 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / 35 mm / October 2006[SI] - Timing is up
Better late than never? http://www.pbase.com/shootin/timing There's still time to get your shot in the timing gallery. As always the Rulz and instructions on submitting images are available at http://si.jlkramer.net/rulz/rulz.htm A tactless reminder - Due November 7, 2006 http://www.pbase.com/shootin/grace > http://www.pbase.com/shootin/timing Jim, Is there a knowable reason why the descriptive text beneath my submission is missing a number of carriage return / line feeds? The first section is correctly broken into four discreet lines beneath the underline, but the second section and the final line of the third are run together. Thanks, Ken > > http://www.pbase.com/shootin/timing > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Thanks, > Ken Hi Ken, Well, my gut feeling is that you interpreted soft carriage returns as hard CR's in your email program based on the number of characters wide your window was when you sent it. As it was cut and past from your email. Could be that I'm taking enough Percocet right now, for a pinched nerve, that has left me a step and a half shy of la-la land. And not terribly functional, but almost, comfortably numb. I believe that it is now properly, or nearly so, formatted, if this is not the case please tell me and I will endeavor to add some more carriage returns. I wonder, why we don't have more carriage outings? Jim > > > http://www.pbase.com/shootin/timing > > [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > Jim Damn, I meant to say "yes." :-) Jim > > Well, my gut feeling is that you interpreted soft carriage returns as > > hard CR's in your email program based on the number of characters wide [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > > > Jim > Damn, I meant to say "yes." > > :-) Jim Heh, heh... Of all people *I* know exactly what you mean... ;-) Good thought. But no, they were all hard returns on my end. No wrap around. And the longest contiguous line was 72 + crlf. My email editor is set to break at 78. So I'm formatting all of this useless info the same as I did for Uncle Al. BTW, I include it mostly for my own entertainment, as a counterpoint to the massive exif files generated by all of those handheld, Cray-wannabe monstrosities everyone else uses. You know, photography really is a simple pursuit. Let's see, there's an aperture, a shutter speed, and a focusing collar. That pretty much covers it... Ken P.S. The lines originally broke as follows: Subject, Location, Time/Date, Conditions ------------------------------------------------------- Community transit park-and-ride bus lot Evergreen State Fairgrounds, Monroe, Washington, USA 10:15pm, October 21, 2006 Total darkness with streetlamp at high upper left side Camera, Meter, Lens, Exposure, Equipment/Technique ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yashica MAT-124G TLR (twin lens reflex) 6x6-cm film camera Internal reflected light meter, real PX625 mercury cell 80mm f/3.5 Yashinon imaging (lower) lens 1/125 sec at f/8-11 Sunpak 544 manual flash, handheld at 15 feet Film, Processing, Printing, Digitizing -------------------------------------------------- Ilford HP5+ B&W 120-roll film at ASA 500 Developed in Kodak D-76d (1+1) for 18 min at 68F/20C Printed on Oriental VC-RPF 8x10-inch paper, Ilford #2 filter Digitized HP 6200C flatbed scanner, 636x636x24bpp at 100 dpi Post-processed using GIMP2 under Window 2000 > > > Well, my gut feeling is that you interpreted soft carriage returns as > > > hard CR's in your email program based on the number of characters wide [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] > Digitized HP 6200C flatbed scanner, 636x636x24bpp at 100 dpi > Post-processed using GIMP2 under Window 2000 Well then I am forced to conclude that Outlook is evil or controlled by demons, maybe both. Or maybe the internet is (THIS HAS BEEN CENSORED IN THE INTEREST OF PLANETARY SECURITY. - E.O.L.) or maybe something else. It is now even more properly formatted, or at least as you intended. And for the record I think it is admirable that you can pull all of that information up, to add to the image. EXIF is a wonderful crutch for learning, but a shooting log is better choice long term. Unfortunately I am a lazy SOB and have great difficulty keeping any papers straight, let alone associated with a negative. And you of all people should not make blanket statements like that. You'll get the art or not wars started again. Simple pursuit indeed... Simply expensive on so many levels... > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > It is now even more properly formatted, or at least as you intended. Thanks for that, Jim. I did make an effort to cut down of the information presented. Back in the day when men were men and photography was too, this sort of info would be of interest to hard core practioners of the craft. Now days it's just a charming anachronism - except for those few of us roaming tyranosaurus rex types... > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > And for the record I think it is admirable that you can pull all of > that information up, to add to the image. EXIF is a wonderful crutch > for learning, but a shooting log is better choice long term. > Unfortunately I am a lazy SOB and have great difficulty keeping any > papers straight, let alone associated with a negative. If one's processes are calibrated and standardized, then the only significant things that change are the individual exposures. In