man & nature # 28a - bigger is better

Lake Champlain moon • click to embiggenOK, I realized after viewing today's earlier entry that I was describing details in one the moon pictures that are probably too small to see easily. Here is that picture in a bigger size.

FYI, Lake Champlain - the lake is actually part of the Adirondack Park. It's a big lake - about 110 miles long. As the crow flies, it's about 15 miles due East of my house. The entire Eastern border of the Adirondack Park is the shore of Lake Champlain, often referred to as the Adirondack Coast.

The lake played an important role in the American Revolutionary War. If I had turned my camera just a tiny bit to the left, Valcour Island would enter the view. The waters around Valcour Island were the site of what is generally regarded as the first naval battle fought by the United States Navy. Under the command of Benedict Arnold, the Americans got their butts kicked (and sunk) but he had enough success that the British attempt to divide the colonies in half was delayed by a year. The later attempt failed miserably with American victory at Saratoga. The battle of Saratoga was the turning point of the Revolution.

In the first of the 2 separate battles that were The Battle of Saratoga, it was Arnold (dispatched to the scene by General Washington when he learned of an impending battle) and the men in his command that handed the British a decisive setback. For his efforts, Arnold was relieved of command and sent packing before the second battle by General Gates, who shared a bitter mutual resentment with Arnold. Gates' report of the battle never mentioned Arnold or his part in it. In fact, it was Arnold who directed the battle and personally lead several charges into the British position while Gates sat in his tent.

Hmmm .... I wonder why he defected.

BTW, the eventual turncoat, Benedict Arnold, is celebrated as a hero in these parts. Before his switch of allegiance to the British side, history considers him to have been the best general and most accomplished leader in the Continental Army. His many battle successes up and down the Adirondack Coast - at Valcour Island, Fort Ticonderoga, Saratoga, to name a few - are considered to be vitally critical to the winning of the war. He was such a pain in the ass to the British that it's amazing that they were willing to not only take him in but make him a Brigadier General, give him a very generous annual pension, and a huge "signing bonus" for switching sides.

man & nature # 28 ~ pictures in my head

Road, field and mist • click
to embiggenYesterday, at my normal time of around 3-3:30PM, I left the house for a round of golf. Arriving at the course - not my regular / home course - I was informed that it was closed for an outing event but, if I returned an hour later, I would have the entire course to myself.

So, uncharacteristically, I found myself teeing off a little after 5PM and finishing up around 8:10PM. In turned out that I did not have the course to myself - in truth there were no other people and most likely because of that fact, I was accompanied throughout the round by quite a number of deer (several mothers with fawns), one fox, hawks, terns, heron, and, how could I forget, about 10,000 mosquitoes.

As I have mentioned, we've had lots of rain this Summer so the mosquitoes are thriving in places that don't normally have standing water. My only problem last evening was that I could picture (in my head) my green bottle of bug repellent sitting on the counter in our back porch. But, it wasn't the only thing I could picture in my head.

After the round, less than a mile from the course, I could also picture my tripod leaning again the disconnected radiator (at about a 10 degree angle) in the upstairs hallway, just outside my bedroom door. Under the circumstances, the vision was particularly vivid and strangely alluring.

Now, that tripod must have felt out of place because its normal residence is on the back seat or floor of my car where, quite honestly, it languishes unused for weeks at a time. In camera IS and a relatively steady hand have not exactly rendered it superfluous but it's not the steady workhorse it used to be. It still comes in very handy from time to time - times like last evening to name just one.

Using the IS and f2.8, I did manage to get by with 1/8-1/15s SS for 3 of the 4 pictures you see here. August moon • click to embiggenBut a very short time and distance later, on Lake Champlain (the largest lake in the US of A that's not a Great Lake), the camera was asking for 1/2-1s SS. It was at that time that another picture appeared in my head. Under a clump of stuff on my back seat - a pair of long pants, a rain/wind golf parka, canoe paddles, 1 life vest, and extra golf caps - I saw (in my head) my seldom-used monopod.

Lo and behold, it was actually there. So, keeping it short and bracing it with my foot against a roadside guardrail, I managed to get the picture.

FYI, the mountains seen across Lake Chaplain are Vermont's Green Mountains. The big one on the left is Camels Hump. The lights on the Vermont side towards the center of the picture are from Burlington. I always refer to this as Vermont's best side - the one you can see from NY.

ku # 531 ~ on seeing

Fallen tree and red berries • click
to embiggenAre you ever shocked when you realize that some of things that you do without thinking - things that are "second nature" to you - seem to be very foreign concepts to others?

