Pics from Sturgis and Yellowstone...
Andrzej Jan Taramina
I just finished posting some of my favourite photographs from our recent trip to
Sturgis and to Yellowstone. Sooner than I expected....got motivated to just get
it done. ;-)
All at http://www.gryffyn.com
Enjoy!
....Andrzej
NOTE: Remove Spamicide(tm) before replying!!!
Donna A.
> Hi all:
>
> I just finished posting some of my favourite photographs from our recent trip to
> Sturgis and to Yellowstone. Sooner than I expected....got motivated to just get
> it done. ;-)
>
> All at http://www.gryffyn.com
>
> Enjoy!
Very nice!
--
Donna A.
Wench #17/Bitch #17/BS #26/AH#107
'95 FLHTCUI Fuel Injected 30th Anniversary Electraglide "Fueley"
'66 H-D Bobcat "Baby Blue"--Harley Hummer Club Member #1066
http://spoiled-brat.com/rwr (m/c related site)
http://userpages.chorus.net/witw (photography site)
Mike S.
> All at http://www.gryffyn.com
Wow. Those were *really* well done. I'm guessing you're not using some
typical 2-megapixel digital camera. :-)
--
Mike (remove NOSPAM to email)
Keller, TX
'03 FLSTFI
JR_FXLR
"Andrzej Jan Taramina" <and...@chaeron.spamicide.com> wrote in message
news:6ojaj0huic7372ts5...@4ax.com...
> Hi all:
>
> I just finished posting some of my favourite photographs from our recent
trip to
> Sturgis and to Yellowstone. Sooner than I expected....got motivated to
just get
> it done. ;-)
>
VERY, very nice. For whatever reason, I especially liked the "Framed tower"
shot.
What's your camera of choice for those shots? I've got a D100 and a D2H, but
we've been looking around for a new addition lately...
JR_FXLR
tusk..o&^o
> Andrzej Jan Taramina wrote:
>
>> All at http://www.gryffyn.com
>
> Wow. Those were *really* well done. I'm guessing you're not using some
> typical 2-megapixel digital camera. :-)
>
I second that, Ziggy, fucken awesome. You gots talent.
--
- tusk..o&^o BS#<?> -
-'96 rhinobike "whoa, ah say, WHOA bitch"-
- "risk is not a fuckin toggle switch" -
Schmoe
news:6ojaj0huic7372ts5...@4ax.com...
>
> I just finished posting some of my favourite photographs from our recent
> trip to
> Sturgis and to Yellowstone. Sooner than I expected....got motivated to
> just get
> it done. ;-)
>
> All at http://www.gryffyn.com
>
> Enjoy!
FANTASTIC! Enjoyed taking that trip with you. Amazing animal shots.
Andrzej Jan Taramina
> Wow. Those were *really* well done. I'm guessing you're not using some
> typical 2-megapixel digital camera. :-)
Thanks to all for the kind compliments.
All the shots but one (the Sturgis Painted Titties one), were taken with either
a Nikon D100 or D70, using a 70-300 AFS VR telephoto or a 12-24 AFS DX lens.
These are 6.2mp DSLR cameras.
The titties shot (with our very own John Bevins...he's the salivating one ;-) )
was taken with a Sony T1 (5mp) ultra-compact pocket camera.
I've got a hankering for the 200-400 AFS VR lens for even better pics of distant
wildlife, but that lens is $8K CDN. Ouch!
I'm also considering a second body (since Dana doesn't always want me to snitch
her D70 for some reason) to minimize lens switchover time, and am anxious to see
the full specs on the impending D200 that Nikon is expected to announce at
Photokina in a bout 3 weeks time.
I missed the penultimate Yellowstone Elk photo by 30 seconds due to having to
change lenses. The elk was in a meadow, in the stream drinking. Classic! But
by the time I pulled the ultra over, grabbed the camera and changed to the zoom
lens, he had walked to the side of the river to get out. Damn! But it's
imprinted in my memory, like so many other special riding moments.
Redbeard Emeritus
<and...@chaeron.spamicide.com> writ:
1) Much kewlness.
2) Look up penultimate. <g>
--
Redbeard Emeritus "The Dirt Devil, with a built-in Crevice Tool" (c)
Do you polka?
Andrzej Jan Taramina
wrote:
> VERY, very nice. For whatever reason, I especially liked the "Framed tower"
> shot.
Thanks JR. That particular shot was done with the new 12-24 DX lens. Love that
lens.....absolutely fantastic for "scenics" on the Nikon DSLR's.
> What's your camera of choice for those shots? I've got a D100 and a D2H, but
> we've been looking around for a new addition lately...
All the shots but one (the Sturgis Painted Titties one), were taken with either
a Nikon D100 or D70, using a 70-300 AFS VR telephoto or a 12-24 AFS DX lens.
These are 6.2mp DSLR cameras. The titties shot (with our very own John
Bevins...he's the salivating one ;-) ) was taken with a Sony T1 (5mp)
ultra-compact pocket camera.
I'm keen on the impending D200 as a 2nd body. It's supposed to be 8.2mp, 5 fps
and 1/500th flash sync. I also expect it will support the new iTTL flash modes
as well. Plus will likely have to be in the $1500 US price range to compete
with the new Canon 20D. Have to see what the real specs are in a few weeks when
Nikon announces at Photokina.
Andrzej Jan Taramina
wrote:
> I second that, Ziggy, fucken awesome. You gots talent.
High praise indeed!
Does this mean you now know where to go for good welding AND good photography
services as a result of RMH, Tusk? <grins>
Donna A.
> On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 13:27:33 GMT, "Mike S." <mikef...@NOSPAMswbell.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Wow. Those were *really* well done. I'm guessing you're not using some
>>typical 2-megapixel digital camera. :-)
>
>
> Thanks to all for the kind compliments.
