Is it just me or have SF vanished?

FrancieBrady wrote: »

But the lengthy forsenics excuses Bish...remember them? :D

I said it was a mistake and a gaff by Louise and friend, from the get go.

Laughable alright!

The explanation on zoom lens's isNot laughable,just fact
Watch the department of health press conference this evening
I've accepted your opinion on Louise and offered mine

I guess my general point is to try to never throw stones in glass houses and that codology about the hospital photo and now the lab photo is/was certainly that
I know the temptation is great
We are all human

McMurphy wrote: »

Scorn one/Scorn all.

You may scorn Professor Holahan using your standards so
Because the zoom lens makes him look like he and others could hold hands with their sign language people
Yet they are definitely 2 metres apart in a room smaller than many labs

Mortelaro wrote: »

The explanation on zoom lens's isNot laughable,just fact
Watch the department of health press conference this evening
I've accepted your opinion on Louise and offered mine

I guess my general point is to try to never throw stones in glass houses and that codology about the hospital photo and now the lab photo is/was certainly that
I know the temptation is great
We are all human

Morte, part of my degree is in photography...will you stop making a complete fool of yourself and stop making excuses while you are at it.

Bishop of hope

McMurphy wrote: »

To be completely fair, I never made an issue on Harris or Leos photo either (for or against) and you can go back and check if you want.

However, replace Leo and Harris with any other members of the Dail/Dallas Cowboys/Disney etc etc etc positioned for a photo opportunity which appears to be disregarding social distancing guidelines - and those defending it - and later posting something similar (whether it be Sinn Fein/FF or anyone else) is completely double standards.

Scorn one/Scorn all.

That's my motto Mc.
But lads to be realistic and we must be, this total distance thing in entirity every second of the day and with every interaction is impossible for any human being.
Not really a political point unless it is being done deliberately and with a forethought of being a protest against the rules.
The rules are an endeavour to get us to be aware of the need for as little interaction closely as possible.
But I've been close to people without thinking briefly a few times, has anyone not that's going about and meeting people, in shops or passing the time of day even, if we meet friends?

maccored

Mortelaro wrote: »

You may scorn Professor Holahan using your standards so
Because the zoom lens makes him look like he and others could hold hands with their sign language people
Yet they are definitely 2 metres apart in a room smaller than many labs

zoom lens let the photographer be at a distance. it doesnt take people spread out and move them closer to each other. even a wide angle lens doesnt do that

maccored wrote: »

zoom lens let the photographer be at a distance. it doesnt take people spread out and move them closer to each other. even a wide angle lens doesnt do that

Incorrect
Zoom lens' distort distances behind the focused objects big time
Go watch the Professor Holahan conference this evening
For a simple experiment,try out your binoculars focusing on a house with a hill a few miles behind it
Or go to a camera shop when they re open and try a zoom lens

Bishop of hope

maccored wrote: »

zoom lens let the photographer be at a distance. it doesnt take people spread out and move them closer to each other. even a wide angle lens doesnt do that

Nothing of noteriety in either pic for me.
If you were to take anything from either pic it would be the value of face masks probably.
But hard to drink coffee with one of them on.

Bishop of hope wrote: »

That's my motto Mc.
But lads to be realistic and we must be, this total distance thing in entirity every second of the day and with every interaction is impossible for any human being.
Not really a political point unless it is being done deliberately and with a forethought of being a protest against the rules.
The rules are an endeavour to get us to be aware of the need for as little interaction closely as possible.
But I've been close to people without thinking briefly a few times, has anyone not that's going about and meeting people, in shops or passing the time of day even, if we meet friends?

Agree 100%
However, that was not the spirit of the discussion a few weeks back and not the spirit a few posts back poking fun at my csi like observations and what a zoom lens definitely does
I do appreciate that these threads are a punch and Judy affair
It's why to be honest, I'm losing interest in them,posts today notwithstanding

McMurphy

Bishop of hope wrote: »

That's my motto Mc.
But lads to be realistic and we must be, this total distance thing in entirity every second of the day and with every interaction is impossible for any human being.
Not really a political point unless it is being done deliberately and with a forethought of being a protest against the rules.
The rules are an endeavour to get us to be aware of the need for as little interaction closely as possible.
But I've been close to people without thinking briefly a few times, has anyone not that's going about and meeting people, in shops or passing the time of day even, if we meet friends?

Yeah this exactly.

I remember a few weeks back some fella made an absolute plank of himself because he publicly had a go at two Gardai in Tullamore for "not social distancing" (from memory they were walking up the street together) when the error of his argument was pointed out to him he fairly wound the neck back in including issuing a rather public apology to the guards in question.

maccored

Mortelaro wrote: »

Incorrect
Zoom lens' distort distances behind the focused objects big time
Go watch the Professor Holahan conference this evening
For a simple experiment,try out your binoculars focusing on a house with a hill a few miles behind it
Or go to a camera shop when they re open and try a zoom lens

whatever floats your boat. if you believe you can get a photo like the one posted when people are 6 feet apart, go you.

maccored wrote: »

whatever floats your boat. if you believe you can get a photo like the one posted when people are 6 feet apart, go you.

Have done
Even developed them back in the day in the dark room of the UCD camera club on Stephen's green

Mortelaro wrote: »

Have done
Even developed them back in the day in the dark room of the UCD camera club on Stephen's green

What?

The camera lens produces the foreshortening effect, you cannot do it in the developing process.

maccored wrote: »

zoom lens let the photographer be at a distance. it doesnt take people spread out and move them closer to each other. even a wide angle lens doesnt do that

It really is something when the Sinn Fein critics have been reduced to complaining about how far a sign language interpreter is from Dr. Holohan.

