Anyone shooting photographs with a chroma green background and then
processing the images in Photoshop?

Can the background be removed with one of the standard tools in
Photoshop? I see references to software for use with chroma green or
blue background, but I think they're for video. Is any type of
software or a plug-in used for stills?

Using the Magic Wand or the Magic Eraser, just about any solid color
can be removed, but I've read that the extraction is simpler and
cleaner if done with a chroma green or a blue background.


--

Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

It doesn't have to be chroma green. Any flat even color background material
can be used but it has to be a totally different color than any part of the
image being photographed. In photoshop the "select color" function will
allow you to easily select only the background color. Then you can delete it
or change it at will. The chroma green works because it is an unusual color
that isn't likely to be part of any image that you photograph in front of
it. When you make the selection in photoshop it only outlines the
background. If the background has different shading or colors in it the
selection process isn't as easy to do.

Video people like chroma blue as it seems to work best for them, but even in
video any even background color that isn't part of the image will make it
easy to be removed.

Charley

"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:8c13s3dvduhii07stkm70vuuup9i9khhbh@4ax.com...
> Anyone shooting photographs with a chroma green background and then
> processing the images in Photoshop?
>
> Can the background be removed with one of the standard tools in
> Photoshop? I see references to software for use with chroma green or
> blue background, but I think they're for video. Is any type of
> software or a plug-in used for stills?
>
> Using the Magic Wand or the Magic Eraser, just about any solid color
> can be removed, but I've read that the extraction is simpler and
> cleaner if done with a chroma green or a blue background.
>
>
> --
>
> Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:

> Anyone shooting photographs with a chroma green background and then
> processing the images in Photoshop?

The Green background could be a better choice for video, but for digital
image then green-screen isn't nessary. But in general it's more of masking
skill than tool.

> Can the background be removed with one of the standard tools in
> Photoshop? I see references to software for use with chroma green or
> blue background, but I think they're for video. Is any type of
> software or a plug-in used for stills?

The green-screen just to separate between normal and green that is an
unusual color to making thing easier to select. That's the main idea.

Yes, there are plug-in, but again plug-in can only to speed thing up,
and usually for small print for displaying. For larger print then Masking
skill is the must have.

> Using the Magic Wand or the Magic Eraser, just about any solid color
> can be removed, but I've read that the extraction is simpler and
> cleaner if done with a chroma green or a blue background.

Well, Magic Wand is a magical tool for newbie to impress other newbie, or
for some commercial video to show off beginner. For detail work (especially
printing) then you may need to spend around a year or so practicing Masking
technique.

I have been using Masking very often (almost of all important photos),
been doing it for many years, and still seeing some improvement. Or I can
say that I am pretty good but still not at the top yet.

"Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:a0h4s318etgqnp39rekvi9rr1lcv0ugu8n@4ax.com...
> tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> Anyone shooting photographs with a chroma green background and then
>> processing the images in Photoshop?
>
> The Green background could be a better choice for video, but for digital
> image then green-screen isn't nessary. But in general it's more of
> masking
> skill than tool.
>
>> Can the background be removed with one of the standard tools in
>> Photoshop? I see references to software for use with chroma green or
>> blue background, but I think they're for video. Is any type of
>> software or a plug-in used for stills?
>
> The green-screen just to separate between normal and green that is an
> unusual color to making thing easier to select. That's the main
> idea.
>
> Yes, there are plug-in, but again plug-in can only to speed thing up,
> and usually for small print for displaying. For larger print then Masking
> skill is the must have.
>
>> Using the Magic Wand or the Magic Eraser, just about any solid color
>> can be removed, but I've read that the extraction is simpler and
>> cleaner if done with a chroma green or a blue background.
>
> Well, Magic Wand is a magical tool for newbie to impress other newbie, or
> for some commercial video to show off beginner. For detail work
> (especially
> printing) then you may need to spend around a year or so practicing
> Masking
> technique.
>
> I have been using Masking very often (almost of all important photos),
> been doing it for many years, and still seeing some improvement. Or I can
> say that I am pretty good but still not at the top yet