>
> All the shots but one (the Sturgis Painted Titties one), were taken with either
> a Nikon D100 or D70, using a 70-300 AFS VR telephoto or a 12-24 AFS DX lens.
> These are 6.2mp DSLR cameras.
>
> The titties shot (with our very own John Bevins...he's the salivating one ;-) )
> was taken with a Sony T1 (5mp) ultra-compact pocket camera.
Oh, so you did get a "pocket-able" one. You said you were thinking of
getting one.
> I've got a hankering for the 200-400 AFS VR lens for even better pics of distant
> wildlife, but that lens is $8K CDN. Ouch!
Yikes!
> I'm also considering a second body (since Dana doesn't always want me to snitch
> her D70 for some reason)
That Bitch(tm)! ;-)
> to minimize lens switchover time, and am anxious to see
> the full specs on the impending D200 that Nikon is expected to announce at
> Photokina in a bout 3 weeks time.
I've been hearing buzz that Canon's got something in the works, too. But
I'm glad I got mine when I did. I've been enjoying it a lot.
> I missed the penultimate Yellowstone Elk photo by 30 seconds due to having to
> change lenses. The elk was in a meadow, in the stream drinking. Classic! But
> by the time I pulled the ultra over, grabbed the camera and changed to the zoom
> lens, he had walked to the side of the river to get out. Damn! But it's
> imprinted in my memory, like so many other special riding moments.
Just out of curiosity, how did you pack the camera on the bike? I'm a
risk-taker--I throw it in the tourpack with just a non-padded HD
shoulder bag that I carry... 8-)
Andrzej Jan Taramina
> FANTASTIC! Enjoyed taking that trip with you. Amazing animal shots.
Thx Schmoe...glad you enjoyed the pics.
Speaking of taking trips with me.....it was a blast to do the journey with Bluiz
and Bubbles (Ron and Cindy Matthews). As an added treat, our very own Ghost
found us in Wall and crashed in our hotel room (like he was gonna find a room
during rally week...right! ;-) ) and then stumbled across the HD Gimp (John
Bevins) on Main Street and convinced him that camping sucked and that he could
have the spare bed in the lodge in Lead where we were staying. Not that this
required much arm twisting on our part.
Andrzej Jan Taramina
wrote:
> 1) Much kewlness.\
Thx, DOF!
> 2) Look up penultimate. <g>
Let's not start that thread again, OK? ;-)
Redbeard Emeritus
<and...@chaeron.spamicide.com> writ:
>> 2) Look up penultimate. <g>
>Let's not start that thread again, OK? ;-)
?
Well, it most Shirley doesn't mean what you think it does. (And
regretably, this is probly not even the penultimate time I'll be
pointing that out.)
Andrzej Jan Taramina
wrote:
> Oh, so you did get a "pocket-able" one. You said you were thinking of
> getting one.
Yup....problem with DSLR's is that they are so freekin' huge....you don't always
have a camera handy. The tiny Sony DSC-T1 is 5mp and truly fits in a pocket. A
marvel of miniaturization. Dana used it for some "action" pics while on the
bike a lot. Very handy for that since it's always in your pocket (though I do
keep it on a lanyard so as not to accidentally drop it).
Dana's scariest moment on the trip was in Yellowstone heading south from
Artist's Point (towards Old Faithful). There was a bison that was strolling on
the road shoulder. 2000+ lbs of buffalo not more than 6 feet from the bike.
All the while I'm urgently hissing "Take a picture.....TAKE A PICTURE!" since
Dana had the camera. She finally stopped shaking long enuf to take a snap.
As for me, I thought the scariest moment was when Dana and Cindy said "You go
ride in the park and take pics...we'll shop in West Yellowstone for the day".
That is a phrase to make a man (and his wallet) cringe in terror!
> That Bitch(tm)! ;-)
Ain't it the truth. ;-)
> I've been hearing buzz that Canon's got something in the works, too. But
> I'm glad I got mine when I did. I've been enjoying it a lot.
The 20D has already been announced by Canon and will be shipping by end of month
from what I hear. 8.2mp camera.
> Just out of curiosity, how did you pack the camera on the bike? I'm a
> risk-taker--I throw it in the tourpack with just a non-padded HD
> shoulder bag that I carry... 8-)
For long hauls I would typically pack it in the Bushtec trailer, since that
vibrates less than in the tour pack.
When actively taking pics (eg. touring in Yellowstone), I would put my whole
camera pack in the tour pack. I use a Moose Peterson MP-3 pack which fits
perfectly in the tour pack and holds all my gear in one backpackable case. Very
nice. Not cheap, but very functional.
Andrzej Jan Taramina
wrote:
> ?
That thread (on the "dictionary" meaning of penultimate) did the rounds a year
or two ago, if memory serves.
> Well, it most Shirley doesn't mean what you think it does. (And
> regretably, this is probly not even the penultimate time I'll be
> pointing that out.)
I know....but the colloquial/common usage fits the bill.
Redbeard Emeritus
<and...@chaeron.spamicide.com> writ:
>On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 08:19:55 -0700, Redbeard Emeritus <redb...@volcano.net>
>wrote:
>
>> ?
>
>That thread (on the "dictionary" meaning of penultimate) did the rounds a year
>or two ago, if memory serves.
>
>> Well, it most Shirley doesn't mean what you think it does. (And
>> regretably, this is probly not even the penultimate time I'll be
>> pointing that out.)
>
>I know....but the colloquial/common usage fits the bill.
You fuckin outlaw. <g>
I kinda like a truly suitable word, like quintessential or something
of the like. Vs something that has a completely different meaning
altogether.
