Thanks for the link, Cate. I love discovering great photographers I've never heard of!!
Originally Posted by Stargazer
Originally Posted by Stargazer
You win the rubber cigar. Good work!
Well, assuming that it IS by Esther Bubley (which hasn't yet been confirmed) I'm glad to have been informed/reminded of her.
(Sorry, it HAS been confirmed - I'm too late on the draw today I guess)
Having said that, this would been more:
1.) fun if the poster got around to telling us the answer sooner before things turned into an argument which you should assume will happen if you wait long enough since they almost always do, and
2.) useful if we all discussed the aspects of the photo which made it work so well.
The composition is obviously wonderful, I'd love to see a larger version to better appreciate the painterly effect and better understand how it was acheived. This is one that I think would not have been nearly as effective in B&W, she apparently thought so too.
Thanks Don. If I'd known there was a prize I wouldn't have complained.
Originally Posted by donbga
(But do it again and it'd better be a real one ).
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
In most jurisdictions this falls clearly under Fair Dealing (or Fair Use depending on where you are.)
Originally Posted by Roger Hicks
As much as some people dislike them, hotlinks would also be more preferable than saving a file to APUG, as you are then not even posting the photograph on this site, merely giving a visul link to its original loaction.
(Not that it would prevent someone choosing to pursue a lawsuit nor does it excuse any real infringements, but jurisdiction in such cases is interesting. The copyright law which applies is always that where the infringement took place - which is where?)
Other than that, if such threads bug you, it probably has more to do with you than the content of the thread. Climbing onto an imaginary high horse usually does not help much with that.
No, I don't think it would be fair dealing, because that's normally for the purpose of review or discussion of a photographer's (or writer's) work, and concealing the photographer's name rather removes it from this realm. As I said, no one is likely to bother but if you annoy enough people...
Nor do I see an 'imaginary high horse'. I see a statement about a particular kind of thread, with an express rider that it was the type of thread that annoyed me, not a personal attack. Perhaps I could have expressed it better, but at least I tried.
The response was then a personal insult in one post, and glee at annoying me in another. .
Would someone be that rude face-to-face? Probably not. Not unless they really enjoy the occasional punch in the mouth. Saying 'Ah, but it's the internet' is no excuse.
I've updated the title of the thread with the photographers name.
Now will you please all be nice to each other, and stop using expressions like "bloviated old fart"?
-- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
I can be as polite as can be on this one because all I can see in the space for the attached thumbnails is empty space. I notice that the latest gallery photo is missing again.
Anyone else having this problem? There was no problem this afternoon. Looks like I need to get my insults in quick in future before the phoots disappear and I am left wondering what it is that's exercising the community to have a go at each other.
All looking fine to me - everything where it should be. Try refreshing the browser window - you may have a cached version that needs clearing.
Originally Posted by pentaxuser
As for the rest, I see we are in cat-herding mode again...
I for one am grateful for the original thread as it has introduced me to a class act of whom I was not previously aware.