Focus on focus

Gortch said:
Ok so you agree that crap photos are unacceptable. What is all the fuss?
Click to expand...

Because the way you say something is as important as what you say, particularly if you are talking to beginners

Also I don't agree that 'crap' photos are unacceptable , what i'm saying is if you think a photo is 'crap' its a good idea to say why you think so in a nice calm and reasonable manner with suggestions for improvement.

you also need to realise that just because a photo is crap/out of focus/badly composed or whatever in your opinion , this doesnt make it a fact or mean that anyone who doesnt agree with you is wrong.

and thirdly critisise the photo not the photographer -even if a picture is distinctly sub par in all our opinions it doesnt necessarily mean that the person who took it is a clueless inept moron. By now you should realise that opinions are like arseholes , everyone has one and they aren't all the same... and not everyone wants to see your arse or hear your opinion
 
Last edited:
Post #214 has 2 shots in which appear to be attributed to yourself. I did not accuse you of stealing them, "merely" of breaching copyright laws.
 
Last edited:
Gortch said:
Well I would have linked to it but I don't know how. Why would anyone pretend to own such a commonplace photo though?
Click to expand...

maybe because they don't have any of their own ?

and seriously you don't know how to link to it ? - oddly enough you do it in exactly the same way as linking to the gallery
 
big soft moose said:
Because the way you say something is as important as what you say, particularly if you are talking to beginners

Also I don't agree that 'crap' photos are unacceptable , what i'm saying is if you think a photo is 'crap' its a good idea to say why you think so in a nice calm and reasonable manner with suggestions for improvement.
Click to expand...

So why don't you have a word with all those people that pretend photos are great and sharp when they are crap? Seems like you should be preaching at them instead of me.
 
Gortch said:
So why don't you have a word with all those people that pretend photos are great and sharp when they are crap? Seems like you should be preaching at them instead of me.
Click to expand...

May be they are giving their opinion ? but unlike you realise its just an opinion !

I don't for a minute believe any established member here is 'pretending' a shot is sharp when it isn't (ignoring the perrenial idiots who put nice shot on every post to try to spam their way to classifieds access) - so if they say "nice sharp shot" its because thats what they think - as is their right to do so

if you disagree by all means say so - but try to do it constructively and without putting the poster down
 
big soft moose said:
Because the way you say something is as important as what you say, particularly if you are talking to beginners

Also I don't agree that 'crap' photos are unacceptable , what i'm saying is if you think a photo is 'crap' its a good idea to say why you think so in a nice calm and reasonable manner with suggestions for improvement.

you also need to realise that just because a photo is crap/out of focus/badly composed or whatever in your opinion , this doesnt make it a fact or mean that anyone who doesnt agree with you is wrong.

and thirdly critisise the photo not the photographer -even if a picture is distinctly sub par in all our opinions it doesnt necessarily mean that the person who took it is a clueless inept moron. By now you should realise that opinions are like arseholes , everyone has one and they aren't all the same... and not everyone wants to see your arse or hear your opinion
Click to expand...


Yes Petes spot on there
Yes you are right it's not helping anyone to say that a photo is good when it's not but there's a right way about doing things
When I started With digital in 2006 I posted my not very good shots on forums like this I had a lot of help improving and am still learning now
 
Last edited:
You should clearly say no - no one wants their name to be associated with an unsharp shot , apart from Nick Utt , and really what's he ever done ??? (apart from award winning journalism which helped change the course of a war) :LOL:
 
Nod said:
Post #214 has 2 shots in which appear to be attributed to yourself. I did not accuse you of stealing them, "merely" of breaching copyright laws.
Click to expand...

Appear to be attributed to me? You're not a lawyer, are you? That's like saying just by viewing it on my computer I breach copyright law because, sure enough, to view it is to download it. Just one small snag, I didn't claim ownership in any way and trust me, I know the law on copyright; such a claim would be required for corroboration.

