ku # 714 ~ FYI

Detritus in a bog ~ in the NE Adirondack PARK• click to embiggenFor a large number of reasons, I have yet to get to setting up a pile of twigs gallery.

And it is quite possible that I will not be able to do so before I leave for my trip to play golf ... on a mountain top in the greenest state in the land of the free where Davy kilt him a bar when he was only three.

Hell, I jist might has ta git me a coonskin hat while I'm there.

In any event, if I am unable to get the gallery set up before I leave, while I'm away nest week, I'll try to arrange for posting some of the pictures as entries.

civilized ku # 468 ~ screw 'em, screw 'em all

Evening light ~ in the Adirondack PARK - Au Sable Forks, NY • click to embiggenSomeone claiming to be a "certified Apple technician .... working on Apple products since 1984" left a long comment on yesterday's entry, civilized ku # 467. The comment was posted using an alias and no link to any site was entered, so the comments are from an "anonymous" someone who may or may not be what he claims to be.

In any event, he took issue with much of my entry stating that it was "very interesting if not mostly wrong". Well, IMO, his comments were not very interesting and they were mostly wrong.

I have neither time nor the inclination to point out all of the errors and the from-my-experience inaccuracies but here are a couple of the more obvious ones:

He stated, "I have never, in all my years doing what I do, had a problem installing Mac software being OS or application. All you need do is take your time and once things start leave them alone till done. Simple." Oh yeah, check this out. And, consider the well known issue as mentioned by Mike C - "I and thousands of others were having cornaries after upgrading to Snow Leopard last summer when suddenly our Epson printers would only run on a Gutenprint driver - impossible to use for photo printing."

He also stated that outdated software/hardware is "Just a fact of life" because he "just purchased a new MacBook Pro with which I replaced my 3 year old MacBook Pro. I started saving this morning for my next MacBook Pro." Apparently he is not bothered at all by planned obsolescence and all of its attendant waste - waste of energy, waste of resources, and, of course, the issue of waste disposal, all issues that result in environmental degradation.

He also stated that the iTune requirement "is a bunch of dunky dust" Well, not so according to Apple. It is only a "bunch of dunky dust" if, as he states, you "use it with the internal apps forever without ever touching the iTunes store ... [B]ut (and there is always a but) since you cannot get apps any where else you are limiting yourself. Yep, sure. That's a solution. Limit yourself.

And, FYI, Mr. Apple tech, I don't have an Amazon account. I do buy online but I have never been required to open an account to do so. I have a TV but I can watch DVDs and broadcast programming without having to open an account. And, yes, I pay a fee to have this blog, but I could have a blog without opening an account / paying a fee (blogspot and others) if I choose to do so.

To sum it all up, the commenter sounds like nothing more than a shill / apologist for the computer software / hardware purveyors who would like nothing more than to keep us all on the merry-go-round / treadmill of endless upgrades.

civilized ku # 467 ~ an Orwellian dystopian future is here

Late day sun on tree and building ~ next to 20 Main - Au Sable Forks, NY • click to embiggenYesterday, I had an idea for yet another body of work - something rather different from any I am currently pursuing.

A key element of this idea is the acquisition of an iPad. So, I began to investigate the purchase thereof only to discover the iPad's dirty little "secret"...

... listed under "Mac requirements" - that is to mean my Power Mac G5 desktop machine - is the item, iTunes 9.1 or later (free download).

OK, it's free so what's the problem with that?

Well .... iTunes 9.1 or later requires Mac OS X v10.5.8 or later on my Power Mac G5 desktop machine.

OK, so what's the problem with that?

Problem # 1 - it's not free. It's $129.00US. And, it's only available by calling the Apple Store because it's a discontinued OS (not available at Apple Stores, online or brick & mortar wise) that is still available but only as part the Apple Legacy Program.

Problem # 2 - OS X v10.5.8, once acquired, requires a "clean install". That means backing up everything - just in case something goes wrong during the install. And, assuming that nothing does go wrong during the install, there is no guarantee that all of my software, to include printer drivers, will work properly without some kind of updating.

Problem # 3 (potential) - there is no guarantee that, after all of the above, with some future version of iTunes, one might have to go through the whole PITA rigamarole again.

Problem # 4 - also listed under "Mac requirements" is the item, iTunes Store account. This is not an option, this is a requirement. While this is not exactly a problem, per se, it does, in fact, really piss me off - I have purchased a zillion things over the course of my life but never have I been required to have an account with a manufacturer or a store in order to own and use them*.

All of that said, here's what I find to be incredibly and somewhat sickeningly ironic about this whole situation - Apple's famous "1984" Super Bowl commercial, which introduced the Macintosh, was based on the concept of an Orwellian dystopian future ruled by an all-controlling "Big Brother" from which we would all be saved by a sledge hammer wielding heroine (with a picture of a Mac on her tank top) who smashes Big Brother's evil visage (and all-controlling intentions).

No more unthinking drones. No more thought control. No more conformity. No more passively accepting whatever it was Big Brother doled out. No, none of that - it was all about "freedom" and the commercial ended with the statement, "On January 24th, Apple Computer will introduce Macintosh. And you'll see why 1984 won't be like 1984."

What they neglected to tell us was that 2010 would be just like "1984", Apple-wise.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - although I never thought I'd include Apple in the bunch - screw 'em. Screw 'em all.

