Re: [Texascavers] Fellows of the NSS
As Carl said, it's not too soon to be thinking about nominating people for 2008, but it's close to too late. The deadline is Nov. 15, which happens to be tomorrow. Today's the day, folks. Bill Carl Kunath carl.kun...@suddenlink.net wrote: No, it's not two years in a row, but there have been gaps even worse than that. Bev Shade received the NSS Fellow award in 2006. Besides 2007, other years without a Texan being honored are: 1972, 1974, 1975, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1992, 1993, 1995, 1996, 2002, and 2003. There is a complete listing of Texans honored by the NSS in 50 Years Of Texas Caving. Beginning in the mid-1960s, there have been a total of 51 Texas-based cavers who were made Fellows. Of those, several received other honors such as Certificate of Merit. As Linda Palit has pointed out, those honored must have been nominated by others and their nomination supported by letters of praise. They must then be approved by the NSS Awards Committee. It may be that we do not have a worthy nominee(s) each year, but there ARE rather large gaps in the record. It's not too soon to begin thinking about nominees for 2008. ===Carl Kunath - Original Message - From: Gill Ediger To: texascavers@texascavers.com Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 4:13 PM Subject: [Texascavers] Fellows Just got my NSS News. Does this make the second year in a row that no NSS Fellows have been awarded to Texas cavers? --Ediger - Visit our website: http://texascavers.com To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.com -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.30/1127 - Release Date: 11/12/2007 9:19 PM - Visit our website: http://texascavers.com To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.com
[Texascavers] Paging Will Rupley -
Please contact off list for any contact information. -WaV
[Texascavers] French climber to scale 300m chinese cave wall :
French Spiderman returns to scale Chinese mountain CHANGSHA, Nov. 14 (Xinhua) -- A French daredevil will climb a central China mountain on Sunday, his latest stunt after scaling a Shanghai skyscraper illegally earlier this year. French Spiderman Alain Robert arrived in Changsha, capital of Hunan Province, on Wednesday. He is set to make a bare-handed ascent of a huge cave on the 1,518-meter-high Tianmen Mountain in the scenic area of Zhangjiajie, said Zhang Biao, an official with a local sports association that set up the promotion. Invited by the scenic spot's management company, Robert will first be transported to about 1,300 meters via cable car at noon and then attempt to scale the left side of the steep 300-meter-high cave. The 45-year-old said he was confident of reaching the top without the aid of any mountaineering gear because the task was similar to another feat he performed in the province five years ago. He is scheduled to leave China two days after his climb. In May, he was detained briefly after climbing Shanghai's tallest building, the 88-storey Jin Mao Tower, without notifying the local authority. Wearing a Spiderman suit, he attracted thousands of spectators and caused a traffic jam as he climbed up and down the skyscraper in 90 minutes. For his actions, he was banned from the country for five years. However, the management company in charge of the cave managed to persuade authorities to let him back in as his upcoming stunt is designed to help boost the profile of the region and bring in tourists. Robert is well-known for his exploits. In 1996, he climbed the Far East Finance Center in Hong Kong. According to media reports, it took him only 25 minutes to scale the tower's 48 stories. In 1998, he annoyed Japanese police by climbing the Sinjuku Center Building in Tokyo. The following year, he climbed the 443-meter-high Sears Tower in Chicago. It is said that he has been arrested and fined more than 100 times for climbing buildings around the world. _http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-11/14/content_7076692.htm_ (http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-11/14/content_7076692.htm) ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
[Texascavers] Digital (cave) Photography
Since the current topic is (Cave) Photography I'm finally upgrading/updating my camera setup from film to digital. I've used Canon/Pentax/Nikon 35mm SLR gear for many years...and I'm in the middle of the learning curve about Digital SLR cameras. I've almost decided on the Nikon D200. Does anyone out there have any feedback/suggestions as I make the leap into the digital photography world?? Scott Nicholson Broker/Waterboy The Discovery Team (512) 94-SCOTT {947-2688} Keller Williams Realty
RE: [Texascavers] Digital (cave) Photography