Say, like ... walking, chewing gum, and breathing all at the same time. Some can do it with ease, others end up tripping all over themselves. Now maybe that's bit of an exaggeration, but you probably get the point.

In any event, I have become very aware, over the past year in particular, that a whole lot of people simply don't see in the way that I see. Some might opine that that's because I have, as a photographer, "trained my eye" to see things that others don't notice but, as I have mentioned before, that ability / condition / freak of nature / whatever you want to call it has been with me long before I ever picked up a camera. When I think about it, I am consciously aware of my propensity for intense looking as far back as early childhood. Consequently, you could say that looking and seeing are second nature to me.

And, in fact, since early childhood, I have always had a desire / need to express that looking / seeing as some form of visual "art". Throughout my youthful festering, I was repeatedly plucked from the obscurity of the lunch box rabble / blackboard jungle and presented with awards, adulation, privileges, honors, and, yes, even cold hard cash simply by doing what came easy - drawing things that I saw all around me.

Oddly enough, even though I grew up literally in the shadow of the Great Yellow Father, AKA, Kodak in Rochester NY, I never picked up a camera in earnest until I found myself living in Japan. I wanted to take pictures of the place / experience, cameras were dirt cheap and, once again, within 3 months of buying my first camera, a Petri 7s, I was plucked from obscurity and given awards, privileges, and a cushy job (as a photographer) because I was doing something that came easy - making pictures of things that I saw all around me.

Now, 41 years after that photo-awakening, I can look back upon a life in photography. It's how I made a living and how I expressed my personal looking and seeing (and continue to do both) and I have to say that the picture making always seemed easy and second nature to me.

So, it comes as a surprise to me that most others do not look and see in anything like the manner I do. It has become increasingly obvious to me that most people are almost blind to the physical world around them. They seem to look and see enough just to navigate (I mean that literally) their way around the planet but beyond that actually take notice of very little of the physical world that they inhabit.

2 cases in point -

Yesterday's picture of my picture. This framed picture, 44×30 inches, sits right inside our front door - the door that everyone uses to come and go through. One does not actually have to navigate around it when coming and going but I am at a loss to figure how anyone could not see it. So, imagine my surprise when I asked a friend of coma girl what she thought of the picture and the response was, "What picture?". I responded, "The rainbow picture." She responded, "What rainbow picture?"

It should be noted that this person had to have come and gone many times since the picture made its appearance. Apparently, it was "invisible". But even more amazing was the fact that, once we were standing in front of it, she asked, "Where was this picture taken?" I was flabbergasted - it was taken on a stretch of main highway that she must have driven by, oh, say, about a billion times in the last 19 years of her life. Once I explained where it was, she could even name the people who lived there but apparently she never "noticed" the place before. Simply amazing.

The Jersey Shore. The wife has been going to the Jersey Shore, Stone Harbor in particular, for, oh, say, 40+ years or so. It's a family affair (and it's a big family). When I first began to picture the place in earnest, 2 years ago, her response to the pictures was simply, "When I go to the Shore, that's not what I see."

Yikes.

What the hell else is there to see? Apparently, the physical world of Stone Harbor is just an incidental backdrop to family, friends, and fun. Nothing wrong or (apparently) unusual about that but I am left wondering if she would notice the physical surroundings if the family got together on the moon. Maybe. Maybe not.

It is often remarked, when someone does something remarkably stupid, "Where was he/she when they passed out the brains?" I am beginning to wonder, "Where the hell were they when they passed out the eyes?"

civilized ku # 92 ~ the big picture

The big picture • click
to embiggenA couple weeks ago, I mentioned that I had made a picture that was so beautiful that I was rather uncomfortable about it. I also promised to post it, so here it is.

It seemed to me that presenting the picture in this manner would also offer the opportunity to continue with yesterday's image quality idea. Of course, you can't tell a damn thing about the resolution, noise, and dynamic range of the picture but, in a way, that's my point - even with this small web presentation it's pretty apparent that the picture has some pizazz and suck-you-in image quality.

FYI, the print size is 24×32, full-frame 4/3rds proportion. All I can say about it is that it's rather stunning. Everyone who looks at it is very impressed. Comments such as, "it's so 'clear'", "oh, my", "the colors are so beautiful". Even fellow photographer Kent Wiley was impressed - but he might have just been saying so since he and his family were guests in my house and he didn't want to risk being thrown out onto the street.

