contest: who can best photoshop this image for me?

Rich wrote:

> I wonder if any of the "pros" here bothered to offer their services
> as a good deed?

Oh goody, a volunteer! Will you also clean my carpets?

On 6 Oct 2005 16:34:37 -0700, eawckyegcy@yahoo.com wrote:

>Rich wrote:
>
>> I wonder if any of the "pros" here bothered to offer their services
>> as a good deed?
>
>Oh goody, a volunteer! Will you also clean my carpets?

If you have enough time to cruise usenet, you have enough time
to help the guy. I don't use Photoshop that much so I wouldn't
be of much help.
-Rich

The tone of these groups, and it's usefulness depends on us, the regulars,
and how we act. Not the "peeps".
--
Mike Russell
www.curvemeister.com

Tony wrote:
> Spammng aholes who want free retouching and crosspost to many groups will
> get exactly the "free" services they deserve.
>

I have about 300 wedding pictures I would like to open up to a contest
as well. Any takers??

(just kidding)

Jim

Rich wrote:
> On 6 Oct 2005 16:34:37 -0700, eawckyegcy@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >Rich wrote:
> >
> >> I wonder if any of the "pros" here bothered to offer their services
> >> as a good deed?
> >
> >Oh goody, a volunteer! Will you also clean my carpets?
>
> If you have enough time to cruise usenet, you have enough time
> to help the guy. I don't use Photoshop that much so I wouldn't
> be of much help.
> -Rich

Thanks Rich for your good sentiment, but I must make it clear - I do
*not* want help! I do *not* need help! Had I needed help I would've
asked for it.

I already have photoshop CS2 on this machine, I still have paintshoppro
from before I got photoshop, and I also have the Gimp. This picture was
left-over from a set that I had already retouched - most were
well-composed in camera. If I thought an image was worth retouching I
would find the time for it, and there's no deadline here; I know
enough, there is plenty of information online if it's something I don't
already know and I also have books. I also find retouching fun so
there's no reason I wouldn't enjoy doing it.

I already had a go at this image and got a satisfying result before I
made the original post. So far I got replies to my email from nice
individuals who had a go at it, and interestingly, the first one took
an identical approach to mine towards it, eventhough I would've thought
it was not the most obvious one.

So no, I don't need pros, and I don't need good deeds of charity. This
picture is of *no* such big importance. I took much better ones that
night.

Jim Sabatke wrote:
> Tony wrote:
> > Spammng aholes who want free retouching and crosspost to many groups will
> > get exactly the "free" services they deserve.
> >
>
> I have about 300 wedding pictures I would like to open up to a contest
> as well. Any takers??
>
> (just kidding)
>
> Jim

This isn't 300 wedding pictures.

Voivod wrote:
> On 6 Oct 2005 14:17:17 -0700, "Mike Henley" <casioculture@gmail.com>
> scribbled:
>
> >
> >gregfarr wrote:
> >> On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 19:55:39 GMT, "Tony" <tspadaro@nc.rr.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Spammng aholes who want free retouching and crosspost to many groups will
> >> >get exactly the "free" services they deserve.
> >>
> >>
> >> Isn't that a little hard, Tony, but true, yes, forget it, leave it in.
> >> I'm so tired of doing free stuff for peeps. One guy, I did one for
> >> here did a logo for a bus and thanked me quite nicely, but other than
> >> that, give some free-bees, and they think that's how the world runs.
> >
> >I have realised long ago that Tony is hopelessly obnoxious with a
> >fetish for overzealous prosecution and *not* worth a reply from me.
> >He's beneath contempt.
> >
> >As for the "free-bees", Geez! What's up with you guys?! This is
> >ridiculous; I have went out of my way to indicate in the original post
> >that this is *not* something transactional. I frequent usenet for fun
> >and information and *not* to solicit services. Anyone who doesn't find
>
> Of course not, you just bombed five groups with your 'contest' for
> 'fun'. Trust me, few people believe you.

If you don't find it 'fun' then stay the heck away. I hope you don't
feel obliged to reply to every 'spam' post.


>
> >this original post a potential fun activity, just friggin' move on and
> >stay away. There's *no* business here, so go away and mind your own
> >business. I'm not looking for "free-bees", but it seems clear now that
>
> You're not? You asked, what, thousands of readers, to edit your work for
> you in a 'contest' that has no prize. How's that NOT looking for
> freebies?

What prize would I offer online? and why should I? The prize is purely
the 'fun' of having a go at it. Nothing else. No one should care here
for any reason other than that, and I have no intention to make it
otherwise.


>
> >some here are looking to get paid - well stop throwing tantrums, this
> >isn't it! Put an ad somewhere and stop harassing people.
>
> No, it seems people are here to discuss Photoshop (and whatever topics
> of interest that are in the other groups you spammed) and not do someone
> else's work for them. I refer you to your own words: "Who can best
> photoshop it for me?"
>
> Sure sounds like you're looking for free work there, Chuckles.

What's wrong with being clear? I'm making a CD for my friends from that
night, this was one of the weaker images, and if something good comes
out of it I would include it in the CD. I already have enough good
images. Of course it's "Who can best photoshop it for me?" - who else
would it be for?!

eawckyegcy@yahoo.com wrote:
> Mike Henley wrote:
>
> > As for the "free-bees", Geez! What's up with you guys?!
>
> Maybe it's all the desperate losers who come to USENET and beg others
> to do their homework for them? Whether or not you intentions are pure,
> the bayesian prior is stacked heavily against you. Maybe you should
> take the hint and crack a book?

