The Online Photographer

New Baker's Dozen Call for Work: Object of Affection

[TOP publishes on Mon./Wed./Fri. Three new posts
today. Comments will be posted later.]

The next Baker's Dozen, with the title "Object of Affection," will be of pictures of objects. Inanimate ones.

Object, noun,

/ˈäbjekt/

A material thing that can be seen and touched.
   "She appeared to be holding a small object"

It can be any kind of object. Perhaps of a sort you have some kind of affection for. I'm loath to give examples, even verbally, because I don't want to risk directing your creativity. Points given, however, for being mindful of the inherent descriptive power of photography.

I'll pick a dozen of the most interesting ones to post, with one extra for good measure. Search the site for "Baker's Dozen" if you want to see past examples.

If you'd like to play, click past the break for instructions.

A Thought on Good Technique

What part of your own practice of photography does technique play? I took this a couple of nights ago—saw it from the car, and though, hmm, maybe someday under the same conditions I could take a picture of that. Which then struck me as being a crazy thought—Jay Maisel's admonition to "always shoot it now; it won't be the same when you go back" came to mind. So I turned around, went back, heaved my lazy butt out of the heated driver's seat, and shot it. I dealt with the low light by taking five or six series of brackets and then just looked for the best one. But of course it could have been better technically if I'd had a tripod. I have a great tripod—an ideal one, really—but I keep it in the back room behind the bookcase. It wasn't doing me a lot of good there. What would be wrong with storing it in the trunk?

I'm not sure my indifferent technique here hurts this—it's properly exposed (I can't look at the sky without thinking about how to properly expose a picture of it). But better technique in steadying the camera might have helped. I'll never know, will I?

Anyway the idea came to mind that I'm not taking much if any joy in good technique—good craftsmanship—these days. There's no moral imperative to use good technique. Part of ignoring it is a protest against the tunnel-vision attitude of technique-above-everything that pervades the internet these days. (And possibly also a protest against 750-page manuals.) But being a good photographic craftsperson can be part of the fun, no?

Mike

Book o' the Week
Eye and Brain by Richard Gregory, Fifth Edition. "As far as I know nothing in the past 50 years is a better explanation of how humans see." —Hugh Crawford

The link is a portal to Amazon. Thank you kindly for helping support The Online Photographer!

The following logo is also a link if you click on it:

Original contents copyright 2020 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. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Hand Me That 750-Page IB, Please

I was reading "Chapter One: Don't Panic!" of Gary L. Friedman's The Friedman Archives Guide to Sony's Alpha 6100 and 6600 the other day, and came across this:

Cameras are literally more complex and harder to learn than computers these days. How much worse does it have to get before camera companies realize they are a.) sucking all the joy out of camera ownership and b.) alienating even geeky/maven customers? I'm alienated. I want a stripper model of the A6600 (and no, not a cheapened one like the A6100. They're both in limbo now anyway, with production stopped because of supply-chain bottlenecks). I don't even care if it's the same price, although it would make sense to price it a couple of hundred dollars less. Just make it so the book about it is 75 pages instead of 750 and can be handled by ordinary, normal paperback printing companies. I'd be happier.

Is it too much to ask for just a few non-hybrid cameras?

For those of you who will inevitably say "everyone wants fewer features but everybody wants different features," please consider two things: 1. the A6600 isn't even a pro model, and it's not even part of Sony's top line, which would be its FF cameras. It's a consumer camera aimed at amateurs. And 2. I'm not suggesting that Sony eliminate the full-featured version. I'm suggesting a stripper model alongside the "regular" model. A you-pays-your-money-you-takes-your-choice type of situation.

Would it be a commercially successful product? Probably not, and again I can list two reasons: 1. They'd blow it, because none of the companies have any experience streamlining the UI. It's not in their DNA, not part of their culture. They'd try, and get it wrong. And 2. It goes against the established customer culture, especially on, but not limited to, YouTube and the internet, which can't talk about any product without making it a competition between features lists. Oh well.

Regardless, I'm firmly convinced the camera companies have painted themselves into a corner with respect to complexification. By making their products "better" and "better," they're making them less and less appealing to buyers. The only exception is Leica, which continues to make some of its products simple and simple to operate—with no imitators, sadly. (Well, I guess Apple is another exception. It has to be counted as a cameramaker too now.)

Even Porsche made the Carrera T, a stripped-down, super-light 911. Of course, Porsche being Porsche, it cost more. (Charging more is Porsche's version of charging less.)

And the kicker here: it amuses me that Gary L. Friedman is literally a rocket scientist. He used to work at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Does it take a rocket scientist to comprehensively understand every aspect of the A6600? Q.E.D., baby, Q.E.D.

