santamonica812

Lives in United States CA, United States
Has a website at www.pbase.com/santamonica
Joined on Jul 26, 2009

Comments

Total: 833, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Mike CH: 83 feet?!?!?

I have trees on my property that are that high!

What are they smoking?

What is WHO smoking? No idea what your point is, since you don't tell us who "they" is/are.

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2017 at 22:26 UTC
In reply to:

Paul Boddie: "Boggs' attorneys have not said whether he will appeal to a higher court"

One above 83 feet?

Heh.

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2017 at 22:25 UTC
In reply to:

thx1138: What we see is why the legal system is so expensive. Let's just waste time and money and kick it to a higher court with out even worrying about the merits, assuming you have deep enough pockets of course.

Is your point that the pilot (who claims he was flying above 83 feet, therefore in "free" airspace) is clearly in the right, so the defendant is responsible for dragging this out and running up the costs in our legal system? Or are you arguing that the defendant is clearly right, and so the pilot is the one you are blaming?

When a reader can't tell what your point or your argument is; your post might need a few more details. :-)

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2017 at 22:23 UTC

I'm a liberal (generally). But for something like this, I'd like to see a 20 year prison sentence. To rape the environment, only because it feels good to behave like a complete @sshole, and to ruin the vista for tens/hundreds of thousands of people, for years to come . . . it makes me see red.

A pity that $5,000 and 6 months is the most they can give.

What a waste of sperm and egg this person is.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 00:54 UTC as 26th comment | 3 replies

When I was a photog student, I always wondered why there was not this sort of resource online. (Of course, there were lots of regular books. But they varied in quality, so a book that was good for portrait lighting was also dreadful on lighting for products.

A site I'll definitely be bookmarking.

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2017 at 20:14 UTC as 16th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Old Cameras: "Settlement" implies it never went to trial, which is unfortunate. Something tells me that no wrong doing was admitted, just a wad of crumpled cash offered up to make it all go away. They needed to be judged and found guilty with a prescription for change.

brn,
"Low" settlements happen all the time. One, the plaintiff might have wanted to make a point and was not interested in hitting the jackpot with a large jury verdict. So, this amount might have been perfectly satisfactory to him.

Or, this plaintiff was particularly risk-averse. "Bird in the hand." and all that.

Or, there might indeed be some missing facts that make this case a closer call, and are what prompted the acceptance of this offer.

Or, her lawyer was the one who was risk-averse, and it was his own lawyer who pressured him into settling.

But, based on the facts that we were given; the plaintiff has a very very strong case. I think that (outsiders') observation is pretty accurate.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2017 at 07:41 UTC
In reply to:

santamonica812: Minor quibble: She was not "awarded" anything, as the article makes clear that it was a settlement. She was given, she settled, she agreed upon . . . all of those could be accurate.

An award would be if a jury or judge found in her favor and ordered an amount of money (or equitable relief, etc).

(As I said, minor quibble.) :-)
Especially since this is a photography, and not a legal-interest, site.

My bad. [face-palm].

Do as I say; not as I do. :-)

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2017 at 07:37 UTC

Minor quibble: She was not "awarded" anything, as the article makes clear that it was a settlement. She was given, she settled, she agreed upon . . . all of those could be accurate.

An award would be if a jury or judge found in her favor and ordered an amount of money (or equitable relief, etc).

(As I said, minor quibble.) :-)
Especially since this is a photography, and not a legal-interest, site.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2017 at 00:14 UTC as 30th comment | 12 replies

Lots of very nice ones. A few that seems overly post-processed...at least, to my eye. But overall, a good selection, with animals shots (not surprisingly) being very over-represented in terms of subject matter. Since I like animal images, I had no problem with this. :-)

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2017 at 19:35 UTC as 5th comment
On article Hands-on with the Canon EOS 77D (450 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Silver Nemesis: Interesting, by a mile: now that the "77" is here, is it a "3" on the way? Don't know about you, but the 3 and 1V were my favourite cameras - and I still have the 3 in perfect working condition - Eye Control AF, gentlemen, Eye Control AF!!!

I still have--and use--my beloved 1v. Took it on 4 trips around the world. 140F in Death Valley. Minus 30 in the South American Andes. Never have had a hiccup or problem, 25 years running. If/when it ever dies, I will be heart-broken.

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2017 at 00:41 UTC

Ilford HP-5. Not too far off from real life, it was one of my go-to films before discovering T-Max (which was better for my alternative developing . . . Lith printing rules!!!)

Link | Posted on Feb 10, 2017 at 05:58 UTC as 15th comment
On photo DSCF8563-1 in the Your City - Graveyard (B&W) challenge (4 comments in total)

Love the shot. Hate the lazy and meaningless title. . . sloppy and unprofessional (which is at odds with the high quality in the actual image).

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2017 at 23:47 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

LEGACYMOMENTSPHOTOGRAPHY: Its nearly 1984................

"It's" (not its).
In our bleak dystopian future, spelling and grammar will be especially important. :-)

Link | Posted on Jan 23, 2017 at 07:45 UTC

As long as it can identify and locate a fire extinguisher after it explodes.
[edit: okay, lots of other people were already thinking along the same lines]

Link | Posted on Jan 23, 2017 at 07:43 UTC as 3rd comment

Best of all: If I duct-tape it to my ski helmet, I can use it in place of my GoPro.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2017 at 11:44 UTC as 11th comment

Love the video; hate the accompanying music. Just dreadful, and it really detracts from the viewing experience. Any time you look at photography and you have to run to hit the mute button, you know the photographer (or editor) did an awful awful job.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2017 at 11:37 UTC as 5th comment
On article Flickr reveals its top 25 photos of 2016 (190 comments in total)

Lots of very nice ones. Several--to my eye--were grossly over-processed, and were therefore uninteresting to me. But many were really excellent compositions.

Link | Posted on Dec 18, 2016 at 07:42 UTC as 31st comment

# 2 looked quite photoshopped to my eye. Lovely composition, but still . . .

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2016 at 07:58 UTC as 5th comment
On photo DSC_4475_sRGB_1600 in the Look Up challenge (2 comments in total)

Like the photo. Hate the lazy and meaningless title

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2016 at 10:33 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
On photo Osaka Shopping Mall in the Look Up challenge (2 comments in total)

Very nice composition, and I like your decision on how to orient the actual photograph.

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2016 at 10:33 UTC as 1st comment
Total: 833, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »