Re: Greater Vancouver Zoo
Hi, Thursday, April 15, 2004, 11:44:20 PM, Rfsindg wrote: Why Bob, she looks just like you. g Regards, Bob S. Bob W. writes: My adoptive daughter, Pip, is at the bottom of this page: http://www.monkeyworld.co.uk/topic.php?TopicID=25Template=standard yes - she was was lucky enough to get her father's brains and looks, and her mother's hairy arms and table manners. -- Cheers, Bob
Re: Greater Vancouver Zoo
On Thu, 15 Apr 2004, Jim Apilado wrote: Is this Vancouver, BC? I thought the zoo was gone. Jim A. Had a few hours walk this Saturaday and took some pictures. To my surprise, I was able to take sharp pictures by handholding my 200mm 300mm. Camera shake used to be a problem with me so I usually had the tripod with me, but not this time (left in the car because of the weight). Any comments welcome. :-) http://www.pbase.com/wlachan/vancouver_zoo Regards, Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan You're probably thinking of the small zoo at Stanley Park in downtown Vancouver. The Zoo that Alan's pictures are from is out in the suburbs of Vancouver. It used to be known as the Vancouver Game Farm, but now its called the Greater Vancouver Zoo. - Chris -- Chris Murray /\ [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN http://apeman.org/ XAGAINST HTML MAIL Cell: 604.861.8307 / \/ Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
Re: Greater Vancouver Zoo
I think the bars force us to reflect on the fact that these creatures of the wild have been imprisoned for our entertainment. Perhaps there are good reasons for it, perhaps not. John On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 07:13:34 -0700, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Alan ... I don't like these at all. The fence between the viewer and the animals really detracts from the critters. Better would have been to get closer, stick a smaller lens through the fence, if at all possible, or get much closer to the fence and use whatever lens you had wide open or close to it, obscuring the fence completely. Baring those options, these are probably as good as you could get, and was a good exercise in hand holding longer lenses ... which you seem to have done quite well. Others might like the idea of the fence being there, but, imo, it makes for very poor photographs. shel Alan Chan wrote: Had a few hours walk this Saturaday and took some pictures. To my surprise, I was able to take sharp pictures by handholding my 200mm 300mm. Camera shake used to be a problem with me so I usually had the tripod with me, but not this time (left in the car because of the weight). Any comments welcome. :-) http://www.pbase.com/wlachan/vancouver_zoo -- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: Greater Vancouver Zoo
I thought about that, and that idea doesn't make it for me. I think there are better ways, photographically, to show that. John Forbes wrote: I think the bars force us to reflect on the fact that these creatures of the wild have been imprisoned for our entertainment. Perhaps there are good reasons for it, perhaps not.
Re: Greater Vancouver Zoo
I visited Vancouver's zoo several years ago. Then I read that the zoo was voted out of existence. There was an aquarium in the same area. I wonder if that still exists. Jim A. From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 19:35:22 +0100 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Greater Vancouver Zoo Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 14:34:37 -0400 I think the bars force us to reflect on the fact that these creatures of the wild have been imprisoned for our entertainment. Perhaps there are good reasons for it, perhaps not. John On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 07:13:34 -0700, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Alan ... I don't like these at all. The fence between the viewer and the animals really detracts from the critters. Better would have been to get closer, stick a smaller lens through the fence, if at all possible, or get much closer to the fence and use whatever lens you had wide open or close to it, obscuring the fence completely. Baring those options, these are probably as good as you could get, and was a good exercise in hand holding longer lenses ... which you seem to have done quite well. Others might like the idea of the fence being there, but, imo, it makes for very poor photographs. shel Alan Chan wrote: Had a few hours walk this Saturaday and took some pictures. To my surprise, I was able to take sharp pictures by handholding my 200mm 300mm. Camera shake used to be a problem with me so I usually had the tripod with me, but not this time (left in the car because of the weight). Any comments welcome. :-) http://www.pbase.com/wlachan/vancouver_zoo -- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: Greater Vancouver Zoo
Hi, I think the bars force us to reflect on the fact that these creatures of the wild have been imprisoned for our entertainment. Perhaps there are good reasons for it, perhaps not. I don't like these at all. The fence between the viewer and the animals really detracts from the critters. Better would http://www.pbase.com/wlachan/vancouver_zoo I agree with Shel. The bars are rather a tired old cliche for showing captivity. They are very beautiful little monkeys, and the photos would be greatly improved by telling us what type of monkeys they are! Squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus)? I'm not sure. By coincidence I was trying to describe precisely this type of monkey to one of my brothers this weekend, but he didn't recognise my description. There's a troupe of them in Monkeyworld, a terribly-named, but brilliant, primate rescue centre in Dorset, England. One of my favourite places in the world. http://www.monkeyworld.co.uk/main.php My adoptive daughter, Pip, is at the bottom of this page: http://www.monkeyworld.co.uk/topic.php?TopicID=25Template=standard -- Cheers, Bob
Re: Greater Vancouver Zoo
So you've switched to Canon IS, Alan ;-) Keep it down, I don't want anyone to know here. :-) But the truth is, I am stuck with Pentax. g Regards, Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan _ Add photos to your messages with MSN Premium. Get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-capage=byoa/premxAPID=1994DI=1034SU=http://hotmail.com/encaHL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
Re: Greater Vancouver Zoo