fact, it's not really worth noting anything unless it varies from the standard significantly. And for the most part those exceptions can be kept in one's head. (When feasibile, I do use a small voice recorder to keep track of the exposures and times of day.) > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > And you of all people should not make blanket statements like that. > You'll get the art or not wars started again. Simple pursuit > indeed... Simply expensive on so many levels... Yeah, I know you're right. Sleeping dogs and all. But sometimes I can't resist when I see such a truly simple thing having been needlessly turned so horrendously complex. And followed now by generations of younger photographers who have been conditioned to know of no other way. Not always, but often enough, I sense an inverse relationship between the quality and depth of a person's photographic efforts and the number of transistors in his or her camera. YM, of course, MV. Ken > Yeah, I know you're right. Sleeping dogs and all. But sometimes I can't > resist when I see such a truly simple thing having been needlessly turned so > horrendously complex. And followed now by generations of younger > photographers who have been conditioned to know of no other way. Two funny/sad stories: My son has been heavily photographed since the day he was born. He took his first photograph when he was 8 months. I suspect he just liked to watch the flash, but he has an eye for composition. He got the idea very quickly that he could come around to the back of the 10D and see the picture on the LCD. Almost as quickly he picked up to push the play button and spin the wheel see all the pictures on the camera. One day I was shooting with the 7NE, I needed to finish a roll up and headed for my favorite subject. When I was done with the roll, he wanted to see the pictures. I tried to explain that this was a different camera and he would have to wait until later to see the pictures; and like most explanations to two year olds was it a waste of time. I finally got frustrated and handed the camera to him and said, "OK, look at the pictures." He looked at it for a good minute and then sadly announced, "Broke." The other story is based around a class he was taking. The instructor had a Polaroid and wanted to take a picture of him. The wee monster dutifully poses, waits for the flash and then runs around to look at the back of the camera. Gets there just in time to catch the photo as it is falling to the floor, and hands the apparently plank piece of paper back to the instructor. Followed by an exchange of "Me see."'s and "Here is your picture."'s until the image started to come up. Then he had that truly profound look of understanding and I wished that I had my camera with me. Every generation is different. I learned how to type so I could use a computer, he was taught to type by a computer. > Not always, but often enough, I sense an inverse relationship between the > quality and depth of a person's photographic efforts and the number of > transistors in his or her camera. YM, of course, MV. I am hard pressed to argue this point with you. Going over to rec.photo.digital and looking at the galleries of people who ask why their pictures aren't selling would certainly solidify that rational in my mind. But I'm glad you left room for a few exceptions to the rule. Jim > My son has been heavily photographed since the day he was born. He > took his first photograph when he was 8 months. I suspect he just liked [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > "OK, look at the pictures." He looked at it for a good minute and > then sadly announced, "Broke." This is *hilarious*! Thanks for that, Jim. You may be interested to know that I printed this and taped it to the wall in my darkroom, right next to my favorite Jack Kennedy inspiration.* Ken * On a far less grand scale, this also quite nicely sums up the reasoning behind my preference for traditional analog photography: "We choose to go to the moon in this decade, not because it is easy, but because it is hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win." -- President John F. Kennedy (or one of his speechwriters) "Ken Nadvornick" <register.nadvor@verizon.net> wrote: <*snip*> > You know, photography really is a simple pursuit. Let's see, > there's an aperture, a shutter speed, and a focusing collar. > That pretty much covers it... > Ken Hi Ken, I can't resist pointing out that you're over-complicating what's really needed in a camera. The aperture (fixed at that) and shutter speed are all that's required. The focusing collar is an enhancement, but totally unnecessary. "Long live the Pin Hole Camera!" :) > Hi Ken, I can't resist pointing out that you're over-complicating > what's really needed in a camera. The aperture (fixed at that) and > shutter speed are all that's required. The focusing collar is an > enhancement, but totally unnecessary. "Long live the Pin Hole > Camera!" :) Hi Mardon, Yep. About a year and a half ago I was asked to teach some seventh and eighth graders some photography. I chose to have them build pinhole cameras. I initially asked them to give me a definition of what a camera was. After listening to a litany of characteristics that would have done the Bill Gates wannabes of the world proud, they were stunned to hear me say that a camera is nothing more or less than a hole in a lightproof box. That's it. Done. The monk was turned out into the desert... After paramedics revived them, we built the cameras out of one-gallon paint