Fall colours.
Mick Fanner
was amazed at the colours of the leaves on trees around the area. OK, not
so widespread as in New England but enough to make a photography
expedition worthwhile. Well as you might imagine, I wasn't feeling like
playing at anything over that first weekend and sadly, for the rest of my
week off, it rained.
Last Sunday the sun shone and so i set out to take pictures of the fall
colours (UK style) and what do I find. Nothing. The leaves were all still
there but with the exception of one glorious tree, the wonderful reds and
yellows had all gone.
Still, I was out with my camera so I produced some colourful images.
http://www.pbase.com/mfann56/november_19th
The brightly coloured tree is the exception that I mentioned. The trees on
the roundabout are the biggest disappointment because a week before they
were quite awesome.
My favourite picture is, oddly enough, the 'Closed' signs hanging on the
fencing. Find your fall colours where you can, I always say <lol>
--
Mick. <Magister mundi sum!>
"This STEREO musicassette gives genuine reproduction on Mono equipment."
Stan
.
> Find your fall colours where you can, I always say <lol>
>
> --
> Mick. <Magister mundi sum!>
>
Great photos Mick!
Stan
Jeanette S.
on the roundabout are the biggest disappointment because a week before
they were quite awesome.
My favourite picture is, oddly enough, the 'Closed' signs hanging on the
fencing. Find your fall colours where you can, I always say <lol>
What a beautiful glorious sight, Mick. I am referring to photo #1456s.
What kind of tree is it? Jeanette
Mick Fanner
> What a beautiful glorious sight, Mick. I am referring to photo #1456s.
> What kind of tree is it? Jeanette
I do believe that that is a variety of acer but I could be wrong.
1457s is a close up of the leaves from that tree if that helps. I've
entered 'acer' into a well known search engine and come up with several
that have that same leaf configuration.
**Lin**
Nice pictures Mick. I think that one tree was very colorful and
pretty. :-) About #1465 - I didn't know JD was in England. LOL!
Really, that's a lovely closeup.
Lin
Mick Fanner
> About #1465 - I didn't know JD was in England.
I'm not at liberty to comment.
> Really, that's a lovely closeup.
I've just printed that as a 12" X 16" and the darned thing looks so alive
I think he's going to bite me. Go back to the pbase site and click on
'original' at the bottom of the image. Then tell me those eyes aren't
alive. ;-)
dae
"Mick Fanner" <mick....@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.11.26....@gmail.com...
Mick,
Beautiful photo's as usual. I guess your arm is doing well now. Question:
What is that latest thing you are adding concerning STEREO, etc.?
Don and his Devil
**Lin**
<mick....@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 18:03:35 +0000, **Lin** wrote:
>
>> About #1465 - I didn't know JD was in England.
>
>I'm not at liberty to comment.
>
>> Really, that's a lovely closeup.
>
>I've just printed that as a 12" X 16" and the darned thing looks so alive
>I think he's going to bite me. Go back to the pbase site and click on
>'original' at the bottom of the image. Then tell me those eyes aren't
>alive. ;-)
Just gorgeous! And you can almost see him breathe.
Mick Fanner
> Beautiful photo's as usual. I guess your arm is doing well now.
Arm's fine Don. Thanks for asking and thanks for liking my pics.
> Question:
> What is that latest thing you are adding concerning STEREO, etc.?
I was attempting to get the music from a prerecorded tape onto a CD, not
very successfully I might add, and I was reading what was on the inner
liner of the case. That's just a part of it.
I eventually ordered the CD of the album from Amazon for about two and
half dollars. Sometimes it's just not worth the fuss of doing it yourself
<lol>
Mick Fanner
>>I've just printed that as a 12" X 16" and the darned thing looks so alive
>>I think he's going to bite me. Go back to the pbase site and click on
>>'original' at the bottom of the image. Then tell me those eyes aren't
>>alive. ;-)
>
> Just gorgeous! And you can almost see him breathe.
I'd love to do people that close but they can't relax like a horse can.
Besides, folks treat you like a pervert if you have the decency/nerve to
ask.
**Lin**
<mick....@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 21:46:29 +0000, **Lin** wrote:
>
>>>I've just printed that as a 12" X 16" and the darned thing looks so alive
>>>I think he's going to bite me. Go back to the pbase site and click on
>>>'original' at the bottom of the image. Then tell me those eyes aren't
>>>alive. ;-)
>>
>> Just gorgeous! And you can almost see him breathe.
>
>I'd love to do people that close but they can't relax like a horse can.
>Besides, folks treat you like a pervert if you have the decency/nerve to
>ask.
Practice on Wendy. And if you use a telephoto lens you don't have to
get real close to them. :-) Problem solved! Tell people you will
give them a nice copy of the picture, big, suitable for framing.
Lin
Mick Fanner
> Practice on Wendy.
I think I ran out of practise time where Wendy is concerned when I did my
photography a few years ago.
> And if you use a telephoto lens you don't have to
> get real close to them. :-)
True enough but a real long lens is the wrong tool for the job and really
does send the wrong message. The right lens (which I might buy myself for
Christmas) will still need me to be no more than six feet away. For
the 'horse' type portrait anyway.
> Problem solved! Tell people you will
> give them a nice copy of the picture, big, suitable for framing.
Interesting point but in reality it's better to have consent forms for the
subject to sign and that again sends the wrong signals. Doing portraits a
la horse on humans in this country is a minefield.
**Lin**
<mick....@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 22:17:27 +0000, **Lin** wrote:
>
>> Practice on Wendy.
>
>I think I ran out of practise time where Wendy is concerned when I did my
>photography a few years ago.
Your mother? The people you work with - on your lunch hour?
>
>> And if you use a telephoto lens you don't have to
>> get real close to them. :-)
>
>True enough but a real long lens is the wrong tool for the job and really
>does send the wrong message. The right lens (which I might buy myself for
>Christmas) will still need me to be no more than six feet away. For
>the 'horse' type portrait anyway.
I don't think six feet away is too close to bother people if they know
it is a portrait type picture. I think some folks might be flattered
that you wanted to take their picture if they knew it was going to be
a portrait.
>
>> Problem solved! Tell people you will
>> give them a nice copy of the picture, big, suitable for framing.
>
>Interesting point but in reality it's better to have consent forms for the
>subject to sign and that again sends the wrong signals. Doing portraits a
>la horse on humans in this country is a minefield.
I guess it is anywhere. But don't you need consent forms only if you
plan on publishing the picture somewhere?
Jean B.
If it makes you feel any better, our NE colors were less than
spectacular this year. :-(
--
Jean B.
Jean B.
> On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 09:48:21 -0600, Jeanette S. wrote:
>
>> What a beautiful glorious sight, Mick. I am referring to photo #1456s.
>> What kind of tree is it? Jeanette
>
> I do believe that that is a variety of acer but I could be wrong.
> 1457s is a close up of the leaves from that tree if that helps. I've
> entered 'acer' into a well known search engine and come up with several
> that have that same leaf configuration.
>
--
Jean B.
Beth
Nice photos, Mick. Still looks quite like fall to me in your home town. As
you know we have nothing that looks like that here in the desert. Nearest
fall colors are up in Utah or the Oak Creek Canyon drive into Sedona.
This coming year, I'll be able to go see the fall colors, for now I'll have
to settle for the Bellagio conservatory, which will now be changing to
Christmas.
Beth