If you do decide to shoot chroma green
make sure your subject is not close to the background
the spillage of or reflected green light will show up on the subject (not
sure the word)
a green backlight is most unflattering on the hair, especially blond
white clothing etc

using white seamless or gray with lot of light onto the backdrop to
eliminate gradation and shadows seems to work for stills


select color range
wand
pen
lasso particularly magnetic lasso
channel methods and combinations of above
you will need all to make really good masks

I have not used extract or background eraser very often but it is popular
Masking HAIR blowing is my least favorite and most difficult assignment
I am pretty good at masking but not great at it

On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:52:39 -0500, "KatWoman" <spamfree@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>
>"Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
>news:a0h4s318etgqnp39rekvi9rr1lcv0ugu8n@4ax.com.. .
>> tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Anyone shooting photographs with a chroma green background and then
>>> processing the images in Photoshop?
>>
>> The Green background could be a better choice for video, but for digital
>> image then green-screen isn't nessary. But in general it's more of
>> masking
>> skill than tool.
>>
>>> Can the background be removed with one of the standard tools in
>>> Photoshop? I see references to software for use with chroma green or
>>> blue background, but I think they're for video. Is any type of
>>> software or a plug-in used for stills?
>>
>> The green-screen just to separate between normal and green that is an
>> unusual color to making thing easier to select. That's the main
>> idea.
>>
>> Yes, there are plug-in, but again plug-in can only to speed thing up,
>> and usually for small print for displaying. For larger print then Masking
>> skill is the must have.
>>
>>> Using the Magic Wand or the Magic Eraser, just about any solid color
>>> can be removed, but I've read that the extraction is simpler and
>>> cleaner if done with a chroma green or a blue background.
>>
>> Well, Magic Wand is a magical tool for newbie to impress other newbie, or
>> for some commercial video to show off beginner. For detail work
>> (especially
>> printing) then you may need to spend around a year or so practicing
>> Masking
>> technique.
>>
>> I have been using Masking very often (almost of all important photos),
>> been doing it for many years, and still seeing some improvement. Or I can
>> say that I am pretty good but still not at the top yet
>
>
>If you do decide to shoot chroma green
>make sure your subject is not close to the background
>the spillage of or reflected green light will show up on the subject (not
>sure the word)
>a green backlight is most unflattering on the hair, especially blond
>white clothing etc
>
>using white seamless or gray with lot of light onto the backdrop to
>eliminate gradation and shadows seems to work for stills

These steps are easily researchable on the web. It's recommended to
place the subject about 4' in front of the chroma green background and
to light the background from the sides to eliminate color spill and
shadows.

My question is about the software. Many companies offer software to
use in conjunction with a green screen. I can't figure out if they do
anything different than what Photoshop does.

Some will remove the green (or blue) and replace it with a background
image, but that seems the same to me as popping in a background image
as a layer.

I have the impression that the software is for those who don't have
Photoshop, but I'm trying to verify this.


--

Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:

<snip>
> These steps are easily researchable on the web. It's recommended to
> place the subject about 4' in front of the chroma green background and
> to light the background from the sides to eliminate color spill and
> shadows.

What you both say is just part of the very BASIC of photography, or it has
nothing to do with green-screen specific but Photoshopy (Video as well)
technique. BTW, I do not against what you two saying, but just add some

> My question is about the software. Many companies offer software to
> use in conjunction with a green screen. I can't figure out if they do
> anything different than what Photoshop does.

YES, there are plug-in for photoshop which get the idea from VIDEO, or
green-screen is original designed for Video. And the problem that some of
you guys (not you specific but in general) don't want to hear thing you
don't want to hear. So I will try to give a little more detail

- YES, there are several and they cost $400-800+ a pop.

- NO, you do not need to spend any extra $$$ on any of them because they
ain't any more special than Select Color with few extra tool to deselect
some area with similar color (green).