Mike

Book o' the Week
Eye and Brain by Richard Gregory, Fifth Edition. "As far as I know nothing in the past 50 years is a better explanation of how humans see." —Hugh Crawford

The link is a portal to Amazon. Thank you kindly for helping support The Online Photographer!

The following logo is also a link if you click on it:

Original contents copyright 2020 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. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

What to Do, That Is the Question

[Comments have been added.]

Here's our day yesterday. My address is 740 East Lake Road, and the addresses here are the mileages from the town line—so I'm 7.4 miles south of the southern border of the hamlet of Penn Yan, up at the top of the Lake.

Curiously, we get different weather than they do. Snow squalls spill over the massif of the bluff and descend on us—once I got to watch a little one come at me, and I saw it all the way, which was thrilling—but they sometimes hit us and leave Penn Yan alone. Yesterday I was coming from town, and the weather up there and for about the first four miles was fine. No snow and clear roads. Down here it was a different story. We got two or three inches in an hour or two.

It's not the first time I've observed this. Weather is very local in these parts. 

Question: When should you not zap up a digital picture with Dehaze and Clarity and so forth? Answer, when you're trying to show a heavy atmosphere. If I kick up the contrast and clarity of the truck in this, I can make it almost look like it was a nice day.

OoP (Out-of-camera. Or should it be OoP?)

Improved? Not sure about that. You be the judge.

As you can see, I opted for something in the middle. When editing digital images, as in darkroom printing, the how is always the easy part. You can master that relatively easily. What to do—judgement, as I call it—is always the tougher question.

Futbol
Just as a followup, it was quite a weekend in the NFL. To quote Ben Shpigel of the New York Times, "I’m not prone to hyperbole, but THAT WAS THE BEST WEEKEND OF FOOTBALL IN THE HISTORY OF EVER. In case you weren’t watching—and if you weren’t, why not?—all four divisional-round games ended on the final play: three field goals and an overtime touchdown."

The Divisional Round is the quarterfinals, in case you don't know. The remaining four teams will meet in the championship games, to determine the AFC (American Football Conference) and NFC (National Football Conference) champions. The two champions square off in the Superbowl—which is typically a pretty snoozy game.

One little tiny flaw in the picture is that our local team, the poor Bills, from the City of Eternal Football Heartache, fell just short again. They were ahead with 13 seconds left. Unless you've hardened your heart against enjoying any sport ever as a matter of principle or of crankiness, you really should watch the ending to that game. Even if you're not a fan of American football—or of sports at all—you'll get it. Remarkable.

I was rooting for Green Bay, Buffalo, and Tampa Bay, in that order, so all of my teams are out of it, knocked down like bowling pins. I guess I'll root for Cincinnati now. (That means they'll lose. I'm a Jonah, I guess.)

Pool this morning! So I need to get breakfast. At least I often win at that. As my friends put it, I cheat: I practice.  :-)

Mike

Book o' the Week
Eye and Brain by Richard Gregory, Fifth Edition. "As far as I know nothing in the past 50 years is a better explanation of how humans see." —Hugh Crawford

The link is a portal to Amazon. Thank you kindly for helping support The Online Photographer!

The following logo is also a link if you click on it:

Original contents copyright 2020 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. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Mark Sampson: "I've spent thousands of hours driving through the murk your photo so accurately describes. That picture makes me recall the mingling of accomplishment and relief I would feel upon reaching my destination, after a long journey in those conditions. Your 'improved?' version merely looks like it was taken an hour later, towards dusk. And Mike, nothing you can do to that image will make it look like a nice day."

Bill Bresler: "When it comes to image adjustments in Photoshop or whatever, I'm reminded of the Cajun Chef who, regarding spicing food, declared, 'A little too much is just enough.' I agree with the chef when I'm cooking. But when I'm editing photos, I tend to stop just short of what looks good on the screen. Sometimes I'll change my mind later, but as long as I still have the raw file, it doesn't matter."

Out Playin'

I've been under a fair amount of stress for one reason and another recently, beleaguered by my nightmares as usual, so I've been going out photographing to kind of get away from it all. Trying to make friends with the Fuji 55–200mm, which I keep in the car.

On the one hand, I don't photograph very often and don't work very hard at it when I do. On the other hand, I "photograph" all the time...because as I go around the world I'm always looking and noticing, always sort of evaluating possible pictures even when I don't have a camera with me. I see a lot of pictures go by. I just don't take them is all.

