Photgraphing under 18s


johnriley

Link Posted 30/07/2009 - 11:12
Quote:
The meaning is perfectly understandable from the phonetical spelling and the context, and does not need further explanation. This constant tut-tutting about incorrect, but perfectly understandable, written English really grates on me for some reason!

You're right in that the function of language is to make ourselves understood and if this is fulfilled then language has served its purpose.

English though is an unusually rich language. It has complex rules and the largest number of words of any language. This means that, correctly used, a lot of nuances and subtelties can be conveyed. This is what tends to get lost as an "anything goes" philosophy takes over.

As another example of "anything goes" take a look at a receipt, a receipt for anything. Then look for the date to enter in your accounts. It could be anywhere, and it wastes time looking for it amongst a mass of computer printout. At one time the form of such documents was fixed. If you wanted the date, there it was, always in the same place.

More efficient to read, but these days there are no such standards applied. All I'm saying is that there is a benefit to getting thngs right.
Best regards, John

aminstar

Link Posted 30/07/2009 - 11:29
johnriley wrote:

You're right in that the function of language is to make ourselves understood and if this is fulfilled then language has served its purpose.

English though is an unusually rich language. It has complex rules and the largest number of words of any language. This means that, correctly used, a lot of nuances and subtelties can be conveyed. This is what tends to get lost as an "anything goes" philosophy takes over.

As another example of "anything goes" take a look at a receipt, a receipt for anything. Then look for the date to enter in your accounts. It could be anywhere, and it wastes time looking for it amongst a mass of computer printout. At one time the form of such documents was fixed. If you wanted the date, there it was, always in the same place.

More efficient to read, but these days there are no such standards applied. All I'm saying is that there is a benefit to getting thngs right.

John,

What a beautiful way of exemplifying the problem described. Strange enough the example of the date in a receipt is absolutely spot on. You got it nailed there. Its not that I am not able to find the date in the receipt, but the few seconds that I waste locating it that gets to me at times if I am in a hurry.

Same with the txt languages used. I have no problem at all with it nor with any short form of words used, but I vehemently abhor its usage where there is no need for it. I use it when texting without any problems because I have a limited number of characters allowed, and sometimems the most common short terms I am quite ok with it being used here but when in one sentence alone I run into several such terms then it starts getting to me. And when the same term is applied to replace different words then depending on my mood on the day it can really start getting to me.
Amin Photo Gallery
Last Edited by aminstar on 30/07/2009 - 11:29

Pentaxophile

Link Posted 30/07/2009 - 12:06
Quote:
there is a benefit to getting thngs right.

LOL!

Quote:
English though is an unusually rich language. It has complex rules and the largest number of words of any language. This means that, correctly used, a lot of nuances and subtelties can be conveyed. This is what tends to get lost as an "anything goes" philosophy takes over.

I agree, but I would apply this more to the printed word in reports and published articles etc... bit OTT to be so stringent in a forum in my opinion, especially when the comment's author may not be able to write in correct, traditional english.
[link=https://500px.com/will_brealey/[/link]
Last Edited by Pentaxophile on 30/07/2009 - 12:12

aminstar

Link Posted 30/07/2009 - 12:10
Pentaxophile wrote:
Quote:
there is a benefit to getting thngs right.

LOL!

Now that is just being pure silly and childish laughing about a typo. We all know that when typing occasionally we are all prone to errors.

There is a big difference between purposely spelling something in a certain way and typing certain thing and missing or making a mistake.
And if one cannot differentiate it then definitely there is something lacking in one's ability to be mentally mature.

We all know that what John intended to write was "things"
Amin Photo Gallery

Pentaxophile

Link Posted 30/07/2009 - 12:12
I thought it was funny in an ironic sense, given the point being made, was not trying to be rude! Anyway that's me done with pentax forums for the day, apologies for helping bring this thread further off topic... Apologies to father Ted.
[link=https://500px.com/will_brealey/[/link]
Last Edited by Pentaxophile on 30/07/2009 - 12:14

Father Ted

Link Posted 30/07/2009 - 12:13
....
Anyway....

I do hope they like the pictures I intend to take at the cricket match
Getting there! Thanks to you guys

Pentax K10d, *istDL, Kit lens ( 18-55mm ), 50mm f1.7 lens, Tamron 70-300mm lens, Prinzflex 70-162 manual lens, Various old flashes.

aminstar

Link Posted 30/07/2009 - 12:15
Pentaxophile wrote:
I thought it was funny in an ironic sense, given the point being made, was not trying to be rude!

Oh I am sorry on jumping to conclusions here
Really sorry. This is when sometimes being face to face and able to see one's expression while saying something has a different meaning all together.

I would see the irony in it too and in a lighter mood. Just read it under the wrong tone that's all.

