As you know, whenever photographers gather, pictures are made. I got to have lunch yesterday with my friends Nick and Jack at Screaming Tuna on the Milwaukee River in the Third Ward, which was fun.
Nick gets schooled in the use of the Leica S-Kahuna, the World's Best Camera according to Yrs. Trly. Photo by me, with the world's 132nd-best camera*.
Nick's portrait of Jack—with a camera he'd never handled before, on manual everything, including focus. Jack was impressed.
Some big doofus with a weenie camera. On the Hank Aaron State Trail in Festival Park, with my trusty GX1/20mm/LVF2 combo.
Jack's shot of the view from the Screaming Tuna: the tug Leona B pushing a coal barge under the Water Street drawbridge. Note "Historic Third Ward" gate in the background.
With only the 120mm lens with him, Jack made a wide-angle panoramic of the coal barge, which worked well even though the barge was moving (slowly).
a 100% crop from the panorama above, which could be printed at 240 res at 12x3 feet in size (Jack's business involves selling large prints).
My restauranteur friends Siam and Quyen no longer own the Screaming Tuna, but they're opening a new restaurant in Shorewood next summer. I'm looking forward to that. But I don't think it will become the site of future meetups; by coincidence, Nick and his wife are planning to move to Arizona soon, and Jack and his wife spend part of each winter at their condo in the same Arizona city. I figure that means that in the future, we'll have to meet for lunch somewhere in the middle of Kansas.
Mike
(Thanks to Nick Hartmann and Jack MacDonough)
*Estimated.
Original contents copyright 2013 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:
Chris: "Nice shot of the Leona B. The pano looks especially nice. I had hoped to catch the St. Mary's Challenger last time I was in Milwaukee. She's the oldest laker still in service. To put things in perspective, she started her career on the Great Lakes in 1906. That's six years before the Titanic. I really need to get a shot of her this year if I can...."
David L.: "Geez, we missed the opportunity for a duel between the S-Kahuna and the Dragoon! Wow, shootout of the decade and it didn't happen :-( "
I think anyplace titled "The Screaming Tuna" must warrant a visit. Or two.
Posted by: Rick Wilcox | Friday, 25 January 2013 at 01:40 PM
Jeez, it looks cold back there. Only 18 days until pitchers and catchers report.
Posted by: Chuck Albertson | Friday, 25 January 2013 at 01:45 PM
"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
Posted by: Mike Johnston | Friday, 25 January 2013 at 01:54 PM
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.
Posted by: Jack | Friday, 25 January 2013 at 02:28 PM
Yikes, that is some detail in that tugboat shot.
Posted by: Richard Alan Fox | Friday, 25 January 2013 at 03:40 PM
Wow, that photo of Milwaukee Harbor seems to have suffer from extreme pixelated jaggies. Easy to see in the lighthouse.
Posted by: Del | Friday, 25 January 2013 at 03:42 PM
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! :)
Posted by: Paul Van | Friday, 25 January 2013 at 04:29 PM
Very cool, Mike. Nothing like breakin' bread with ol' buds. Nice pics too. Yes, that big kahuna Leica is something special.
Posted by: Mark | Friday, 25 January 2013 at 04:57 PM
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?
Posted by: David Bennett | Friday, 25 January 2013 at 05:03 PM
You can remove the EXIF data? Who knew? (I think I will just leave it in, all the same.)
Posted by: Andrew Kirk | Friday, 25 January 2013 at 06:41 PM
"...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
Posted by: DavidB | Friday, 25 January 2013 at 07:04 PM
Wow! Holy crop!
Posted by: Cmans | Friday, 25 January 2013 at 07:05 PM
At 100%, I should have said "Wow! Wholly Crop!"
Posted by: Cmans | Friday, 25 January 2013 at 07:20 PM
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".
Posted by: Sarge | Friday, 25 January 2013 at 08:11 PM
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
Posted by: Richard Jones | Saturday, 26 January 2013 at 01:36 AM
"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?
Posted by: Richard Tugwell | Saturday, 26 January 2013 at 02:29 AM
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..
Posted by: Christer | Saturday, 26 January 2013 at 04:41 AM
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...
Posted by: Dave Stewart | Saturday, 26 January 2013 at 03:51 PM
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.
Posted by: Richard Tugwell | Sunday, 27 January 2013 at 02:36 AM
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!
Posted by: Carl Blesch | Sunday, 27 January 2013 at 10:27 PM
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]
Posted by: Dave I. | Monday, 28 January 2013 at 06:22 PM