expert EVEN with a degree besidews anyone on line can claim to be a pro, and everyone has oppinions.
Sometimes I think ppl who think they know ALL in photography & use such items or programs to enrich their subjects NEED to go back and re-think what photography is/was invented for.
Take Ansel Adams... No fancy programs needed... He by far is/was the GREATEST Photographer ever known & will be, long afte I am dead!
He is my inspirations & it is his work/skills I judge other work on.
Sorry, but that's just me... like it or not.


-My email in response to you Kelly, was as follows:

Dear JasminenHoney or Kelly,

Yes, everyone does have opinions, Kelly, but it is HOW you voice your opinions that make you respected on this site, with friends, associates and fellow human beings. We at this site and I'm sure many if not all will agree...That our purpose here mainly is this:

1. To study and appreciate each others work. Not to tear down another person's work.

2. Share constructive positive tips, advice and or suggestions, with others. These come from an international community of like minded photographers. We share our talents and love of photography with each other in a respectful way. (you may wish to check out... <www.northscape.co.uk/index.html> or
<www.luminous-landscapes.com/tutorials/hdr.shtml>)
These are just two of the many sites that come highly recomended to those perusing this site.

3. While we may be partaking in competitions, we do so by encouragement and guiding each other to achieve higher skill levels.

4. To build a portfolio so that others may view. ("Hopefully without rude critiques!")
(I'm sure that there are many other reasons indiviuals have for posting their work on this site, but I think I have covered some of the basics.)

Now to address your e-mail to me once again, Kelly...You have accused me of being a know-it-all in your e-mail to me. No Kelly I'm not a know-it-all, but I am definately not closed minded to other people's work as you have shown Stephen.

The use of items or programs???...(as you put it... "and use such items or programs to enrich their subjects NEED")...I can only gather that you are refering to the use of Photoshop, I can't even guess what else it is that you are stating here. Could it be digital cameras, what are you using, may I ask? You may wish to clairify this statement, I'm sure I would love to answer you if you had completed this thought. Please do so!

Yes most of us do use photoshop to enhance our images. You see we now live in the digital age, and we use it to clone out smudges that collect on our digital camera sensors. We use Photoshop to tweak our levels and or curves to improve the image luminance. We frame our work in Photoshop and or other imaging programs. There are no fast hard rules against it. Some photographers here even dabble in creative artistic works combining their photographs with their art abilities; which I might add, "they have the right to do so!" They also have the right to be Appreciated and respected for doing creative work. May I remind you that you are using a program to post your work, otherwise we would not be rejoicing over it here on the internet.

In your statement Kelly,you said...(re-think what photography is/was invented for.)
My answer: "The story of photography begins in 1839, with Louis-Jacques-Mandé Daguerre of France and William Henry Fox Talbot of England. They announced separately two exciting new processes that would revolutionize societies perception of reality. These processes known as Daguerreotype and calotype (Talbotype), respectively". This statement is taken from a book about the history of photography. The year is now 2007, and I believe that I would be correct in my summation...that photography continues to evolve and revolutionize societies perceptions of reality to this day.

I for one, was helping you with suggestions on how to better photograph you bottles / decanters,... I recall that these items were in color, (They are very lovely indeed, and in my correspondenc with you I stated that, I enjoyed your sharing them with us. Even now I hope you will succeed in photographing them to their highest potential)...but are you stating that only black and white photography has the right to exist??? I am not sure what your meaning is by writing me this,...?...In your statement Kelly, you said... "what photography is/was invented for." Maybe you could clue me in on your thoughts here?