Andrzej Jan Taramina
wrote:
> You fuckin outlaw. <g>
Coming from you, RE, that's high praise indeed! LOL!
> I kinda like a truly suitable word, like quintessential or something
> of the like. Vs something that has a completely different meaning
> altogether.
A good point....I'll use the word quintessential instead of penultimate in the
future.
As in, RE is the quintessential picky DOF! <heehee>
Donna A.
> On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 08:11:20 -0700, Redbeard Emeritus <redb...@volcano.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>1) Much kewlness.\
>
>
> Thx, DOF!
>
>
>>2) Look up penultimate. <g>
>
>
> Let's not start that thread again, OK? ;-)
Yeah! Ask him about male Black Widow spiders instead. He loves to
discuss them...
<d&r>
Chilly
> On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 08:19:55 -0700, Redbeard Emeritus
> <redb...@volcano.net> wrote:
>
>> ?
>
> That thread (on the "dictionary" meaning of penultimate) did the
> rounds a year or two ago, if memory serves.
>
>> Well, it most Shirley doesn't mean what you think it does. (And
>> regretably, this is probly not even the penultimate time I'll be
>> pointing that out.)
Perhaps it does. Perhaps he already has the Ultimate shot, and that what
he saw was truely penultimate ...
> I know....but the colloquial/common usage fits the bill.
Oh, guess not ...
Btw, *love* the pictures!
--
Chilly
NoVA BS#226 DOF#55 MANS
'04 FLHTCi - Night
www.chilly-willy.net
Redbeard Emeritus
<and...@chaeron.spamicide.com> writ:
>On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 08:32:00 -0700, Redbeard Emeritus <redb...@volcano.net>
>wrote:
>
>> You fuckin outlaw. <g>
>
>Coming from you, RE, that's high praise indeed! LOL!
>
>> I kinda like a truly suitable word, like quintessential or something
>> of the like. Vs something that has a completely different meaning
>> altogether.
>
>A good point....I'll use the word quintessential instead of penultimate in the
>future.
>
>As in, RE is the quintessential picky DOF! <heehee>
Guilty as charged. (Numberous prior convictions, I fear. I wonder
why the 3-strikes hasn't caught up with me. Various jurisdictions, I
guess.)
Now to turn my attention to imply / infer.
Redbeard Emeritus
writ:
>Andrzej Jan Taramina sed:
>
>> On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 08:19:55 -0700, Redbeard Emeritus
>> <redb...@volcano.net> wrote:
>>
>>> ?
>>
>> That thread (on the "dictionary" meaning of penultimate) did the
>> rounds a year or two ago, if memory serves.
>>
>>> Well, it most Shirley doesn't mean what you think it does. (And
>>> regretably, this is probly not even the penultimate time I'll be
>>> pointing that out.)
>Perhaps it does. Perhaps he already has the Ultimate shot, and that what
>he saw was truely penultimate ...
No. He's got just one more coming. Much th' pity, huh?
Redbeard Emeritus
<flhtc...@SPAM.hotmail.com> writ:
>Andrzej Jan Taramina wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 08:11:20 -0700, Redbeard Emeritus <redb...@volcano.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>1) Much kewlness.\
>>
>>
>> Thx, DOF!
>>
>>
>>>2) Look up penultimate. <g>
>>
>>
>> Let's not start that thread again, OK? ;-)
>Yeah! Ask him about male Black Widow spiders instead. He loves to
>discuss them...
>
><d&r>
If I'm th' quintessential nitpicker, Donna's the quintessential SHIT
DISTURBER. QSD Numero Uno.
Andrzej Jan Taramina
wrote:
> If I'm th' quintessential nitpicker, Donna's the quintessential SHIT
> DISTURBER. QSD Numero Uno.
If the label fits....
lol
Donna A.
> On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 10:11:08 -0500, "Donna A." <flhtc...@SPAM.hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Oh, so you did get a "pocket-able" one. You said you were thinking of
>>getting one.
>
>
> Yup....problem with DSLR's is that they are so freekin' huge....you don't always
> have a camera handy. The tiny Sony DSC-T1 is 5mp and truly fits in a pocket. A
> marvel of miniaturization. Dana used it for some "action" pics while on the
> bike a lot. Very handy for that since it's always in your pocket (though I do
> keep it on a lanyard so as not to accidentally drop it).
I just looked it up--nice camera!
> Dana's scariest moment on the trip was in Yellowstone heading south from
> Artist's Point (towards Old Faithful). There was a bison that was strolling on
> the road shoulder. 2000+ lbs of buffalo not more than 6 feet from the bike.
> All the while I'm urgently hissing "Take a picture.....TAKE A PICTURE!" since
> Dana had the camera. She finally stopped shaking long enuf to take a snap.
he he he CrowDog would've been thinking of buffalo meat for lunch!
> As for me, I thought the scariest moment was when Dana and Cindy said "You go
> ride in the park and take pics...we'll shop in West Yellowstone for the day".
> That is a phrase to make a man (and his wallet) cringe in terror!
Oh, my!
>>That Bitch(tm)! ;-)
>
>
> Ain't it the truth. ;-)
>
>
>>I've been hearing buzz that Canon's got something in the works, too. But
>>I'm glad I got mine when I did. I've been enjoying it a lot.
>
>
> The 20D has already been announced by Canon and will be shipping by end of month
> from what I hear. 8.2mp camera.
Oh, I'll have to look it up and see what it's all about then! That kinda
sounded like the hokey-pokey song, didn't it? Yikes, my brain's still
scrambled--I'm still sick! We'll see if I can remain coherent enough to
tell the doc my problems when I visit him for the 3rd day in a row
today. 8-) la la la la laaaaaaaaaaaaa
>>Just out of curiosity, how did you pack the camera on the bike? I'm a
>>risk-taker--I throw it in the tourpack with just a non-padded HD
>>shoulder bag that I carry... 8-)
>
>
> For long hauls I would typically pack it in the Bushtec trailer, since that
> vibrates less than in the tour pack.