- It's much wiser to use regular Masking plug-in, or learning to use
Photoshop's built-in tool which is capable of doing the hundreds of $$$ can.
YES, the regular Masking plug-in has more advance than Green-Screen plug-in

> Some will remove the green (or blue) and replace it with a background
> image, but that seems the same to me as popping in a background image
> as a layer.

GREEN (a special green not normal green) because we won't see that kind of
green in our daily life, making thing much easier to separate. That's it!

> I have the impression that the software is for those who don't have
> Photoshop, but I'm trying to verify this.

.. and if the foreground is GREEN then you may find WHITE background is a
much better choice than Green-Screen background. Or I am trying to make the
WHITE more special than GREEN-SCREEN.

On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 07:30:31 -0600, Joel <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote:

>tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
><snip>
>> These steps are easily researchable on the web. It's recommended to
>> place the subject about 4' in front of the chroma green background and
>> to light the background from the sides to eliminate color spill and
>> shadows.
>
> What you both say is just part of the very BASIC of photography, or it has
>nothing to do with green-screen specific but Photoshopy (Video as well)
>technique. BTW, I do not against what you two saying, but just add some

In basic photography, the background is not normally lit in any
special manner. In studio photography, a solid background will be lit
in a similar way, but there is less importance to lighting a "picture"
background. Positioning to avoid shadows would be important, though.
>
>> My question is about the software. Many companies offer software to
>> use in conjunction with a green screen. I can't figure out if they do
>> anything different than what Photoshop does.
>
> YES, there are plug-in for photoshop which get the idea from VIDEO, or
>green-screen is original designed for Video. And the problem that some of
>you guys (not you specific but in general) don't want to hear thing you
>don't want to hear. So I will try to give a little more detail
>
>- YES, there are several and they cost $400-800+ a pop.
>
>- NO, you do not need to spend any extra $$$ on any of them because they
>ain't any more special than Select Color with few extra tool to deselect
>some area with similar color (green).
>
>- It's much wiser to use regular Masking plug-in,

I don't know of any "regular Masking plug-in". I know only of masking
by the standard feature in Photoshop.

> or learning to use
>Photoshop's built-in tool which is capable of doing the hundreds of $$$ can.
>YES, the regular Masking plug-in has more advance than Green-Screen plug-in

In what way?

>> Some will remove the green (or blue) and replace it with a background
>> image, but that seems the same to me as popping in a background image
>> as a layer.
>
> GREEN (a special green not normal green) because we won't see that kind of
>green in our daily life, making thing much easier to separate. That's it!

The web sources say that the blue and greens used are used because
they are the colors that are the most different from flesh tones.
It's not the rarity of the color, but the opposite factor.

>> I have the impression that the software is for those who don't have
>> Photoshop, but I'm trying to verify this.
>
> .. and if the foreground is GREEN

The "foreground" is usually a subject, and unless that foreground is a
Martian, the green will be distinct from the flesh tones.

>then you may find WHITE background is a
>much better choice than Green-Screen background. Or I am trying to make the
>WHITE more special than GREEN-SCREEN.

The foreground subject's clothing is more likely to have white bits,
or colors near-to white, than either the green or blue used in these
screens.

I appreciate your comments, Joel, but what I'm really interested in is
finding someone who *does* use a green or blue screen and eliciting
comments from them about the need for software.


