The Sisters of Mercy Forum
NOOOOO....REALLYHom_Corleone wrote:He even makes ninewhilenine seem like (...tries to think what the opposite of troll is...MadameButterfly wrote:I´m sorry but give me mr. 8 instead of um let´s say Dark Angel anyday!smiscandlon wrote: You disappoint me.
)...
What did I miss...
Yeah, I'd rather have her back and all.Dark wrote:Ro...
´Hom_Corleone wrote:CANDYMAN...CANDYMAN...CANDY....mh wrote:Shhhhhh! Don't mention the names!!!
As it is just a hobby for me, no worriesMadameButterfly wrote:I love watching clouds!Obviousman wrote: @Debs: Mmmmm, clouds. My hard drive has too many cloud pictures on it
(though I think only digitals, I should try slide + polarizer
)
Slide = dias, polariser makes you can make skies look like this without tweaking 
No need to agree, just my personal point of view, which has grown out of not being able to afford onereactiv8 wrote:Let us indeed continue @Obviousman … I’m interested/surprised what you say about tripods … Hmmm, let me reserve judgement on that one, eh? Aye, of course take as much time as possible with your shots and ignore distractions. Setting ISO to 400, 800, 1600 or further can and does give good results for sure, and often the grain is a welcome addition. I suppose I often use a tripod ‘cos I’m really also recording what I see, as opposed to trying to be artistic (lazy too though, hrumpf) … I liked those flowers, and your composition – were they wild roses? Can we be allowed to know what settings you used and which film? Yeah, Macro is another universe entirely, but don’t tempt me?! (goes rushing off into the digital archive …)
Remember I don't set ISO but need to pick the right film on beforehand 
When shooting B&W grain is and can be very nice, don't disagree there, but I think when it's colour pictures you're going for, higher ISO means less remarkable colours. That being something I think I've noticed with the different films I've used, even though their number has been relatively limited.
), lens was a Minolta 35-105 AFLens on a Minolta 7000, B+W/Schneider Kreuznach Circular polariser filter and settings would've been 1/125 f/22 (best guess though, not entirely sure of that). Thank you and a most stunning shot there Z!Obviousman wrote:As it is just a hobby for me, no worriesMadameButterfly wrote:I love watching clouds!Obviousman wrote: @Debs: Mmmmm, clouds. My hard drive has too many cloud pictures on it
& With reference to most of the above:~ Gave you something to talk about though, eh? ... I've heard (a lot) worse of course. "Old Hippy" - maybe, but "racist undercurrents" - no. I think you misunderstood, but hey @JB, I was enjoying your art school tales, which I'd describe as nostalgia which we all indulge in, surely? As for the other stuff: 
... apart from @obviousman who was talking about photography only So, thanks. 
I think I missed something here, too.MadameButterfly wrote:NOOOOO....REALLY
) and generally behaving like an insufferable asshole are tolerated/ignored/encouraged as long as one's got "tenure" here. Ahhh...got it. *Snaps fingers* 
reactiv8 wrote:
@MB - are you an 'apprentice' moderator? Not a job I'd relish ... but also: Ta.
Ooooohhhh that! *snaps fingers* Got it!SINsister wrote:I think I missed something here, too.MadameButterfly wrote:NOOOOO....REALLY
*Ponders*
Hmm...on second thought, maybe not. I think I've got the gist of it, now: deliberately baiting and insulting fellow Heartlanders and their opinions and creations (under the very flimsy guise of providing "constructive criticism" or "taking the piss"
Mmmmm...how I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning (afternoon, evening, etc.).
Not shockingly - I'm sure - I'm really glad it's all no longer my problem.
Now really, even I did not see this. Reactiv8 is not more offensive than the others mentioned a couple of posts ago. He's not even offensive in my opinion. Or he must be soooo subtle it is almost invisible to the foreign-speaker's eye.SINsister wrote:I think I missed something here, too.MadameButterfly wrote:NOOOOO....REALLY
*Ponders*
Hmm...on second thought, maybe not. I think I've got the gist of it, now: deliberately baiting and insulting fellow Heartlanders and their opinions and creations (under the very flimsy guise of providing "constructive criticism" or "taking the piss"
Mmmmm...how I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning (afternoon, evening, etc.).
Not shockingly - I'm sure - I'm really glad it's all no longer my problem.
You are of course entitled to your opinion. As I'm sure we all are.Izzy HaveMercy wrote:He's not even offensive in my opinion.
But of course, maybe I'm just too daft or naïve to see itsmiscandlon wrote:You are of course entitled to your opinion. As I'm sure we all are.Izzy HaveMercy wrote:He's not even offensive in my opinion.
Well you do have that reputation round here...Izzy HaveMercy wrote:But of course, maybe I'm just too daft or naïve to see itsmiscandlon wrote:You are of course entitled to your opinion. As I'm sure we all are.Izzy HaveMercy wrote:He's not even offensive in my opinion.
IZ.
smiscandlon wrote:
And you can see a booby! Aren't graveyards brilliant?MadameButterfly wrote:What a lovely shot! I like the green and the mother protecting child!
Men and boobiessmiscandlon wrote:And you can see a booby! Aren't graveyards brilliant?MadameButterfly wrote:What a lovely shot! I like the green and the mother protecting child!
Old goth! Oh, sweets - my observation above wasn't referring to you in any way, shape, or form!MadameButterfly wrote:Ooooohhhh that! *snaps fingers* Got it!SINsister wrote:I think I missed something here, too.MadameButterfly wrote:NOOOOO....REALLY
*Ponders*
Hmm...on second thought, maybe not. I think I've got the gist of it, now: deliberately baiting and insulting fellow Heartlanders and their opinions and creations (under the very flimsy guise of providing "constructive criticism" or "taking the piss"
Mmmmm...how I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning (afternoon, evening, etc.).
Not shockingly - I'm sure - I'm really glad it's all no longer my problem.
Good morning Sinnie!
Yeah you have other matters to deal with and I'm just little me with the cheeky mouth at most times...oh dear.
*passes you a coffee*
Sorry, Steven, but the fact that you even felt the need to make that kind of "disclaimer" about your artwork makes me ill - this is precisely what I'm talking about. Art, like music, is subjective. Hello!!! It's not rendered "invalid" just because someone else doesn't like it. FFS!smiscandlon wrote:Here is a 'photograph' I took. And before Blast starts, I'm not making any claims to it being a work of 'art', I just thought it looked 'nice'.
I know that Sinnie!SINsister wrote: Oh, sweets - my observation above wasn't referring to you in any way, shape, or form!
I'm not that sensitive! Ok, *phew*!MadameButterfly wrote:I know that Sinnie!SINsister wrote: Oh, sweets - my observation above wasn't referring to you in any way, shape, or form!
Just got what you were meaning that's all!
I'm totally with you.SINsister wrote:Art, like music, is subjective. Hello!!! It's not rendered "invalid" just because someone else doesn't like it. FFS!
What happened to folks standing up for themselves and for what they believe in? Good friggin' grief.
