Re: Stepping out a panorama (the method that can't be done!)

Only a little off topic.

On Feb 9, 9:46 pm, Harold Hughes - Higglytown Hero
<hhug...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Cryptopix wrote:
> The3 more people who link to it, the higher it's ranking goes.
To Doug - Freudian slip?  3 more people would probably have more than
tripled his normal monthly viewing figures...

> It is only my peers I take seriously.
To Doug - do you mean liars and pretenders?  That'd be why Rita and
you get on famously.  Is there anyone else here you call a peer?  If
not, why do you post here?

> The garbage
> > mouths like Mark and the Athiest are about as significant in my life
> > as the mozzie I just swatted.
>
> So why mention them in every post?
A very good question, HHHH.

The matters raised by Doug have been demolished on numerous occasions,
but he keeps repeating them in a sad attempt to convince someone
(anyone?)..  If anyone *is* actually interested, refer to my post of
Jul 30 2007, 8:39 pm in this thread begun by 'Julian', the infamously
exposed Douglas sockpuppet:
http://groups.google.com.au/group/aus.photo/browse_frm/thread/6bf4b5dd0761caf1
Strangely, Doug doesn't like to talk about Julian much anymore...

By the way, did anyone ever manage to find a Douglas MacDonald
calendar?  In all my wanderings I have only ever found one dusty old
postcard in a Tourism Info centre - they gave it to me free because it
was so old.  Sorry, Doug, no royalties on that one..

> > I use less than 15% of each image to create a stepped out panorama.
Bit wasteful...  Interesting approach, especially when Doug next
says..

> > Shooting with a 150mm lens doesn't help the similarity in the images
Hmm.  A 150mm lens, eh..?  Let's give Douglas the benefit of the doubt
and assume he is talking 35mm full-frame (hehe).  I know the location
where he took those shots, and it is ridiculous to suggest that they
were taken with such a lens.  You can only go backwards about 20
metres before you run into houses and a hill.  I invite anyone
following this ridiculous charade to visit that location and look for
themselves.  My examples, which roughly match Doug's, were shot at
about 30mm equiv.  Was Doug shooting with 4x5 perhaps?

> > In fact, I don't ever recall offering any
> > information about how to do it, just a suggestion that it produces
> > uniquely different images.
To Doug - indeed you haven't.  You have lied about the original
images, and not shown any result.  We wait for the proof.


> > because he couldn't do it with his toysRus Sony
To Doug - So prove you can.  By the way, Your alzheimers is showing.
It's a Fuji.  You'll note my images were sharper than yours, by the
way..

> > I must be (once again) full of bull****...
Yep.

> > the end result always justifies
> > the means!
I'm sure it will, if it ever comes.  Can't wait, I've got my apology
already typed and ready to go...

> And here I was thinking with the birth of CD and the death of vinyl we
> wouldn't have to listen to scratched records anymore.

HHHH, I apologise for repositioning the stylus before the scratch
again..

again..
again..