Images!

duceditor

Squier-Axpert
May 29, 2014
15,080
The Monadnocks, NH USA
It's be fun learning how many here are and/or have been involved in photography. It, as much as music and writing ,have been central to my life,

That so many of us here have discovered photography's joys in a sense is not surprising. For both of these 'arts' -- photo imaging and guitar playing -- share the mixed joys of creating and playing with "instruments."

I"ve shared some of my own imaging, and had others join in adding theirs, on several threads. But thought that a thread devoted just to this might be nice. Along with the invitation for all to share their own works, be they casual or more serious.

When I retired from a career in imaging -- mostly for science and medicine -- I gave myself the goal and exercise of creating at least one "shareable" image each day. This to discipline myself and to provide a 'stage' for my eye -- to keep it alert to visual things and events -- even just the ever ongoing passage of light and time.

I've done this pretty consistently now for several years and have posted those images in various places.

For a time I was a 'hired on' content provider for PJ Media. The editor there used to enjoy posting my work sans article. Just images for images sake.

When he and I both left working for PJM I started posting daily on Facebook -- something that I continue to do under the heading "My Image for the Day."

I thought I might occasionally share such here as well. As today.

My image for the day today was entitled "Across the Way." It was taken from the location of my mailbox, looking northeast across the road to a neighbor's property.

Across the Way  9-6-18.jpg


-don
 

Afrika61

Squier-holic
My start was, ah, a little different and it began with the back cover of a Marvel comic book.
We all remember the adds that spoke of big prizes to be won by selling cards, seed, and all sorts of things. I answered the add one day and, several weeks later, I recieved a package in the mail containing about ten boxes or so of greeting cards. It dawned on me then as to how much work the project would actually entail and I tried weaseling out of it but my Mom, was having NO part of that: I had signed on to do a job and that was the end of that. Furthermore She would keep an eye on my sales and decide what prise I was aiming for. So for about two years it was door to door and to be honest, I had a lucky streak or maybe people took pity on my poor*** and I did quite well with the sales. I'd also gotten use to "going out on the road" to do my sales schtick and never thought anymore about it until one day Mom said that there was another package in the mail for me. I couldn't imagine where or who it came from and so I tore into the box. Inside was a brand new Canonet 19 with strap and fake leather cover. As I said earlier Mom was keeping an eye on my sales and decided on something pratical, which in this case was a new camera: if I took to photography fine, if not I could always sell it and pocket the cash. She also sent a letter of resignation to the greeting card company so I was off the hook with them as well.
The rest, as they say, is history,....
canonet-19-ql-camera-BPBCK0.jpg
 
Last edited:

Afrika61

Squier-holic
@Afrika61 Hah! I remember those ads.

Good for you and your mom. Lessons for life and a camera! A true double win! :)

-don
Well, I'll tell something: I still HAVE a canonet 19, a QL 19GIII in fact. It may be the fact that it was what I started out with or it may be the fact that Canons glass was always good quality, but I always liked the shots that I got from that particular lens. And the fact that it survived through several generations of compact RF and the SLRs that Canon produced, seems to back that contention up.
Any favorite glass in your stable Don?
 

woolbrig

Squier-holic
Apr 16, 2010
3,703
IL
I enjoy photography but my pictures are all at night. Here a few from my flickr page. They tend to take a little longer than typical photos. The Horsehead nebula has a total exposure time of around 13 Hours. Processing these images usually takes me several days.

Saturn


Mars



Horsehead Nebula


Orion Nebula
 

duceditor

Squier-Axpert
May 29, 2014
15,080
The Monadnocks, NH USA
Any favorite glass in your stable Don?

When I was a working imager I was very fond of Nikon gear. Tried others and always came back to it.

The F3 system, while less aesthetically appealing than the original "F," became the de rigueur pro workhorse for a reason. It was perfectly thought through. Its lenses absolutely superb. And it had every accessory one could possibly need.

I still have my F3 system. -Several bodies, motor drive, finders, lenses, focus screens, macro bellows and related gear. Not a single part ever required any service whatever. And the lenses are superb. All of the true "Nikkors" are And even the amatuer "E" types were pretty dang decent.

I later moved on to doing most of my work in 6x7 format. Better quality, yes. But also (frankly) it made for a better business model. Both because my higher than typical per negative charge was more easy for my clients to justify, and because slides made from those negatives had to be made by me. Clients couldn't have me do the initial work and then move on to others -- often making what was seen as my work (but actually wasn't) less than perfect.

My Pentax 67 system is also a sweetheart. Beautifully built. Rugged far beyond what my mostly studio (with occasional indoor location work for such as medical books) needs required.

Again I have several bodies, numerous finders and a nice collection of lenses.

Today that all sits.

I did make the transition to digital with Nikon -- and have a fine for its time D1x body. But when I retired it seemed good to truly start afresh. And since Nikon had changed their line, as had Canon, I looked at both (and others) before deciding to go over to the Canon's sub 35 sensor system. The T2i specifically.