*my cell phone requires an account with a service provider.

ku # 713 ~ a creeping vanity

Vernal water with ice ~ in the NE Adirondack PARK • click to embiggenMy fear is that I might slowly succumb to the vanity of a pile of twig arrogance - as in a my pile of twigs are better than your pile of twigs kind a thing*.

I only mention this because, quite frankly, there really are an abundance of unique and interesting piles of twigs up here in my neck of the woods.

*FYI and BTW, an arrogance that is distinctly different from the one that says my pile-of-twig pictures are better than your pile-of-twig pictures.

ku # 712 ~ enough is enough

Red twig dogwood shrub (?) ~ in the NE Adirondack PARK • click to embiggenUntil I acquired my EP-1 I had thought that my days of manual focusing were far behind me.

Once I had entered the digital camera world, in which AF is the order of the day, I just started to rely upon AF. For the most part, it worked quite well and I can probably count, using only the fingers on one hand, the number of times that I lost a picture due to mis-focusing on the part of the camera AF.

That said, I did/do use a kind of manual AF - my AF was/is always set to a single center "zone" which, when a subject is off-center, I use by placing the subject in the center of the frame, acquire and hold focus by depressing the shutter 1/2 way, reposition the subject to the desired location in the frame, and then make the picture. This technique works perfectly, 999 out of 1,000 times.

However, now that I use my EP-1 for almost all of my picture making, I am using the LCD screen (via Live View) for framing and, with increasing frequency, for manual focusing. Especially so for focusing when I am making narrow DOF pictures - which I am also doing with increasing frequency. I really like both the pinpoint focusing accuracy and the added element/ satisfaction of manually taking even more control of the picture making process.

All of which makes me pine for an EP-1 minus all of the features that the brave new world of digital cameras come with. Just give me an aperture ring, a focus ring, a shutter speed dial, an exposure meter (internal or external) and screw all the rest. I mean, what the hell, I made really nice pictures with my totally manual Nikon F3s and my handheld trusty Minolta Auto Meter III w incident-light attachment.

Sure, I'd be OK with AF or AE capabilities for those times when I needed / wanted them. But spare me from scene modes, face recognition, multi-zone AF, 10 different kinds of metering modes, ART Filters, HD video, etc., etc., etc.

All I wanna do is make pictures the simple way.

IMO, and without exaggeration, I really believe that camera makers, by adding on layer upon endless layers of "features", have made making pictures much more complicated than it ever was when a picture maker had to do it all "manually".

Update on Wednesday, April 14, 2010 at 02:02PM by gravitas et nugalis

Featured Comment: The Cinemascapist wrote: "then why not just buy the Leica M8? Shutter speed dial on top, aperture ring, small size, and digital. what is it missing or adding that you don't like?

my response: the Leica M8 is a discontinued camera that sold for $5800US (body only) or there about. I don't want no discontinued camera (at any price).

The replacement camera body, the M9, sells for $7,000US. Add to that the cost of Leica glass - like say the $3,000US WA 35mm f/2.0 Summicron M Aspherical Manual Focus Lens, which is similar to the 20mm f/1.7 Panasonic lens I use on my EP-1 - and I'm living under the bridge on Main St. in a cardboard refrigerator shipping container, turning tricks at 20 Main in exchange for food and a beer (assuming, that is, that I'm lucky enough to find myself still amongst the living after the wife finds out).

And, even though made with a 35mm f/2.0 Summicron adorned M9, that's definitely not a pretty picture.

civilized ku # 466 ~ the intensity of the photographer's seeing

Tall hedge and building ~ Plattsburgh, NY • click to embiggen

You know you are seeing such a photograph if you say to yourself, "I could have taken that picture. I've seen such a scene before, but never like that." It is the kind of photography that relies for its strengths not on special equipment or effects but on the intensity of the photographer's seeing. It is the kind of photography in which the raw materials--light, space, and shape--are arranged in a meaningful and even universal way that gives grace to ordinary objects. ~ Sam Abell

civilized ku # 465 ~ curious

USAF B47 ~ former PAB - Plattsburgh, NY • click to embiggenIndulge me with a few answers - how many pictures do you make in a week? Is your camera a constant companion or is it only a take-it-out-when-I'm-on-a picture-making-specific mission?

And, how many pictures (yours or of others), photography wise, do have on the walls of your abode?

FYI, this AM, after actually making a count, I was quite literally stunned to realize that we have 50 pictures (photography-wise) on our walls. And that's not counting college/coma girl's zillions of girlfriend pictures. Nor does the number include any family portraits, vacation snapshots, or the like. I only counted photo pictures that would be considered as, dare I say it, "art".

civilized ku # 464 ~ on the kitchen table

Daffodils and cherry tomatoes • click to embiggenI just noticed a short article regarding the making of an episode of the TV medical drama program, House.

The director of the series used a full-frame Canon 5D Mark II DSLR camera and selection of Canon's prime lenses, the 24-70mm and 70-200mm lenses to shoot the entire production. In an interview, the director stated that this was to achieve a shallow depth of field and a "richer look". He also said he "feels it’s the future".

What I find very interesting is that, in a very real sense, someone in the motion picture industry has gone "backwards" to get to the future. And, as an added dollop of irony, they have used a digital piece of equipment in order to get the richer look and feel of the film era.

Next thing you know, they'll be adding a bit of film grain to make it look and feel even richer.