You know I don't always agree with Jan. But really if you don't like what he is saying do you really think engaging it with out even addressing what he is saying does anything? By definition that would be more classified at bulling then talking about the subject in a hostile way. FAUX NEO INTELLIGENTSIA.
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 1:09 PM, Randy Little <randyslittle@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Mirror gelman mirror. Pot meet kettle.On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 1:05 PM, YGelmanPhoto <ygelmanphoto@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
There he goes again.On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Jan Faul <jan@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jan 10, 2014, at 11:59 AM, Emily L. Ferguson wrote:Art Faul -
Not sure what the image has to do with the caption, especially when digital display in the forum gallery is so poorly suited to revealing evidence of print quality. Not inclined to keep looking when such ugly language accompanies the presentation.
You are misreading the language just as you are picking apart minutiae. The title is the location. It is difficult for me to understand how viewers only at the PF Gallery can be so obtuse.Work with pixels long enough and you will forget the big picture and only look at the pivels. It is a centrally eyes-to-the-ground feature of digital photographers.
Art Faul