If people on here put more emphasis on learning and quality, there might be some images worth stealing. And this obsession with stamping your images with fake copyright notices is just silly. Trust me, nobody is going to blag a fuzzy, badly composed, picture of a plant or a chameleon hammered to a plank.

People must be bored Reading this. Let me assure you, I'd much rather be discussing the technicalities of photography. As long as people keep typing stupid comments on this thread, though, I am obliged to respond.
 
LCPete said:
Yes Petes spot on there
Yes you are right it's not helping anyone to say that a photo is good when it's not but there's a right way about doing things
When I started With digital in 2006 I posted my not very good shots on forums like this I had a lot of help improving and am still learning now
Click to expand...

Pete, you probably got that help from people like me who were not out to trick you into thinking your photographs were perfection.

Thanks for your contribution and support in this discussion.
 
Gortch said:
Appear to be attributed to me? You're not a lawyer, are you? That's like saying just by viewing it on my computer I breach copyright law because, sure enough, to view it is to download it. Just one small snag, I didn't claim ownership in any way and trust me, I know the law on copyright; such a claim would be required for corroboration.

If people on here put more emphasis on learning and quality, there might be some images worth stealing. And this obsession with stamping your images with fake copyright notices is just silly. Trust me, nobody is going to blag a fuzzy, badly composed, picture of a plant or a chameleon hammered to a plank.

People must be bored Reading this. Let me assure you, I'd much rather be discussing the technicalities of photography. As long as people keep typing stupid comments on this thread, though, I am obliged to respond.
Click to expand...

You've downloaded, and then re hosted it on the TP server in order to post it here, there by breaking any link to the source, you've not even provided a link to the source, therefore you have breached the copyright of the owner of that image...

Unless of course you've requested permission to post it in such a fashion, I also find it astonishing that you suggested you didn't know how to post it correctly
 
MWHCVT said:
You've downloaded, and then re hosted it on the TP server in order to post it here, there by breaking any link to the source, you've not even provided a link to the source, therefore you have breached the copyright of the owner of that image...

Unless of course you've requested permission to post it in such a fashion, I also find it astonishing that you suggested you didn't know how to post it correctly
Click to expand...

In law I am not obliged to establish a link to a source. There are literally millions of pictures it would be impossible to source -- in law they are called orphans. But since I am not claiming ownership or using the picture for commercial purposes, all that is just background noise.

The site deserves better than this petty tripe. You should apologise to the readership.
 
Gortch said:
Prove it or walk.
Click to expand...

Oh purlease - why should he prove anything to you ...

Gortch said:
Pete, you probably got that help from people like me who were not out to trick you into thinking your photographs were perfection.
.
Click to expand...

Do get a grip man - no one is trying to trick anyone - are you so insecure that you can't handle the thought that someone can honourably hold a different opinion to yours
 
Gortch said:
In law I am not obliged to establish a link to a source. There are literally millions of pictures it would be impossible to source -- in law they are called orphans. But since I am not claiming ownership or using the picture for commercial purposes, all that is just background noise.
Click to expand...

You fail at copyright law I'm afraid - a) the orphan works legislation hasn't been passed yet, b) even when it does the picture you have downloaded could not be an orphan since it is on a clearly attributed page (and you'd have to demonstrate you took reasonable steps to ascertain copyright holder - which clearly you haven't , and c) Whether or not you use the picture for commercial purposes is irrelevant all that matters is whether you republish the photo - which you have done by posting it here

Gortch said:
The site deserves better than this petty tripe.
Click to expand...

It does - but for some reason you keep posting it
 
Gortch said:
In law I am not obliged to establish a link to a source. There are literally millions of pictures it would be impossible to source -- in law they are called orphans. But since I am not claiming ownership or using the picture for commercial purposes, all that is just background noise.

The site deserves better than this petty tripe. You should apologise to the readership.
Click to expand...

If anyone should try and be a little contrite it is yourself, you've been on the whole though not entirely rude almost offensive to a large portion of the members of this community, with suggestions that 60-70% of the photos posted are OOF...
 