I pulled into a parking space meaning to spy on a few of the ice fishermen with the long lens, and this guy is standing right in front of the windshield. I expect the car to startle him, but does he fly away? He does not. He gives me the gimlet eye, tucks one foot away out of sight, and continues to survey his domain. Every now and then he casts his eye back on me as if to say I'm watching you too, buster. And every time he does I take another picture of him (or her, I don't know). I was amused. Species stinkeyeus, genus peglegidae.

I should have had enough d-o-f; ƒ/8 at 128mm on APS-C (this is cropped). I guess the blurring is due to the angle of the windshield I was shooting through. Any self-respecting bird photographer would scoff. If he was going to stay put (and he sure did—he was still there when I passed on the way back out of town), I should have eased back out, moved 20 feet away, angled the car the other direction and shot out the open window. I'm just not that dedicated. It's only a seagull.

Lazy, in other words. But birds are hard. And insects—I've never liked photographs of insects, but I'm in complete awe of people who can photograph them well. That takes some serious skill and dedication. And landscapes are hard, too. I feel like I'm only middling good at them. I've always liked landscapes, but not always when I take them.

This isn't a picture, but it was cool to see. For a short time just after dawn, the treetops were covered with a thin coating of ice, brightly illuminated by the sun, which is just behind the snow-covered rooftop in the foreground. Every time a puff of wind hit the trees, a cloud of ice crystals would bloom off the treetops into the air, accompanied by a very faint tinkling or crinkling sound like thousands of tiny distant bells. I watched it for a while, and took a picture as an afterthought. Half an hour later, all gone.

What would it take to actually get a good picture of that? I have no idea. I might as well be assigned to take a picture of a jumping spider in mid-air.

As I always say, I should either go out shooting more, or less.

Mike

Book o' the Week
Eye and Brain by Richard Gregory, Fifth Edition. "As far as I know nothing in the past 50 years is a better explanation of how humans see." —Hugh Crawford

The link is a portal to Amazon. Thank you kindly for helping support The Online Photographer!

The following logo is also a link if you click on it:

Original contents copyright 2020 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. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Craig Yuill: "You were doing what blogger Robin Wong would call 'photo therapy.' Good call! You mentioned that your 'ice crystals' photo isn’t a picture, but it may be the photo of yours that I like the best so far."

xf mj: "I treated myself to a lens rental of the 40–150mm Olympus a couple weeks back. Like you, I'm not used to its kind of shooting. But it was fun trying bird pics for once. They are tough! I have a much much greater admiration for good bird shots, and almost just as much admiration for decent ones. Even so, despite all my misses and no real hits, it was fun to try. It was also fun seeing what landscapes I could now get. Much different than a 40mm-equivalent or 90mm-e gets of course. It was like a different world opened up to be photographed.

"This was all prompted by a stitched landscape I had taken of an open river area near me where birds tend to hang out, and where I regularly photo walk. While I was panning and shooting, one of the residents of the neighborhood said 'ahh...you must see that bald eagle that's always out there, huh?' I nodded politely, agreeing with them, having no idea whether what they said was true and not wanting to waste their time explaining that my camera lens wasn't really for that.

"Sure enough, I walk home, zoom in on the shots with my computer and there on the screen is this little white dot head off in the distance. A bald eagle dead center of the pano! When I got the long lens and went back daily, the eagle was there nearly daily too. Some days with an eagle friend. Still far away, but it/they sure had my attention.

"Funny what you can suddenly recognize that's always been there to be seen."

Keith: "I like going out with a camera because then it gives me an excuse to walk at my pace, and pause to think about potential shots whenever I feel the desire. I don't measure the success of the walk or drive by the number of shots I took, it's how much I enjoyed the process."

Blog Note—Boosted?

UPDATE: All comments from this past week have now been published, along with a new Book o' the Week suggested by Hugh Crawford.

I apologize again for this. Still feeling rather out of it.

I'm behind on comments again—haven't posted Monday's yet—and I had intended getting all caught up today, but I had my booster shot yesterday afternoon and, as several of my friends here also did in the aftermath, I've felt run-down, tired, and faintly nauseous today. Not sick. Just kinda blah. (As I was wracking my brain-pan for the term "run-down," all I could come up with were the words "tepid" and "insipid." The synapses were hardly turning over.) Haven't even spent any time in the pool table shed, which is how you really know when there's something wrong with me.

Anyway: I will attack comments tomorrow and write this week's Friday post(s) on Saturday. That's the plan.

Kind regards,

—Mike, Yr. Temporarily Tepid & Insipid Ed.

 

Traffic Lights and Taillights

[Comments have been added.]

I've tried several shooting experiments recently. One was shooting square. I think I liked it, but unfortunately I didn't try it for long enough to really start seeing that way.