Last summer I bought myself a Canon PowerShot A630. Don't know how it is in caves since I don't cave any more, but it's great for outdoor and indoor shots and has a lot of bells and whistles which will take me some time to, if not master, at least get the hang of. Cost on sale less than $300. Louise List-Post: texascavers@texascavers.com Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 10:03:25 -0800From: csnicholson@sbcglobal.netTo: texascavers@texascavers.comSubject: [Texascavers] Digital (cave) Photography Since the current topic is (Cave) Photography I'm finally upgrading/updating my camera setup from film to digital. I've used Canon/Pentax/Nikon 35mm SLR gear for many years...and I'm in the middle of the learning curve about Digital SLR cameras. I've almost decided on the Nikon D200. Does anyone out there have any feedback/suggestions as I make the leap into the digital photography world?? Scott Nicholson Broker/Waterboy The Discovery Team (512) 94-SCOTT {947-2688} Keller Williams Realty
[Texascavers] RE: Digital (cave) Photography
Scott Nicholson said: Does anyone out there have any feedback/suggestions as I make the leap into the digital photography world?? A really nice, small camera for quick point-and-shoot underground is the Pentax Optio WP and its successors the W10 and W30 http://www.pentaximaging.com/products/product_details/digital_camera--Optio_W30/reqID--9587364/subsection--optio. It won't give you the kind of quality that an SRL will, but you can't beat it for routine photos on the go. We use one for documentation on almost every trip we take, and get some remarkably good pictures. It is waterproof and has a real optical zoom. The only thing it really needs is a better and/or external flash. It costs $200 - $300. Mark Minton
[Texascavers] Houston borehole
Once upon a time I made the mistake of visiting Houston. I think it might have been 1989. I wrote a story about it called A business trip to Texas. Here is an excerpt: Houston is a microcosm of all our urban sins, a Los Angeles about to happen saved from critical mass only by the oil slump. I sat in my motel room in despair until I remembered Wild Bill Rupley, an old caving friend that I met in Belize. A comprehensive tour of all the punk rock clubs and sleazy bars in town brought my spirits back. The next evening we were at a loss until I mentioned the great gray green greasy Buffalo Bayou which flows through the oldest and most decrepit part of downtown Houston. Wildlife is where you find it, so we outfitted ourselves with headlamps and canoe and set out to explore Houston the hard way. The idea was to explore the maze of sewage tunnels beneath the city, and to shine the eyes of trolls, rats, bag ladies, and other wildlife. Beneath the bridges. The bayou was up due to recent flooding so we had a fine fast ride through the suburbs. Our first discovery was big borehole, a vine-draped tunnel entrance at least ten feet in diameter leading back into the bowls of tho city. Not having taken the proper equipment (rubber galoshes) we were finally stopped by a deep pool of poop that flooded the passage. We could hear a waterfall beyond, the passage beckoned, but prudence dictated that this was a dry weather cave. The beer supply was running low, but we managed to re-provision at an all night 7-11, then continued on down the bayou. Beneath the bridges the ruins of ancient civilizations could be seen everywhere, but the inhabitants had fled to join the Anasazi. Only one vagrant was seen, but he submerged into the debris upon our approach and escaped before we could photograph him to determine the species. Once we reached the tidal portion of the bayou, the wildlife changed. Regular black rats were replaced by numerous semi aquatic wharf rats. Were those the cute little fur bearing nutrias that I had envisioned raising as a child? “Mommy, will you buy me a swamp so I can make big money raising nutrias?” We wondered about predators, supposing that the rats were at the top of the food chain, when whuump sploosh one of them disappeared beneath the greasy surface. Shortly thereafter the mystery was solved when we ran headlong into an alligator gar that attempted to turn the canoe over and eat us. It was at least seven feet long. Bill, who was in the bow, was visably shaken. Now that Piranhas, Alligators, rats, and Mambas have all had their moment of glory on the silver screen, I would recommend Gars for the next scifihorrorflick extravaganza. “Just when you thought it was safe to canoe down the bayou ... “ By the time we reached the last and greatest arched bridge our minds had become as murky as the turbid waters of the bayou. I chanced to knock the paddle against the side of the canoe and thereby discovered that we were in a gigantic echo chamber, the frequency of which depended on where we were relative to the apex of the arch of the bridge. The senseless hoots and gibbers that followed were compounded by the weird acoustical aberrations of the echo chamber. The police left us alone, supposing that we were only an errant band of gibbering gibbons, siamangs out for a fling. Sleazeweazel ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