>
> When actively taking pics (eg. touring in Yellowstone), I would put my whole
> camera pack in the tour pack. I use a Moose Peterson MP-3 pack which fits
> perfectly in the tour pack and holds all my gear in one backpackable case. Very
> nice. Not cheap, but very functional.
Oh, okay... Thanks!
Donna A.
> On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 10:23:46 -0500, "Donna A."
> <flhtc...@SPAM.hotmail.com> writ:
>
>
>>Andrzej Jan Taramina wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 08:11:20 -0700, Redbeard Emeritus <redb...@volcano.net>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>1) Much kewlness.\
>>>
>>>
>>>Thx, DOF!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>2) Look up penultimate. <g>
>>>
>>>
>>>Let's not start that thread again, OK? ;-)
>
>
>>Yeah! Ask him about male Black Widow spiders instead. He loves to
>>discuss them...
>>
>><d&r>
>
>
> If I'm th' quintessential nitpicker, Donna's the quintessential SHIT
> DISTURBER. QSD Numero Uno.
Why thank you, dear! Love you, too!
--
Donna A.
Wench #17/Bitch #17/BS #26/AH#107/QSD Numero Uno
Donna A.
> On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 08:58:25 -0700, Redbeard Emeritus <redb...@volcano.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>If I'm th' quintessential nitpicker, Donna's the quintessential SHIT
>>DISTURBER. QSD Numero Uno.
>
>
> If the label fits....
>
> lol
Does this label make my ass look big? ;-)
--
Donna A. "it's the fever talking. or was that me?"
Wench #17/Bitch #17/BS #26/AH#107/QSD Numero Uno
Dirty Harry
> Andrzej Jan Taramina writ:
>>
>> I missed the penultimate Yellowstone Elk photo by 30 seconds due to
>> having to change lenses. The elk was in a meadow, in the stream
>> drinking. Classic! But by the time I pulled the ultra over,
>> grabbed the camera and changed to the zoom lens, he had walked to
>> the side of the river to get out. Damn! But it's imprinted in my
>> memory, like so many other special riding moments.
>
> 1) Much kewlness.
> 2) Look up penultimate. <g>
Mayhaps he was trying to say that this was the best photo-op he had seen,
but was leaving the door open for the possibility of an even better one
somewhere in the future. <sfsf> But then again, what do I know, English
is not even my first language.
--
Dirty Harry, BS#59, DOF#4, FFDI
Everybody's got something to hide,
except for me and my monkey!
Andrzej Jan Taramina
wrote:
> he he he CrowDog would've been thinking of buffalo meat for lunch!
Or Rocky Mountain Oysters?
> > When actively taking pics (eg. touring in Yellowstone), I would put my whole
> > camera pack in the tour pack. I use a Moose Peterson MP-3 pack which fits
> > perfectly in the tour pack and holds all my gear in one backpackable case. Very
> > nice. Not cheap, but very functional.
>
> Oh, okay... Thanks!
You can see pics of the MP-3 pack (and it's larger cousin the MP-1) and how much
gear it will hold at:
http://www.moose395.net/gear/index.html
I like it because it doesn't look like a pro camera bag...why advertise you have
expensive toys to steal?
Andrzej Jan Taramina
wrote:
> Does this label make my ass look big? ;-)
Not gonna touch that with a 10 foot pole!
The comment that is.... LOL
Andrzej Jan Taramina
<dirtyharryya...@invalid.gov> wrote:
> Mayhaps he was trying to say that this was the best photo-op he had seen,
> but was leaving the door open for the possibility of an even better one
> somewhere in the future. <sfsf> But then again, what do I know, English
> is not even my first language.
What he said! ;-)
Schmoe
news:okobj0l11p3k74nv6...@4ax.com...
> whack>
> I've got a hankering for the 200-400 AFS VR lens for even better pics of
> distant
> wildlife, but that lens is $8K CDN. Ouch!
What's that, about $37.58 USD? :)
whack some mo'
Donna A.
> On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 11:14:03 -0500, "Donna A." <flhtc...@SPAM.hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Does this label make my ass look big? ;-)
>
>
> Not gonna touch that with a 10 foot pole!
>
> The comment that is.... LOL
Nice save, Andrzej! LOL
--
Donna A.
Wench #17/Bitch #17/BS #26/AH#107
Donna A.
The outside looks a lot like the shoulder bag I used to carry to work.
It sure holds a lot of gear! Is it comfortable as a backpack?
What I've been using when we've been out 'n about hiking & stuff is a
really really cheap back-pack one I got on sale at Walmart for a
whopping $11! (I know you're probably shocked at me blowing that much
money on a camera bag, but hey, it was worth it. <grin>) It only holds
the camera and one long lens, but works fine for what I use it for.
--
Donna A. "the cheap Norsky"
Andrzej Jan Taramina
wrote:
> The outside looks a lot like the shoulder bag I used to carry to work.
> It sure holds a lot of gear! Is it comfortable as a backpack?
It is comfortable....though if you were mountaneering it probably wouldn't cut
it.
> What I've been using when we've been out 'n about hiking & stuff is a
> really really cheap back-pack one I got on sale at Walmart for a
> whopping $11! (I know you're probably shocked at me blowing that much
> money on a camera bag, but hey, it was worth it. <grin>) It only holds
> the camera and one long lens, but works fine for what I use it for.
You extravagant bitch you. Poor CrowDog!
