civilized ku # 768 ~ FYI
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/af5d0/af5d02e165c3ab18fee122daef291f9637f2f33a" alt="Date Date"
Patio in the sky ~ Montreal, CA • click to embiggenEven with all the ethereal malarkey.'Zen and the Art of', narcissism, and self-aggrandizement, and "anyone with two brain cells in their head to put together knows what's going on here" that has been perceived as part and parcel of my on seeing writing, visitor and page view numbers have exhibited a nice little bump since I started the writing endeavor. Apparently some of you out there appreciate it, or, at the very least, the effort I am making in this regard.
I am also rather delighted with the fact that a number of lurkers have shed their anonymity and made comments. While many of those comments have contained expressions of appreciation for my pictures, virtually no one has offered much at all on the subject of seeing and making pictures of what they see from their point of view. More's the pity.
I certainly do not discourage or dislike thoughtful and/or informed opinions and critiques of my opinions on the subject but wouldn't it be nice if I and members of The Landscapist audience could read about other's thoughts on the subject of seeing? You know, something more constructive and informative than just opining about my writing skills or lack thereof.
BTW, on a technical note regarding the picture in this entry, I made the picture with my E-3 and a long lens. Even though I could have put that lens on the E-P1 (using an adapter), I was, perhaps, too lazy to do so. That said, I was also apparently too lazy to check the ISO setting on the E-3, only to discover when I was converting the RAW file that, surprise, surprise, the ISO was set to 1600. Considering that and the fact that I made the picture through a less than clean window, I am quite pleased with the result (no noise reduction applied). I may just have to print this picture at my 'standard' 24×24 inch size just to see how it holds up.
Reader Comments