[Texascavers] Photoshop
Yes, a few of those photos from Brazil are rather garish. In fact, though, in a couple of cases it looks like a less-edited version of the same scene is in the set. They also appear, as least on screen, to have been overly enthusiastically sharpened. Nevertheless, I've sent that URL on to Urs Widmer of Speleo Projects in case he wants to contact the photographer. I think several of the photos would qualify for the annual Caving Calendar from Switzerland. Presumably the photographer could submit unedited, or nearly so, original images for consideration. The NSS Photo Salon does have a separate category for digital images. In fact, entries in that category are judged more strictly, on the theory that there's no excuse for defects in a photo that's been manipulated in a computer. I think most of the photos entered in the last couple of NSS salons have been digital, although I haven't really paid attention. I'm sure that's the case in the print salon, which I inspect during the convention. I use the Photo Salon night on Thursdays to stay in camp and let my liver regenerate, so I don't see the slides (or, I suppose I should say, the projected images). The meaningful distinction these days, seems to me, ought to be not digital vs film, but natural vs something really offbeat, such as a montage or something that has been manipulated in an unrealistic way (say, using some special-effect filter or adding simulated lens flare). But I suppose it might be hard to decide where to draw the line. What computer manipulations are just improving a photograph, and what are creating something different?--Bill Mixon -- You may reply to the address this message came from, but for long-term use, save: Personal: bmi...@alumni.uchicago.edu AMCS: edi...@amcs-pubs.org or sa...@amcs-pubs.org - Visit our website: http://texascavers.com To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.com
Re: [Texascavers] Photoshop
I use Photoshop to some degree on all my cave shots. You can brighten underexposed areas bring out detail, you can darken overexposed areas, generally improve the quality of the final image with a little work. It's just the fake over-saturation of colors that weren't that bright in the actual setting that gets to me a bit. If you underexposed by an f-stop, by all means, lighten the shot up a bit, if it makes it presentable -- but show the cave as it really is. I do this with my scanned slides as well as shots from the new digital (Yes, I highly recommend the Nikons) so the real film vs. digital debate is kind of moot. The best thing about digital in the preview screen. It sure is nice to be able to look at the image and say Okay, I'm going to open 'er up an f-stop, and point that flash you're holding about 5 degrees more to the left, and hold it up higher. Ok, THAT's a keeper. (having a memory card that'll hold 275 RAW files is nice, too) CV On Nov 14, 2007, at 8:54 PM, Mixon Bill wrote: Yes, a few of those photos from Brazil are rather garish. In fact, though, in a couple of cases it looks like a less-edited version of the same scene is in the set. They also appear, as least on screen, to have been overly enthusiastically sharpened. Nevertheless, I've sent that URL on to Urs Widmer of Speleo Projects in case he wants to contact the photographer. I think several of the photos would qualify for the annual Caving Calendar from Switzerland. Presumably the photographer could submit unedited, or nearly so, original images for consideration. The NSS Photo Salon does have a separate category for digital images. In fact, entries in that category are judged more strictly, on the theory that there's no excuse for defects in a photo that's been manipulated in a computer. I think most of the photos entered in the last couple of NSS salons have been digital, although I haven't really paid attention. I'm sure that's the case in the print salon, which I inspect during the convention. I use the Photo Salon night on Thursdays to stay in camp and let my liver regenerate, so I don't see the slides (or, I suppose I should say, the projected images). The meaningful distinction these days, seems to me, ought to be not digital vs film, but natural vs something really offbeat, such as a montage or something that has been manipulated in an unrealistic way (say, using some special-effect filter or adding simulated lens flare). But I suppose it might be hard to decide where to draw the line. What computer manipulations are just improving a photograph, and what are creating something different?--Bill Mixon -- You may reply to the address this message came from, but for long-term use, save: Personal: bmi...@alumni.uchicago.edu AMCS: edi...@amcs-pubs.org or sa...@amcs-pubs.org - Visit our website: http://texascavers.com To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.com - Visit our website: http://texascavers.com To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.com