Or, I kept grabbing different cameras. Always the problem with owning more than one.

Another has been that I'm keeping a camera with an 84-305mm-equivalent lens on it in the car, so I can take pictures of faraway subjects as I wander the highways and byways of Western New York State (as I've discussed a time or two, I find a lot more pictures are far away here than other places I've lived). That's going well too, but, again, it's too early to know if it's a good way of working for the long term.

I think I just enjoy shooting, and I'm not sufficiently devoted to any particular parameters.

I haven't started experimenting with the A6600 yet. But it's been, you know, Winter.

Here's a question for the collective brain trust. Does anyone know why digital has such trouble rendering red taillights and traffic signals? Is it because digital has some particular kind of problem with LEDs and most taillights and traffic signals are LEDs these days? Or are they just much brighter than they seem to the eye, such that they're always blown out at anything like the proper exposure for the scene?

Several friends and I have been in a rather intense conversation about this over the past few days. Or rather, they're conversing and I'm looking on from the sidelines—they're much better technically than I am. Two of them have 100-MP Fujis, so we've been trying to determine if one of those does a better job with red traffic lights than, say, a G9 or an X-H1. (The consensus seems to be...a little better). One of them won't shoot scenes with a traffic signal in them because the abysmal rendering irritates him so much.

It didn't seem to be a problem with film. Although aside from several Pete Turners (such as this one—scroll down a bit) and Ernst Haas's "Route 66 Albuquerque, New Mexico, 1969," I'm not aware of any famous photographs with red lights in them.

Anyone know more about this?

Mike

Book o' the Week
Eye and Brain by Richard Gregory, Fifth Edition. "As far as I know nothing in the past 50 years is a better explanation of how humans see." —Hugh Crawford

The link is a portal to Amazon. Thank you kindly for helping support The Online Photographer!

The following logo is also a link if you click on it:

Original contents copyright 2020 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. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Alex Mercado: "It is due to the photon absorption rates of the sensor’s photodiodes. The red sensitive photodiodes are more efficient than those of the blue and green. Also those red photodiodes are also sensitive to infrared. If you point a remote control at your phone camera and press any of the remote’s buttons, you’ll likely see the IR light emitted from the remote as a false-colored flickering dot on your phone’s screen.

"A good read about CMOS sensors can be found here."

Mike replies: That link is way over my head, but I bet some readers will be able to read it.

John Camp: "Judging by what LED headlights do to my eyes at night, I'd say that they're way brighter than old-fashioned bulbs. They're absolutely dazzling. That Ernst Haas photo is terrific."

Mike replies: Isn't it? Always loved that one.

Peter Komar: "I recall reading a photography magazine from many years ago when Pete Turner was all the rage that he duplicated his original 35mm slides to achieve those classic reds, blues and oranges. It’s true if you duplicate your original slide on either duplicating film or same film stock as the original, contrast and color saturation increase. I tried it myself and it does work and of course this was long before Photoshop and digital. I also recall Pete Turner may have also duplicated the duplicate to further get those vivid colors. I also think that digital sensors just have inherent challenges with red in general, I always was disappointed in deep red color flowers and the results from digital was somewhat disappointing."

John Krumm: "All I know is that red is problematic with a lot of digital cameras. It easily blows out and loses detail. You still get red, just a very uniform red. I think some of the changes in the K-1 Mark II were supposed to address this problem. I've done experiments with red in bright light, and it's surprising how much you have to underexpose before the red channel is OK sometimes. "

Bill Bresler: "I must say that I appreciate snow much more now that I'm semi-retired.

"In regards to square photos: The first real camera I ever held was my uncle's Rolleiflex F. When I was in high school I worked for a mom and pop photo studio. They liked their 6x7 Graflex XLs, and that's what I learned on, but there was a beat-up Rolleiflex C on the shelf and I'd use that whenever I could. As soon as I could scrape up the money, I bought a Mamiya C-330. Sold that to buy 35mm gear for newspaper work. Regretted selling it. Finally bought my own Rolleiflex E2 from a retiring photographer in 1985. He had used that same camera to photograph our wedding in 1978. I still run at least a half-dozen rolls of Tri-X 400 through it each year. Traded a Leica for a Hasselblad 500cm. Liked it, but liked the Rollei better. Had a five or six year flirtation with the Holga. When I got my first iPhone I downloaded a camera app called 6x6.

"Yeah, I like the square, but I can't really say why. All I know is that in nearly fifty years of being a working photographer, using all kinds of formats, 35mm, 6x6, 6x7, 4x5, 8x10, digital everything, my favorite images, and the ones that I consider my best, and hang on my walls, are mostly 6x6. I always come back to it.