Concerning your dropping Mr. Ansel Adam's name in my lap, so to speak,...Mr. Adams corresponded with my father by mail and on the phone in 1972 up to about the time he passed away in 1984. You see my father was the offset photographer for a company here in Iowa. They reproduced hard bound book covers for library edition and childrens library books. Mr. Adams maintained strict ownership copy rights that few people to this day, maintain over their artistic works. In that any and I mean any--company printing or reprinting his works, had to have his written approval and a press proof sent to him before he would consent to even reprint a cover to a book of his, for even a library edition reprinted cover. Mr. Adams gave my father exclusive rights to reproduce all of his book covers excluding all other companies after seeing my father's skills, and attention to detail in the reproduction of his book covers. Mr. Adams and my father struck up a friendship of correspondence because of their shared love of photography. (Yes, my father was and is a very proficient photographer. Without that knowledge and skill he would not have been a very good offset photographer in both black and white halftones, and high-end color work.) (I learned from the best my, father. He has and countinues to this day to share his knowledge with me, and sometimes I get to share my skills with him.) When I went to work for that same company in 1981, as a graphics technician and assistant supervisor, I also spoke with Mr. Adams, as he was my client in working out any and all details concerning the construction of his book covers. Mr. Adams was one of the nicest and most interesting people you could ever have hoped to meet. He expected high quality results for his covers and was always able to assist us with kindness and respect when working with him.

I am so glad that you hold Mr. Adams in such high regard, his work is second to no one. What I don't understand is why you are using Mr. Adams exquiste black and white photography, which is an art form unto it's self,--as a guide-post to judging someones color images. This makes no sense what-so-ever, not to me or anyone else here on the blog. Color photography really is completely different in character altogether. Most of us are able to look at and appreciate both mediums respectively. There are many books and magazines that will give you a plethora of explanations for the technical side as well as the philosophical aspects of photography.

By the way Kelly, Mr. Adams didn't use, ...as you put it, –"No fancy programs needed..." My answer: No, he did not use Photoshop, one, it wasn't invented yet, Do you understand that?
"It wasn't invented yet!" Who's to say he would not have had a great time trying it out if it had been invented. He did use an enlarger and some really nice cameras, he also sought out the best papers to use on his work and he even used the micro wave to dry his prints, in which he discussed temperature setting with my father. Mr. Adams was, incase you don't know, an environmentalist, he would have loved to find a way of producing his work without the use of caustic chemicals. He even spoke about this to my father. And the effect that photographic chemicals had on his health and the environment. (I am now facing some problems on my own hands due to chemical exposure from my enlarger days. I have to wear white cotten gloves in the summer to keep the sun from aggravating my skin, and thermal fingerless gloves in the winter for the same reason. I don't think you even realize how really inovative Mr. Adam's was. Are you seeing the bigger picture here Kelly? He made references to people working in the field of photography and printing who did not take the pride, time or the skill it took to produce good work, no mater what proceses they used. A common misconsception is that people were thinking that he felt that everone had to do things his way. Not true at all, Mr. Adams just wanted people to strive to achieve excellence in there work. Which has nothing to do with the use of photoshop.

Unfortunately, you are closing your mind to the possibilities of others as well as your own, when you trash someone elses work. What I'm getting at Kelly, is quite simple,...it comes from a Beatrix Potter book..."If you can't say something nice don't say anything at all." If you have an issue with a person's work, say something positive about what you may like about it first and foremost. Then offer a suggestion nicely and ask if they wouldn't mind trying such and such as an alternative to: In your statement Kelly, you said...
"It's very nice but the black against the flower is harsh... looks like a cut out form. I love flower's... I'm a florist by trade...." (Here in this statement, you said it's very nice then you proceeded to trash his work without offering any suggestion as to what he might try to do to bring his work up to "your standard". The fact that you love flowers, is irrelevent to the your issue at hand, Kelly. The fact that you are a florist by trade, does not have anything to do with this gentleman's photography. Are you claiming that because you're a florist, and that you know how to arrange flowers in a vase or floral foam,--you have some insite or overriding influence as to how every flower in the universe should be viewed? I don't believe your throwing your florist weight at him is any indication, that his creative skills as a photographer are lacking in anyway. Working with flowers myself, and reading many books on the subject as well as teaching others how to arrange flowers,...I can truely state that I have never once read or had it stated to me,... that I could not set an arrangement let alone a single flower against a black background.)