Re: [Texascavers] Photoshop
I believe any photo can usually be improved with a bit of touch up; whether you did it in the dark room in the olden days, or in PhotoShop at present is irrelevant. You are still working with a single exposure in which the photons that were captured, document an instant in time that was selected and engineered by the photographer - for better or worse. It's takes experience and talent to select the appropriate lighting, camera angle, exposure, and composition for that single photo. Only so much can be added or deleted in subsequent digital manipulations. The digital photos that give me pause are the composites, where several exposures are combined and edited into a final version. To be fair, a lot of talent is required to set up and engineer the shots; and to digitally merge them into a beautiful photo. But something unnatural has been added I think. You'll never see those scenes in the cave, however magnificent they are. To a purist, they are unfaithful representations of the underground, and pass into the realm of pure art. This is neither bad nor good, but certainly different then traditional photography. Jerry. In a message dated 11/14/2007 9:45:41 P.M. Central Standard Time, cvreel...@austin.rr.com writes: use Photoshop to some degree on all my cave shots. You can brighten underexposed areas bring out detail, you can darken overexposed areas, generally improve the quality of the final image with a little work. It's just the fake over-saturation of colors that weren't that bright in the actual setting that gets to me a bit. If you underexposed by an f-stop, by all means, lighten the shot up a bit, if it makes it presentable -- but show the cave as it really is. I do this with my scanned slides as well as shots from the new digital (Yes, I highly recommend the Nikons) so the real film vs. digital debate is kind of moot. The best thing about digital in the preview screen. It sure is nice to be able to look at the image and say Okay, I'm going to open 'er up an f-stop, and point that flash you're holding about 5 degrees more to the left, and hold it up higher. Ok, THAT's a keeper. (having a memory card that'll hold 275 RAW files is nice, too) CV ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
Re: [Texascavers] Good cave photos
I've gotta agree somewhat. While the composition is excellent, and a lot of work went into setting up those shots, someone needs to lay off the over-saturation a bit. (a lot) I've noticed that's a trend lately with cave photography, and photography in general -- get a good picture, then jack the color up so bright as to be utterly unrealistic. I'm not a fan of the technique. Chris On Nov 13, 2007, at 10:52 AM, David Locklear wrote: If those photos are today's standard for good cave photos, I would like to see what the very good or the excellent look like. Will the average caver be able to take good cave photos? Is it now just a matter of how good of a digital camera and lighting you can afford? Or can you get photos like that with cheap digital gear? Will mastering Photoshop become a pre-requisite for being a real caver? David Locklear - Visit our website: http://texascavers.com To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.com - Visit our website: http://texascavers.com To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.com
Re: [Texascavers] Good cave photos
Hi, It's always been about lighting. Partly that's what you can afford. Partly its how much time it takes to set things up. If you think about it, most indoor flash pictures of people are crap, and that's despite the fact that most of a person is usually at one distance from the camera where illumination is approximately constant. Good flash pictures taken by professional photographers involve multiple sources of light, continuous bright lights, diffuse light sources, and time to make all this work. It's not a situation intrinsically unique to cave photography. The reason we think its different is that we get around it all the time above ground because daylight photography has light coming from everywhere. That doesn't mean that you can't get good cave photography with a camera-mounted flash. It happens all the time - but usually only for close-up objects. To get good photos, you need shadows, which moves the flash off the camera. Then you don't the shadows to be completely black, which gets you the second flash. They you need tripods or assistants to hold these things. . . If you give a mouse a