What Dave was talking about...

[dave partington]

you'll have to bait me a bit better to get rid of this nusaince. In fact, you'll need to become MasterBaiters. This old "concern troll" ain't dim enuff to fit into preconceived misconceptions. you can google it. And be sure to include the parentheses. Many of us have mutual appreciations.

 

[tyflier]

you'll have to bait me a bit better to get rid of this nusaince. In fact, you'll need to become MasterBaiters. This old "concern troll" ain't dim enuff to fit into preconceived misconceptions. you can google it. And be sure to include the parentheses. Many of us have mutual appreciations.

Dude...what are you all bent up about? Seriously, I'm not picking or prying...heck I don't even care what happened or what you think happened or whatever the heck is going on. I made a lighthearted comment that this thread gave no one named Dave any reason to be offended.

Unless that was your website, in which case...take better photos and you'll probably sell more stuff. Want help? oke: :toiletgra

 

[Michael823]

How presumptious.

Michael823, thank you for not showing or linking to the entire thread, so as to leave room for it to be taken "out of its entire context". Very thoughtful of you. I would not expect anything less.

Not sure how this offends you either? You seemed put off by Hypancistrus' attempt to agree with your take on web design, so I tried telling you there was no need to be offended, and that she was actually agreeing. You also seemed confused, so I posted the link to point out what she was agreeing with. I did not read your entire post again, and was not meaning to leave the rest of the thread out to take your words out of context. I dug up your post to help you out, honestly I was trying to be nice by digging for your it for you, that way you could see what hypancistrus was referring to. I didn't link the thread because it took so long to find the page your post was on, and figured others might not want to take the time digging themselves. Not sure why this offends you, but I really was only intending to do the work of finding your quote to help you understand what this thread was referencing.

 

[Michael823]

Not sure how this offends you either? You seemed put off by Hypancistrus' attempt to agree with your take on web design, so I tried telling you there was no need to be offended, and that she was actually agreeing. You also seemed confused, so I posted the link to point out what she was agreeing with. I did not read your entire post again, and was not meaning to leave the rest of the thread out to take your words out of context. I dug up your post to help you out, honestly I was trying to be nice by digging for your it for you, that way you could see what hypancistrus was referring to. I didn't link the thread because it took so long to find the page your post was on, and figured others might not want to take the time digging themselves. Not sure why this offends you, but I really was only intending to do the work of finding your quote to help you understand what this thread was referencing.

*meant "digging for your post for you"* Too late, very tired after a late night feeding and cleaning, good night!

 

[dave partington]

So I turned on my computer, and discovered I was now the subject of a discussion board topic.
Regardless as to good or bad or gray area.
If you would like a photography tutorial, you could have simply asked.

With regard to the link, it's not terrible. It's not like they have pictures of a 12 year old (no no honey, put on your short shorts, and the tee tiny tank top) holding animals. So at least in this instance they're not doing the child exploitation thing.

 

[whippet]

wow...dave...you are just plain being a jerk.

 

[snakewispera snr]

Cheers Dave and reps on the way.......... You deserve them.
And a big thank you for taking the focus of attention away from my idiotic post.....
Nice one mate.

 

[dave partington]

Thank you Tara. Bless your heart. That was very helpful. Should I feel flattered, being made a subject? dave

 

[tyflier]

Thank you Tara. Bless your heart. That was very helpful. Should I feel flattered, being made a subject? dave

Dude, really...what is your problem? Why are you getting so twisted? Nobody is going out of their way to insult you that I can see.

Usually when people are publicly agreed with it makes them happy...Relax a little, dude. You're gonna have a heart attack...

 

[dave partington]

Prozac's kicking in. Sorry guys n dolls. I've been a complete ass. I've never been a subject before. I guess if I'm going to run for site moderator or president, I'd better get used to it. Training wheels, kid gloves. It's so easy for me to see when other people are presenting a post written from the emotional place, not the logic place. Yet I am blind to see that in myself. Well, I'm seeing the light now. Thanks for the tolerance. Or allowing my openness. Or whatever that is. dave

 

[tyflier]

Prozac's kicking in. Sorry guys n dolls. I've been a complete ass. I've never been a subject before. I guess if I'm going to run for site moderator or president, I'd better get used to it. Training wheels, kid gloves. It's so easy for me to see when other people are presenting a post written from the emotional place, not the logic place. Yet I am blind to see that in myself. Well, I'm seeing the light now. Thanks for the tolerance. Or allowing my openness. Or whatever that is. dave

Cool. Glad we can all get along again.