--

Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

"Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:2048s359inlsuamodh92ra9h8i0074644o@4ax.com...
> tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>> These steps are easily researchable on the web. It's recommended to
>> place the subject about 4' in front of the chroma green background and
>> to light the background from the sides to eliminate color spill and
>> shadows.
>
> What you both say is just part of the very BASIC of photography, or it has
> nothing to do with green-screen specific but Photoshopy (Video as well)
> technique. BTW, I do not against what you two saying, but just add some
>
>> My question is about the software. Many companies offer software to
>> use in conjunction with a green screen. I can't figure out if they do
>> anything different than what Photoshop does.
>
> YES, there are plug-in for photoshop which get the idea from VIDEO, or
> green-screen is original designed for Video. And the problem that some
> of
> you guys (not you specific but in general) don't want to hear thing you
> don't want to hear. So I will try to give a little more detail
>
> - YES, there are several and they cost $400-800+ a pop.
>
> - NO, you do not need to spend any extra $$$ on any of them because they
> ain't any more special than Select Color with few extra tool to deselect
> some area with similar color (green).
>
> - It's much wiser to use regular Masking plug-in, or learning to use
> Photoshop's built-in tool which is capable of doing the hundreds of $$$
> can.
> YES, the regular Masking plug-in has more advance than Green-Screen
> plug-in
>
>> Some will remove the green (or blue) and replace it with a background
>> image, but that seems the same to me as popping in a background image
>> as a layer.
>
> GREEN (a special green not normal green) because we won't see that kind of
> green in our daily life, making thing much easier to separate. That's it!
>
>> I have the impression that the software is for those who don't have
>> Photoshop, but I'm trying to verify this.
>
> .. and if the foreground is GREEN then you may find WHITE background is a
> much better choice than Green-Screen background. Or I am trying to make
> the
> WHITE more special than GREEN-SCREEN.


I did not see Tony's post
for some reason he was on my blocked list

On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 13:06:02 -0500, "KatWoman" <spamfree@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>
>"Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
>news:2048s359inlsuamodh92ra9h8i0074644o@4ax.com.. .
>> tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>> These steps are easily researchable on the web. It's recommended to
>>> place the subject about 4' in front of the chroma green background and
>>> to light the background from the sides to eliminate color spill and
>>> shadows.
>>
>> What you both say is just part of the very BASIC of photography, or it has
>> nothing to do with green-screen specific but Photoshopy (Video as well)
>> technique. BTW, I do not against what you two saying, but just add some
>>
>>> My question is about the software. Many companies offer software to
>>> use in conjunction with a green screen. I can't figure out if they do
>>> anything different than what Photoshop does.
>>
>> YES, there are plug-in for photoshop which get the idea from VIDEO, or
>> green-screen is original designed for Video. And the problem that some
>> of
>> you guys (not you specific but in general) don't want to hear thing you
>> don't want to hear. So I will try to give a little more detail
>>
>> - YES, there are several and they cost $400-800+ a pop.
>>
>> - NO, you do not need to spend any extra $$$ on any of them because they
>> ain't any more special than Select Color with few extra tool to deselect
>> some area with similar color (green).
>>
>> - It's much wiser to use regular Masking plug-in, or learning to use
>> Photoshop's built-in tool which is capable of doing the hundreds of $$$
>> can.
>> YES, the regular Masking plug-in has more advance than Green-Screen
>> plug-in
>>
>>> Some will remove the green (or blue) and replace it with a background
>>> image, but that seems the same to me as popping in a background image
>>> as a layer.
>>
>> GREEN (a special green not normal green) because we won't see that kind of
>> green in our daily life, making thing much easier to separate. That's it!
>>
>>> I have the impression that the software is for those who don't have
>>> Photoshop, but I'm trying to verify this.
>>
>> .. and if the foreground is GREEN then you may find WHITE background is a
>> much better choice than Green-Screen background. Or I am trying to make
>> the
>> WHITE more special than GREEN-SCREEN.
>
>
>I did not see Tony's post
>for some reason he was on my blocked list
>

What's this? Why, Kat, I am a mild and non-confrontational poster
with all but the greatest of fools. True, I may turn a bit acerbic to
the likes of "Vovoid", but I'm generally as comfortable as an old shoe
in this group.

There are other groups in which I post - where I am more sure of my
footing - that I take the occasional controversial position in, but in
a Photoshop group I mostly listen and learn.

Restore me to your approved list, Kat. There's nothing I have to
teach you, but I won't offend you.




--

Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

Tony

First I do shoot digital images with chroma key green and blue in the form
of rolls of background paperc (they call 'something' blue - Chroma blue
etc - I can;t remember what "something" is but it is a two part name)) I
also have some blue Roscoe paint which is the ultimatte blue (which is
different to Chroma Key Blue but is used in their propriety compositing
system) which I havn't used yet. I don't shoot that much chroma key stuff
that I would call myself a guru. The problem is that some blue (or green)
pixels are left on the boundary and depending on the background you are
pasting over can be seen.