cans and used circular b&w enlarging paper as film, mounted inside the lids. I let them expose and develop their own paper negatives, then contact print them. (I turned one of the teacher's restrooms into a temporary darkroom.) I was told later by a couple of the real teachers that several of the kids had gone home and told their parents that it was one of the best "classes" they had ever taken. One young lady, I was told, went on in high school to take a course in traditional photography because of her experience. Here's a simple web presentation I've left up of the kid's efforts: http://mysite.verizon.net/kjnadvor/ZLS/PhotoClass.htm Ken > Better late than never? > http://www.pbase.com/shootin/timing [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > http://www.pbase.com/shootin/grace When I got home from work last night, I noticed the mandate for Timing was just about over. Old photos were allowed in this particular one, and I thought of a pic I took a while back that would be perfect for the "Timing" mandate. I got so caught up in making sure I submit properly and adhereing to the rules, that I overlooked a very important matter. My entry was taken with a medium format camera! I am so sorry guys! I understand completely that my entry should be disqualified. My fault!! Again, I'm so sorry. Regards, Helen > When I got home from work last night, I noticed the mandate for Timing > was just about over. Old photos were allowed in this particular one, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > guys! I understand completely that my entry should be disqualified. > My fault!! Again, I'm so sorry. The rulz have changed. It is now: "Any kind of still photography camera may be used (including digital). It is up to the photographer to scan and format the image for the SI. " (quoted from the rulz page, http://si.jlkramer.net/rulz/rulz.htm ) > Regards, > Helen > > When I got home from work last night, I noticed the mandate for Timing > > was just about over. Old photos were allowed in this particular one, [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Regards, > > Helen Thanks so much Graham. I was embarrassed about that. I read the rulz, and saw the quote: "Any kind of still photography camera may be used (including digital). It is up to the photographer to scan and format the image for the SI, " but was still unsure. I was even embarrassed to ask the question. That's why I changed my mind and erased it from the NG. I'm glad you saw it and replied. Thanks again. :^) Cheers, Helen >My entry was taken with a medium format camera! Oh! That explains why I had to scroll all over the place to appreciate your picture! :^) DuncanC PS Welcome to SI. > >My entry was taken with a medium format camera! > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > PS Welcome to SI. LOL. :^) Thank you Duncan. Helen > My entry was taken with a medium format camera! So was mine... Ken >> My entry was taken with a medium format camera! > > So was mine... You're all gonna burn in Hell... > You're all gonna burn in Hell... If the EPA finds out about the Superfund PX625 mercury battery in the camera, or its 19 other lifetime supply cousins in my freezer, I just might... <g> Ken > If the EPA finds out about the Superfund PX625 mercury battery in the > camera, or its 19 other lifetime supply cousins in my freezer, I just > might... <g> > > Ken I thought I was the only one to build a backlog of the original mercury cells for my Gossen meters and Canon Q:17 GIII rangefinders. I probably have 10 or so. I even bought a mint 6x6 camera last night just to be able to use one of those batteries -- a Yashicamat 124. :) ken rosenbaum > > My entry was taken with a medium format camera! > > So was mine... > > Ken Yes indeed! Using a twin-lens reflex----Excellent shot, Ken. Helen > Yes indeed! Using a twin-lens reflex----Excellent shot, Ken. Thanks, Helen. I was happy to see your contribution - and *its* contribution to your conquering of that shyness. A graceful outcome on both counts which will hopefully lead to continued participation in future mandates. To be truly "one of the guys," you might also consider submitting a mandate of your own. It's the only time you can get a valid jump on everyone else. Ken > > Yes indeed! Using a twin-lens reflex----Excellent shot, Ken. > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Ken Good idea! I have some thoughts for some mandates that I should mention to Uncle Al and Jim. I read your story about teaching students photography. What a lovely story. In fact when I was in grade 7, we had a substitute teacher for a week. He promised us brats that if we were good, he would show us a slide show of his work during his travels around the world. Well, being all of 12 years with big chips on our shoulders, our attitudes were "who gives a ____! We were on our best behavior only because the principal's office was right next door and he was watching us like a pit bull............anyway, after the week was over, he showed us his slides. You could hear a pin drop during that slide show, except when a new pic was displayed on the screen and everyone's "ooohs, and ahhhs" were heard. I was impressed for life. Your story reminded me of that time. Helen >>Yes indeed! Using a twin-lens reflex----Excellent shot, Ken. > > Thanks, Helen. > > I was happy to see your contribution - and *its* contribution to your > conquering of that shyness. A graceful outcome on both counts which will Did somebody say graceful?  Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.