So...how about that photography tutorial? I could use some help... oke::nyah:

Just messin' wit ya'...

 

[Hypancistrus]

I should have been more specific in my opening post... I was definitely agreeing with the exact post in the Walter thread, the one that Michael posted (Michael-- thanks so much for digging that up, as I would have had to otherwise)...

And Chris, you are right, the photos themselves aren't bad (could be better, I think... with better backgrounds, lighting, etc) but I guess what turned me off the most was the complete lack of proper grammar useage... like you said, site looks like a 6 year old wrote it!

Again, my apologies for not being more specific.

 

[CaptBogart]

The creepy, hairy hand in the one pic kinda disturbed me....

 

[dave partington]

Lauren, no need to apologize. Did some reflecting today, so I'm just going to ramble here. Having had several businesses, lived in many towns, seen lots of printed publications.


In my home town community (offline) , personX's pawn shop, their name is on the cover outside. They put it there. I do not see signs that say "Hay Xguy" or 'What so-N-so meant' signs along the road. Sometimes I see a 'Happy Birthday Dingbaticus maximus' sign in a front yard. As far as calling anyone out text, It is a seldom seen event or incident or whatever that is.

Newspapers have classifieds sections where a missing individual might be found...
Craigslist has their policies, one cannot post an ad titled to someone by their name, but persons writing an ad can say "to the guy who was looking at my pangolin in March".

The www is a distinctively different; there are hundreds of thousands of "online communities"; discussion boards, chatter forums, and so forth.
With MySpace or Facebook or whatever, a person can post verbage or pics on someone elses page, but the someone else can edit them off if they do not agree with the content.
The majority of the sites I've seen do not call anyone out by name. If there's a scammer in the community, the thread title does not say "beware of Name". It more likely says Beware of Scammers...
Many of the discussion boards are about people looking for help regarding a specific issue.
This crazy reptile breeders dealers thing is different from the other forums/disgussion boards of other subjects. People have names, more than just a company name or a website name. Everyone seems to know everyone. There seems to be no personal private information in the community. Every individual objectified. It seems necessary to an extent. There are many scams and taken people in all business realms. I don't know if its any better /worse in herptoculture, but HerpeVille's still a fairly small community compared to antiques/collectibles/pizza parlours/or used car lots. As such: closely knitted. Unlike anything I've encountered elsewhere.

If a reporter contacts their victim in advance and asks for an interview; at least the story subject isn't suprised when they see they're a title. I guess I just need to get used to the walls around me being torn down. I'll have to adapt. It is the way of the herpe business.

As I waddled around the www putting together the reptile dealers webpage, I saw a lot of persons names out there, but in most cases, their names were their own, they have their name incorporated into their website name, or on their site's homepage. That is their choice; they control that. And on numerous sites, theres a Links page, which often includes other persons names, but the page title is not someone elses name. It seems to be mostly this site, and Faunaclassifieds, where I run into the most instances of seeing a persons name as part of a thread title.

Every community has its own unique style, flavor, distinctivitititity, whatever thats called. I suppose while staying outward focused , looking at all those and this site, it never dawned on me that one day, my name would be on a thread title. Widdle weazley me. And yet there it is. It was bound to happen sometime. I guess what I'm saying here Lauren is Thanks for Doing that. Better someone I have admiration for/of to do it then, well, someone who, um, i better leave it at that.

The creepy, hairy hand in the one pic kinda disturbed me....

Hypertrichosis?

thank you for taking the focus of attention away from my post.....
Nice one mate.

Always happy to be a mate's tool.

 

[dave partington]

Self-criticisim

Cicada Hornet with Prey.
They dig burrows in slopes on high/dry land, and each burrow has numerous side passages. These hornets are about 3-4 inches in length. Quite omnious. I've been on hillsides where hundreds of them are around me, yet they've never messed with me, nor I with them. I snapped this picture in the evening, as this female was beating her wings while climbing up the side of the house, to attain some height above the ground, as her load of prey is too heavy for her to take off at ground level. She paralyzes the Cicada, and then later, back in the burrow, lays a single egg on it.

The flash washed the colors out. If I had put her with her prey in a jar in the refrigerator overnight, she would have been cool, and thus not ready to fly away quickly. She then could have been photographed in a more scenic (natural) background.