That said, I am certain beyond doubt that the pixel peeping crowd would, nose to glass, find something to complain about. I am also certain that my Pentax K20D with its 14.5mp APS-size sensor would render a very modestly sharper and somewhat smoother tonal quality that would make the nose on glass peepers much happier but I think I've come up with a way to deal with that.

It's simple - I am going to keep a number of doggie shock collars on hand at home. All photographers who enter the premise will be required to wear one. The electronic boundary will be set to 3.5 feet in front of my prints. If anyone steps inside of that boundary - ZAP! If I want to get really fancy, maybe, when the collar is triggered, it can also trigger a recording that says, "Please step away from the print and enjoy the total viewing experience. Thank you for your cooperation." The voice, of course, would be one of those really annoying and irritating electronic ones.

One other point about image quality. My son, The Cinemascapist, has recently secured first-tier East & West Coast gallery representation. A "big-time" NYC show is in the works. It's rumored that his prints (22×40 inch) will be limited to editions of 5 with a price tag of $5,000. (FYI, he has a show in LA this September where the last of his $1,800 prints (same size) will be offered for sale. Get 'em while you still can).

That said, here's the point - even though, until recently (when I gave him my E-510), he made his Cinemascapes with a "older" Olympus E-330 (with the "lowly" kit lens) - a camera about which the "authoritative" dpreview.com said:

I struggled for a long time rating this camera, and if we had a half-way it would get an 'Above Average and a Half' however it's just good enough to scrape a Recommended ... but come on Olympus you can (and will have to) do better than this!

Just goes to show ya, and as has been stated over and over and over again (when will the peepers ever learn?), it's not the camera, it's the photographer who makes the picture.

BTW & FYI, a plug from the shameless commerce division - you can now purchase a signed limited edition Cinemascapes book.

man & nature # 27 ~ superior idiots

Port Kent Amtrak "station"
• click to embiggenSometime last week there was "without doubt the most exciting digital photography announcement this year" - Phil Askey, DPReview.com.

The announcement was compliments of Olympus and Panasonic, co-conspirators in the development of the 4/3rds standard /format (along with Leica) of which I am an avid user. I bought into the Olympus 4/3rds format because it is an open standard - all lenses made any manufacturer are completely compatible with any other manufacturer's camera bodies. With the top 2 makers of optics - Olympus and Leica - involved in the standard, it was a no-brainer for me to get on board.

There was also the promise of tidy compact cameras with the 4/3rds standard and my first Olys - a E-500 and then an E-510 - were indeed rather tidy and compact. But after using them for a while, I came to long for something with a bit more substance and heft. They just seemed too compact and far too light in weight. This was especially true when fitted with something like my Zuiko 50-250mm f2.8/3.5 lens - it was like the tail was wagging the dog.

So, I eventually became the owner of the Oly flagship, an E-3, which seems to have careened to the opposite end of the spectrum, tidy/heft-wise. It truly is a flagship, with extreme emphasis on the word "ship". It's BIG and hernia-inducing hefty, especially with the battery grip attached. And tidy it's not - I've saw fewer buttons on all the tux adorned men at last weekend's wedding than there are on an E-3 body.

That said, after using the E-3 (and my Pentax K20D) for a while, I find myself longing for something with a lot less substance and heft. That's where the "most exciting digital photography announcement this year" comes into play. Oly/Panasonic are developing mirror-less compact camera bodies with full size 4/3rds sensors. The mirror-less part allows for the making of a small body and small lenses that should produce a 35mm rangefinder-like digital camera with dslr image quality. Exactly the kind of camera I would like to have had at this past weekend's wedding.

That said, this announcement has been greeted by the techno crowd with cries of "inferior image quality" - based on the "inferior image quality" of the 4/3rds sensor. IMO, these morons need to get a life. Or, more accurately, they need to get a life that has at least a small hint of what constitutes true image quality.

Now, I am not here to defend the 4/3rds standard because there is simply nothing to defend. It's particular image quality is just that - one of many flavors of image quality in the digital picture making domain. It is neither "inferior" nor "superior". It just is what it is.

Here is how I have come to look at the differences in techno image quality (IQ). There are, in fact, lots of differences in the results obtained from various sensors - most notably differences in resolution, noise, and dynamic range. In most cases these differences are a matter of relatively subtle degree, especially so when viewing a print from a "normal" viewing distance. Those who judge such matters at pixel level - 100% view on a monitor - are involved in something other than and very different from looking at photographs.

Looking at photographs is an emotional and intellectual experience - not a technical exercise - especially so if one wishes to see the real image quality - what a picture says. When will these equipnojerks understand that all their fetishistic caterwauling is nothing but an onerous distraction that gets in the way of seeing a photograph's true image quality?