"About a year ago, I heard that Costco was shutting down their photo labs in local stores. I had used my local Costco for years. The gentleman who ran that lab for over 10 years knew what he was doing and trained those who worked for him how to make great prints. I started editing my 6x6 photos, scanned the negs and ordered about 30 15x15 on 16x20 B&W prints. I went to pick them up a couple of days before the lab closed. I spent many years in darkrooms but these prints were superb. He thanked me for having his lab print such beautiful work in their final days. It was kind of emotional, and probably the most meaningful validation of my photography.

"Sorry for the long and rambling post but you hit a nerve. The square works for me."

Mike replies: Great comment, thank you.

Dan Hillier: "With your traffic light question, I found this video interesting. From about 22 min., the presenter talks about how traffic light colours were chosen. But when you look at the graph that is developed, it is a bit of an Ah ha!! moment. I'm sure we've all seen that graph before."

Mike replies: Wow, what a fantastic presentation. He doesn't mince about, does he. Thanks for that, I really enjoyed it.

Joel Wolford: "Not a comment on the problem, but on the book containing the Pete Turner photo that you referenced: The Contact Sheet from Ammo Books. I recently purchased this book (it is available on Amazon now!) and it was just as informative and interesting as you stated. A nice addition to any photobook collection, IMHO."

Mike replies: IMHO too.

Snow, Beautiful Snow

On Sunday night and into Monday we had what used to be known as a nice little snow, which is now known as Oh my God it's Armageddon huge storm affecting 80 million people roads closed ice snow hail disaster ice ice ice cars are slipping and the sky is falling airports closed travel discouraged carnage ruin apocalypse gaaaaaaaaah MELTDOWN. That seems to be the take of the news organizations concerning Winter storms these says. Something more to freak out about.

(I'm not saying it isn't a problem where it's really serious.)

Thirteen inches here, and the roads and driveways all clear by the next day. If you failed to prepare in advance and lay in at least 18 hours of emergency food supply, you could have, you know, gone hungry for a few hours. Such that your tummy might have rumbled. It was that bad. Of course, what kind of grasshopper doesn't have 18 hours of food in the house as a normal thing?

When I was young I remember a storm that dumped 18 inches of just this kind of snow over the morning and afternoon of a weekday, and my school, pretty reluctantly, let the kids go home at 2:00 instead of 3:15. That's how bad that was. Teachers of last-period classes were miffed. A gang of boys with snow shovels cleared the parking lot by hand. A bunch of us gathered at the foot of the mild slope of the parking lot entrance to help cars get up the rise to the road. More fun than last-period class.

In those days there were American cars with one-wheel drive (compliments of an open differential), and it was one of the rear wheels. Add shiny summer bias tires and it was no wonder they couldn't get up a gentle little slope. Back then, Swedish Saabs with front-wheel drive were considered super-competent for Winter driving. Now, FWD is normal and ordinary.

Have I mentioned recently how awesome snow tires are? This is lost knowledge today. "All-Season" tires should be called Three-Season tires. Two-wheel drive and snow tires beats four-wheel drive and all-season tires on snow and ice.

Of course, four-wheel drive with snow tires is best.

Anyway, life has returned to normal here at TOP Rural World Headquarters, thanks to my neighbor Jim Schnitzler and his enormous pickup truck with the industrial-sized plow on the front and a salt-spreader on the back. It's quite a rig. Great big knobby tires. I failed to get a picture. Took him about seven minutes to clear my driveway and he did a beautiful job.

His other car is a Prius. With all-wheel drive! Who says there's no such thing as progress?

Mike

Book o' the Week
Eye and Brain by Richard Gregory, Fifth Edition. "As far as I know nothing in the past 50 years is a better explanation of how humans see." —Hugh Crawford

The link is a portal to Amazon. Thank you kindly for helping support The Online Photographer!

The following logo is also a link if you click on it:

Original contents copyright 2020 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. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Benjamin Marks: "I call this "Weather Alarmism." It is what happens when the news philosophy of "If it Bleeds, it Leads," is crossed with cable news specialization, as in "The Weather Channel." Hey, when else are you going to get the eyeballs?"

Rick Popham: "Absolutely agree with you about snow tires. I drive a Subaru AWD these days, and people ask me why I would bother with snow tires. I tell them 'It's because I like to stop when I have to.'"

Brief Public Service Announcement

Just in case anyone doesn't know it yet, U.S. Americans can now order up to four free COVID-19 home tests per household at www.covidtests.gov. It's very simple; just enter your address and email address. I ordered mine yesterday.