cookie. . . Digital photography helps because you can see the results of a time-consuming shot straight up, while with film you take several variations on the same shot with different lighting etc. and hope you got it right. Now that I have a cheap digital camera that still has a lot of pixels and good control features, I'm thinking of getting some slave flashes and trying nighttime and cave photography on the cheap. The wimpy flash on the camera isn't good enough for cave photography, but it can set off the slaves. Thank God being a good photographer was never a prerequisite for being a real caver. Gregg David Locklear wrote: If those photos are today's standard for good cave photos, I would like to see what the very good or the excellent look like. Will the average caver be able to take good cave photos? Is it now just a matter of how good of a digital camera and lighting you can afford? Or can you get photos like that with cheap digital gear? Will mastering Photoshop become a pre-requisite for being a real caver? David Locklear - Visit our website: http://texascavers.com To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.com - Visit our website: http://texascavers.com To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.com
Re: [Texascavers] Good cave photos
Death to Photoshop -Original Message- From: Chris Vreeland cvreel...@austin.rr.com Sent: Nov 14, 2007 7:57 AM To: David Locklear dlocklea...@gmail.com Cc: speleoste...@tx.rr.com speleoste...@tx.rr.com, Texas Cavers texascavers@texascavers.com Subject: Re: [Texascavers] Good cave photos I've gotta agree somewhat. While the composition is excellent, and a lot of work went into setting up those shots, someone needs to lay off the over-saturation a bit. (a lot) I've noticed that's a trend lately with cave photography, and photography in general -- get a good picture, then jack the color up so bright as to be utterly unrealistic. I'm not a fan of the technique. Chris On Nov 13, 2007, at 10:52 AM, David Locklear wrote: If those photos are today's standard for good cave photos, I would like to see what the very good or the excellent look like. Will the average caver be able to take good cave photos? Is it now just a matter of how good of a digital camera and lighting you can afford? Or can you get photos like that with cheap digital gear? Will mastering Photoshop become a pre-requisite for being a real caver? David Locklear - Visit our website: http://texascavers.com To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.com - Visit our website: http://texascavers.com To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.com http://home.infionline.net/~tbsamsel/ - Visit our website: http://texascavers.com To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.com
RE: [Texascavers] Good cave photos
Ted, You are wrong, wrong, wrong. If you worked in desktop publishing as I do and had to make publishable photos out of other people's c*** or if you needed to restore fragile family photos, tintypes, etc, that are just barely visible because of time or deterioration, you'd fall on your knees and kiss the feet of whoever invented Photoshop. Maybe it's not right for you or for your particular application, but for those of us who do need it, it's the only thing that will work. Perhaps NSS just ought to ban enhanced photos in the competition. Or limit enhanced photos to another category. Louise Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:18:32 -0500 From: tbsam...@infionline.net To: cvreel...@austin.rr.com CC: texascavers@texascavers.com Subject: Re: [Texascavers] Good cave photos Death to Photoshop -Original Message- From: Chris Vreeland cvreel...@austin.rr.com Sent: Nov 14, 2007 7:57 AM To: David Locklear dlocklea...@gmail.com Cc: speleoste...@tx.rr.com speleoste...@tx.rr.com, Texas Cavers texascavers@texascavers.com Subject: Re: [Texascavers] Good cave photos I've gotta agree somewhat. While the composition is excellent, and a lot of work went into setting up those shots, someone needs to lay off the over-saturation a bit. (a lot) I've noticed that's a trend lately with cave photography, and photography in general -- get a good picture, then jack the color up so bright as to be utterly unrealistic. I'm not a fan of the technique. Chris On Nov 13, 2007, at 10:52 AM, David Locklear wrote: If those photos are today's standard for good cave photos, I would like to see what the very good or the excellent look like. Will the average caver be able to take good cave photos? Is it now just a matter of how good of a digital camera and lighting you can afford? Or can you get photos like that with cheap digital gear? Will mastering Photoshop become a pre-requisite for being a real caver? David Locklear - Visit our website: http://texascavers.com To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.com - Visit our website: http://texascavers.com To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.com http://home.infionline.net/~tbsamsel/ - Visit our website: http://texascavers.com To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.com