McMurphy wrote: »

Was it this shot or a different (definitely not for PR purposes) one you had all kinds of excuses for, including camera angles and tricks of the light?

All that post does is show ignorance of the social distancing rules.

If we were to apply your rules strictly not one of us could go shopping as your version of the two metre rule is broken all the time.

https://www2.hse.ie/conditions/coronavirus/protect-yourself-and-others.html

"There is very little risk if you are just passing someone. But try to keep a distance of 2 metres as much as possible."

Moving close together for the five seconds it takes for a photograph is not a problem.

Sitting for twenty minutes close together having a coffee and a chat is a problem.

Can you understand the difference?

McMurphy

blanch152 wrote: »

All that post does is show ignorance of the social distancing rules.

If we were to apply your rules strictly not one of us could go shopping as your version of the two metre rule is broken all the time.

https://www2.hse.ie/conditions/coronavirus/protect-yourself-and-others.html

"There is very little risk if you are just passing someone. But try to keep a distance of 2 metres as much as possible."

Moving close together for the five seconds it takes for a photograph is not a problem.

Sitting for twenty minutes close together having a coffee and a chat is a problem.

Can you understand the difference?

Keep up.

McMurphy wrote: »

To be completely fair, I never made an issue on Harris or Leos photo either (for or against) and you can go back and check if you want.

However, replace Leo and Harris with any other members of the Dail/Dallas Cowboys/Disney etc etc etc positioned for a photo opportunity which appears to be disregarding social distancing guidelines - and those defending it - and later posting something similar (whether it be Sinn Fein/FF or anyone else) is completely double standards.

Scorn one/Scorn all.

McMurphy wrote: »

Keep up.

Do you accept that there is a difference between a five-second photograph and a twenty minute coffee and chat in terms of social distancing and Covid risk?

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What?

The camera lens produces the foreshortening effect, you cannot do it in the developing process.

I didn't say that,that would be a stupid thing to say

Back in the day, we had zoom lens's too..
We also developed our own photos
Only difference today is it's all digital

I would respectfully suggest now,we move on

blanch152 wrote: »

Do you accept that there is a difference between a five-second photograph and a twenty minute coffee and chat in terms of social distancing and Covid risk?

You need to keep up tbh
The photo's are not a problem

In episodes on bbc one,of eastenders, the announcer used say filmed before social distancing rules came in
Perhaps we need a note under photographs these days too regarding lens's

Right I'm done with this lens topic,just saw the tweet and wanted to post for people in glass houses

blanch152 wrote: »

Do you accept that there is a difference between a five-second photograph and a twenty minute coffee and chat in terms of social distancing and Covid risk?

Where did the '20 mins' come out of?
She could have just sat on the seat momentarily while passing.

Can you link to any back up of '20 mins'?

Mortelaro wrote: »

I didn't say that,that would be a stupid thing to say

Back in the day, we had zoom lens's too..
We also developed our own photos
Only difference today is it's all digital

I would respectfully suggest now,we move on

Why mention developing photos then?

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Where did the '20 mins' come out of?
She could have just sat on the seat momentarily while passing.

Can you link to any back up of '20 mins'?

I asked a question as to whether posters could see any difference between two hypothetical situations, yet you deflect. Why?

Just answer the question, the relevance or not of the 20 minutes comes later.

Mortelaro wrote: »

You need to keep up tbh
The photo's are not a problem

In episodes on bbc one,of eastenders, the announcer used say filmed before social distancing rules came in
Perhaps we need a note under photographs these days too regarding lens's

Right I'm done with this lens topic,just saw the tweet and wanted to post for people in glass houses

I never said the photos were a problem. I just asked the question whether posters thought there was a difference between a five-second photoshoot and a 20 minute coffee and chat close together in terms of social distancing and Covid-19 risk?

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Why mention developing photos then?

Just an added point of interest
I was going to also add it was pre smokey coal ban meaning on frosty November nights the cycle in from bellfield to the meetings put soot on your face
There was also a gypsy fortune teller regularly at the door
I Wasn't actually going to add the 2nd piece of information though

Now I'm off, Ciao folks

blanch152 wrote: »

I never said the photos were a problem. I just asked the question whether posters thought there was a difference between a five-second photoshoot and a 20 minute coffee and chat close together in terms of social distancing and Covid-19 risk?

He has a point
The conversation might have been under 15 minutes and probably was
The only slipshod thing was,they should not have been seen tbh
I mean that as in the not seen in public setting a bad example

It goes on
But less and less so

Right ciao

blanch152 wrote: »

I never said the photos were a problem. I just asked the question whether posters thought there was a difference between a five-second photoshoot and a 20 minute coffee and chat close together in terms of social distancing and Covid-19 risk?

5 second photoshoots?

You haven't been at any photoshoot I have been at so.

Yes, I accept that there is a difference between a 5 sec engagement and a 20 minute one.

So, how long did this engagement take?

FrancieBrady wrote: »

5 second photoshoots?

You haven't been at any photoshoot I have been at so.

Yes, I accept that there is a difference between a 5 sec engagement and a 20 minute one.

So, how long did this engagement take?

Well, that's a start.

You haven't been at any photoshoot since the start of Covid-19, have you?

blanch152 wrote: »

Well, that's a start.

You haven't been at any photoshoot since the start of Covid-19, have you?

No. What's your point here?

How do you know the time they spent on the bench. Louise appears to have two cups of coffee in her hand...could have been just passing on her way to the car in the shot. Who knows.

Where did the 20 mins come from?

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No. What's your point here?

How do you know the time they spent on the bench. Louise appears to have two cups of coffee in her hand...could have been just passing on her way to the car in the shot. Who knows.

Where did the 20 mins come from?

I've never known Louise to talk for less than 20 minutes at a time, going right back to her time in SIPTU.