Jump to content

Russell Watkins

Verified
  • Content Count

    527
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Russell Watkins

  1. It's a mooring bollard. Good job there aren't any warps/lines/hawsers/cables/ropes to keyword too...
  2. HDSLR magazine appears in "Newsstand" on the iPad and isn't a pdf, unfortunately. It's in whatever proprietary format Newsstand publications are in and sandboxed to the app. Having said that, an article can be exported a page at a time into Pages (the IOS/OSX WP) and from there can be exported as a pdf. I've just given this a go and it works in principle but the recent update of Pages causes my iPad to freeze when I'm browsing documents. The only way out of this is a hard reset. I'm hoping Apple issue a for a fix for this soon. Hopefully, Lynne isn't plagued by the same problem. And just in case anyone's wondering, HDSLR magazine is a free eMag and so we're not really being naughty, thieving bar stewards.
  3. "...they do go..." is also a peculiarly Welsh grammatical construction.
  4. Meanwhile, the double entendrified "strap-ons" appears to be universally understood. Love it.
  5. Insect-proof mesh doing its job; it's not just about slapping on some Deet when you're in the tropics... . . . . Chillis - the source of capsaicin, used as a topical analgesic... . . . . Blood-filled syringe and 21G needle...
  6. Let's call it objectivity. Actually ethnic categorisations are quite a fascinating subject - unscientific and vague for the most part and almost impossible to agree on. Good Christmas forum fodder. Sorry, I was being my usual obtuse self. I was referring to your use of "WOP" and its (ironic given the current thread) derogatory connotations for a certain group of Southern Europeans. Wiki entry here. I agree that ethnic categorisation (along with language) is fascinating. Of course historically, anthropological research was driven by the desperate need to prove the inherent supremacy of whitey over everything else. EEEK. Various expletives uttered - thanks for pointing that out Russell. My wife is wondering why I'm swearing at the computer. It wasn't a Freudian slip - purely accidental and I blame Alamy for using it in the first place (WOP means without people - maybe they should have used NP - no people. I've edited it to explain what was meant just in case it offends although I think that is unlikely. I wasn't getting at you, mate. It's the English language's fault, not yours. And I don't think you should worry about causing offence - it's obvious you were using the accepted Alamy abbreviation. It was just an ironic (non-Freudian) linguistic juxtaposition in this thread. And my brain seems to be wired to see such things. And then post about them. And cause others to shout "EEEK" and swear at computers. Sorry about that. Oh no I understood and never thought you were being anything but funny. I should have got it first time. I've enjoyed our conversations before. Have a good veggie Christmas You too, you bluddy.....carnivore... Yo?? I've been veggie since 1977. EEEK. *Swears at computer iPad* Apologies.
  7. Let's call it objectivity. Actually ethnic categorisations are quite a fascinating subject - unscientific and vague for the most part and almost impossible to agree on. Good Christmas forum fodder. Sorry, I was being my usual obtuse self. I was referring to your use of "WOP" and its (ironic given the current thread) derogatory connotations for a certain group of Southern Europeans. Wiki entry here. I agree that ethnic categorisation (along with language) is fascinating. Of course historically, anthropological research was driven by the desperate need to prove the inherent supremacy of whitey over everything else. EEEK. Various expletives uttered - thanks for pointing that out Russell. My wife is wondering why I'm swearing at the computer. It wasn't a Freudian slip - purely accidental and I blame Alamy for using it in the first place (WOP means without people - maybe they should have used NP - no people. I've edited it to explain what was meant just in case it offends although I think that is unlikely. I wasn't getting at you, mate. It's the English language's fault, not yours. And I don't think you should worry about causing offence - it's obvious you were using the accepted Alamy abbreviation. It was just an ironic (non-Freudian) linguistic juxtaposition in this thread. And my brain seems to be wired to see such things. And then post about them. And cause others to shout "EEEK" and swear at computers. Sorry about that. Oh no I understood and never thought you were being anything but funny. I should have got it first time. I've enjoyed our conversations before. Have a good veggie Christmas You too, you bluddy.....carnivore...