Usually:
the magic tools of photoshop are usually the poorest at cutting out the
blue.

the next best is using channel information in Photoshop to create a mask

the best is a purpose built plugin.

I would recommend to you two books which have some advice on removing
Blue/Green backgrounds (compositing):

Masking and Compositing by Katrin Eisman (a Cs or Cs2 book but the best
of the two for this), and
Adobe Photoshop CS3 for Photographers by Martin Evening

Digital Anarchy have a plugin called Primatte which used to be downloadable
as a test version (full facilities but left their trademark image on the
results). Get a copy and play with it. There are other plugins available
so Google for them.

Regards
Malcolm

On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 02:56:52 GMT, "Malcolm Smith"
<malcolms@ember-razement.com.au> wrote:

>Tony
>
>First I do shoot digital images with chroma key green and blue in the form
>of rolls of background paperc (they call 'something' blue - Chroma blue
>etc - I can;t remember what "something" is but it is a two part name)) I
>also have some blue Roscoe paint which is the ultimatte blue (which is
>different to Chroma Key Blue but is used in their propriety compositing
>system) which I havn't used yet. I don't shoot that much chroma key stuff
>that I would call myself a guru. The problem is that some blue (or green)
>pixels are left on the boundary and depending on the background you are
>pasting over can be seen.
>
>Usually:
> the magic tools of photoshop are usually the poorest at cutting out the
>blue.
>
> the next best is using channel information in Photoshop to create a mask
>
> the best is a purpose built plugin.
>
>I would recommend to you two books which have some advice on removing
>Blue/Green backgrounds (compositing):
>
> Masking and Compositing by Katrin Eisman (a Cs or Cs2 book but the best
>of the two for this), and
> Adobe Photoshop CS3 for Photographers by Martin Evening
>
>Digital Anarchy have a plugin called Primatte which used to be downloadable
>as a test version (full facilities but left their trademark image on the
>results). Get a copy and play with it. There are other plugins available
>so Google for them.
>

Thank you.


--

Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:

> On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 07:30:31 -0600, Joel <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote:
>
> >tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> ><snip>
> >> These steps are easily researchable on the web. It's recommended to
> >> place the subject about 4' in front of the chroma green background and
> >> to light the background from the sides to eliminate color spill and
> >> shadows.
> >
> > What you both say is just part of the very BASIC of photography, or it has
> >nothing to do with green-screen specific but Photoshopy (Video as well)
> >technique. BTW, I do not against what you two saying, but just add some
>
> In basic photography, the background is not normally lit in any
> special manner. In studio photography, a solid background will be lit
> in a similar way, but there is less importance to lighting a "picture"
> background. Positioning to avoid shadows would be important, though.

Shadow was what I am aiming at, but this ain't Photographer so I won't go
for detail on the shadow stuff.

> >> My question is about the software. Many companies offer software to
> >> use in conjunction with a green screen. I can't figure out if they do
> >> anything different than what Photoshop does.
> >
> > YES, there are plug-in for photoshop which get the idea from VIDEO, or
> >green-screen is original designed for Video. And the problem that some of
> >you guys (not you specific but in general) don't want to hear thing you
> >don't want to hear. So I will try to give a little more detail
> >
> >- YES, there are several and they cost $400-800+ a pop.
> >
> >- NO, you do not need to spend any extra $$$ on any of them because they
> >ain't any more special than Select Color with few extra tool to deselect
> >some area with similar color (green).
> >
> >- It's much wiser to use regular Masking plug-in,
>
> I don't know of any "regular Masking plug-in". I know only of masking
> by the standard feature in Photoshop.

There are several of them, chroma is one of them. The Photoshop built-in
masking can be as powerful as the commercial plug-in, but it requires lot of
skill and different techniques combined. Also, Photoshop offers several
different ways of masking.