(or this statement of yours Kelly,)
~Jass
I have to disagree with you Nige... The outline on the petals are far too sharp for a real flower.. no matter how good you are at photography... Some program did enhancement and it looks un-natural. I do & have alot of personal experience with lots of flower's & even though the image of this flower is beautiful, the background & the sharpness of the edges make this image look in my veiw as not quite right. Even the stem is not correct.
~Jass (Now your stating that his flower is over sharpened, it may be so, I'll give you that much, but there is a good reason for sharpening and it's a difficult skill to learn not to over sharpen. When you post an image on the web especially in JPEG format you almost always NEED to sharpen your image just a touch because of what the JPEG format does to your image. You are directing a new issue at Nigel about Stephen's photo. Nigel was commenting probably on the crispness and clairity and detail of the flower. By the by, we photographers, often use term sharp when we mean crisp image.

(or this statement of yours Kelly,)
Sorry guys but if I rated this it would be very low...
Sorry Stephen it's my personal opinion as a florist... however much I like the flower the background still looks too fake. Jass

-My response,... ("Sorry guys but if I rated this it would be very low..." ...Now Kelly, that's just plain rude to someone! Once again you are throwing your weight as a florist around, and it doesn't have anything to do with a person's photographic skill. It's irrelevent to the issue of photography. Are you catching my drift?

(My response to you was...)
Sorry Kelly-Jass, but you are not a graphic and fine artist, nor have you studied photography for Thirty years. And yes, I worked in floral arranging as well. That doesn't make you an expert in photography or fine arts. ("Now obviously you did not appreciate my throwing my experience in photography and experience of floral arranging at you any more than I'm sure, Stephen, appreciated you throwing your floral arranging at him. Quid pro quo, Kelly!...But you didn't seem to get my point did you.")

Superb shot Stephen! Please don't be discouraged, (Those who can't critique rudely).
Both shots are extremely well executed, your color just pops! Daenna

(your response to me was...)
Perhaps not D... but it's ppl like us with no fancy skills that do buy the work that are produced.~ Kelly ( Actually Kelly it's people like fine art houses, galleries, museums, advertising agencies, stock image brokers, art /photography publishing houses that buy and promote work that is produced on the greater open market and we much of the time, buy from them. But I do not see to whom we buy our photography or art from, as having any rellevance to the subject at hand, Kelly.

The point that I am trying to making with you is that,..."it might be nice to work on yourself a little, concerning how you communicate to others by way of courtesy and respect to an individual and their work".

Now then It is a shame that you may not have, or like, or wish, to buy photoshop or other programs to improve your photography. I can only say that there are other programs and even what are called. lite versions of photoshop that you could try out. That is up to you. I don't think you will find to many of us here at the blog, use an enlarger or film camera's all the time. But on the other hand nor do we pull good work out from under our armpits. It's just a fact of life your going to have to deal with on your own.

Don't you dare e-mail me and throw your purist single minded florist issues at me, I don't suffer fools, Kelly. If you want to rant on and on and send me an insulting e-mail, then I suggest you try puristsareusdotcom. If you wish to take this up again with me or anyone else. I will be more than happy to publish this whole reply to you on the forum for further debate.

I'm on line here at the blog to improve my skills and help others. I enjoy there work and enjoy sharing mine. And by the by, I am who I say I am. I don't appreciate your insinuation that I am not. Also, I never told you I had a degree in anything, I am Journeyman trainned and registered, in both technical and offset camera processes. Self taught in Photoshop when 3.0 came out and I am now working in CS2. and in Illustrator 8. and many other programs related to my field. Why? It's my job as a graphic artist and Illustrator, and printing consultant.

You came up with that photography pro stuff all by yourself, Kelly, in your email to me as above stated. Yes, I have 30 years studied photography and worked in related fields with exposure to accepted styles of art. FYI setting a flower on a black background is a perfectly acceptable style of presenting images of flowers, by the way, so is a white background.

I don't consider my self a pro. I have a high skill level and expertise that you have not quite reached yet. There are many people on this site who are much closer to pro than I am. Also if you are going to quote me then do so correctly, especially when it's to my face. I'll be happy to correct any misconceptions you may have contrived.