Mike

P.S. Speaking of email reminds me of a joke from a list of retail worker stories about customers:

Clerk: "Do you have an email address, sir?"
Customer: "Email? What's that? I've never heard of that. I have gmail."
Clerk: (being quick-witted and also kind): "Excellent! That will work fine."

We passed a grim landmark last weekend. Deaths from COVID-19 in the formerly United States exceeded the highest estimate of combatant deaths in the American Civil War, by far the most lethal war in our history—more people died in the Civil War than in all of America's other wars combined. Determining how many soldiers died in the war is a headache for historians, but the extreme high end of the range of estimates for combatants is 850,000, and as of last weekend we have lost more than that many people to COVID. It is also more deadly than the 1919 Spanish Flu pandemic among Americans, although that outbreak was deadlier worldwide.  

The oldest known human pandemic is the Hamin Mangha plague of 5,000 years ago, deduced from two archaeological mass graves in Northeastern China. The best-known in the Western world is the Black Death of A.D. 1346–53, which wiped out up to half the population of Europe and changed the course of European history. The least appreciated are what might collectively be called the American Plagues of the 16th century, a collection of Eurasian diseases that decimated the defenseless native populations of the Americas, doing much of the work of European conquest before most Europeans even got here. The Pilgrims, for example, arrived at Plymouth to find not only wilderness, but also cleared farm fields that were abandoned. This also changed the course of history, undoubtedly, but in ways we cannot know.

May I just add as a moral issue that I decry the "blaming and shaming" of unvaccinated victims of COVID-19. Those deaths are more a matter of a failure in public health and of deliberate misinformation campaigns than the fault of individuals, and they are just as tragic and every bit as bad a loss for their loved ones as unpreventable deaths.

As far as vaccination is concerned, as usual, our smarter and kinder neighbors to the North might be on to something. After Quebec announced recently that vaccination passports will shortly be required for purchases at liquor and cannabis stores, requests for vaccinations in Quebec quadrupled, from 1,500 a day to 6,000. There's more than one way to get a job done!

P.P.S. The above is the longest P.S. I've ever posted on TOP, but hey, I put the word brief right there in the title, what was I gonna do? Actually be brief? That wouldn't be like me. More posts soon....

Paperweights

[TOP publishes on Mon./Wed./Fri. Comments are added later.]

Reader and friend o' TOP JG—you might recall the Frankencamera—had an unfortunate accident with this PC-Super-Angulon-R 28mm ƒ/2.8, made by Schneider, I believe, for Leica. "I removed the shift mechanism from the body," he writes, "and had the lens loosely mounted to a carbon fiber panel that was in turn mounted to a GFX-to-Pentax 645 lens adapter—in retrospect, it was obviously mounted a bit too loosely!—and when I fumble-fingered it while removing it from the camera body, the lens came loose and fell more than five feet onto the marble tile floor underneath my tripod...oops!"

Most unfortunate that it happened to land wrong. I don't know what Roger would say about this, but my experience has been that lenses are generally tougher than they look.

For one thing, early lenses had very soft glass elements, and that turned out to be a good thing. They got what were called "cleaning marks"—tiny concentric scratches from photographers wiping them with the ends of their neckties in a circular motion. Cleaning marks were common enough that the lensmakers had to address the problem. By the '80s, a Leica rep bragged that you could deliberately try to scratch the outermost element of a 50mm Summicron with barbed wire and it wouldn't leave a mark.

I can believe it; I've bought plenty of used lenses marked "glass mint," and many of them were in well-used condition, with marks, dings, mars and scratches everywhere but on the glass. If the glass itself hadn't been tough and scratch-resistant, surely more photographers would have left their marks.

The boredom test
When I worked for Jim Sherwood at the PG County Schools, sometimes between jobs we had little to do but make work for ourselves. Jim had a lot of equipment in that lab, which included, from time to time, boxes of donated camera gear. So once I got to wondering how a nearly valueless old zoom would survive a fall from a second-story window on to asphalt (the lab was on the second floor). Some of you might remember that one of David Letterman's early features was throwing stuff off a five-story building—that was no doubt what gave me the idea.

To my surprise, the cheap old zoom survived with just a small dent, which in turn fired up my experimental curiosity. So I made some test pictures, and then subjected it to further tortures—drops from the roof, or throwing it as high as I could in the air and letting it land on concrete. With test pictures each time. To my great surprise, all this abuse was hardly visible in the photographs. Eventually, the front element even cracked in half, and it still took halfway decent pictures.