- You can use the Extract which is similar to many regular Masking plug-ins
do, except they are better and give more features/options than the Extract
option does. You may want to check the Fluid-Mask and EZ-Mask for some
general idea.

- You can use Quick Mask command which I often do. And with lot of practice
and combination of layer, and other tricks you can make very good mask

- Or you can use CHANNEL for masking, and this seems that many Photoshop
users use this technique. I did start with this and few others, but I had
quite abit of problem with the edge (very hard to blend the forground and
background). And because I didn't have enough masking skill then so I had
to develope my own technique (using Mask command or the [o] button), and
after years of using it I am be able to do a better job than most powerful
plug-in (except flying hair which I don't do so the plug-in is better)

> > or learning to use
> >Photoshop's built-in tool which is capable of doing the hundreds of $$$ can.
> >YES, the regular Masking plug-in has more advance than Green-Screen plug-in
>
> In what way?

Practicing and more practicing! here is your choices

- If you want to learn to use the Photoshop built-in then you may want to
invest on the commercial video tutorial called Mask & Channels by Lynda. I
don't use the method shown in video, but it gives lot of different good
techniques. I don't use any of them not because they are not good, but
because I had tried many similar before, but because of lacking of
experience I got stuck at some point so I had to develope a different
technique. Or the video wasn't available at the time.

- Take a look at the plug-in like EZ-Mask and Fluid Mask etc.. they are not
cheap but will give you a good started. Or just look at their video
tutorials to have some idea what the regular Mask plug-in is.

- Or the 3rd option is to practice the Photoshop built-in tools.

It may take you few days/weeks on the first tries, but if you keep on
practicing then who know months/years later it may only take you few
minutes.

> >> Some will remove the green (or blue) and replace it with a background
> >> image, but that seems the same to me as popping in a background image
> >> as a layer.
> >
> > GREEN (a special green not normal green) because we won't see that kind of
> >green in our daily life, making thing much easier to separate. That's it!
>
> The web sources say that the blue and greens used are used because
> they are the colors that are the most different from flesh tones.
> It's not the rarity of the color, but the opposite factor.

That's it! and it has been working great for video and it's been using on
video for ages. But as I mentioned earlier that Graphic & Video are 2
different beasts, and graphic has a much more requirement than video so the
Green-Screen doesn't work well on graphic as it does on video.

> >> I have the impression that the software is for those who don't have
> >> Photoshop, but I'm trying to verify this.
> >
> > .. and if the foreground is GREEN
>
> The "foreground" is usually a subject, and unless that foreground is a
> Martian, the green will be distinct from the flesh tones.

It doesn't matter what the foreground is, or try to think in general
instead of ????. Or it won't kill you if you wear a green shirt, the tree
won't die because the leave is green etc..

> >then you may find WHITE background is a
> >much better choice than Green-Screen background. Or I am trying to make the
> >WHITE more special than GREEN-SCREEN.
>
> The foreground subject's clothing is more likely to have white bits,
> or colors near-to white, than either the green or blue used in these
> screens.

I can see that you may have some learning problem here, because it seems
like you are looking for some negative and having problem getting a whole
picture.

> I appreciate your comments, Joel, but what I'm really interested in is
> finding someone who *does* use a green or blue screen and eliciting
> comments from them about the need for software.

Good luck on your quest. Also, if you want to find out yourself then why
not just download some sample then try it yourself?

tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:

<snip>
> >I did not see Tony's post
> >for some reason he was on my blocked list
> >
>
> What's this? Why, Kat, I am a mild and non-confrontational poster
> with all but the greatest of fools. True, I may turn a bit acerbic to
> the likes of "Vovoid", but I'm generally as comfortable as an old shoe
> in this group.

Well, I don't think you need to ask why, because it's pretty much
personal. Example

- If someone finds that reading someone message won't benefit them, then
they just kill-file that specific person so they don't have to manually
delete the message.