Good the overall tone of the thread has subsided, which is good

So now, father Ted, are we going to see some nice cricket match images soon?
Amin Photo Gallery

Father Ted

Link Posted 30/07/2009 - 12:23
Well, I'm still planning on going after work on Monday..if the weather holds.

aminstar wrote:

So now, father Ted, are we going to see some nice cricket match images soon?

Does that mean you didn't think my previous ones were nice.





Sorry, couldn't resist
Getting there! Thanks to you guys

Pentax K10d, *istDL, Kit lens ( 18-55mm ), 50mm f1.7 lens, Tamron 70-300mm lens, Prinzflex 70-162 manual lens, Various old flashes.

aminstar

Link Posted 30/07/2009 - 12:26
Father Ted wrote:

Does that mean you didn't think my previous ones were nice.

Sorry, couldn't resist

Oh my oh my, , now you are really being mean father Ted . You know very well what I meant, and what I said doesn't imply in any form or sense that your previous ones were not nice. I might not have commented on them but that doesn't necessarily mean that they were not nice.

"off running to check on the other cricket images scratching my head", where the heck are they?
Amin Photo Gallery

Father Ted

Link Posted 30/07/2009 - 12:29
No, you've done it now. My feelings are irrevocably hurt now.



Here they are
https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/topic/first-go-at-sports-photography--13715
Getting there! Thanks to you guys

Pentax K10d, *istDL, Kit lens ( 18-55mm ), 50mm f1.7 lens, Tamron 70-300mm lens, Prinzflex 70-162 manual lens, Various old flashes.

George Lazarette

Link Posted 30/07/2009 - 15:35
Pentaxophile wrote:
Quote:
Just thought of making sure whether the short form you are using the term "URE" does it stand for "You Are" or "Your" or it can just be applied either way and left to interpretation.

The meaning is perfectly understandable from the phonetical spelling and the context, and does not need further explanation. This constant tut-tutting about incorrect, but perfectly understandable, written English really grates on me for some reason!

Had it been perfectly understandable, nobody would have asked what it meant.

G
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.

Road_Dancer

Link Posted 30/07/2009 - 19:00
Unless they were just being pedantic?

Quote:
First of all I don't know what "phonetical spelling" means. I know what phonetic spelling is though

Which is what I took that to be BTW *laughs* but... Eh, that's the peril of text only, I don't get to see how it was said!

As far as it goes, I hate use of text speak and unneeded abbreviations, even in texts.

Which may or may not included the use of BTW instead of 'By The Way', etc. but this i s all discussion that should be taken light heartedly and probably elsewhere!

With regards to the underage Crickets, if the entomologist don't mind... What, not that cricket? Oh, right...

Personally, I've taken pictures in a few public places, and I'm yet to have problem, but then, I've generally been 'passing through' at the time. If I was going to be setting up at the side of the game, I think it's only polite to ask the chap or chapess in charge of said match.
Pentax K10d; Metz mecablitz 48 AF-1; Pentax A 50mm F2; Pentax 18-55mm DAII; Sigma 28-300mm F3.5-5.6; Koboron 24-70mm F3.5-4.8. Pentax MZ-7, Zenit 35mm
My Flickr Photos

Father Ted

Link Posted 04/08/2009 - 08:42
Back on topic

I had a word with the guys at the cricket club. They were more than happy for me to take photos. I gave them a few prints from the adult match I watched a couple of weeks ago, to win them over.
I also offered to email them any decent shots I got, at this stage I'm not too bothered about selling images, (but I will stick my name on the bottom).

The kids came over and asked to see the shots and were impressed when I showed them, so, all in all, a success!

Just need to go through all the shots and see which worked
Getting there! Thanks to you guys

Pentax K10d, *istDL, Kit lens ( 18-55mm ), 50mm f1.7 lens, Tamron 70-300mm lens, Prinzflex 70-162 manual lens, Various old flashes.

aminstar

Link Posted 04/08/2009 - 08:52
Good one Father Ted Glad all worked so well.

Now let's see some of those shots so that we can throw an avalanche of criticism at them
Amin Photo Gallery
Last Edited by aminstar on 04/08/2009 - 08:52

Father Ted

Link Posted 04/08/2009 - 08:56
aminstar wrote:
Good one Father Ted Glad all worked so well.

Now let's see some of those shots so that we can throw an avalanche of criticism at them

Morning Amin!

I hope that'd be an avalanche of constructive criticism

I have some work to do on them as someone convinced me to shoot in RAW

https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/topic/shooting-in-raw-13925

But, I'll get some posted later this evening hopefully
Getting there! Thanks to you guys

Pentax K10d, *istDL, Kit lens ( 18-55mm ), 50mm f1.7 lens, Tamron 70-300mm lens, Prinzflex 70-162 manual lens, Various old flashes.
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.