TP film and conventional Flickr group

skysh4rk said:
Apostrophes are used to indicate either the omission of letters or possession, not abbreviations.
Click to expand...

So how does it work when it's the omission of letters that makes the abbreviation?

@Andysnap - how many times did you read your post to be sure it was grammatical before you hit the send button? ;)
 
So whats the difference 'tween the omission of letter's and abbreviation's?
 
Last edited:
NickT said:
Hi Nick, That's me.I thought that I had put both my TP name and my Flickr name in the Flickr message. I would like an invitation to join please. Regards, Nick
Click to expand...
Sorry Nick missed that, you should have access now.
 
ChrisR said:
Oh dear, I humbly apologise to Nick for unnecessary pedantry... :( :rolleyes::coldfeet::eggface::muted: :muted::pompous::sorry:
Click to expand...
No really I'm serious, I don't have a problem with the pendantry but what is the difference between the ommision of letters, abbreviations and contractions?
 
RaglanSurf said:
No really I'm serious, I don't have a problem with the pendantry but what is the difference between the ommision of letters, abbreviations and contractions?
Click to expand...

Photos is a contraction of Photographs not a situation where a single or group of letters have been omitted for style reason, think it's vs it is. The only time Photo's would be valid would be if photo was the nickname of a person who took photographs. Have you seen Photo's photos.
 
Strappy said:
So how does it work when it's the omission of letters that makes the abbreviation?
Click to expand...

RaglanSurf said:
So whats the difference 'tween the omission of letter's and abbreviation's?
Click to expand...

An apostrophe could be used within an abbreviation to mark where letters have been omitted (e.g., W'hampton on motorway signs for Wolverhampton; can't for cannot). However, in this case of photo, you are simply making the word plural by adding an s; you aren't dropping any more letters.

steveo_mcg said:
Photos is a contraction of Photographs not a situation where a single or group of letters have been omitted for style reason, think it's vs it is. The only time Photo's would be valid would be if photo was the nickname of a person who took photographs. Have you seen Photo's photos.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that's quite right and I don't think that the comparison with its versus it's really applies here. Photo was formerly an abbreviation of photograph, but is now an acceptable word in its own right. Also, photo's wouldn't need to be a nickname to be grammatically correct. For instance, I could say 'the photo's white border" if I were referring to a border around a photograph.
 
Last edited:
RaglanSurf said:
No really I'm serious, I don't have a problem with the pedantry but what is the difference between the ommision of letters, abbreviations and contractions?
Click to expand...

I think the apostrophe is mainly used for the possessive, eg Nick's photos. IIRC there are a few common cases where the apostrophe is used to suggest contractions where two words are run together, like isn't, aren't. The word "it's" is a special case, as it looks as if it could be either the possessive ("everything has it's place" - wrong) or the contraction for "it is". By convention it is always used for the latter, and omitted for the possessive. Most abbreviations are indicated by full stops, i.e. and e.g. being examples, but these are often omitted, as in my first example. Many abbreviations, like photo for photograph, are just accepted as new words. Sometimes where parts of a word are repeated, often on repetition, an ellipsis (...) might be used, eg Llanfairpwll....

The "greengrocers' apostrophe" is the mistake commonly seen on greengrocers' advertising boards, of using an apostrophe before the plural form, eg "potato's", "bean's". There are a few cases I've come across where the normal plural form is really uncomfortable, and the urge to insert an apostrophe is almost overwhelming; however I can't think of one OTTOMH!

As Andy says, language is always evolving, but the apostrophe is useful to reduce ambiguity, so we should defend it. And the above may be only partially correct, and certainly maybe partly wrong!
 
skysh4rk said:
I'm not sure that's quite right and I don't think that the comparison with its versus it's really applies here. Photo was formerly an abbreviation of photograph, but is now an acceptable word in its own right. Also, photo's wouldn't need to be a nickname to be grammatically correct. For instance, I could say 'the photo's white border" if I were referring to a border around a photograph.
Click to expand...

Fair point. Though photo was and remains an abbreviation of photograph and would never have needed an apostrophe to indicate missing letters, whist a contraction does. I got them mixed up earlier.
 
