Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer
I think 10 years is an overshoot. Of course, you ain't young no more, and it might take longer. I've been playing fretted instruments (mostly guitar) since 1964. If you discount 1964 to 1968 as adolescent idiocy (and you should), I learned one _hell of a lot_ between 68 and 72. Enough to write original stuff that still stands up. The OneBigThang I learned about playing music is that the first brick wall you hit is terrible. If you stick with it, at some point, it evaporates and you move ahead to the next brick wall. But passing that first brick wall brings more things than any other of the endless brick walls you hit after Numero Uno. I think that's because you inherit your style after somehow breaking thru the first. BTW, I love Mando.. the jam I go to these days has 1 to 4 mando players, and I always want at least one of them to be there. graywolf wrote (snipped, of course): I am at the level in music that you seem to be in photography. I took two, two long years, wow, of lessons and still can not get what I want out of my mandolin. People who actually play them well tell me it will take 10 years of practice to get good at it. I may not have 10 years left, so I do not try too hard anymore. Of course I could program any music I want into MIDI and let the computer play it. Somehow I don't feel it is the same thing. Do you see the parallels in what I am saying?
Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer
Choral music never bores me, photography does. Too many photographs are alike. Maybe the variation in music is bigger. Also, the human factor may be bigger: singing and conducting is something you do yourself. It's as personal as it can get. Funny how I feel the opposite. Most choral music sounds the same to me but I always amazed as how new many photos seem. This is not a criticism of the music. I''ve just never invested the time to learn how to listen to music, and it doesn't come naturally to me for classical or choral music. I guess it depends on what details you are sensitive to. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer
Thanks Kenneth for your explanation. I may sound amateurish, but I'm the one who just sees a shot and takes it. I hate having to do a lot afterwards, be it in a darkroom or in a digital room. That's why I took to slides a certain period, they just gave me what I saw. Looking back I can all my mistakes all too clearly as well. What I certainly do not like about photgraphy is the amount of technique I need to get a picture rigt. I feel the technique is more a burden than a blessing. As a choir conductor I do not sense any limits like this. As a pianist I did however. My arms and fingers didn't want to do what I did. The piano was in my way, as are a lot of photographical technical aspects. The absurd limits of a film for instance. I hope that digital solves this all in due course. This sounds more negative than it really is, but as I'm picking up my photography now I do encounter the very same things that made me stop twcie before. So, I'm not a natural photographer I guess. :-) Paul Delcour From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 18:00:44 -0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 18:00:47 -0400 Paul, this image was submitted digitally to Outdoor Photographer. I used Photoshop to set white and dark points, clean dust spots with the clone stamp, apply a little unsharp mask, a slight crop and then size the image. The Image as printed pretty much agrees with the original slide. It is as straight forward as I can make it. This is pretty much the way I handle all my images that I either post or print. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Paul Delcour [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 5:37 AM Subject: Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer Kenneth, really wonderful picture. I wander what you did do in Photshop as you say the image wasn't manipulated or anything. How straightforward a shoot was this? :-) Paul Delcour From: Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 06:50:57 +0200 To: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 02:50:11 -0400 Hi! Here's the correct URL: http://pug.komkon.org/01jul/IceFlwer.html Congratulations. Boris ===8==Original message text=== KW Well, after being advised a year ago that an image of mine was selected for KW publication in Outdoor Photographer, Your Gallery section, it finally KW appeared in the October 2003 issue. Check out pages 80/81 of that issue - KW the Your Gallery section. I've posted this previously to the PUG KW (http://pug.komkon.org/01jul/IceFlwr.html). KW I also sent them a paragraph about the capture of this image but they chose KW to write their own. KW They did to use this image previously as a background for an story on KW Keeping Cool, KW in the June 2003 issue of Outdoor Photographer. KW Kenneth Waller ===8===End of original message text===
Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer
In a message dated 9/19/2003 12:49:47 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The absurd limits of a film for instance. I hope that digital solves this all in due course. Paul Delcour I hadn't really thought about this before. Interesting idea. Marnie aka Doe
Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer
I don't think this is negative, I think it's the just the extreme expression of the aesthetic aspect of photography. Like most art forms, there is a technique side that puts constraints on pure aesthetics, and the resulting combination is art. One of the good parts about photography is that if you have the aesthetic sense (theeye) then you can probably learn enough technique or get an automatic enough camera to not limit yourself too much. This is not true in many arts (like painting) which is why I believe photography is such a popular hobby. Certainly, this is true in my case, although I think my enjoyment of the technical aspects is important to me and my eye is probably my limitation ;-) Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/19/03 05:50AM Thanks Kenneth for your explanation. I may sound amateurish, but I'm the one who just sees a shot and takes it. I hate having to do a lot afterwards, be it in a darkroom or in a digital room. That's why I took to slides a certain period, they just gave me what I saw. Looking back I can all my mistakes all too clearly as well. What I certainly do not like about photgraphy is the amount of technique I need to get a picture rigt. I feel