« Gary Briechle Photographs | Main | The TOP Model for Print Sales »

Friday, 25 January 2013

Comments

I think anyplace titled "The Screaming Tuna" must warrant a visit. Or two.

Jeez, it looks cold back there. Only 18 days until pitchers and catchers report.

"Jeez, it looks cold back there."

Wisconsin doesn't get cold any more, sad to say. It wasn't too bad yesterday. On Monday or Tuesday I saw –8° on the thermometer, though. That's nice and crisp.

Mike

Sure it's cold, that's why they need to deliver the coal.

As a side business to generating electricity, the power company generates steam which is piped to many downtown buildings for heat.

Correction Mike, on the permanent transfer to AZ. That's Nick not Jack. Why leave WI weather in the summer?

And the Tuna was indeed screaming good.

Yikes, that is some detail in that tugboat shot.

Wow, that photo of Milwaukee Harbor seems to have suffer from extreme pixelated jaggies. Easy to see in the lighthouse.

141 were faster than he, Irving went looking for number 143. From the Ballad of Irving - the 142nd fastest gun in the west.
Sorry... I couldn't resist after reading your ranking... and you still rate higher than I! :)

Very cool, Mike. Nothing like breakin' bread with ol' buds. Nice pics too. Yes, that big kahuna Leica is something special.

I wondered what the (estimated) 132nd best camera was - so I took a look at your photo and I see you shot it with a Panasonic DMC-GX1 with a 20mm lens at 1/25th of a second at f4.

It's not possible to see that with my shots because I strip out all the EXIF data when I save for web.

I wonder what people think about the pros and cons of stripping out or leaving the EXIF data in?

You can remove the EXIF data? Who knew? (I think I will just leave it in, all the same.)

"...we'll have to meet for lunch somewhere in the middle of Kansas..."

Why not Arizona? Much more interesting. Bring a camera!

DavidB
Flagstaff, AZ

Wow! Holy crop!

At 100%, I should have said "Wow! Wholly Crop!"

Nice and warm post and images, Mike. Where I come from <=20° Celsius is "nice and crisp"; -8° is inconceivably cold!

@David Bennett

For an aspiring enthusiast like me, I appreciate exif data (aperture, shutter speed, ISO, WB) being provided for out-of-camera files iff little or no post-processing was done to them.

I think the exif data of heavily post-processed digital pics are a "con". However, info on the camera and lens combo used to take the photo is a "pro".

David Bennett wrote,

"I wonder what people think about the pros and cons of stripping out or leaving the EXIF data in?"

Since it's a photography forum, people probably are interested in the camera/lens, so I leave the data in.

regards,

Richard

"I wonder what people think about the pros and cons of stripping out or leaving the EXIF data in?" - David Bennett.

Even better, what do folk think about editing the EXIF data with mischievous intent?

David:

With regard to stripping out the EXIF data, I am all for it. Better still: strip out all data. Particularly if the data shows where the original file is located and the location includes your clear name because your computer is called something with your name in it..

To continue the EXIF diversion:

I leave it in, along with embedded copyright and contact information. Have come across a couple of sites that have pinched my photos, and it's still be left in. One of those sites having a, "No part of this site may be copied" type notice on the associated page. Hmmm...

While I remember, I meant to add that there are other models for photographers wanting to sell prints other than the expensive, time consuming one-off cross-your-fingers gallery show. The basic idea is to get the physical prints in fron of an audience. Try doctors, dentists, hairdressers - all places where you have a captive audience staring into space for a while. Subject matter could be important! Or cafes, and other small establishments. In most cases you get your prints in front of an audience for no cost - and the venue get's attractive decor.

Make you an offer, Mike. If I make it back to Milwaukee this summer to visit family, and if your friends Siam and Quyen have opened their restaurant in Shorewood (two suburbs south of where I grew up), I'll take you there - my treat!

Sorry to be so picky, but "restauranteur" sticks out like a sore thumb. (See http://grammarist.com/spelling/restaurateur/)

The AP Stylebook had that misspelling as one of their many examples of common mistakes.

Maybe restaurateur with an "n" is accepted by some, but it still stops my reading in its track when I see it spelled with an "n".

["Restaurateur" is the French, but "restauranteur" is a perfectly acceptable alternate spelling in English. It's like "judgement" vs. "judgment"; neither is all wrong or all right. I would suggest you stop letting it bother you.... --Mike]

The comments to this entry are closed.