Andrzej Jan Taramina
> > I've got a hankering for the 200-400 AFS VR lens for even better pics of
> > distant
> > wildlife, but that lens is $8K CDN. Ouch!
>
> What's that, about $37.58 USD? :)
US dollar has been down for ages against Int'l currencies. It would be about
$6200 US. Expensive lens in any currency. ;-)
Donna A.
> On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 11:29:47 -0500, "Donna A." <flhtc...@SPAM.hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>The outside looks a lot like the shoulder bag I used to carry to work.
>>It sure holds a lot of gear! Is it comfortable as a backpack?
>
>
> It is comfortable....though if you were mountaneering it probably wouldn't cut
> it.
It'd be nice to be able to carry everything you need AND have it as a
backpack because that's so much better than a shoulder strap...
>>What I've been using when we've been out 'n about hiking & stuff is a
>>really really cheap back-pack one I got on sale at Walmart for a
>>whopping $11! (I know you're probably shocked at me blowing that much
>>money on a camera bag, but hey, it was worth it. <grin>) It only holds
>>the camera and one long lens, but works fine for what I use it for.
>
>
> You extravagant bitch you. Poor CrowDog!
What can I say? I just looooove to throw money away!
--
Donna A.
D_Hawg
> Hi all:
>
> I just finished posting some of my favourite photographs from our recent
trip to
> Sturgis and to Yellowstone. Sooner than I expected....got motivated to
just get
> it done. ;-)
>
> All at http://www.gryffyn.com
>
> Enjoy!
>
Did enjoy, these are from the lense of an artist,,,,,, beautiful..
Dale P.........
Andrzej Jan Taramina
wrote:
> t'd be nice to be able to carry everything you need AND have it as a
> backpack because that's so much better than a shoulder strap...
Which is exactly why I bought the MP-3. Smart girl! Have another Moon Pie! ;-)
> What can I say? I just looooove to throw money away!
LOL
Andrzej Jan Taramina
> Did enjoy, these are from the lense of an artist,,,,,, beautiful..
Wow...never been called an artist before. Thanks Dale.
Donna A.
> On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 12:02:58 -0500, "Donna A." <flhtc...@SPAM.hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>t'd be nice to be able to carry everything you need AND have it as a
>>backpack because that's so much better than a shoulder strap...
>
>
> Which is exactly why I bought the MP-3. Smart girl! Have another Moon Pie! ;-)
Mmmm! Sounds good... Ooops, I'll have to go home to get one, tho, since
I already ate the one I brought for lunch! (I gotta ration 'em out...)
Greg
papaboop
"Andrzej Jan Taramina" <and...@chaeron.spamicide.com> wrote in message
news:6ojaj0huic7372ts5...@4ax.com...
> Hi all:
>
> I just finished posting some of my favourite photographs from our recent
trip to
> Sturgis and to Yellowstone. Sooner than I expected....got motivated to
just get
> it done. ;-)
>
Great shots!
> >
> ....Andrzej
>
--
Papaboop
http://papaboop.com/
eatcrapspammers
>change lenses. The elk was in a meadow, in the stream drinking. Classic!
Andrzej,
Your photos are AMAZING....what a great eye you have....classic indeed!
DiCt
00FXDWG
05FLHTC
'Key
great pics..
thanks for posting the tiny url..
here is the real url..
http://www.gryffyn.com/index.html
have your next round on me, ok
g'day
--
"Key"
jjs
> On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 13:27:33 GMT, "Mike S." <mikef...@NOSPAMswbell.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Wow. Those were *really* well done. I'm guessing you're not using some
>> typical 2-megapixel digital camera. :-)
>
> Thanks to all for the kind compliments.
>
> All the shots but one (the Sturgis Painted Titties one), were taken with
> either
> a Nikon D100 or D70, using a 70-300 AFS VR telephoto or a 12-24 AFS DX
> lens.
> These are 6.2mp DSLR cameras.
OH, I thought maybe you were using a real camera. ;) Like my latest:
http://course1.winona.edu/jstafford/x
That's a 781 mega-pixel camera - on low-grade rez.
Donna A.
Oh, sure, make me really really really jealous. <grin> About as "large"
a format as I ever got was my old 2 1/4 TLR. Hmmm... Maybe I'll have to
get that old doll out again. It's a good camera for making you really
think about what you're taking a picture of. You have to get into
"quality" not "quantity" with that one. <grin>
Got any samples of pics from that one you could share?
Andrzej Jan Taramina
> OH, I thought maybe you were using a real camera. ;) Like my latest:
> http://course1.winona.edu/jstafford/x
>
> That's a 781 mega-pixel camera - on low-grade rez.
Luddite. I think film is obsolete. ;-)
Judging by the comments on my recent pics here and on the Nikon groups, it seems
that I'm right. <grins>
jjs
> On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 15:30:57 -0500, "jjs" <j...@jj.jj> wrote:
>
>> OH, I thought maybe you were using a real camera. ;) Like my latest:
>> http://course1.winona.edu/jstafford/x
>>
>> That's a 781 mega-pixel camera - on low-grade rez.
>
> Luddite. I think film is obsolete. ;-)
They said that about Harley V-Twins when the Honda 750 4-banger came out.
jjs
> On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 15:30:57 -0500, "jjs" <j...@jj.jj> wrote:
> Luddite. I think film is obsolete. ;-)
Oh, I forgot that you don't know - my day job photography is 100% digital.
Nyaaa. Canon XL-1, Nikons, Olympus 8080, all that crap. Yaaaawn.
Redbeard Emeritus
<and...@chaeron.spamicide.com> writ:
>On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 15:30:57 -0500, "jjs" <j...@jj.jj> wrote:
>
>> OH, I thought maybe you were using a real camera. ;) Like my latest:
>> http://course1.winona.edu/jstafford/x
>>
>> That's a 781 mega-pixel camera - on low-grade rez.