You're probably thinking of the small zoo at Stanley Park in downtown Vancouver. The Zoo that Alan's pictures are from is out in the suburbs of Vancouver. It used to be known as the Vancouver Game Farm, but now its called the Greater Vancouver Zoo. That explains why the zoo seems a little primitive (no disrespect), but we enjoy petting the animals. :-) Regards, Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan _ Add photos to your messages with MSN Premium. Get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-capage=byoa/premxAPID=1994DI=1034SU=http://hotmail.com/encaHL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
Re: Greater Vancouver Zoo
I believe you meant the Stanley Park. The aquarium should still be here, but haven't seen any zoo. Regards, Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan I visited Vancouver's zoo several years ago. Then I read that the zoo was voted out of existence. There was an aquarium in the same area. I wonder if that still exists. _ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN Premium. Get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-capage=byoa/premxAPID=1994DI=1034SU=http://hotmail.com/encaHL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
Re: Greater Vancouver Zoo
I concur with Shel wrt fence. It's a real distraction. I've taken a few zoopix over the years, and I realize that it's often either fence, or no pic. OTOH, that shot of the buzzards or whatever type of ugly bird they are, is pretty cool. And, yes, they're pretty damned sharp. Better than I coulda done, that's for sure. That one's my favourite of the bunch. The ring-tailed lemurs (or whatever they are - any lower-primate-looking mammal with a ringed tail is a ring-tailed lemur to me) are sharp enough, but they really aren't doing much interesting imho. Not a bad shot, just not so interesting. But, as Shel said, if the exercise is one in handholding a long lens steady, you were most successful. The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Greater Vancouver Zoo Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 07:13:34 -0700 Hi Alan ... I don't like these at all. The fence between the viewer and the animals really detracts from the critters. Better would have been to get closer, stick a smaller lens through the fence, if at all possible, or get much closer to the fence and use whatever lens you had wide open or close to it, obscuring the fence completely. Baring those options, these are probably as good as you could get, and was a good exercise in hand holding longer lenses ... which you seem to have done quite well. Others might like the idea of the fence being there, but, imo, it makes for very poor photographs. shel Alan Chan wrote: Had a few hours walk this Saturaday and took some pictures. To my surprise, I was able to take sharp pictures by handholding my 200mm 300mm. Camera shake used to be a problem with me so I usually had the tripod with me, but not this time (left in the car because of the weight). Any comments welcome. :-) http://www.pbase.com/wlachan/vancouver_zoo _ STOP MORE SPAM with the MSN Premium and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-capage=byoa/premxAPID=1994DI=1034SU=http://hotmail.com/encaHL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
Re: Greater Vancouver Zoo
I concur with Shel wrt fence. It's a real distraction. I've taken a few zoopix over the years, and I realize that it's often either fence, or no pic. Looks like it was not such a good idea then. OTOH, that shot of the buzzards or whatever type of ugly bird they are, is pretty cool. And, yes, they're pretty damned sharp. Better than I coulda done, that's for sure. That one's my favourite of the bunch. Actually this pic was shot through the fence too, but the lens was stick so close to the fence they aren't visible in the picture. The ring-tailed lemurs (or whatever they are - any lower-primate-looking mammal with a ringed tail is a ring-tailed lemur to me) are sharp enough, but they really aren't doing much interesting imho. Not a bad shot, just not so interesting. But, as Shel said, if the exercise is one in handholding a long lens steady, you were most successful. I have a good excuse for this - the glass window was dirty. g Regards, Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan _ Free yourself from those irritating pop-up ads with MSn Premium. Get 2months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-capage=byoa/premxAPID=1994DI=1034SU=http://hotmail.com/encaHL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
Re: Greater Vancouver Zoo
I was there last summer. The aquarium was very nice. I think there was a small children's petting zoo, but no more than that. Alan Chan wrote: I believe you meant the Stanley Park. The aquarium should still be here, but haven't seen any zoo. Regards, Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan I visited Vancouver's zoo several years ago. Then I read that the zoo was voted out of existence. There was an aquarium in the same area. I wonder if that still exists. _ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN Premium. Get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-capage=byoa/premxAPID=1994DI=1034SU=http://hotmail.com/encaHL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines -- Daniel J. Matyola mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Stanley, Powers Matyola mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 78 Grove Streethttp://geocities.com/dmatyola/ Somerville, NJ 08876 (908)725-3322 fax: (908)707-0399
Re: Greater Vancouver Zoo
I think I know what you mean. I was there few years ago but it was closed at the time. There were a few animals wandering freely inside. Regards, Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan I was there last summer. The aquarium was very nice. I think there was a small children's petting zoo, but no more than that. _ Free yourself from those irritating pop-up ads with MSn Premium. Get 2months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-capage=byoa/premxAPID=1994DI=1034SU=http://hotmail.com/encaHL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
Re: Greater Vancouver Zoo
frank theriault wrote: I concur with Shel wrt fence. It's a real distraction. I've taken a few zoopix over the years, and I realize that it's often either fence, or no pic. OTOH, that shot of the buzzards or whatever type of ugly bird they are, is pretty cool. Those are King Vultures, I believe - I love those guys.. I think _one_ of the monkey shots behind the bars would have done... sweet fellows - and I also wanted to know who/what I was looking at, Alan. Sorry to hear the Stanley Park zoo is gone - I shot there in - gosh - the mid 70's. I think I've been to the larger one as well, but now can't remember for sure. ann
