Anyway take a look and I hope you enjoy the pictures.

On Sep 30, 5:05 pm, Calgary <actual.ridernos... at (no spam) telus.net> wrote:
On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:08:32 -0700 (PDT), Tim Kreitz

timkre... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
On Sep 29, 9:25 pm, Calgary <actual.ridernos... at (no spam) telus.net> wrote:
Anyway take a look and I hope you enjoy the pictures.

Indeed I did. Thanks for posting them, Don. It's nice to check in here
once in a while and see that there's still some occasional motorcycle
content. Great job. I'm glad you had a fun, safe trip.

Thanks Tim. We had a great time.

Once the snow begins to fall I am sure RGD will regale us with his
riding adventures from the summer. That will add some interesting
motorcycle stuff to the group.

Heh, heh. Well, if I can remember what I did, Don.

Gladys recorded the odometer on her bike at the beginning of this
season. Checking against what is on the bike now, she's ridden more
than 30,000 kms [1] this season.

We should have something to muse
about after that!

[1] 18K miles for the metrically impaired.

[1] 18K miles for the metrically impaired.

Ah, let search for an on line converter.

On 30 Sep, 03:25, Calgary <actual.ridernos... at (no spam) telus.net> wrote:
It's been a while since I have posted any kind of ride report and my
web skills which were never very good are even worse now. But for what
it is worth here is a link to our recent ride through the interior of
BC and down into Washington State.http://www.actualriders.ca/cc2009pictures.htm

The weather was fantastic. A little brisk in the mornings but sunny
and hot through the days. We couldn't have asked for better.

Anyway take a look and I hope you enjoy the pictures.

The scenery pix are great.

Tip for pix with bikes in: try and avoid parking the bikes in shadow.
If you have the side of the bike that's facing the camera in shadow,
pop off some fill-in flash. Action shots: a nice fast shutter speed
for head-on cornering pix, and maybe 1/60th or 1/125th for panning.

The really sucky part was I never got to ride GTTS road. There was
four hour delays due to construction and it killed my timeline to
wait.

Calgary <actual.ridernospam at (no spam) telus.net> wrote:


Well you ought to remember that the next time I post a few pictures
and not bother to look at them.

HMF? Don't understand this.

--

Calgary <actual.ridernospam at (no spam) telus.net> wrote:

Deary dear. There are some nice pix there, and you've obviously had fun.
And I like your write-ups. If you can't take a couple of constructive
tip that would make them even better, well... *shrug*.

Pompous and arrogant to the end!

I can't understand your problem. I like your stuff, like your write-ups,
like your pictures, and merely pointed out how you could make *some of
them* even better.

It is your assumption I don't understand basic photography that led to
the pompous remark. I do not look for a work of art every time I pick
up the camera. Sometimes, for a dozen reasons, I will just grab the
camera, stick it on auto and snap a bunch of pictures. I post them for
folks who might be interested in seeing a bit of scenery they might
never see and because quick frankly I am very proud of the corner of
the world I live in. Only a usenet bozo like you would think they were
posted for some kind of artistic value.

Did you not read the opening comment: "The scenery pix are great"? My
first words. Did you not read them?

The thick comment is because you are too dense to see this.

I think the problem here is actually because you're too dense to see
that I posted a compliment. And as someone who takes a lot of pix, and
sometimes gets paid to do so,
Your mother doesn't count.

I suggested something to make some of your
pix even better.

Now I'm sorry if you misinterpreted this, because it wasn't intended to
be a snipe. It was intended as genuinely helpful advice.
Your comments were basic, simplistic and hardly worthy of a

But you've
chosen to spit the dummy. Oh well.

I can't help feeling you fell out of bed and bumped your head or
something, because you're not usually this combative.

Now, read the thread again, and perhaps you'll change your stance.

On Sat, 3 Oct 2009 16:42:21 +0100, totallydeadmailbox at (no spam) yahoo.co.uk (The
Older Gentleman) wrote:

Calgary <actual.ridernospam at (no spam) telus.net> wrote:

Deary dear. There are some nice pix there, and you've obviously had fun.
And I like your write-ups. If you can't take a couple of constructive
tip that would make them even better, well... *shrug*.

Pompous and arrogant to the end!

I can't understand your problem. I like your stuff, like your write-ups,
like your pictures, and merely pointed out how you could make *some of
them* even better.

It is your assumption I don't understand basic photography that led to
the pompous remark. I do not look for a work of art every time I pick
up the camera. Sometimes, for a dozen reasons, I will just grab the
camera, stick it on auto and snap a bunch of pictures. I post them for
folks who might be interested in seeing a bit of scenery they might
never see and because quick frankly I am very proud of the corner of
the world I live in. Only a usenet bozo like you would think they were
posted for some kind of artistic value.

Did you not read the opening comment: "The scenery pix are great"? My
first words. Did you not read them?

The thick comment is because you are too dense to see this.

I think the problem here is actually because you're too dense to see
that I posted a compliment. And as someone who takes a lot of pix, and
sometimes gets paid to do so,
Your mother doesn't count.

I suggested something to make some of your
pix even better.

Now I'm sorry if you misinterpreted this, because it wasn't intended to
be a snipe. It was intended as genuinely helpful advice.
Your comments were basic, simplistic and hardly worthy of a
professional photographer.

But you've
chosen to spit the dummy. Oh well.

I can't help feeling you fell out of bed and bumped your head or
something, because you're not usually this combative.

lol, mostly I just ignore pompous asses.

Now, read the thread again, and perhaps you'll change your stance.

Deary dear. If you can't take a little constructive criticism, well...
*shrug*.

Or as we say on this side of the pond "Suck it up Princess".

Calgary <actual.ridernos... at (no spam) telus.net> wrote:
Your comments were basic, simplistic and hardly worthy of a
professional photographer.

Where did I say I'm a professional? They were basic and simplistic
because they were intended to be: a couple of basic and simple tips that
would make good pictures look even better.



But you've
chosen to spit the dummy. Oh well.

I can't help feeling you fell out of bed and bumped your head or
something, because you're not usually this combative.

lol, mostly I just ignore pompous asses.

Now, read the thread again, and perhaps you'll change your stance.

Deary dear. If you can't take a little constructive criticism, well...
*shrug*.

Do you actually *enjoy* misquoting me? Not once in this thread have I
sued the word "criticism". You've just taken what I said and changed the
word 'tip' to 'criticism'. That really is unworthy of you. More like
Krusty, really.

For the final time (and I am rarely as conciliatory as this). I like
your posts. I like your touring write-ups. I like your pix. I'm sorry
I've offended you. And I cannot understand why you are behaving in this
chlidish manner.

He is like the grammar police.

On Oct 5, 2:25 am, Twibil <nowayjo... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 4, 8:58 pm, "Tim M." <tomorrowerolsdot... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:

Shoot, I'd be happy to ride with either of you, and trade photography
tips with either or both of you.

On the other hand; we *could* get Keith to shoot both of them, you
could photograph the carnage, and Hen3ry could start a new nut-group
claiming that the photos are "undeniable proof" that they were both
blown up with "squibs" by the Jews.

Where's the downside?

Congratulations; I think you have come up with the first win-win Reeky
scenario ever developed.