[SI] - Shoot-In - Mandate - Tie-in

[SI] - Shoot-In - Mandate - Tie-in

Subject and Background Tie-in.

Some way they relate in an interesting manner like a shape is repeated or
contrasted, a soft OOF background's forms emphasize a characteristic of the
subject... more than just the obvious like a cow in a field, something more
intentional.

Due June 6, 2008

* w w w .pbase . com /shootin/tiein

Why does this keep happening?
* si.jlkramer . net /rulz/rulz.htm

Re: - Shoot-In - Mandate - Tie-in

On May 2, 9:57 am, "jimkramer" <Newsread...@NOFSPAMjlkramer . net >
wrote:
> Subject and Background Tie-in.
>
> Some way they relate in an interesting manner like a shape is repeated or
> contrasted, a soft OOF background's forms emphasize a characteristic of th=
e
> subject... more than just the obvious like a cow in a field, something mor=
e
> intentional.
>
> Due June 6, 2008
>
> * w w w .pbase . com /shootin/tiein
>
> Why does this keep happening? * si.jlkramer . net /rulz/rulz.htm

Hey, that's my birthday!! It will be easy to remember!! :0)
Helen

Re: - Shoot-In - Mandate - Tie-in

On May 2, 9:57 am, "jimkramer" <Newsread...@NOFSPAMjlkramer . net >
wrote:
> Subject and Background Tie-in.

I think "Tie-Up" might have produced some interesting images.

Re: - Shoot-In - Mandate - Tie-in

"Annika1980" <annika1980@aol . com > wrote in message
news:b8d6c19e-56a3-4f88-8003-f72d42852250@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups . com ...
On May 2, 9:57 am, "jimkramer" <Newsread...@NOFSPAMjlkramer . net >
wrote:
> Subject and Background Tie-in.

I think "Tie-Up" might have produced some interesting images.

No, that's out of bounds. :-)
-Jim

Re: [SI] - Shoot-In - Mandate - Tie-in

jimkramer wrote:
> Subject and Background Tie-in.
>
> Some way they relate in an interesting manner like a shape is repeated or
> contrasted, a soft OOF background's forms emphasize a characteristic of the
> subject... more than just the obvious like a cow in a field, something more
> intentional.
>
> Due June 6, 2008
>
> * w w w .pbase . com /shootin/tiein
>
> Why does this keep happening?
> * si.jlkramer . net /rulz/rulz.htm

I got an interesting shot today for the tie-in mandate (for last month):
* edgehill . net /California/Bay-Area/San-Francisco/gritty/7-15-08-mission/pg1pc2
Alright maybe it's not the most breathtaking image but it's a reasonable
composition... and pretty clever I thought :-) Partly luck of course, I
just noticed the cop car's colors matched the building, when I got home
I realized the two were really speaking the same language.

--
Paul Furman
w w w .edgehill . net
w w w .baynatives . com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam

Re: [SI] - Shoot-In - Mandate - Tie-in

> jimkramer wrote:
>>
>> Why does this keep happening?
>> * si.jlkramer . net /rulz/rulz.htm

So, is the shoot-in dead?
No suggestions for the next mandate?


> (last month)

Re: [SI] - Shoot-In - Mandate - Tie-in

"Paul Furman" <paul-@-edgehill . net > wrote in message
news:0szfk.33224$ZE5.28144@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc . com ...
>> jimkramer wrote:
>>>
>>> Why does this keep happening?
>>> * si.jlkramer . net /rulz/rulz.htm
>
> So, is the shoot-in dead?
> No suggestions for the next mandate?
>
>
>> (last month)

It is dead. No more attempts at a resuscitation will be made by me.
-Jim

(RIP) Re: [SI] - Shoot-In - Mandate - Tie-in

jimkramer wrote:

>> So, is the shoot-in dead?
>> No suggestions for the next mandate?
>
> It is dead. No more attempts at a resuscitation will be made by me.

Cool! I predicted its demise before it started. Your biggest mistake, Jim,
was to expect to find photographers on Usenet. Only thing you will find in
these "photography" groups are trolls and malcontents that love to instigate
trouble. This is why I started the Usenet Stimulus Project and why it has
become so successful in thinning out the herd of idiots and fools. Now the
noise level has dropped drastically. If you want SI to be successful you
need to take it to a photography group.

Rest in peace!




Rita
--
Stamping out Internet stupidity one idiot at a time. Never empower the
idiot, embrace it and stimulate it. For more details go to the Usenet
Stimulus Project page.

* ritaberk.myhosting247 . com

Re: (RIP) Re: [SI] - Shoot-In - Mandate - Tie-in


"Rita Berkowitz" <ritaberk2008@aol . com > wrote in message
news:7p-dnf2zgcvv2eLVnZ2dnUVZ v inZ2d@supernews . com ...
> jimkramer wrote:
>
>>> So, is the shoot-in dead?
>>> No suggestions for the next mandate?
>>
>> It is dead. No more attempts at a resuscitation will be made by me.
>
> Cool! I predicted its demise before it started. Your biggest mistake,
> Jim, was to expect to find photographers on Usenet. Only thing you will
> find in these "photography" groups are trolls and malcontents that love to
> instigate trouble. This is why I started the Usenet Stimulus Project and
> why it has become so successful in thinning out the herd of idiots and
> fools. Now the noise level has dropped drastically. If you want SI to be
> successful you need to take it to a photography group.