Re: [Texascavers] Good cave photos
Louise, I agree completely, and I've used Photoshop for some of the same reasons you have - most importantly personally to improve the legibility of scans of many 19th and early 20th century family letters and other documents. The program helped enormously in scanning the journal kept by one of my German Texan ancestors as he came across the Atlantic from Bremen in 1850. The seas, unfortunately, must have gotten rough because he abandoned the journal well before reaching New Orleans. And of course Photoshop is wonderful for restoring old pictures! Roger Moore Houston In a message dated 11/14/07 11:19:44 Central Standard Time, power_lou...@hotmail.com writes: Ted, You are wrong, wrong, wrong. If you worked in desktop publishing as I do and had to make publishable photos out of other people's c*** or if you needed to restore fragile family photos, tintypes, etc, that are just barely visible because of time or deterioration, you'd fall on your knees and kiss the feet of whoever invented Photoshop. Maybe it's not right for you or for your particular application, but for those of us who do need it, it's the only thing that will work. Perhaps NSS just ought to ban enhanced photos in the competition. Or limit enhanced photos to another category. Louise
[Texascavers] RE: Good cave photos
Louise Power said: Perhaps NSS just ought to ban enhanced photos in the competition. Or limit enhanced photos to another category. I believe that is already the case, isn't it (separate category)? From http://www.caves.org/committee/salons/Slide.shtml: CATEGORIES - Classification letters are: A. Story Series (maximum of 20 slides, include a caption for each slide in the series) B. Scenes from Nature, including closeups and images, whether taken with single or multiple flash or in natural light (each of these was a separate category in the past) C. Enhanced Surreal Imagery, including non-standard lighting, film processing, gels, computer enhancement, unusual subjects for a cave setting such as models in atypical attire; this is also the category for those images that have been digitally manipulated. D. Humor. Humor images are scored by the judges, but selected for show by the Slide Salon Co-Chairmen. If you have a slide that may not be up to full artistic standards, but is a crowd-pleaser for its humor, please consider entering it Note category C. It is certainly true that you can't believe something these days just because you saw a picture of it! Mark Minton
Re: [Texascavers] Good cave photos
There are some interesting light techniques, that when used with digital cameras, can produce some amazing photos without massive strobes/lights/etc. I'm sure people on the list have seen 360 Degrees of Lechuguilla Cave computer tour that came out recently ( http://www.360parks.com/lechuguilla_cave_virtual_tour.shtml). All of the 360 degree panoramas were illuminated with handheld lights - they literally painted the cave with light for minutes during open exposures. It's a simple technique that has been around for a while, but with digital cameras you can quickly view the result. If you want to take a stab at 360 degree images you can mess around with a bunch of photos in software like Stitch. Maybe it's time to spend money on a nice sturdy lightweight tripod and ditch the heavy battery packs. Simon -- Forwarded message -- From: Gregg iar...@io.com To: Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 10:03:00 -0600 Subject: Re: [Texascavers] Good cave photos Hi, It's always been about lighting. Partly that's what you can afford. Partly its how much time it takes to set things up. If you think about it, most indoor flash pictures of people are crap, and that's despite the fact that most of a person is usually at one distance from the camera where illumination is approximately constant. Good flash pictures taken by professional photographers involve multiple sources of light, continuous bright lights, diffuse light sources, and time to make all this work. It's not a situation intrinsically unique to cave photography. The reason we think its different is that we get around it all the time above ground because daylight photography has light coming from everywhere. That doesn't mean that you can't get good cave photography with a camera-mounted flash. It happens all the time - but usually only for close-up objects. To get good photos, you need shadows, which moves the flash off the camera. Then you don't the shadows to be completely black, which gets you the second flash. They you need tripods or assistants to hold these things. . . If you give a mouse a cookie. . . Digital photography helps because you can see the results of a time-consuming shot straight up, while with film you take several variations on the same shot with different lighting etc. and hope you got it right. Now that I have a cheap digital camera that still has a lot of pixels and good control features, I'm thinking of getting some slave flashes and trying nighttime and cave photography on the cheap. The wimpy flash on the camera isn't good enough for cave photography, but it can set off the slaves. Thank God being a good photographer was never a prerequisite for being a real caver. Gregg