I hope I will be looking forward to seeing your work, as a photographer and in your communications with others improve here at the blog. We are all here to support you along the way. Any questions you may have concerning photography, I will be happy to answer or guide you to a person who can or website, magazine, or book all you need do is ask.
Best wishes,
Daenna

(Kelly, after I responded to your email, you neither had the intestinal fortitude to respond and/or to apologize to me at that time.) (I have very respectfully left you alone on the blog, since your email to me. I did not wish to insight your wrath, or wish to have a conversation with you on any matter what so ever. As I did realize that you seem to take anything I would offer out of context, just as you have concerning my personal response to John's lovely photo. Once again you have attacked me and smeared me all over this blog. Why is that, Kelly????????????????????? This time I would really like an answer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
---------------------
And now you are skipping all over the blog and the forums and accusing me of: Offensive language that you feel was directed at you... you really do have some issues dear. I was talking to John, in a general sense, and made no comment to you personally. I will also invoke my freedom to give anyone I see fit a 10 for a rating, or say something nice to them when ever I wish,...(which has nothing what so ever to do with you personally, Kelly.) As far as my being God's gift,... He works in mysterious ways...LOL! In fact you must have read that statement incorrectly, (and it wouldn't be the first time that you have misconstrued something I've said, by the way,) I was poking fun at my self, in reference to my god complex, (and it had nothing, what so ever to do with you personally, Kelly.) Are you getting me dear. Are you capable of understanding anything it is that I am saying, dear??????????? By the way I'm flattered that you have been watching me so closely now for how you put it to Chris,..."For a full year!" "Really, I didn't think I was that interesting!"...LOL!


As for my artificial mask and that I'm a wolf in lambs clothing... "Wolf Wolf! ...LOL! blink.gif

If anyone else has a question or a misconception about me, please feel free to just ask me here, Thank you for your time!
Regards!
Daenna


In Topic: Infra Red

25 May 2008 - 08:11 PM

Hi Nigel!

I know you're probably busy shooting those fabulous black and whites, but if you have the time...I would love to know a little more about infrared.
Do you go to the channel mixer in PS and switch around the red to 100, and then take the blue and green up the scale till you get something you like for the infrared look? or are there other ways to achieve the look?
I've been curious about doing more with this, but so far, I have tried only one shot last summer. If you have any tips you might like to share with me, I would very much appreciate it. smile.gif

Thank you, Nigel!

Daenna from the blog

In Topic: Photo Of The Week - Proposed New Voting System

18 November 2007 - 03:27 PM

Hello, Mark and everyone
Didn't know this was going on...sad to see theres a fly in the ointment!

I'm of the group that enjoyed being able to participate and looked forward to seeing my images and others that I admired being in the top ten. I'm like Maggie and Amanda on this. Like Maggie I choose the photo that I think is the best, no matter to whom it may belong. And I'm Like Amanda, when I say, this is the one thing I really enjoyed popping in once a week and being able to participate in this one contest,... or just seeing my work included in the top ten. I think it's pathetic that someone may copy their identy to vote more than once. If you have family and friends that vote for you, then great!... as long as they are established members who have posted photos in the past and are fairly current posting members!

The one issue that I saw pop up with other members is that of one's name on their photos: When I post a photo it is my intellectual property and I have the right to have my name on MY intellectual property. If I'm ask to remove my name because that person doesn't like it being there,...that person can go to heck!... and if it means my removing my name to qualify for a contest then I'm GONE from this site!!!!

I'm sorry that it may come down to voting for these two options. I don't have a problem with you choosing Mark, but it does set you up for bad feelings from those who may feel that your personal tastes, may limit you in your choices. You, being the one and only judge on both contests, it would be the easier of the two choices for all parties. It doesn't leave us with much to look forward too in the participating end of things.

The second option would be one judge who chooses the next judge, etc. I see a great many problems with this option. Friends choosing friends as judges, and choosing there friends images over others. Folks not being able to post anything for a week because they can't vote on their own work and so on and so forth. I'm more for a panel of judges and you being the tie-breaker on this one. But once again, interest may wane at the site, due to lack of the feeling of being able to participate on a regular basis.

I'm sorry Mark, I'm not sure I can make a choice based on choosing option one or two. I'm saddend that some people seem to be abusing the system here. I'm not going to make a choice at this time. Many folks have been on here for a few years and I have only been on for about one year. So I'm thinking that I may not know enough about this situation to be voting on this.
Try and have a good day everyone!
Daenna