<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Word is Photos NOT Photo&#8217;s</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mcpactions.com/blog/2009/11/25/the-word-is-photos-not-photos/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mcpactions.com/blog/2009/11/25/the-word-is-photos-not-photos/</link>
	<description>Photoshop, Lightroom, and Photography Tips for Photographers</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 00:42:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob</title>
		<link>http://www.mcpactions.com/blog/2009/11/25/the-word-is-photos-not-photos/comment-page-1/#comment-103500</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2012 13:51:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mcpactions.com/blog/?p=5510#comment-103500</guid>
		<description>The people that get the most angry are usually the ones that are wrong!

There&#039;s plenty of posts here explaining it correctly; true to English it would be photo&#039;s (contraction), but if you allow photo to be a word in its own right, which perhaps we should, then photos is correct (and infact in this case photo&#039;s does then become incorrect).

as both are correct you should probably all calm down!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The people that get the most angry are usually the ones that are wrong!</p>
<p>There&#8217;s plenty of posts here explaining it correctly; true to English it would be photo&#8217;s (contraction), but if you allow photo to be a word in its own right, which perhaps we should, then photos is correct (and infact in this case photo&#8217;s does then become incorrect).</p>
<p>as both are correct you should probably all calm down!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben</title>
		<link>http://www.mcpactions.com/blog/2009/11/25/the-word-is-photos-not-photos/comment-page-1/#comment-99337</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Dec 2011 18:07:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mcpactions.com/blog/?p=5510#comment-99337</guid>
		<description>No, you morons. Photos is correct. Photo&#039;s is not correct. &quot;Photos&quot; is a real word now; it doesn&#039;t matter that it&#039;s a contraction of the word photographs, because in this case, it isn&#039;t. As someone above mentioned, phone is a contraction of the word telephone, TECHNICALLY.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No, you morons. Photos is correct. Photo&#8217;s is not correct. &#8220;Photos&#8221; is a real word now; it doesn&#8217;t matter that it&#8217;s a contraction of the word photographs, because in this case, it isn&#8217;t. As someone above mentioned, phone is a contraction of the word telephone, TECHNICALLY.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://www.mcpactions.com/blog/2009/11/25/the-word-is-photos-not-photos/comment-page-1/#comment-89802</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Oct 2011 23:32:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mcpactions.com/blog/?p=5510#comment-89802</guid>
		<description>Phil, you&#039;ve damaged your credibility by using the wrong form of &quot;it&#039;s&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Phil, you&#8217;ve damaged your credibility by using the wrong form of &#8220;it&#8217;s&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Just me</title>
		<link>http://www.mcpactions.com/blog/2009/11/25/the-word-is-photos-not-photos/comment-page-1/#comment-85048</link>
		<dc:creator>Just me</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Aug 2011 21:12:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mcpactions.com/blog/?p=5510#comment-85048</guid>
		<description>Are we talking about the word &#039;photographs&#039; the plural form of photograph? If so then the correct form has to be photo&#039;s because, as you correctly point out, it&#039;s either the possessive form or a contraction and clearly in this case photo&#039;s is a contraction of photographs.

It is not &#039;photos&#039; because that would be a pluralisation of the word photo and not photograph.