We'd all love to see anything of substance produced by your "stimulus"
project. It, like anything else your fat ass touches is useless. Geez, talk
about the pot calling the kettle black...

BTW, you can help this group: go away. And take your multiple area-code ass
with you.

Re: (RIP) Re: [SI] - Shoot-In - Mandate - Tie-in

Rita Berkowitz wrote:
> jimkramer wrote:
>
>>> So, is the shoot-in dead?
>>> No suggestions for the next mandate?
>>
>> It is dead. No more attempts at a resuscitation will be made by me.
>
> Cool! I predicted its demise before it started. Your biggest mistake,
> Jim, was to expect to find photographers on Usenet. Only thing you will
> find in these "photography" groups are trolls and malcontents that love
> to instigate trouble.

100 on the irony meter.

--
lsmft

Re: (RIP) Re: [SI] - Shoot-In - Mandate - Tie-in

Rita Berkowitz <ritaberk2008@aol . com > wrote:
> Only thing you will find in
>these "photography" groups are trolls and malcontents that love to instigate
>trouble.

People like you.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic . net

Re: (RIP) Re: [SI] - Shoot-In - Mandate - Tie-in

Ray Fischer wrote:
> Rita Berkowitz <ritaberk2008@aol . com > wrote:
>> Only thing you will find in
>> these "photography" groups are trolls and malcontents that love to instigate
>> trouble.
>
> People like you.
>

Re: (RIP) Re: [SI] - Shoot-In - Mandate - Tie-in

Rita Berkowitz wrote:
> jimkramer wrote:
>
>>> So, is the shoot-in dead?
>>> No suggestions for the next mandate?
>>
>> It is dead. No more attempts at a resuscitation will be made by me.
>
> Cool! I predicted its demise before it started. Your biggest mistake,
> Jim, was to expect to find photographers on Usenet. Only thing you will
> find in these "photography" groups are trolls and malcontents that love
> to instigate trouble. This is why I started the Usenet Stimulus Project
> and why it has become so successful in thinning out the herd of idiots
> and fools. Now the noise level has dropped drastically. If you want SI
> to be successful you need to take it to a photography group.
>
> Rest in peace!
>
>
>
>
> Rita

Didn't someone recently offer to put up some cash and prizes to liven it
up? Surely the lure of a prize would encourage a few people to submit
entries? Maybe it's the "If I can't have it nobody can" syndrome?

It would be a shame to see it go but it was a shame to see Lisa Horeton
and the plethora of people who were really interested photography go too.

Digital cameras have done this. Now that anyone with a $100 digital can
take an almost decent shot, a whole bunch of malcontent's who think they
know all there is to know have started to bring some really bad habits
to the groups. It probably will not be long before most ISPs will dump
newsgroups altogether.

Certainly the complaint register is running hot at my access provider.
It's only a matter of time before the end starts for all of Usenet.


Me and big squid.

Re: (RIP) Re: [SI] - Shoot-In - Mandate - Tie-in

2SQUID wrote:
> Rita Berkowitz wrote:
>> jimkramer wrote:
>>
>>>> So, is the shoot-in dead?
>>>> No suggestions for the next mandate?
>>>
>>> It is dead. No more attempts at a resuscitation will be made by me.
>>
>> Cool! I predicted its demise before it started. Your biggest
>> mistake, Jim, was to expect to find photographers on Usenet. Only
>> thing you will find in these "photography" groups are trolls and
>> malcontents that love to instigate trouble. This is why I started the
>> Usenet Stimulus Project and why it has become so successful in
>> thinning out the herd of idiots and fools. Now the noise level has
>> dropped drastically. If you want SI to be successful you need to take
>> it to a photography group.
>>
>> Rest in peace!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Rita
>
> Didn't someone recently offer to put up some cash and prizes to liven it
> up? Surely the lure of a prize would encourage a few people to submit
> entries? Maybe it's the "If I can't have it nobody can" syndrome?
>
> It would be a shame to see it go but it was a shame to see Lisa Horeton
> and the plethora of people who were really interested photography go too.
>
> Digital cameras have done this. Now that anyone with a $100 digital can
> take an almost decent shot, a whole bunch of malcontent's who think they
> know all there is to know have started to bring some really bad habits
> to the groups. It probably will not be long before most ISPs will dump
> newsgroups altogether.
>
> Certainly the complaint register is running hot at my access provider.
> It's only a matter of time before the end starts for all of Usenet.

Yes, Usenet is dead; film at l1...

Digital didn't kill the SI; a lot of buttholes did.

--
lsmft

Re: - Shoot-In

On Jul 17, 8:32 am, "jimkramer" <Newsread...@NOFSPAMjlkramer . net >
wrote:
> "Paul Furman" <pa...@-edgehill . net > wrote in message
>
> news:0szfk.33224$ZE5.28144@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc . com ...
>
> >> jimkramer wrote:
>
> >>> Why does this keep happening?
> >>> * si.jlkramer . net /rulz/rulz.htm
>
> > So, is the shoot-in dead?
> > No suggestions for the next mandate?
>
> >> (last month)
>
> It is dead.  No more attempts at a resuscitation will be made by me.
> -Jim

I am truly saddened to hear this Jim. But I want to thank you and all
the others who hosted the SI for a great job. You did your best. The
cause of its demise was lack of participation.
Helen