the technique is more a burden than a blessing. As a choir conductor I do not sense any limits like this. As a pianist I did however. My arms and fingers didn't want to do what I did. The piano was in my way, as are a lot of photographical technical aspects. The absurd limits of a film for instance. I hope that digital solves this all in due course. This sounds more negative than it really is, but as I'm picking up my photography now I do encounter the very same things that made me stop twcie before. So, I'm not a natural photographer I guess. :-) Paul Delcour From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 18:00:44 -0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 18:00:47 -0400 Paul, this image was submitted digitally to Outdoor Photographer. I used Photoshop to set white and dark points, clean dust spots with the clone stamp, apply a little unsharp mask, a slight crop and then size the image. The Image as printed pretty much agrees with the original slide. It is as straight forward as I can make it. This is pretty much the way I handle all my images that I either post or print. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Paul Delcour [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 5:37 AM Subject: Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer Kenneth, really wonderful picture. I wander what you did do in Photshop as you say the image wasn't manipulated or anything. How straightforward a shoot was this? :-) Paul Delcour From: Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 06:50:57 +0200 To: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 02:50:11 -0400 Hi! Here's the correct URL: http://pug.komkon.org/01jul/IceFlwer.html Congratulations. Boris ===8==Original message text=== KW Well, after being advised a year ago that an image of mine was selected for KW publication in Outdoor Photographer, Your Gallery section, it finally KW appeared in the October 2003 issue. Check out pages 80/81 of that issue - KW the Your Gallery section. I've posted this previously to the PUG KW (http://pug.komkon.org/01jul/IceFlwr.html). KW I also sent them a paragraph about the capture of this image but they chose KW to write their own. KW They did to use this image previously as a background for an story on KW Keeping Cool, KW in the June 2003 issue of Outdoor Photographer. KW Kenneth Waller ===8===End of original message text===
Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer
- Original Message - From: Paul Delcour Subject: Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer What I certainly do not like about photgraphy is the amount of technique I need to get a picture rigt. I feel the technique is more a burden than a blessing. As a choir conductor I do not sense any limits like this. As a pianist I did however. My arms and fingers didn't want to do what I did. The piano was in my way, as are a lot of photographical technical aspects. The absurd limits of a film for instance. I hope that digital solves this all in due course. I would like you to expand on the absurd limits of a film, I am curious to know what you mean. If you think phototechnique is hard now, you should have been doing photography 30 or more years ago, when a photographer actually had to have some photo technical knowledge. William Robb
Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer
You're right of course, but I find the limits of light values within which you can get a decent picture rather an obstruction than a blessing. Funny I do not experience this with my choral conducting, although the limits of waht a choir can do are sometimes enormous, considering the level of singing some choirs have (or not). But within those limits I do no find that a problem. You can sing when and whenever you want. Try that with a camera! :-) Paul Delcour From: Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 08:47:00 -0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 08:47:22 -0400 I don't think this is negative, I think it's the just the extreme expression of the aesthetic aspect of photography. Like most art forms, there is a technique side that puts constraints on pure aesthetics, and the resulting combination is art. One of the good parts about photography is that if you have the aesthetic sense (theeye) then you can probably learn enough technique or get an automatic enough camera to not limit yourself too much. This is not true in many arts (like painting) which is why I believe photography is such a popular hobby. Certainly, this is true in my case, although I think my enjoyment of the technical aspects is important to me and my eye is probably my limitation ;-) Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/19/03 05:50AM Thanks Kenneth for your explanation. I may sound amateurish, but I'm the one who just sees a shot and takes it. I hate having to do a lot afterwards, be it in a darkroom or in a digital room. That's why I took to slides a certain period, they just gave me what I saw. Looking back I can all my mistakes all too clearly as well. What I certainly do not like about photgraphy is the amount of technique I need to get a picture rigt. I feel the technique is more a burden than a blessing. As a choir conductor I do not sense any limits like this. As a pianist I did however. My arms and fingers didn't want to do what I did. The piano was in my way, as are a lot of photographical technical aspects. The absurd limits of a film for instance. I hope that digital solves this all in due course. This sounds more negative than it really is, but as I'm picking up my photography now I do encounter the very same things that made me stop twcie before. So, I'm not a natural photographer I guess. :-) Paul Delcour From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 18:00:44 -0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 18:00:47 -0400 Paul, this image was submitted digitally to Outdoor Photographer. I used Photoshop to set white and dark points, clean dust spots with the clone stamp, apply a little unsharp mask, a slight crop and then size the image. The Image as printed pretty much agrees with the original slide. It is as straight forward as I can make it. This is pretty much the way I handle all my images that I either post or print. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Paul Delcour [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 5:37 AM Subject: Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer Kenneth, really wonderful picture. I wander what you did do in Photshop as you say the image wasn't manipulated or anything. How straightforward a shoot was this? :-) Paul Delcour From: Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 06:50:57 +0200 To: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 02:50:11 -0400 Hi! Here's the correct URL: http://pug.komkon.org/01jul/IceFlwer.html Congratulations. Boris ===8==Original message text=== KW Well, after being advised a year ago that an image of mine was selected for KW publication in Outdoor Photographer, Your Gallery section, it finally KW appeared in the October 2003 issue. Check out pages 80/81 of that issue - KW the Your Gallery section. I've posted this previously to the PUG KW (http://pug.komkon.org/01jul/IceFlwr.html). KW I also sent them a paragraph about the capture of this image but they chose KW to write their own. KW They did to use this image previously as a background for an story on KW Keeping Cool, KW in the June 2003 issue of Outdoor Photographer. KW Kenneth Waller ===8===End of original message text===
Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer
Yes I do, but you forget one thing. People have talents. The very first time I stood in front of a choir I simply knew what to do. Nobody told me, it just came out of me as if I had never done anything else. Of course I had to learn things and develop that talent, but as a photographer I find I have the talent to 'see' good shots, but lack the urge to learn and develop. Once I've seen the shot, that's it, I'm done. All that work afterwards downgrades that moment immensely for me. Choral music never bores me, photography does. Too many photographs are alike. Maybe the variation in music is bigger. Also, the human factor may be bigger: singing and conducting is something you do yourself. It's as personal as it can get. :-) Paul Delcour From: graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 13:39:30 -0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 13:40:04 -0400 Boy are you in trouble. The thing about digital to the serious photographer is it brings all those controls back into his hands. To do good digital photos you have to have more skills, not less. Face it to 99% of the people who take photos art does not enter the equation at all. The other 1% need quite a bit of technical skill to make the medium say what they want it to say. The interesting thing is that while the pros are dumping their darkroom stuff, many amateurs are setting up darkrooms (especially for BW work) because there is a certain joy to doing things the old way. One can in fact set up a pretty nice darkroom for the price of an istD. I am at the level in music that you seem to be in photography. I took two, two long years, wow, of lessons and still can not get what I want out of my mandolin. People who actually play them well tell me it will take 10 years of practice to get good at it. I may not have 10 years left, so I do not try too hard anymore. Of course I could program any music I want into MIDI and let the computer play it. Somehow I don't feel it is the same thing. Do you see the parallels in what I am saying? Paul Delcour wrote: Thanks Kenneth for your explanation. I may sound amateurish, but I'm the one who just sees a shot and takes it. I hate having to do a lot afterwards, be it in a darkroom or in a digital room. That's why I took to slides a certain period, they just gave me what I saw. Looking back I can all my mistakes all too clearly as well. What I certainly do not like about photgraphy is the amount of technique I need to get a picture rigt. I feel the technique is more a burden than a blessing. As a choir conductor I do not sense any limits like this. As a pianist I did however. My arms and fingers didn't want to do what I did. The piano was in my way, as are a lot of photographical technical aspects. The absurd limits of a film for instance. I hope that digital solves this all in due course. This sounds more negative than it really is, but as I'm picking up my photography now I do encounter the very same things that made me stop twcie before. So, I'm not a natural photographer I guess. :-) Paul Delcour From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 18:00:44 -0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 18:00:47 -0400 Paul, this image was submitted digitally to Outdoor Photographer. I used Photoshop to set white and dark points, clean dust spots with the clone stamp, apply a little unsharp mask, a slight crop and then size the image. The Image as printed pretty much agrees with the original slide. It is as straight forward as I can make it. This is pretty much the way I handle all my images that I either post or print. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Paul Delcour [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 5:37 AM Subject: Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer Kenneth, really wonderful picture. I wander what you did do in Photshop as you say the image wasn't manipulated or anything. How straightforward a shoot was this? :-) Paul Delcour From: Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 06:50:57 +0200 To: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 02:50:11 -0400 Hi! Here's the correct URL: http://pug.komkon.org/01jul/IceFlwer.html Congratulations. Boris ===8==Original message text=== KW Well, after being advised a year ago that an image of mine was selected for KW publication in Outdoor Photographer, Your Gallery section, it finally KW appeared in the October 2003 issue. Check out
Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer
Graywolf dude wrote: The interesting thing is that while the pros are dumping their darkroom stuff, many amateurs are setting up darkrooms (especially for BW work) because there is a certain joy to doing things the old way. One can in fact set up a pretty nice darkroom for the price of an istD. Amen to that Brother.:-)I have some of the shirt cardboard WW was talking about and hope to have a few carriers cut this weekend and away i go.:-) Dave
Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer
On 19/9/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: I am at the level in music that you seem to be in photography. I took two, two long years, wow, of lessons and still can not get what I want out of my mandolin. ! I'll play with you any time you like Tom. Musicalia accoustic, bought in 1995. Haven't picked it up in ages, all my callouses have gone :-( Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer
Seconded. Nice shot in a place hard to get to. Mark Cassino wrote: Congrats again, Ken!
Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer
Hi! Here's the correct URL: http://pug.komkon.org/01jul/IceFlwer.html Congratulations. Boris ===8==Original message text=== KW Well, after being advised a year ago that an image of mine was selected for KW publication in Outdoor Photographer, Your Gallery section, it finally KW appeared in the October 2003 issue. Check out pages 80/81 of that issue - KW the Your Gallery section. I've posted this previously to the PUG KW (http://pug.komkon.org/01jul/IceFlwr.html). KW I also sent them a paragraph about the capture of this image but they chose KW to write their own. KW They did to use this image previously as a background for an story on KW Keeping Cool, KW in the June 2003 issue of Outdoor Photographer. KW Kenneth Waller ===8===End of original message text===
Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer
Boris Liberman wrote: Here's the correct URL: http://pug.komkon.org/01jul/IceFlwer.html Congratulations. Seconded. Wonderful image. Well done Kenneth! John
Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer
Congrats again, Ken! - MCC At 03:32 PM 9/17/2003 -0400, you wrote: Well, after being advised a year ago that an image of mine was selected for publication in Outdoor Photographer, Your Gallery section, it finally appeared in the October 2003 issue. Check out pages 80/81 of that issue - the Your Gallery section. I've posted this previously to the PUG (http://pug.komkon.org/01jul/IceFlwr.html). I also sent them a paragraph about the capture of this image but they chose to write their own. They did to use this image previously as a background for an story on Keeping Cool, in the June 2003 issue of Outdoor Photographer. Kenneth Waller - Mark Cassino Kalamazoo, MI - Photography: http://www.markcassino.com
Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer
Paul, this image was submitted digitally to Outdoor Photographer. I used Photoshop to set white and dark points, clean dust spots with the clone stamp, apply a little unsharp mask, a slight crop and then size the image. The Image as printed pretty much agrees with the original slide. It is as straight forward as I can make it. This is pretty much the way I handle all my images that I either post or print. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Paul Delcour [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 5:37 AM Subject: Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer Kenneth, really wonderful picture. I wander what you did do in Photshop as you say the image wasn't manipulated or anything. How straightforward a shoot was this? :-) Paul Delcour From: Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 06:50:57 +0200 To: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 02:50:11 -0400 Hi! Here's the correct URL: http://pug.komkon.org/01jul/IceFlwer.html Congratulations. Boris ===8==Original message text=== KW Well, after being advised a year ago that an image of mine was selected for KW publication in Outdoor Photographer, Your Gallery section, it finally KW appeared in the October 2003 issue. Check out pages 80/81 of that issue - KW the Your Gallery section. I've posted this previously to the PUG KW (http://pug.komkon.org/01jul/IceFlwr.html). KW I also sent them a paragraph about the capture of this image but they chose KW to write their own. KW They did to use this image previously as a background for an story on KW Keeping Cool, KW in the June 2003 issue of Outdoor Photographer. KW Kenneth Waller ===8===End of original message text===
Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer
Thanks Ken, You mentioned several months ago that it would be in OP, and I've been looking, in vain. I was afraid that I'd missed it or something. Now I'm relieved to find that I haven't. I think I may have already congratulated you, but what the hell, I'll do it again! It's a great photo, and most worthy or publication. cheers, frank Kenneth Waller wrote: Well, after being advised a year ago that an image of mine was selected for publication in Outdoor Photographer, Your Gallery section, it finally appeared in the October 2003 issue. Check out pages 80/81 of that issue - the Your Gallery section. I've posted this previously to the PUG (http://pug.komkon.org/01jul/IceFlwr.html). I also sent them a paragraph about the capture of this image but they chose to write their own. They did to use this image previously as a background for an story on Keeping Cool, in the June 2003 issue of Outdoor Photographer. Kenneth Waller -- Hell is others -Jean Paul Sartre
Re: OT: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer
On 17/9/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: Well, after being advised a year ago that an image of mine was selected for publication in Outdoor Photographer, Your Gallery section, it finally appeared in the October 2003 issue. Check out pages 80/81 of that issue - Well done Ken. I'll keep em peeled for a copy. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