- I kill-file lot of people not because I dislike them, but I just don't
have any interest reading or having conversation with them. Example

a. I kill-file all toppers (top posting) because I know I won't have any
conversation with them

b. I kill-file all blankers (using Subject line to post the whole Message
or Request).

c. I kill-file all foul-mouthed because they won't impress me.

d. I kill-file billboarder (posting the same message on multiple groups)

And I have been spending about 5-10 minutes daily to add more and more of
them to my kill-files, and I have been doing this for years. Like I said, I
don't against anyone but for my own good, or I don't have to spend time to
manually delete them daily.

> There are other groups in which I post - where I am more sure of my
> footing - that I take the occasional controversial position in, but in
> a Photoshop group I mostly listen and learn.
>
> Restore me to your approved list, Kat. There's nothing I have to
> teach you, but I won't offend you.

No, you don't have to offend anyone to earn the reward <bg> or just like
Photoshop, we just need to develope our own technique to deal with our own
life, to make thing more enjoyable, easier to breath.

I don't kill-file permanent, but usually 120 days. And I won't mind if
other kill-file me, and that's one of the reasons I use the same name (same
dummy email) to make thing easier for other to kill-file me (if they wish).

"KatWoman" <spamfree@hotmail.com> wrote:

<snip>
> I did not see Tony's post
> for some reason he was on my blocked list

You can see my response. I am very heavy on kill-file (you are looking at
thousands of them), and I know that there is some dupes (err).

On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 08:45:14 -0600, Joel <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote:

>
>- I kill-file lot of people not because I dislike them, but I just don't
>have any interest reading or having conversation with them. Example
>
> a. I kill-file all toppers (top posting) because I know I won't have any
> conversation with them
>
> b. I kill-file all blankers (using Subject line to post the whole Message
> or Request).
>
> c. I kill-file all foul-mouthed because they won't impress me.
>
> d. I kill-file billboarder (posting the same message on multiple groups)

> No, you don't have to offend anyone to earn the reward <bg> or just like
>Photoshop, we just need to develope our own technique to deal with our own
>life, to make thing more enjoyable, easier to breath.
>
> I don't kill-file permanent, but usually 120 days. And I won't mind if
>other kill-file me, and that's one of the reasons I use the same name (same
>dummy email) to make thing easier for other to kill-file me (if they wish).


Uncle Joel, maybe we even like the same kind of beer..:-)

Dave

On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 08:45:14 -0600, Joel <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote:

> And I have been spending about 5-10 minutes daily to add more and more of
>them to my kill-files, and I have been doing this for years. Like I said, I
>don't against anyone but for my own good, or I don't have to spend time to
>manually delete them daily.
>
I'm certainly glad that you have a project that you enjoy. I don't
kill-file anyone. There's a little icon in Agent - the newsreader
that I use - that allows me to skip to the next message, and I can do
so without actually reading the skipped message. Not as satisfying as
your system of condemning miscreants to Don't Show Me purgatory, but
it saves me that 5-10 minutes a day.


--

Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

"Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:6tsas3hf32bpmn82umeoj1j0l3tdv355ta@4ax.com...
> tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>> >I did not see Tony's post
>> >for some reason he was on my blocked list
>> >
>>
>> What's this? Why, Kat, I am a mild and non-confrontational poster
>> with all but the greatest of fools. True, I may turn a bit acerbic to
>> the likes of "Vovoid", but I'm generally as comfortable as an old shoe
>> in this group.
>
> Well, I don't think you need to ask why, because it's pretty much
> personal. Example
>
> - If someone finds that reading someone message won't benefit them, then
> they just kill-file that specific person so they don't have to manually
> delete the message.
>
> - I kill-file lot of people not because I dislike them, but I just don't
> have any interest reading or having conversation with them. Example
>
> a. I kill-file all toppers (top posting) because I know I won't have any
> conversation with them
>
> b. I kill-file all blankers (using Subject line to post the whole Message
> or Request).
>
> c. I kill-file all foul-mouthed because they won't impress me.
>
> d. I kill-file billboarder (posting the same message on multiple groups)
>
> And I have been spending about 5-10 minutes daily to add more and more of
> them to my kill-files, and I have been doing this for years. Like I said,
> I
> don't against anyone but for my own good, or I don't have to spend time to
> manually delete them daily.
>
>> There are other groups in which I post - where I am more sure of my
>> footing - that I take the occasional controversial position in, but in
>> a Photoshop group I mostly listen and learn.
>>
>> Restore me to your approved list, Kat. There's nothing I have to
>> teach you, but I won't offend you.
>
> No, you don't have to offend anyone to earn the reward <bg> or just like
> Photoshop, we just need to develope our own technique to deal with our own
> life, to make thing more enjoyable, easier to breath.
>
> I don't kill-file permanent, but usually 120 days. And I won't mind if
> other kill-file me, and that's one of the reasons I use the same name
> (same
> dummy email) to make thing easier for other to kill-file me (if they
> wish).