It is small and light. Optics are wonderful my my non pro purpose. And priced so I could justify buying what I truly wanted.

This system (as I started with it):

IMG_1788.JPG


I have since added other lenses. But amazingly that body has served me trouble free for quite a few years.

The size advantage is seen here. The 'baby' canon next to my old Nikon workhorse, each carrying a macro lens....

IMG_1791.JPG

My absolute favorite "piece of glass" is the Canon EF-S 10-22 ultra-wide angle zoom.

in 35mm speak that is equivalent to to a 16-35mm. Almost perfectly rectilinear. Just an amazing lens.

Used even more often, though (and this may be a surprise!), is a Sigma DC 18-250. That, again in 35mm terms, is equivalent to corresponding to field of view of a 27-375 mm lens. And it is sharp, sharp sharp, and with only moderate linear distortion (which in any case is correctable digitally.

The only thing these lack is "speed." Not really for it needing more light gathering ability but for their having a bit too much depth of field even when fully open.

One learns to live with such. :)

All are the product of modern materials and computer design. Aspheric elements. Advanced coatings so that even with many elements they can deal with in-the-field light sources. None of which would have been even a dream when I started out in the `60s.

But even as I wax lyrical about the capabilities of this gear, in truth I think about such very little. I even take some of my "morning walks" with nothing but my iPhone. (Today's Image for the Day posted above was taken with that.)

As with guitars, it is a great time to be into photography. Just so much is available even for a retiree on a no-longer-pro budget such as myself.

:)

-don
 
Last edited:

Ralph124C41

Dr. Squier
Feb 10, 2016
6,114
Photography used to be my main hobby or at least up there. I'm referring to non-digital stuff. I used to have my own darkroom and processed and printed black-and-white film and tried my hand at converting slides to pictures (not too well as I could never get the flesh tones exactly right.) I also used it in my work as a reporter/photographer on small weeklies and daily newspapers, although I didn't do the darkroom part. In fact I still own a Canon SLR with some lenses. Somewhere. I haven't touched it in years.

But my tastes have changed through the years. I bought a basic digital camera but now I just use the cheap camera in my cheap phone. I am going on a trip this weekend and I would like to use the digital camera again but I have to find it, reread the instructions, get new batteries ... so I imagine I will just use my phone.
 

Afrika61

Squier-holic
When I was a working imager I was very fond of Nikon gear. Tried others and always came back to it.

The F3 system, while less aesthetically appealing than the original "F," became the de rigueur pro workhorse for a reason. It was perfectly thought through. Its lenses absolutely superb. And it had every accessory one could possibly need.

I still have my F3 system. -Several bodies, motor drive, finders, lenses, focus screens, macro bellows and related gear. Not a single part ever required any service whatever. And the lenses are superb. All of the true "Nikkors" are And even the amatuer "E" types were pretty dang decent.

I later moved on to doing most of my work in 6x7 format. Better quality, yes. But also (frankly) it made for a better business model. Both because my higher than typical per negative charge was more easy for my clients to justify, and because slides made from those negatives had to be made by me. Clients couldn't have me do the initial work and then move on to others -- often making what was seen as my work (but actually wasn't) less than perfect.

My Pentax 67 system is also a sweetheart. Beautifully built. Rugged far beyond what my mostly studio (with occasional indoor location work for such as medical books) needs required.

Again I have several bodies, numerous finders and a nice collection of lenses.

Today that all sits.

I did make the transition to digital with Nikon -- and have a fine for its time D1x body. But when I retired it seemed good to truly start afresh. And since Nikon had changed their line, as had Canon, I looked at both (and others) before deciding to go over to the Canon's sub 35 sensor system. The T2i specifically.

It is small and light. Optics are wonderful my my non pro purpose. And priced so I could justify buying what I truly wanted.

This system (as I started with it):

View attachment 109659


I have since added other lenses. But amazingly that body has served me trouble free for quite a few years.

The size advantage is seen here. The 'baby' canon next to my old Nikon workhorse, each carrying a macro lens....

View attachment 109660

My absolute favorite "piece of glass" is the Canon EF-S 10-22 ultra-wide angle zoom.

in 35mm speak that is equivalent to to a 16-35mm. Almost perfectly rectilinear. Just an amazing lens.

Used even more often, though (and this may be a surprise!), is a Sigma DC 18-250. That, again in 35mm terms, is equivalent to corresponding to field of view of a 27-375 mm lens. And it is sharp, sharp sharp, and with only moderate linear distortion (which in any case is correctable digitally.

The only thing these lack is "speed." Not really for it needing more light gathering ability but for their having a bit too much depth of field even when fully open.

One learns to live with such. :)

All are the product of modern materials and computer design. Aspheric elements. Advanced coatings so that even with many elements they can deal with in-the-field light sources. None of which would have been even a dream when I started out in the `60s.

But even as I wax lyrical about the capabilities of this gear, in truth I think about such very little. I even take some of my "morning walks" with nothing but my iPhone. (Today's Image for the Day posted above was taken with that.)