I'm bored now - this troll seems to be stuck on repeat - do you think we can claim a new one under the sale of goods act ? :LOL:

I know lets go and talk photography instead ;)
 
Last edited:
You lot are unbelievable so I'll post a picture for critique :D

trolls.gif
 
big soft moose said:
I'm bored now - this troll seems to be stuck on repeat - do you think we can claim a new one under the sale of goods act ? :LOL:

I know lets go and talk photography instead ;)
Click to expand...
big soft moose said:
You fail at copyright law I'm afraid - a) the orphan works legislation hasn't been passed yet, b) even when it does the picture you have downloaded could not be an orphan since it is on a clearly attributed page (and you'd have to demonstrate you took reasonable steps to ascertain copyright holder - which clearly you haven't , and c) Whether or not you use the picture for commercial purposes is irrelevant all that matters is whether you republish the photo - which you have done by posting it here



It does - but for some reason you keep posting it
Click to expand...

You're wrong. I am in Scotland and I know the law. But you should be ashamed at the way you are stoking this petty nonsense. It reflects desperation and I'm sure readers will judge accordingly.

As for talking about photography, why bother? It's all art. All pictures are equal. You're a really nice chap. Everyone is lovely and their photographs are equally perfect.

What does that leave us with? Zilch.

Do you want to "go large" with that?
 
big soft moose said:
Oh purlease - why should he prove anything to you ...
Click to expand...

He was the one that mentioned it and he mentioned it to substantiate a point In a debate. If he doesn't need to validate anything in an argument, why should anyone else?

Apart from the argument, even if we were not debating the issue of softness etc, I would still have a right to ask him to prove it because he is flaunting it in a public forum. The truth is I don't believe him. If he is happy for us not to believe him and to regard him as a fabricator then I am happy for him not to validate it.
 
The difference is, hes been here a long time and proved himself numerous times to be genuine. Maybe you should do the same.
 
Your knowledge of copyright law is woeful Gordy.
 
Gortch said:
If he doesn't need to validate anything in an argument, why should anyone else?
Click to expand...

and conversely if you aren't happy to validate anything (probably because you can't) then why should he or anyone else ?

Gortch said:
I would still have a right to ask him to prove it because he is flaunting it in a public forum. The truth is I don't believe him. If he is happy for us not to believe him and to regard him as a fabricator then I am happy for him not to validate it.
Click to expand...

there's no us here , we believe him - because he's an established proven member - you on the other hand have been here about 5 minutes - so I doubt biker gives a toss if you believe him or not - so yeah you have the right to ask him and he has the right to tell you to get f***ed
 
Gortch said:
You're wrong. I am in Scotland and I know the law.?
Click to expand...

no you really really don't - how about posting some links to the orphan works legislation that supports your point (except of course you can't because it doesn't - even in Scotland)
 
And? You think he's not governed by the same international intellectual property laws as everyone else? Clue's in the name :rolleyes: ;)
 
The site he apparently "borrowed" the images from has a copyright notice on it - hardly an orphan work.

Back under the bridge please, Gordon.
 
viv1969 said:
And? You think he's not governed by the same international intellectual property laws as everyone else? Clue's in the name :rolleyes: ;)
Click to expand...

ah but you see he's from the future - where Scotland has become independent and passed its own law on copyright - that's how he knows more than everyone else and only his opinion is worth listening to - that's how he knows that anyone who disagrees with him is wrong :LOL:
 
Gortch said:
Prove it or walk.
Click to expand...

Lol. Manners arent your strong point are they.
Just been asked, need to provide a small write up and the full res image, which I've done tonight. It'll be in next weeks magazine. When I get that I'll be sure to post a copy for your condemnation.

But I'll give you a hint, it's on my Flickr which hasn't many images
 
the technical term would get me banned
 
Nod said:
The site he apparently "borrowed" the images from has a copyright notice on it - hardly an orphan work.

Back under the bridge please, Gordon.
Click to expand...

Zzzzzzzzzzzz. Would be easier to sleep without that stink of desperation.
 
JFHCA..............Another TP classic............:clap:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top