... and I was possibly a bit wrong about reducing ambiguity, as we can say "Nick's photograph" and "Nick's photographing" with quite different uses of the apostrophe s...:runaway::help::sleep: (I do like some of these emoticons, although sometimes I'd not know what they are supposed to imply except when inserting them!)
 
I think the clinching argument will be whether you can play PHOTO in Scrabble without having an argument :)
 
But if I was using photo's as an abbreviation or contraction of photographs.......oh forget it I've adjusted the post on the rules page now :LOL: It's quicker.
 
Strappy said:
I think the clinching argument will be whether you can play PHOTO in Scrabble without having an argument :)
Click to expand...

You cannot play Scrabble without an argument!:bat:

[ETA: I really mean: I cannot... :) ]
 
Last edited:
Im going to stop using apostrophes altogether now :sulk: I dont even care if Im wrong or youre right.
 
ChrisR said:
There are a few cases I've come across where the normal plural form is really uncomfortable, and the urge to insert an apostrophe is almost overwhelming; however I can't think of one OTTOMH!
Click to expand...

The dos and don'ts of apostrophes can be complicated.
 
Apostrophes are bad enough but don't even get me started on nominative absolutes.....:exit:
 
wtf r u lot witterin on about


all it has to be is unnerstandable..:)
 
Back to topic, what is the group for? I had a look through, and it comes across as a random selection with some nice photos in it, devoid of context... fir example, the Homeless Holga pics look just weird. if you didn't already know what they were. I'm not trying to pick an argy here (I admit I was stroppy with Strappy earlier, sorry 'bout that!), just trying to work out if it's worth posting more stuff to flickr to make use of the group. So far, the humungous "Show us yer..." thread seems more useful...
 
Cheers for the invite - in now and no doubt will be boring you with shots of trees for the upcoming future :)
 
Nice one. I've added my first photograph and given all members of the group I weren't already following on there a follow.
 
norters said:
Nice one. I've added my first photograph and given all members of the group I weren't already following on there a follow.
Click to expand...
I've followed you back!

(That doesn't sound right does it?!)
 
nearly managed to get the Homeless Holga stuff uploaded - only another couple of days worth to go...

only a suggestion, but would there be any mileage in relaxing the "5 a day" submissions rule for a couple of days, just so everyone could populate the group with their back catalogue? Then, once everyone has "caught up" stick it back to 5?

I was surprised that with 35 members we'd only got 186 shots - just over 5 each (or, allowing for my "carpet bombing", probably nearer 4 and a bit...) - or have I missed something, and it's just for new stuff?
 
I was only going to put new stuff up, though I only really generate a few shots a month.
 
steveo_mcg said:
I was only going to put new stuff up, though I only really generate a few shots a month.
Click to expand...

I was just going on the comment by RJ earlier, about looking up pictures going back in the "show us..." thread, and to be truly useful for that purpose, I'd say it'd be better with some "back catalogue" added...

skysh4rk said:
It's very slow and cumbersome to look for images that have previously been posted in the Show us your film shots thread. I can't even quickly or easily look up the photos I've posted myself in the thread without resorting to google.

At least within Flickr, it's much easier to simply browse photos or look for particular images.
Click to expand...

If it's actually just for new stuff, I can always pull the stuff i've added... though I doubt i'd be contributing much stuff anymore, as I can't actually remember the last time I shot a roll of film.
 
Pretty please may I join in from Carol Ritchie aka MrsR66. :kiss:
 
TheBigYin said:
I was just going on the comment by RJ earlier, about looking up pictures going back in the "show us..." thread, and to be truly useful for that purpose, I'd say it'd be better with some "back catalogue" added...



If it's actually just for new stuff, I can always pull the stuff i've added... though I doubt i'd be contributing much stuff anymore, as I can't actually remember the last time I shot a roll of film.
Click to expand...

Aye, fair point.
 
I'm just going to put up stuff that I think is good... this of course is the reason there isn't much of my stuff on there. I will at some point have a root through the older stuff and put some more up but I kind of think its better to be a bit picky over what goes in there, just to keep it manageable.

Andy
 
So are we going with old photos, new photos or anything goes? I was just going to slowly add in some back catalogue stuff, so as not to bombard the group with all of my photos at once, but I'm happy to follow whatever guidelines are set.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top