>>3284472You both used a Fuji and the same PS version, and your photo was posted with a direct reference to those zoo shots... you don't see the relevance? I asked you if you were the same person, right here
>>3283993>hypocrisyI already said bird feeder shots were lazy here
>>3283993 though, so there goes that argument. The rest of the critique was about how badly composed it was, and that you completely missed focus.
>I have noticed your posting style in other threads. It's very distinctive.Do you realize how insane you sound? First, I'd also like to point out your hypocrisy: You just attacked me for assuming you were someone else based on camera make, Photoshop version, and direct reference. Now you're saying you know who I am because of the way I type. On top of that, your assessment of my writing is wrong:
>You hit Enter after every sentenceThe first part of my critique here
>>3283993 is a 4 sentence paragraph. The next part is a 6 sentence paragraph. Do you not understand how punctuation works? If a point is made in one sentence, you use one sentence. You did it yourself for your first 2 lines right here
>>3284472 as well as use commas liberally.
Even more hypocrisy:
>you are always looking for ways to attack others in petty waysThen the rest of your comment is literally attacking me in petty ways. A rambling word salad devolving into points on nationality and etiquette... fucking bizarre. Talk about ending on a low note.
You're an idiot, and your woodpecker photo is trash. I told you why it's trash, so just get over it.