RE: [Texascavers] Good cave photos
You missed my joke.. I use Photoshop everyday,, adobe illustrator.. ARCGIS.. sometimes ERDAS I do web pages computer cartography everyday.. -Original Message- From: Louise PowerSent: Nov 14, 2007 12:18 PM To: Ted Samsel , Chris Vreeland Cc: Texas Cavers Subject: RE: [Texascavers] Good cave photos Ted,You are wrong, wrong, wrong. If you worked in desktop publishing as I do and had to make publishable photos out of other people'sc*** or if you needed to restore fragile family photos, tintypes, etc, that are just barely visible because of time or deterioration,you'd fall on your knees and kiss the feet of whoever invented Photoshop. Maybe it's not right for you or for your particular application, but for those of us who do need it, it's the only thing that will work. Perhaps NSS just ought to ban enhanced photos in the competition. Or limit enhanced photos to another category.Louise Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:18:32 -0500 From: tbsam...@infionline.net To: cvreel...@austin.rr.com CC: texascavers@texascavers.com Subject: Re: [Texascavers] Good cave photos Death to Photoshop -Original Message- From: Chris Vreeland cvreel...@austin.rr.com Sent: Nov 14, 2007 7:57 AM To: David Locklear dlocklea...@gmail.com Cc: "speleoste...@tx.rr.com" speleoste...@tx.rr.com, Texas Cavers texascavers@texascavers.com Subject: Re: [Texascavers] Good cave photos I've gotta agree somewhat. While the composition is excellent, and a lot of work went into setting up those shots, someone needs to lay off the over-saturation a bit. (a lot) I've noticed that's a trend lately with cave photography, and photography in general -- get a good picture, then jack the color up so bright as to be utterly unrealistic. I'm not a fan of the technique. Chris On Nov 13, 2007, at 10:52 AM, David Locklear wrote: If those photos are today's standard for "good cave photos," I would like to see what the "very good" or the "excellent" look like. Will the average caver be able to take "good cave photos?" Is it now just a matter of how good of a digital camera and lighting you can afford? Or can you get photos like that with cheap digital gear? Will mastering Photoshop become a pre-requisite for being a real caver? David Locklear - Visit our website: http://texascavers.com To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.com - Visit our website: http://texascavers.com To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.comhttp://home.infionline.net/~tbsamsel/ - Visit our website: http://texascavers.com To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.com http://home.infionline.net/~tbsamsel/ - Visit our website: http://texascavers.com To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.com
[Texascavers] House with a Cave
Cavers, I f you are looking for a house in SA and have the bucks, this one is gorgeous and the cave is nice - about the size of my living room with a couple of dig leads off if I remember correctly. Last time I was in the cave it was being used as a playhouse for the kids. Contact me if you want a picture. Contact the owner if you want more pictures and if you are interested in purchase. Linda -Original Message- From: Richard Swint [mailto:tosp...@satx.rr.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 9:23 AM To: li...@tcmacaves.org Subject: From the TCMA Website RE: San Antonio Caves Linda I am writing to you to tell you of a house which is going up for sale in San Antonio with a cave in the front yard of the house. The cave is listed in the Texas cave books as Cueva Cave. The home is in The Town of Hollywood Park (south of FM-1604 and west of SR 281). The home is completely remodeled and photos are available, but we are currently getting them ready to post on the web hopefully with a video. The only owners of the house have died and my wife is the executor of the estate. The house was built in 1972 and is a little over 3000 sq ft and on .48 acre lot, and has been completely redecorated with new carpet and paint throughout. Please help me to get this property to the caving community as potential buyers. I will understand if you cannot help. The family is looking for $350k-400k for the property.