Yuck. A.
On 31/8/04 5:29 pm, "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Take a look at this Antonio, > http://www.jcoconnell.com/temp/barge12mp.jpg > or even better, print it at 8x10 or 11x14 > on high quality glossy paper. > > I think you will find it quite different than > those old 35mm photos posted in the PUG. > > As far as "knowing it all", no one does but > I do not post on things I know nothing about > and I have very strong opinions on things > I know a lot about. You are a presumptuous > fool to be making silly claims based on my old > 35mm images, the very ones I TOLD you are > no good, when I am claiming the LF is the > way to go. You make no sense. > JCO > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Antonio [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 4:06 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: 35 vs digi - Some points to ponder. > > > Don, I do not put myself across as an expert on matters photographical. > I have an opinion, yes - but I am willing to be proven wrong on the > discussions I take part in. > > JCO on the other hand thinks he knows it all and keeps harping on about > quality all the time. Looks like he talks the talk but cant walk the > walk looking at the images he has posted. They have to be some of the > worst quality images I have seen on the web. Where is the quality JCO? > > > A. > > > > > > > On 29/8/04 10:45 pm, "Don Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Really, has anyone ever seen an AA pic? >> As rare as him posting a message that isn't a derogatory "re"! >> >> Keep pluggin' quality JCO, before we all forget it's important. :-( >> >> Don >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Jostein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2004 3:37 PM >>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Subject: Re: 35 vs digi - Some points to ponder. >>> >>> >>> I know, JCO... :-) >>> >>> Still looking forward to AA's pics, though... >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Jostein >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2004 10:27 PM >>> Subject: RE: 35 vs digi - Some points to ponder. >>> >>> >>>> Hi-Rez LF images cant be seen on a PC screen without downsizing them >>>> to death. All the details are gone when they are reduced to fit on a > >>>> computer screen. The only way to appreciate them is on >>>> a big print in person. Most of the links below >>>> are old 35mm and P67 shots. I post LF stuff once >>>> and a while on f32.net now which is a LF forum but >>>> not to discuss/display image quality. >>>> JCO >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Jostein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2004 4:13 PM >>>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> Subject: Re: 35 vs digi - Some points to ponder. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Antonio wrote: >>>>> JCO you seem to be obsessed with image quality, but I have yet to >>>> see a >>>>> quality image from you. Why is that? >>>> >>>> Probably because you didn't bother to look in the first place. PUG >>> is >>>> always a good place to start: http://pug.komkon.org/02mar/peir2.html >>>> http://pug.komkon.org/02may/hbinlets.html >>>> http://pug.komkon.org/03jan/sun2pug.html >>>> http://pug.komkon.org/03mar/pug0203.html >>>> http://pug.komkon.org/99aug/PEL_2SM.htm >>>> http://pug.komkon.org/archive/oconnell.html >>>> >>>> >>>> By the way, I can't recall to have seen any of your online images, >>> and >>>> Google didn't help me either. Do you have a link to share? >>>> >>>> Jostein >>>> >>>> >>> >> >