>
>Luddite. I think film is obsolete. ;-)
Funny. I wuz just thinking about getting on e-bay and seeing what I
could find in the way of a bellows camera using 120 film.
--
Redbeard Emeritus "The Dirt Devil, with a built-in Crevice Tool" (c)
Do you polka?
Andrzej Jan Taramina
>
> They said that about Harley V-Twins when the Honda 750 4-banger came out.
Apples and oranges.
Your point is?
Andrzej Jan Taramina
> Oh, I forgot that you don't know - my day job photography is 100% digital.
> Nyaaa. Canon XL-1, Nikons, Olympus 8080, all that crap. Yaaaawn.
So your point about the weird file camera would be what?
Andrzej Jan Taramina
wrote:
> Funny. I wuz just thinking about getting on e-bay and seeing what I
> could find in the way of a bellows camera using 120 film.
Each to their own I suppose. Film will remain a hobbyists obsession for some
time to come, just like B&W and doing your own development has been for some
time now.
> Do you polka?
Yup...I do. In fact, I teach too. ;-)
Redbeard Emeritus
<and...@chaeron.spamicide.com> writ:
>On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 20:49:47 -0700, Redbeard Emeritus <redb...@volcano.net>
>wrote:
>
>> Funny. I wuz just thinking about getting on e-bay and seeing what I
>> could find in the way of a bellows camera using 120 film.
>
>Each to their own I suppose. Film will remain a hobbyists obsession for some
>time to come, just like B&W and doing your own development has been for some
>time now.
Just haven't been able to part with m' darkroom equip. Hell, maybe
sometime I may actually put it back to use.
>> Do you polka?
>
>Yup...I do. In fact, I teach too. ;-)
Butt missed th' tail, I guess.
jjs
news:pcqfj0592it6g5m9m...@4ax.com...
> Funny. I wuz just thinking about getting on e-bay and seeing what I
> could find in the way of a bellows camera using 120 film.
I was into those. I still have a couple of 'em. Both Zeiss Ikons. One is
6x4.5cm format and is more compact than any 35mm SLR. The other is 6x6cm, a
folder that is still big and heavy. Lemmie know what you have in mind for
qualities and I can help out.
jjs
> On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 21:04:34 -0500, "jjs" <Jo...@nopsam.stafford.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> They said that about Harley V-Twins when the Honda 750 4-banger came out.
>
> Apples and oranges.
>
> Your point is?
So film is obsolete. So am I. What are ya going to make of it?
jjs
> On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 21:21:42 -0500, "jjs" <Jo...@nopsam.stafford.net> wrote:
>
>> Oh, I forgot that you don't know - my day job photography is 100%
>> digital.
>> Nyaaa. Canon XL-1, Nikons, Olympus 8080, all that crap. Yaaaawn.
>
> So your point about the weird file camera would be what?
Hey, if you can't dig the virtues of large format, then there's nothing I
can do to teach you. I'm sure someone here can translate that into a Harley
saying.
Chilly
"no replacement fer displacement!"
--
Chilly
NoVA BS#226 DOF#55 MANS
04 FLHTCi - Night
www.chilly-willy.net
Spunky the Tuna
> Luddite. I think film is obsolete. ;-)
>
> Judging by the comments on my recent pics here and on the Nikon
> groups, it seems that I'm right. <grins>
For good or ill, I think you're right. I hate to see it happen, but when
you get right down to it I suspect that mine's an emotional response rather
than anything reasoned.
You photos are really, really good. High quality, nice composition,
compelling subject matter. I can't think of any element of those pictures
that could be improved by using film rather than digital equipment.
Arguably (and I have no interest in arguing it on either side) film can
still have a finer granularity, if you'll pardon that word. But for all
intents and purposes that's largely academic.
The bugaboos that were drawbacks to digital photography appear to have been
handled so well that I really don't see much of an argument for film over
pixels.
Sigh.
So now I have to reroute my hoarding of bux for a new way-spendy Nikon
digital camera and lenses rather than an old way-spendy Nikon 35mm film
camera. Seems no matter what I just keep drooling over one Nikon or
another.
--
Spunky the Tuna
BS69 SENS DOF#R LSMFT EIEIO PDQ op cit
the more hurry, the speed...
Andrzej Jan Taramina
> So film is obsolete. So am I. What are ya going to make of it?
Nothing.
Andrzej Jan Taramina
> Hey, if you can't dig the virtues of large format, then there's nothing I
> can do to teach you. I'm sure someone here can translate that into a Harley
> saying.
I can dig the virtues, but only if you've got one of the custom digital backs
for it.
Film just doesn't interest me. Nor does the intricacies of large format, which
is a splinter interest for a very small minority.
Different strokes for different folks...
Donna A.
> On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 01:53:37 GMT, Andrzej Jan Taramina
> <and...@chaeron.spamicide.com> writ:
>
>
>>On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 15:30:57 -0500, "jjs" <j...@jj.jj> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>OH, I thought maybe you were using a real camera. ;) Like my latest:
>>>http://course1.winona.edu/jstafford/x
>>>
>>>That's a 781 mega-pixel camera - on low-grade rez.
>>
>>Luddite. I think film is obsolete. ;-)
>
>
> Funny. I wuz just thinking about getting on e-bay and seeing what I
> could find in the way of a bellows camera using 120 film.
You know, there's something so very...satisfying? about using a camera
like that, or my little old TLR. You're so much more involved in the
"process" of what you're doing instead of banging off a bunch of shots
and picking the best one. I'd get 12 shots off my roll film and it'd
take a week to get it back at the ONE camera store in Madison that would
process it. I'd be damned sure that I was seeing what I wanted before I
hit the shutter.