To be clear, I am NOT saying that matters of resolution, noise, or dynamic range have no bearing upon the meaning / message that a photograph conveys. If your heart's desire is to capture every little detail and tonal/color nuance of, as an example, the forest floor and seeing every little detail and tonal/color nuance in the print thereof is important to what you have to say, then, by all means, save (as in "horde") your money and buy a Hassey with a 50mp back.

On the other hand, if you are more about capturing and conveying impressions about what it means to be human, you might be better served by saving (as in "conserving") your money and buying an Oly 420 or, for that matter, a Canon G9. Because, guess what? They are both perfect instruments for the task at hand.

civilized ku # 91 ~ 18 hrs in New Jersey & 24 hrs with a Landscapist reader/contributor

A thoroughly modern wedding
• click to embiggenIt all started at 10 AM on Friday - in the car for a solo drive to NJ for the wedding of the wife's nephew. Arrived in NJ at 3:30PM with just enough time to clean up and shave for the 4PM ceremony except for the fact that I had left all my toiletries at home. So, long story short, I didn't make the wedding.

The reception was a few hours later and about 4 trillions light years removed from my sensibilities. Opulence and over-the-top were the order of the day. But, that said, I am certain that everyone had a good time - after all, 5 1/2 hrs of open bar with only top-shelf liquor helps keep everybody happy.

Then it was up at 8:30 AM on Saturday and a drive home with coma girl so she could go to work and so I could hook up with Kent Wiley and family. Regulars here will know that Kent is a sometime commenter and guest gallery participant.

Kent, his wife and teenage daughter were training their way from home (VA.) to Montreal and back (with stopovers along the way) on Summer holiday. Learning of their plans to spend a few days in my neck of the woods, I extended an invitation to them for the use of a car and our home while my family was in NJ for the weekend. Kent accepted and I was lucky enough to spend Saturday afternoon and part of Sunday with them. I had a very enjoyable time with some very nice people.

All in all, it was a good weekend.

FYI, those are my dancing shoes cooling off after an inspired dance set. Man, was I on fire.

man & nature # 26 ~ the 5 minute wait

Storm over Macs • click to embiggen"The National Weather Service has issued a severe weather warning".

Without exaggeration, I have heard this warning broadcast on radio and television 3 or 4 times a day, on average 3-4 days a week for the last 2 months. Yesterday's newspaper indicated that I am most likely going to keep it seeing / hearing it for another 2 months.

Sandwiched in amongst these weird weather days are some gloriously mild and sunny Summer days that are a pure joy. I don't really mind the weather roller coaster ride as much as some do. In fact, during some of the relatively brief but very violent rain and wind (and occasional hail) storms, I like to stand on the front porch under the metal roof and listen to the rain pounding like a drum, the thunder and the wind, and watch the cascades of water running down the street and off of the roof. They are amazing displays of nature's power.

Of course, I have been able to enjoy these displays because I/we have been fortunate enough to not have suffered any of the damaging effects of this weather. Unfortunately, many have not been so lucky - flashing flooding, downed trees and power lines on houses and roads, property damage from high winds, etc. are regular occurrences. But, because these storms are relatively short in duration and small in geographic coverage, the damage is not widespread during individual "bursts". However, cumulatively, there has been a fair amount of damage.

It has always been said that, if at any given moment, you didn't like the weather in the Adirondacks all you had to do was wait 5 minutes and it will change. That's never been more true than this Spring and Summer.

man & nature # 25 ~ time in a bottle

Rain drops on spider web on clogs • click to embiggenA notion that we have rarely discussed regarding the medium is that of time - stopping / freezing time, the past, the present, moment in time, etc.

In the recent Focus magazine interview with Joel Meyerowitz, he stated:

It's what photography can actually do best, to describe a moment in "the present", whatever that present is. It's the "eternal present". We sit here in 2008 and we pick up something from 1860 and we look at it from 2008 and it's in our lives. It fills us with wonder ... suddenly you're there and you forget where you are.

That is certainly one way of looking at it (time) but I also recently came across this quote from William Faulkner:

Time is dead as long as it being clocked by little wheels; only when the clock stops does time come to life.

I do not know the context of that little gem but I do very much like it as an idea when applied to the medium of photography. We (photograhers) do interrupt the spinning of the wheels of time. We stop the clock. We freeze a moment and make it come to life, grant it significance, and give it meaning in a manner that it never could quite have in the flow of time.

Do you ever think about "time" and how it applies to your photography?