Well it didn't occur to me to consider the 'all the desperate losers
who come to USENET and beg others to do their homework for them' - this
was *not* within my horizon of intentions at the time so I did not
foresee it, though I see now how my post was misinterpreted, that said,
I'm also begining to see that this is starting to sound like, no
offence meant, to use a fitting analogy, a bunch of prostitutes whining
and bitching because some other people might be having sex 'for free'
and for the fun of it. The prostitutes could stay away and mind their
own business, but no, if there's sex happening somewhere and they're
not getting paid for it they seem intent on making things as sour as
could be.

I made it clear in my original post that there's *no* business here,
would the prostitutes now stay away please?

On 6 Oct 2005 22:21:34 -0700, "Mike Henley" <casioculture@gmail.com>
scribbled:

>
>Rich wrote:
>> On 6 Oct 2005 16:34:37 -0700, eawckyegcy@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> >Rich wrote:
>> >
>> >> I wonder if any of the "pros" here bothered to offer their services
>> >> as a good deed?
>> >
>> >Oh goody, a volunteer! Will you also clean my carpets?
>>
>> If you have enough time to cruise usenet, you have enough time
>> to help the guy. I don't use Photoshop that much so I wouldn't
>> be of much help.
>> -Rich
>
>Thanks Rich for your good sentiment, but I must make it clear - I do
>*not* want help! I do *not* need help! Had I needed help I would've
>asked for it.

You did ask for it....your exact request for help was:
"Who can best photoshop it for me?"

>I already have photoshop CS2 on this machine, I still have paintshoppro
>from before I got photoshop, and I also have the Gimp. This picture was
>left-over from a set that I had already retouched - most were
>well-composed in camera. If I thought an image was worth retouching I
>would find the time for it, and there's no deadline here; I know
>enough, there is plenty of information online if it's something I don't
>already know and I also have books. I also find retouching fun so
>there's no reason I wouldn't enjoy doing it.

Funny how none of the above was mentioned in your initial post.

>I already had a go at this image and got a satisfying result before I

Never mentioned that either until you got flamed for looking for free
work disguised as a 'contest'.

>made the original post. So far I got replies to my email from nice

What email of yours are you talking about?

>individuals who had a go at it, and interestingly, the first one took
>an identical approach to mine towards it, eventhough I would've thought
>it was not the most obvious one.

And I believe in the Easter Bunny....

>So no, I don't need pros, and I don't need good deeds of charity. This
>picture is of *no* such big importance. I took much better ones that
>night.

Just stop lying....

On 6 Oct 2005 22:34:55 -0700, "Mike Henley" <casioculture@gmail.com>
scribbled:

>
>Voivod wrote:
>> On 6 Oct 2005 14:17:17 -0700, "Mike Henley" <casioculture@gmail.com>
>> scribbled:
>>
>> >
>> >gregfarr wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 19:55:39 GMT, "Tony" <tspadaro@nc.rr.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Spammng aholes who want free retouching and crosspost to many groups will
>> >> >get exactly the "free" services they deserve.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Isn't that a little hard, Tony, but true, yes, forget it, leave it in.
>> >> I'm so tired of doing free stuff for peeps. One guy, I did one for
>> >> here did a logo for a bus and thanked me quite nicely, but other than
>> >> that, give some free-bees, and they think that's how the world runs.
>> >
>> >I have realised long ago that Tony is hopelessly obnoxious with a
>> >fetish for overzealous prosecution and *not* worth a reply from me.
>> >He's beneath contempt.
>> >
>> >As for the "free-bees", Geez! What's up with you guys?! This is
>> >ridiculous; I have went out of my way to indicate in the original post
>> >that this is *not* something transactional. I frequent usenet for fun
>> >and information and *not* to solicit services. Anyone who doesn't find
>>
>> Of course not, you just bombed five groups with your 'contest' for
>> 'fun'. Trust me, few people believe you.
>
>If you don't find it 'fun' then stay the heck away. I hope you don't
>feel obliged to reply to every 'spam' post.

So you admit your post was spam?

>> >this original post a potential fun activity, just friggin' move on and
>> >stay away. There's *no* business here, so go away and mind your own
>> >business. I'm not looking for "free-bees", but it seems clear now that
>>
>> You're not? You asked, what, thousands of readers, to edit your work for
>> you in a 'contest' that has no prize. How's that NOT looking for
>> freebies?
>
>What prize would I offer online? and why should I? The prize is purely

Because that's the nature of a 'contest' to win _something_. The praise
of some unknown idiot isn't a prize.

>the 'fun' of having a go at it. Nothing else. No one should care here

No, the prize was to do free work for you while you pretended it was a
contest.

>for any reason other than that, and I have no intention to make it
>otherwise.

Who the hell are you to try and dictate what anyone else cares about?

>> >some here are looking to get paid - well stop throwing tantrums, this
>> >isn't it! Put an ad somewhere and stop harassing people.
>>
>> No, it seems people are here to discuss Photoshop (and whatever topics
>> of interest that are in the other groups you spammed) and not do someone
>> else's work for them. I refer you to your own words: "Who can best
>> photoshop it for me?"
>>
>> Sure sounds like you're looking for free work there, Chuckles.
>
>What's wrong with being clear? I'm making a CD for my friends from that

Nothing's wrong with being clear, you on the other hand, weren't.

>night, this was one of the weaker images, and if something good comes
>out of it I would include it in the CD. I already have enough good
>images. Of course it's "Who can best photoshop it for me?" - who else
>would it be for?!

Your friends whom the CD is for? Oh, oops, didn't think about that, did
ya?