  8. Let's call it objectivity. Actually ethnic categorisations are quite a fascinating subject - unscientific and vague for the most part and almost impossible to agree on. Good Christmas forum fodder. Sorry, I was being my usual obtuse self. I was referring to your use of "WOP" and its (ironic given the current thread) derogatory connotations for a certain group of Southern Europeans. Wiki entry here. I agree that ethnic categorisation (along with language) is fascinating. Of course historically, anthropological research was driven by the desperate need to prove the inherent supremacy of whitey over everything else. EEEK. Various expletives uttered - thanks for pointing that out Russell. My wife is wondering why I'm swearing at the computer. It wasn't a Freudian slip - purely accidental and I blame Alamy for using it in the first place (WOP means without people - maybe they should have used NP - no people. I've edited it to explain what was meant just in case it offends although I think that is unlikely. I wasn't getting at you, mate. It's the English language's fault, not yours. And I don't think you should worry about causing offence - it's obvious you were using the accepted Alamy abbreviation. It was just an ironic (non-Freudian) linguistic juxtaposition in this thread. And my brain seems to be wired to see such things. And then post about them. And cause others to shout "EEEK" and swear at computers. Sorry about that.
  9. Let's call it objectivity. Actually ethnic categorisations are quite a fascinating subject - unscientific and vague for the most part and almost impossible to agree on. Good Christmas forum fodder. Sorry, I was being my usual obtuse self. I was referring to your use of "WOP" and its (ironic given the current thread) derogatory connotations for a certain group of Southern Europeans. Wiki entry here. I agree that ethnic categorisation (along with language) is fascinating. Of course historically, anthropological research was driven by the desperate need to prove the inherent supremacy of whitey over everything else.
  10. On that photo, he's wearing a sweatshirt/hoodie with the Union Jack flag and what looks like "England" written on it. I make that comment because Al Q is not exactly pro-Britain so it seems incongruous that he would be "an aspiring suicide bomber" for that particular organisation. On the other hand, I'm not having the shit bombed out of me in Aleppo, so what do I know?
  11. As a point of related information, "Caucasian" isn't specific to "white-skinned" either. Those peoples with darker, even brown skin from Europe, the Middle East, North Africa, Middle Asia and the Indian Sub-Continent are also anthropologically "Caucasian". (The other three "races" are Mongoloid, Negroid and Australioid although the latter is often categorised as being part of the Negroid group. The Mongo group includes Native Americans and Eskimos). The upshot is that "Hispanics" are in fact, "Caucasians". As usual with the English Language though, common (mis-) usage means that "Caucasian" has mutated to almost become the de facto synonym for "white-skinned".
  12. It's great to do some "hands-on" tactile stuff, too. There'd be even more tactility if you did your own developing. I still enjoy mounting my prints after having fiddled with them on a screen for hours for the same reason.
  13. Unable to type because of the cholesterol overdose from the deep-fried Jaffa cakes, I bet. Or high on Ilfosol.
  14. Everyone has their own line they won't cross and there's no absolute right or wrong. I rationalise my iffy choices in lots of ways and inconsistently at that.
  15. On a slightly related point, I stopped shooting film because of my vegetarian/vegan beliefs. (Gelatine, in case you were wondering). Really? You stopped taking photographs, just like that? How long did it take you to find out about gelatin? Or did you just stop when digital came along? They overlapped. Or rather, I restarted shooting film (and doing the dev) after I'd started digital and then realised that gelatine was involved and decided I'd rather not use film because of that.
  16. It's more about "being happy with what comes out of the box" vs "making some efforts to make the picture stand out" For me, taking the shot is just half the work. Cheers, Philippe Same horse, different jockey. Your decision point has changed, that is all.
  17. ^^^ This. Capture sharpening a raw file is analogous to in-camera JPEG processing so is absolutely fine, in my eyes. Creative sharpening isn't really needed for my Alamy shots but if I thought that say, a model's eyes needed a bit of a lift, I think a little local creative sharpening is OK too. But you should definitely not apply any output sharpening at all - that depends on publication medium (digital vs print; glossy vs matte vs lustre vs newspaper vs etc) and output image size.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.