But I do enjoy my digital SLR, too. ;-)
--
Donna A. "why is everything upside down in the viewfinder???"
Andrzej Jan Taramina
wrote:
> For good or ill, I think you're right. I hate to see it happen, but when
> you get right down to it I suspect that mine's an emotional response rather
> than anything reasoned.
Most of the arguments I have had about the topic seem to be based on an
emotional attachment to film. It'll be around for some time still, but is just
being relegated to the more "obscure" hobby status for afficionado's is all.
> You photos are really, really good. High quality, nice composition,
> compelling subject matter. I can't think of any element of those pictures
> that could be improved by using film rather than digital equipment.
> Arguably (and I have no interest in arguing it on either side) film can
> still have a finer granularity, if you'll pardon that word. But for all
> intents and purposes that's largely academic.
Actually, with current DSLR technology, the grain of digital has equalled or
exceeded the fineness of film. I routinely print at 13x19" with very nice
results from digital.
> So now I have to reroute my hoarding of bux for a new way-spendy Nikon
> digital camera and lenses rather than an old way-spendy Nikon 35mm film
> camera. Seems no matter what I just keep drooling over one Nikon or
> another.
A good point, Spunky. But good glass still has a long lifespan, though the
bodies may not. So investing in good lenses will likely pay off in the long
run, but plan to upgrade the digital body a bit more frequently than you were
used to with the film cameras. Seems that the D-series SLRs are changing every
2-3 years, which is a lot faster than the F series film bodies did. Definitely
a downside of digital at the moment...but hopefully at some point that will
change and things will stabilize.
jjs
> On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 00:04:00 -0500, "jjs" <Jo...@nopsam.stafford.net> wrote:
Lemmie clear something up. The "Yawn" comment I made concerned the cameras I
have to use. It was not intended to cast aspersions on your preference for
digital.
> I can dig the virtues [<LF photograhy>], but only if you've got one of the
> custom digital backs
> for it.
There is no digital back that covers 4x5" (or the nominal 3.6x4.6") except
the abysmal 'scanning' back (like a flatbed working on an aerial image)
which is teathered and also so slow it is only good for shooting dead
things, and one of the better of those requires three passes to capture
colors (R,G,B separately), something overcome with film photography a
hundred years ago.
> Film just doesn't interest me. Nor does the intricacies of large format,
> which
> is a splinter interest for a very small minority.
LF, and to a lesser extent, MF is one way to slow down and get deeper, and
yeah, like anything complex it seems to attract anal types. Ya know that's
not me. I feel pretty strange in the company of LFers. Kinda like being
hijacked by a Grovel of GoldWingers.
Like I said, I do digital on the day job and my major complaint is the
lenses. Unless you are using a full-frame (24x36) DSLR, then the
characteristic DOF of those tiny (nominal) normal lenses makes real
photography lenswork almost impossible so that it obviates other virtues.
Thanks for posting the pictures. I always like to see pictures.
Best,
#2
Redbeard Emeritus
<flhtc...@SPAM.hotmail.com> writ:
>
>I'd get 12 shots off my roll film and it'd
>take a week to get it back at the ONE camera store in Madison that would
>process it. I'd be damned sure that I was seeing what I wanted before I
>hit the shutter.
Hell, my first Fortran course was like that. Punch the program onto
cards, ship 'em to UCLA to have it compiled, and get it back a week
later. No shit. Talk about being sure you got it right. You didn't
wait for the computer to find your keypunch errors.
On topic, there's a store in Sacto that just closed its doors this
month: "Black and White Photo Shop." Lab on premises, needless to
say. Wuz considering finding out what they want for an Omega
enlarger.
jjs
> On topic, there's a store in Sacto that just closed its doors this
> month: "Black and White Photo Shop." Lab on premises, needless to
> say. Wuz considering finding out what they want for an Omega
> enlarger.
FWIW, tomorrow I'm probably cinching the deal to buy a conventional
photography studio that's been inactive for 15 years. Five Omega 4x5's,
dozens of lenses, a box of "old hasselblad crap", big Jobo system, boxes of
8x10 hardware, sinks, tanks, all kinds of stuff. By the pound. Stay in
touch.
Steve Mackay
> Redbeard Emeritus wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 01:53:37 GMT, Andrzej Jan Taramina
>> <and...@chaeron.spamicide.com> writ:
>>
>>
>>>On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 15:30:57 -0500, "jjs" <j...@jj.jj> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>OH, I thought maybe you were using a real camera. ;) Like my latest:
>>>>http://course1.winona.edu/jstafford/x
>>>>
>>>>That's a 781 mega-pixel camera - on low-grade rez.
>>>
>>>Luddite. I think film is obsolete. ;-)
>>
>>
>> Funny. I wuz just thinking about getting on e-bay and seeing what I
>> could find in the way of a bellows camera using 120 film.
>
> You know, there's something so very...satisfying? about using a camera
> like that, or my little old TLR. You're so much more involved in the
> "process" of what you're doing instead of banging off a bunch of shots
> and picking the best one. I'd get 12 shots off my roll film and it'd
> take a week to get it back at the ONE camera store in Madison that would
> process it. I'd be damned sure that I was seeing what I wanted before I
> hit the shutter.
>
> But I do enjoy my digital SLR, too. ;-)
You do take some fine photos there Donna. Or is it just the processing you
do on the Mac that make them more superior? :)
Anyways, hey, we'll be up in your neck of the woods tomorow(Baraboo,
actually). Picking up another bike we got off ebay :)
Donna A.
> On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 07:59:40 -0500, "Donna A."
