Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 15:15:40 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:

GPUAR, Reggie. And why not post a photo that shows nature as she is,
Reggie? Certainly an asshole like you can't improve upon it.
Harry,

I don't believe in the philosophy that a photo should capture exactly
what you saw. I follow the philosophy that a photograph should capture
what you felt.
Perhaps if you were sober...

Your photoshopping stands out more than your photos. Which is why I
think they suck. Some of the compositions would be interesting if the
lighting were realistic.

You wouldn't know a photoshopped image from an unphotoshopped image.

Don't even try to pretend you can - you've proven that you have no
freakin' clue it more than once here and elsewhere.

I don't give a crap about your problem with Reggie, but don't pretend
to be an expert on this when when you clearly aren't. The object of
critiquing is (1) knowing something about the subject and (2) keeping
your personality conflicts out of it - neither of which you are
capable of.


Ha. It's not difficult to see the photoshopping in reggie's latest
photos of his trip. In some of the photos, the "natural lighting" is a
dead giveaway of photoshopping. You don't have to be an expert in
photoshop to see it overused; you just have to have spent some time
outdoors in daylight.