I suggested to JG that the hurt former PC Super-Angulon pictured above might serve as a paperweight and conversation piece. Unfortunately, however, the glass of the shattered element is loose and could come off. So, unless anyone needs this for spare parts, it's landfill-bound.

As for the hapless zoom I experimented with all those years ago, it was, um, tested to completion. Eventually I damaged the bayonet mount and it could no longer be mounted on a camera. So it, too, was returned to the earth.

And as for the barbed wire test? Well, I had paid a whopping $650 for my then-brand-new 50mm Summicron (it was this type), and I was loathe to perform that test for myself. So I took the rep's word for it! I haven't learned much in my traverse through life, but I know enough not to tempt fate like that.

Mike

P.S. Let's not mention the Fuji GS645s to Oren—surely he's forgotten about that review by now, and won't repeat the story.

UPDATE from Oren: "< pokes head out of burrow > 'But, well, I dropped this one. I don't know how it happened...' < ducks back into burrow >"

Mike adds: Oren, who forgets nothing, reminds me every decade or so of one of my most public embarrassments: while reviewing the Fuji GS645s long ago, I dropped the thing and it broke into many pieces! Although I would have dearly loved to do a "coverup," my philosophy has always been that reviews are most useful to readers when the reviewer is honest. So, I 'fessed up, and recounted my ineptitude in the published article. What else could I do? Still find a bit of dried egg on my face from that one.

Book o' the Week
Eye and Brain by Richard Gregory, Fifth Edition. "As far as I know nothing in the past 50 years is a better explanation of how humans see." —Hugh Crawford

The link is a portal to Amazon. Thank you kindly for helping support The Online Photographer!

The following logo is also a link if you click on it:

Original contents copyright 2020 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. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Grant: "I started in the camera business in the late '70s. Back then every company rep had his own 'schtick' to demonstrate the superiority of his brand. Our Fuji rep, who was an 'industry veteran,' used to show off the durability of the then-new Fujinon EBC coatings by putting out a cigarette on the element. It always cleaned up perfectly."

hugh crawford: "Two thoughts on that banged lens. First, the lens is certainly repairable, or at least Leitz used to stock replacement elements as service parts. I speak from experience. Second, if there are no service parts left I’ll bet that out of all the damaged P.C. Angulons in the world, having the rear element broken is the rarest fault of all, so this has value greater than a paperweight. I mean the most trashed example you can find probably has a rear group that is relatively fine. I suspect that this well publicized salvage will attract the attention of someone with the corresponding lens shaped wreckage."

Mike replies: It did. JG has already homed it, with an owner of the same lens that has different issues.

Stan B.: "On a shoot in an upstate park once, I was left in charge of all the equipment while the photographer, art director, etc. all went out to lunch. I started tidying things up a bit when I tripped over the sync cord, and as I regained my balance...I noticed the 8x10 Deardorff atop the tripod ever so tentatively start to plummet face first unto the concrete. I willed it to stop mid air in its slow motion downward plunge towards oblivion! Next, I immediately started fantasizing fleeing into a witness protection program, faking a robbery scene where I boldly fought off the would be thieves—anything to get me outta this split-second, life-altering catastrophe!

"Regaining whatever composure I had left, I finally went over to assess the camera- and shoot-obliterating damage. The lens hood had absorbed the impact and was slightly dented inwards to one side. Not one scratch, dent or abrasion anywhere else on lens or body—and the shutter worked! Everyone returned, the shoot continued without further incident as I anticipated blurting out the entire scenario at the mere sound of my name. As the photographer was disassembling his precious Deardorff at shoot's end I noticed him stop to curiously examine the lopsided lens shade. Finally, he shook his head and carried on...best purchase he ever made."

Kenneth Wajda: "I learned long ago anything that’s dropping, stick out my foot and kick or break the fall. Saved many a lens and other breakables this way."

Moar Futbol! (OT)

Haven't been following American football* lately? Totally understand. I was away from it too, for years. Sports are the thing I miss most about not owning a TV.  

For some reason I got back into it this year. Well, the reason is probably that the NFL on YouTube has been publishing 15-minute "highlight" videos from recent games, which make it possible to fast-forward through a complete game.   

It was fun to see the Cincinnati Bengals win their first playoff game in 31 years. They have an absolutely standout young wide receiver in Ja'Marr Chase. Rookie of the Week in five different weeks. Watch his exceptional performance in Week 17 against the Chiefs (who lost last year's Super Bowl). Eleven receptions, 266 receiving yards and three touchdowns. Yowzuh. That's just fun.

Ja'Marr Chase, born in 2000(!) in Harvey, Louisiana  

Several young quarterbacks have had an excellent year: Patrick Mahomes of the Chiefs, Josh Allen of the Bills, and Joe Burrow of the Bengals among others. And of course young Tom Brady—he's 44—of the Buccaneers.   