Sorry TONY I am pretty sure
it must have been in error while blocking the VOIVOID guy I may have thought
it was one of his aliases or clicked the wrong header
you are officially unblocked

Dave <d@d.durbs> wrote:

> On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 08:45:14 -0600, Joel <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >- I kill-file lot of people not because I dislike them, but I just don't
> >have any interest reading or having conversation with them. Example
> >
> > a. I kill-file all toppers (top posting) because I know I won't have any
> > conversation with them
> >
> > b. I kill-file all blankers (using Subject line to post the whole Message
> > or Request).
> >
> > c. I kill-file all foul-mouthed because they won't impress me.
> >
> > d. I kill-file billboarder (posting the same message on multiple groups)
>
> > No, you don't have to offend anyone to earn the reward <bg> or just like
> >Photoshop, we just need to develope our own technique to deal with our own
> >life, to make thing more enjoyable, easier to breath.
> >
> > I don't kill-file permanent, but usually 120 days. And I won't mind if
> >other kill-file me, and that's one of the reasons I use the same name (same
> >dummy email) to make thing easier for other to kill-file me (if they wish).
>
>
> Uncle Joel, maybe we even like the same kind of beer..:-)
>
> Dave

You don't need any beer, just try to be a topper once or twice then a
chance for 120 days vacation is pretty high <bg>

"KatWoman" <spamfree@hotmail.com> wrote:

<snip>
> Sorry TONY I am pretty sure
> it must have been in error while blocking the VOIVOID guy I may have thought
> it was one of his aliases or clicked the wrong header
> you are officially unblocked

Voivoid has been on vacation reservation for quite few years now <bg>

On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 16:10:58 -0500, "KatWoman" <spamfree@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>Sorry TONY I am pretty sure
>it must have been in error while blocking the VOIVOID guy I may have thought
>it was one of his aliases or clicked the wrong header
>you are officially unblocked
>
I am greatly relieved. I feel compelled, now, to write something
instructional, informative, or interesting to show you that I am
worthy of your reconsideration, but I'm drawing a blank here.

How about a link to a rope font so you can pass it along to
Salonowiec? http://simplythebest.net/fonts/fonts/rope_mf.html
--

Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 17:20:32 -0600, Joel <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote:


> Voivoid has been on vacation reservation for quite few years now <bg>


and I am starting to appreciate him

Dave

On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 19:36:35 -0500, tony cooper
<tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:

>On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 16:10:58 -0500, "KatWoman" <spamfree@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Sorry TONY I am pretty sure
>>it must have been in error while blocking the VOIVOID guy I may have thought
>>it was one of his aliases or clicked the wrong header
>>you are officially unblocked
>>
>I am greatly relieved. I feel compelled, now, to write something
>instructional, informative, or interesting to show you that I am
>worthy of your reconsideration, but I'm drawing a blank here.
>
>How about a link to a rope font so you can pass it along to
>Salonowiec? http://simplythebest.net/fonts/fonts/rope_mf.html


The moment she unblocks you, you push het into work..!
Salonowiec do not want to be feed with a spoon - I hope.

Dave