> <flhtc...@SPAM.hotmail.com> writ:
>
>>I'd get 12 shots off my roll film and it'd
>>take a week to get it back at the ONE camera store in Madison that would
>>process it. I'd be damned sure that I was seeing what I wanted before I
>>hit the shutter.
>
>
> Hell, my first Fortran course was like that. Punch the program onto
> cards, ship 'em to UCLA to have it compiled, and get it back a week
> later. No shit. Talk about being sure you got it right. You didn't
> wait for the computer to find your keypunch errors.
Kind of how I started out "typesetting" on a computer. I inserted odd
codes into the text, hit "print" then walked four blocks to the only
laser printer on campus. It took up a good portion of the basement of
the building it was in (man am *I* dating myself!!). If I missed *one*
code in setting it up, the entire job from that point on would come out
in greek characters. It was all done blind. This "new fangled" desktop
publishing stuff I've been doing since 1988 has allowed me to get sloppy
in what I do, because it's so easy to just quickly fix it and reprint
it. I think that kind of applies to the 2 different ways I take
photographs--one way with the TLR, and another with the DSLR. The TLR
requires me to be careful with each shot while the DSLR allows me to use
the shotgun approach and shoot a ton of pictures and pick out only the
very best.
> On topic, there's a store in Sacto that just closed its doors this
> month: "Black and White Photo Shop." Lab on premises, needless to
> say. Wuz considering finding out what they want for an Omega
> enlarger.
Kewl. I've always wanted an at-home b&w darkroom. But I don't have room
for it here. Hopefully I will when we get the "dream home" up in the
north woods. I enjoy b&w print making.
--
Donna A.
Wench #17/Bitch #17/BS #26/AH#107
'95 FLHTCUI Fuel Injected 30th Anniversary Electraglide "Fueley"
'66 H-D Bobcat "Baby Blue"--Harley Hummer Club Member #1066
http://homepage.mac.com/donnaa1 (m/c related site)
http://userpages.chorus.net/witw (photography site)
Donna A.
Really! Kewlness! What did you get? Oh, and there's a bridge out in the
middle of town so you might have to follow an odd detour...
--
Donna A.
Wench #17/Bitch #17/BS #26/AH#107
'95 FLHTCUI Fuel Injected 30th Anniversary Electraglide "Fueley"
'66 H-D Bobcat "Baby Blue"--Harley Hummer Club Member #1066
http://homepage.mac.com/donnaa1 (m/c related site)
http://userpages.chorus.net/witw (photography site)
Donna A.
Yeah, replying again... Deal with it. <grin>
None of my photos are real. They're all virtual reality I created on the
Mac. Really. Or would that be "virtually really"??? he he he
--
Donna A.
Wench #17/Bitch #17/BS #26/AH#107
'95 FLHTCUI Fuel Injected 30th Anniversary Electraglide "Fueley"
'66 H-D Bobcat "Baby Blue"--Harley Hummer Club Member #1066
http://homepage.mac.com/donnaa1 (m/c related site)
http://userpages.chorus.net/witw (photography site)
Steve Mackay
Got yet another Buell S3T. Only 6,000 miles on the clock. $3200 :)
Steve Mackay
:)
Ummm... I think ya forgot to renew your .mac membership.
Donna A.
> On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 13:03:32 -0500, Donna A. wrote:
>
>
>>Steve Mackay wrote:
<whackabunch>
>>>You do take some fine photos there Donna. Or is it just the processing you
>>>do on the Mac that make them more superior? :)
>>
>>Yeah, replying again... Deal with it. <grin>
>>
>>None of my photos are real. They're all virtual reality I created on the
>>Mac. Really. Or would that be "virtually really"??? he he he
>
>
> :)
That whole thing kinda made my head hurt when I read it.
> Ummm... I think ya forgot to renew your .mac membership.
I let it go when they started charging for it. I've got a better deal
now. Thanks, DP 8-)
--
Donna A.
Wench #17/Bitch #17/BS #26/AH#107
'95 FLHTCUI Fuel Injected 30th Anniversary Electraglide "Fueley"
'66 H-D Bobcat "Baby Blue"--Harley Hummer Club Member #1066
http://spoiled-brat.com/rwr (m/c related site)
http://userpages.chorus.net/witw (photography site)
Donna A.
> On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 13:01:42 -0500, Donna A. wrote:
>
<snip>
>>Really! Kewlness! What did you get? Oh, and there's a bridge out in the
>>middle of town so you might have to follow an odd detour...
>
>
> Got yet another Buell S3T. Only 6,000 miles on the clock. $3200 :)
Wow! Have you paid for it yet? If so, I'll run up and pick it up. You
can get it from my garage 2 years from Sunday. ;-)
--
Donna A.
Wench #17/Bitch #17/BS #26/AH#107
'95 FLHTCUI Fuel Injected 30th Anniversary Electraglide "Fueley"
'66 H-D Bobcat "Baby Blue"--Harley Hummer Club Member #1066
http://spoiled-brat.com/rwr (m/c related site)
http://userpages.chorus.net/witw (photography site)
Steve Mackay
> Steve Mackay wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 13:01:42 -0500, Donna A. wrote:
>>
> <snip>
>
>>>Really! Kewlness! What did you get? Oh, and there's a bridge out in the
>>>middle of town so you might have to follow an odd detour...
>>
>>
>> Got yet another Buell S3T. Only 6,000 miles on the clock. $3200 :)
>
> Wow! Have you paid for it yet? If so, I'll run up and pick it up.
Nope. It was an ebay buy... So we ain't payin' till we pick it up :)
I'll post some pics of the the "twins"(the Burgandy S3T, and the new Black
S3T) next door this weekend :)
> You
> can get it from my garage 2 years from Sunday. ;-)
Okay, but I need your luxo barge in the meantime, k? :-P