Oldsters
In my time the quarterback who was famous for being "old" was Kenny "The Snake" Stabler, who retired mid-year when he was 37. It was considered pretty ancient for a QB in an era when "roughing the passer" was still something to strive for rather than a penalty. Fans accepted at the time that Stabler gritted out his last three years, hanging on past his sell-by date out of pure toughness and cussedness.

The oldest quarterback ever, though, was George Blanda, who played until he was 48. He spent 26 years in the League, the most ever. Brady has played 20 seasons. Quite a few more than the NFL average career length of 3.3 years for quarterbacks, but Brady would have to play till age 50 to catch up to Blanda. He might try.

"The hotter the game, the cooler he became," John Madden said
of his QB and friend Kenny Stabler. Photo by George Brich.

I've finally fallen into the gravity field of the nearby Buffalo Bills, who have become great fun to watch. The butt-whumping they laid on perennial powerhouse New England was, as the kids say, epic: the Bills scored on their first seven possessions. Buffalo didn't do a lot of things: they didn't punt; they didn't turn the ball over; and they didn't attempt a field goal (two missed extra points accounts for their unusual point total). The final score of Rebel Alliance 47, Galactic Empire 17 makes the game look closer than it was. The deficit at halftime was the worst in Patriot playoff history.

Insane
If Josh Allen, Brady, Mahomes and Burrow are having outstanding years, there's one QB who's having an insane year: Aaron Rodgers of the Green Bay Packers. He's a baaaad man. He's 37 too, the age at which Stabler hung up his spurs, but he's showing not one iota of decline. After posting their third 13–3 season in three years, Rodgers is arguably even better this year than in the previous two: for example, over his last six games he has 18 touchdowns to zero interceptions, which in the NFL is just shy of a unicorn getting out of a flying saucer. He has just one interception over his last 384 pass attempts. These numbers make Old COVID-Toe probably the best quarterback with the fewest Super Bowls in history. Right there with Jim Kelly, Fran Tarkenton, Dan Fouts, Dan Marino, and Warren Moon. He does have one Super Bowl, but he ought to have about five. He's that good.

Readers with long memories might remember my "futbol" dilemma when I moved here (if you lived where I do, what's the logical team to root for? The answer was the Packers, of course). True to long allegiance, I'll root for the Packers first. But after that, it's the Bills.

I think this means I'm starting to be a real New Yorker.

Mike

*This website's style sheet—the list of ways in which we handle various spelling, punctuation, and usage matters in order to stay consistent—has settled the "football/football" standoff by referring to the two games as "American football" and "World football."

Book o' the Week
American Geography by Matt Black, a great name for a photographer but a terrible internet name, impossible to search. Stan Banos calls American Geography a "handsome, well thought out and put together book." Matt's work is outstanding.

The link is a portal to Amazon. Thank you kindly for helping support The Online Photographer!

The following logo is also a link if you click on it:

Original contents copyright 2020 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. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Tippler: "I’ve lost interest in American (gridiron) football to association football. You know that sport where they don’t touch the ball, but rather apply foot to ball to maneuver it across the field into the opposing net.

"It all started with my brother-in-law and his friends. Argentines and Uruguyans. When watching the Argentine national team in big matches with them, one name popped up: Messi. When at home, my cable channel lineup included La Liga (i.e. the top Spanish league), where this guy Messi would be on every week. I was hooked in short order. Association football fans have the best deal in the world, with classicos, derbys, world cup qualifying tournaments, World Cup tournaments, long standing rivalries (USA vs. Mexico, Argentina vs. Brazil…). My favorite team, though, is the U.S. National Women's Team on account of their heart and spirit, and oh, they’re the best team out there. One big reason why I enjoy futbol so much may be inconceivable to gridiron football fans: no commercials during play!"

Greg Heins: "I was living in the Bay Area in 1970 and that fall Blanda, at 43, having been released by multiple teams during his career, came in late during each of the last five Oakland games of the season and engineered fantastic comeback wins with both passing touchdowns and field goals. (Early in his career he also played linebacker.) I lived next to a guy with a TV and happened to be visiting him for the amazing ending of the first of those games and after that he would bang on the wall for me to come over each time Blanda came into the game. Blanda became the AP's Male Athlete of the Year, the first pro football winner of that award. Those were giants that walked the earth...."

Clay Olmstead: "In Australia, they play Australian Rules Football, American Football, rugby and World Football: which they call footy, gridiron, rugby and soccer, respectively. No confusion there."