Garden Snail after a rain.

I should have used a small watercolor paint brush to get the tiny bits of soil and detrius off of the snail, and off of the snail shell. It is always easier to edit the shot before taking the picture. It is just a couple of tiny areas of photographic imperfection, and could easily be manipulated away in photoshop, but some of the truth would be made into a lie.

Toad Lily. The flowers are about an inch across. Shot in Macro.

I should have gotten down on my belly a bit more, lower to the ground. Then there would be more definition of the top of the flower, easily revealing its intricanicity. There's a few specks of yellow pollen at the top of the photo. Could have used the paintbrish to dust them off. Also, on a warm/hot day, when plant juices are moving, thus making the plant parts more pliable: I could have wrapped the petals closest to the camera around a paint brush handle, so they would curve down a bit more, exposing the interior reproductive parts of the flower more fully. Be careful though, don't want to damage it.

Stinky Fungus. You can smell them from a hundred feet away. Got down on my belly for this shot, a foot away. Came very close to shooting my lunch, too. Horrific scent. Interesting shrooms. Won't try to take a picture of these again.

I should have removed more of the leaves around the subjects. The seedling Amorphophallus (green thing) is distracting. Too much clutter.

This is one of this year's hatchlings.

Ugly setting.

I like exotic foods. Sometimes the neighbors come over. One night I was making lamb marinated overnight in sea salt, greek oregano, lavender, and garlic. I invited them to stay for dinner, but they couldn't get out of here fast enough.

As far as the photo goes, the lettuce should have been in a higher class container.
As far as the neighbors go, I think what scared them off was the bowl of mice.

 

[danielle]

Like the hatchling Dave and the food....I would have stayed for dinner,lol

 

[tyflier]

Dave-

A good number of your shots appear to be using either a pop-up flash opr a very small hot-shoe flash. You're getting blown-out hot spots, especially on the wasp, 'shrooms and food, though admittedly the shrooms could be entirely from natural light. I would recomend checking out Lumiquest. They produce some absolutely fantastic diffusion screens for both pop-up and shoe mount flash untis that work excellently. I can personally attest to the increased quality of night time closeup shots using a LumiQuest diffusion screen on a pop-up flash:

This is a closeup of a Dobson Fly using a 14-42mm lens at around 35mm from about 6 inches away. I used my pop-up flash and the LumiQuest diffusion screen, and you can see there aren't any blown highlights or "hot spots" from the flash...just nice, even, soft lighting all around.

Also...your flower shot...I would recommend a narrower apertur for such a broad flower. You've lost focus on both the front and back petals, and only the center of the flower is sharp, which would be great if we could actually see the center of the flower. A narrower aperture would increase your depth of field and bring more of the flower in focus:

This was shot at f/5.6, and as you can see...the DoF very quickly drops away from the subjects. As well, I've positioned my camera to actually decrease the depth of the flowers, giving the impression of a flatt(er) surface area, so more of the flwoers are sharp. I've also focused my camera to where you can see what is in focus.

Here is a flower shot with a tighter aperture:

This was shot at f/11 or f/16...something like that, I don't remember. But as you can see, the tighter acperture has GREATLY increased my depth of field, giving me the entire flower, most of it's stem and some of the ground litter in focus. And the background that is soft is not soft enough to be "out of focus"...just soft on the edges.

Anyhow...not trying to be picky...just giving you my own $.02...

 

[dave partington]

Dr. Flier, Lovely cranesbill geranium. Thanks for the tips. Will look into them. I see an opportunity to swipe the scarybug pic and use part of it to make a background image for a tiled screensaver thingy.
dave

 

[tyflier]

Dr. Flier, Lovely cranesbill geranium. Thanks for the tips. Will look into them. I see an opportunity to swipe the scarybug pic and use part of it to make a background image for a tiled screensaver thingy.
dave

Cranesbill Geranium? Oh...you mean the "Solitary Purple Flower"...

I'm just beginning to learn some fo the local wildflowers. I have no idea what most of them are, but I'm trying to learn...

If you ever want tips for photography...just ask. I'm not a great photographer, but I know a couple little things, so I might be able to offer some tips to make things easier for you...

 

[diamondlil]

Chris, huge thanks for the diffusion screen idea! I've been getting so frustrated with the flash on my camera when using macro settings, but didn't realise I could actually get a device to help.