It is becomes it&#039;s, photographs becomes photo&#039;s, both contractions. The apostrophe marks the missing letters. I fail to see the issue.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Are we talking about the word &#8216;photographs&#8217; the plural form of photograph? If so then the correct form has to be photo&#8217;s because, as you correctly point out, it&#8217;s either the possessive form or a contraction and clearly in this case photo&#8217;s is a contraction of photographs.</p>
<p>It is not &#8216;photos&#8217; because that would be a pluralisation of the word photo and not photograph.</p>
<p>It is becomes it&#8217;s, photographs becomes photo&#8217;s, both contractions. The apostrophe marks the missing letters. I fail to see the issue.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: georgia</title>
		<link>http://www.mcpactions.com/blog/2009/11/25/the-word-is-photos-not-photos/comment-page-1/#comment-84832</link>
		<dc:creator>georgia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Aug 2011 00:12:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mcpactions.com/blog/?p=5510#comment-84832</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve wondered about this for a while, and I&#039;m still undecided. The way I see it, there are two options:
1) &quot;Photos&quot; - no apostrophe because it is simply the plural of &#039;photo&#039;.
2) &quot;Photo&#039;s&quot; - an apostrophe because it is an abbreviation of &#039;photographs&#039;.
What are your thoughts? Perhaps something to think about.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve wondered about this for a while, and I&#8217;m still undecided. The way I see it, there are two options:<br />
1) &#8220;Photos&#8221; &#8211; no apostrophe because it is simply the plural of &#8216;photo&#8217;.<br />
2) &#8220;Photo&#8217;s&#8221; &#8211; an apostrophe because it is an abbreviation of &#8216;photographs&#8217;.<br />
What are your thoughts? Perhaps something to think about.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nikki</title>
		<link>http://www.mcpactions.com/blog/2009/11/25/the-word-is-photos-not-photos/comment-page-1/#comment-81702</link>
		<dc:creator>Nikki</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Jun 2011 02:50:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mcpactions.com/blog/?p=5510#comment-81702</guid>
		<description>Okay - the word &quot;Photo&quot; is in the Oxford English Dictionary as a proper word. The policy is that a new word is entered after it has been in common usage for ten years. Therefore the contraction is now more or less inadmissible. The Plural is &quot;Photos&quot; or &quot;Photographs&quot; depending on how you formal you wish to be. The listing in the OED is as follows, (note the plural) 
Photo
Pronunciation:/ˈfəʊtəʊ/
noun (plural photos)
a photograph.
informal a photo finish.
verb (photoes, photoing, photoed)
[with object] informal
take a photograph of.
I think that takes care of it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Okay &#8211; the word &#8220;Photo&#8221; is in the Oxford English Dictionary as a proper word. The policy is that a new word is entered after it has been in common usage for ten years. Therefore the contraction is now more or less inadmissible. The Plural is &#8220;Photos&#8221; or &#8220;Photographs&#8221; depending on how you formal you wish to be. The listing in the OED is as follows, (note the plural)<br />
Photo<br />
Pronunciation:/ˈfəʊtəʊ/<br />
noun (plural photos)<br />
a photograph.<br />
informal a photo finish.<br />
verb (photoes, photoing, photoed)<br />
[with object] informal<br />
take a photograph of.<br />
I think that takes care of it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andy_P</title>
		<link>http://www.mcpactions.com/blog/2009/11/25/the-word-is-photos-not-photos/comment-page-1/#comment-81641</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy_P</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Jun 2011 19:12:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mcpactions.com/blog/?p=5510#comment-81641</guid>
		<description>Quote from one of the other comments:

Thank you! I don’t know why it is so hard for people to understand the contraction/possessive rule. Thank you for showing everyone!

But is this a simple case? &quot;Photo&quot; *is* a contraction of &quot;photograph&quot;. So it could be argued thatthe apostrophe in &quot;photo&#039;s&quot; is there to show the contraction and not a mistaken possessive at all/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Quote from one of the other comments:</p>
<p>Thank you! I don’t know why it is so hard for people to understand the contraction/possessive rule. Thank you for showing everyone!</p>
<p>But is this a simple case? &#8220;Photo&#8221; *is* a contraction of &#8220;photograph&#8221;. So it could be argued thatthe apostrophe in &#8220;photo&#8217;s&#8221; is there to show the contraction and not a mistaken possessive at all/</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christopher Lacey</title>
		<link>http://www.mcpactions.com/blog/2009/11/25/the-word-is-photos-not-photos/comment-page-1/#comment-49048</link>
		<dc:creator>Christopher Lacey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Sep 2010 17:14:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mcpactions.com/blog/?p=5510#comment-49048</guid>
		<description>But surely the whole point is that photo IS a contraction, of photographs, so the apostrophe is used to illustrate that there are missing letters.

Although I do realise that the apostrophe here has fallen out of usage - just as people do not write &#039;papers or &#039;phone, although technically grammatically they ought to.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But surely the whole point is that photo IS a contraction, of photographs, so the apostrophe is used to illustrate that there are missing letters.</p>
<p>Although I do realise that the apostrophe here has fallen out of usage &#8211; just as people do not write &#8216;papers or &#8216;phone, although technically grammatically they ought to.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan</title>
		<link>http://www.mcpactions.com/blog/2009/11/25/the-word-is-photos-not-photos/comment-page-1/#comment-39686</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jun 2010 11:13:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mcpactions.com/blog/?p=5510#comment-39686</guid>
		<description>I tend to agree with Phil. Though I would probably use Photos but it wouldn&#039;t drive me crazy because it is a contraction of the word photographs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I tend to agree with Phil. Though I would probably use Photos but it wouldn&#8217;t drive me crazy because it is a contraction of the word photographs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan</title>
		<link>http://www.mcpactions.com/blog/2009/11/25/the-word-is-photos-not-photos/comment-page-1/#comment-39685</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jun 2010 11:08:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mcpactions.com/blog/?p=5510#comment-39685</guid>
		<description>But is Photo&#039;s not a contraction of photographs?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But is Photo&#8217;s not a contraction of photographs?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Object Caching 562/568 objects using disk: basic

Served from: www.mcpactions.com @ 2012-02-11 21:03:30 -->
