| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/06/2004 12:34:00 AM · #26 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by mk:
Sure, some people have no hands but do have an artistic vision. Some people have no photography skills but do have an artistic vision... |
... and join DPC to gain some. I just don't think it's that big a deal. If I ask Isaac if I should crop it "here" or "there" and then take his advice, should that DQ my shot because it's a collaborative effort?
I also found your answer just a little flippant. I was serious, that there are people who have a functioning estheic sense, but lack the physical capability to handle a camera or computer mouse. I don't think we should say they "can't" be photographers, merely because they use assistants. |
My answer wasn't intended to be flippant but to point out what I feel is a flaw in your reasoning. And I'm not sure why you're now introducing physical handicap into the picture...this has nothing to do with that. It's a matter of not wanting to spend the money on equipment. Which I certainly understand, but I'd love to have a dslr. That doesn't mean I seek out someone with one and ask them to take a photo for me.
I also don't think that asking Isaac his advice on a crop and then doing it yourself is the same thing. You aren't sending the photo off to Isaac and asking him to pick the best crop himself.
Anyway, you offered your opinion, I offered mine. |
|
|
|
10/06/2004 12:38:41 AM · #27 |
my concern is a floodgates issue. Sure, Ron may be preserving his "artistic vision" and making all the choices, but if we allow this, it opens the doors to other types of "assistance" that are not so clear cut. I don't want to set bad precedents, we have enough of them around here, and I would rather not go this route even if the means, goal and intentions are benign in this case.
|
|
|
|
10/06/2004 12:41:18 AM · #28 |
I was trying to point out a case where the proposed procedure might seem logical, appropriate, or even necessary; then, it it were to be allowed there, it should be allowed in all cases.
But, it's no big deal to me; there's no way we could tell if someone "cheated" this way anyhow -- I appreciate someone asking first! |
|
|
|
10/06/2004 01:17:40 AM · #29 |
Hmmm, is this a peek into the secret Site Council Forum? Really didn't mean it to go this far...
|
|
|
|
10/06/2004 01:20:28 AM · #30 |
Originally posted by TooCool:
Hmmm, is this a peek into the secret Site Council Forum? Really didn't mean it to go this far... |
You're right -- I guess we'll have to "disqualify" you now ... |
|
|
|
10/06/2004 01:22:23 AM · #31 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by TooCool:
Hmmm, is this a peek into the secret Site Council Forum? Really didn't mean it to go this far... |
You're right -- I guess we'll have to "disqualify" you now ... |
NO! I can't disappear yet! I haven't even met Laurielblack...
|
|
|
|
10/06/2004 01:24:49 AM · #32 |
Originally posted by TooCool:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by TooCool:
Hmmm, is this a peek into the secret Site Council Forum? Really didn't mean it to go this far... |
You're right -- I guess we'll have to "disqualify" you now ... |
NO! I can't disappear yet! I haven't even met Laurielblack... |
Sending you to Texas is close enough to disappearing for me. |
|
|
|
10/06/2004 01:40:12 AM · #33 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Sending you to Texas is close enough to disappearing for me. |
Careful, Laurie might come kick your @$$ if she hears you talkin' like that...
|
|
|
|
10/06/2004 01:41:26 AM · #34 |
Don't make me have to go Xena on you, GeneralE... ;o)
|
|
|
|
10/06/2004 01:48:02 AM · #35 |
Originally posted by laurielblack:
Don't make me have to go Xena on you, GeneralE... ;o) |
Ooh, Ooh!!! Can I watch????
|
|
|
|
10/06/2004 02:13:12 AM · #36 |
Originally posted by laurielblack:
Don't make me have to go Xena on you, GeneralE... ;o) |
You never talk to me like that... ;-)
|
|
|
|
10/06/2004 02:21:59 AM · #37 |
Originally posted by taterbug:
Originally posted by laurielblack:
Don't make me have to go Xena on you, GeneralE... ;o) |
Ooh, Ooh!!! Can I watch???? |
Too bad ... you could have gotten a nice shot for the Parts challenge ...
OK .. I admit it, Texas is the best chunk of land we ever stole from Mexico, except maybe for California ... and I can play London Homesick Blues better than I can play California Dreamin' : ) |
|
|
|
10/06/2004 02:25:05 AM · #38 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
OK .. I admit it, Texas is the best chunk of land we ever stole from Mexico, except maybe for California ... and I can play London Homesick Blues better than I can play California Dreamin' : ) |
Just don't play Dueling Banjos... (shudder)
Message edited by author 2004-10-06 02:55:29.
|
|
|
|
10/06/2004 02:33:10 AM · #39 |
Originally posted by TooCool:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
[quote=taterbug]OK .. I admit it, Texas is the best chunk of land we ever stole from Mexico, except maybe for California ... and I can play London Homesick Blues better than I can play California Dreamin' : ) |
Just don't play Dueling Banjos... (shudder) |
What's funny is that on the "original" version one of the guys is flat-picking a guitar -- not a banjo at all. But I don't do that kind of stuff; my instrumental abilities are strictly limited. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 11/16/2025 04:27:42 AM EST.