As with guitars, it is a great time to be into photography. Just so much is available even for a retiree on a no-longer-pro budget such as myself.

:)

-don
Nikon stuff is unbelievably durable due to the fact that Nikon stuff is built unbelievably tough.
When I was in the service on of the younger guys who came from a well-off family carried an FM constantly and one day he had it with him when his squad was sent on a recce detail. The squad was loading into an Alouette chopper and as the chopper began to rise, I saw somethin fall and hit the turf from about 5-6 meters up. It was Phillips FM and as I walked up to it to grab it and make sure he got it back when he returned, I was sure that it was a goner. I was stunned to find out that beyond a dent in the lens hood and some small scratches, the FM was in good working order: the shutter and film advance worked normally, focusing ring rotated with out any hard spots, even the optics were still in alignment as far as I could tell. Later after he got it back from a repair shop Phillip mentioned that the repair bill was minimal as there was very little damage to the FM. That FM was one tough mother******,..
 
Last edited:

duceditor

Squier-Axpert
May 29, 2014
15,080
The Monadnocks, NH USA
That FM was one tough mother******,..

And the FM was their less tough semi-pro model!

That's no put down. They and the FE were great cameras.

When we traveled Jan used an FE. That gave her the ability to use all my lenses.

Oh, and then there was the Nikkormat. Remember those?


K81A1730.jpg


When my department first agreed to buy me some in house gear -- 1971 or 72? -- a 'mat was what I started with. Used it daily for years, first myself, and then as a lender for staff, and it never failed me once. What a bleedin' tank! :)

Come to think of it, when my son went to RIT (as a photo major) in 89 he took that old tank with him and used it until he could afford a more "pro" model. Half the paint was worn off but it still worked perfectly!

-don
 

duceditor

Squier-Axpert
May 29, 2014
15,080
The Monadnocks, NH USA
Wow, just entered another time warp. With this...




Really well written. By someone who understands.

Jan and I are in the midst of a tear down, reorg, of the music room/office. One thing we have done is neatly (and protectively) pack the camera gear. Dang it all. Now I wanna get it out again!

Oh, andI just found this. The good lady, circa late-70s, with her Nikon. An FE. Another memory hole for me to fall into! :D

Screen Shot 2018-09-06 at 2.29.54 PM.png


-don
 

Afrika61

Squier-holic
And the FM was their less tough semi-pro model!

That's no put down. They and the FE were great cameras.

When we traveled Jan used an FE. That gave her the ability to use all my lenses.

Oh, and then there was the Nikkormat. Remember those?


View attachment 109663


When my department first agreed to buy me some in house gear -- 1971 or 72? -- a 'mat was what I started with. Used it daily for years, first myself, and then as a lender for staff, and it never failed me once. What a bleedin' tank! :)

Come to think of it, when my son went to RIT (as a photo major) in 89 he took that old tank with him and used it until he could afford a more "pro" model. Half the paint was worn off but it still worked perfectly!

-don
Oh yeah.
The Canon analog to the Nikkormat, the TX, is what my collection of Canon FL bayonet mount and FD lens pair up with. Both are bare bones simple SLRs to my mind and I have to admit that using the TX from time to time forces me to slow down a touch and actually think about what I'm trying to accomplish(which is Not such a bad thing when you think about it).
And that worn of paint patina would probably fetch an extra 10% in price on the Antiques Road Show,....:D
 

Ralph124C41

Dr. Squier
Feb 10, 2016
6,114
My first guitar (maybe my first two) SLRs were Nikkormats I purchased from the Navy Exchange back when I was in the Navy (the U.S. Navy) when I was in the Vietnam War zone. In fact I still somehow have lots and lots of slides I took of some of the places I visited in the Far East. Great, simple, reliable cameras. You could drop one down a flight of stairs on a ship and it would still work. I'm told. I never tried that, however.
 
Last edited:

Afrika61

Squier-holic
My first guitar (maybe my first two) SLRs were Nikkormat I purchased from the Navy Exchange back when I was in the Navy (the U.S. Navy) when I was in the Vietnam War zone. In fact I still somehow have lots and lots of slides I took of some of the places I visited in the Far East. Great, simple, reliable cameras. You could drop one down a flight of stairs on a ship and it would still work. I'm told. I never tried that, however.
Really?
I used to have a Canon IV screw mount that the original owner had purchased at a post exchange while serving in the far east. It had a red PX exchange engraving on the top deck: anything like that on your Nikkormat?
 

Ralph124C41

Dr. Squier
Feb 10, 2016
6,114
Really?
I used to have a Canon IV screw mount that the original owner had purchased at a post exchange while serving in the far east. It had a red PX exchange engraving on the top deck: anything like that on your Nikkormat?
I don't know. I haven't had it (or them) for decades. I couldn't afford an upgrade to a Nikon and those lesnes so I started getting some Canon SLRs.

But I don't remember any red engraving on the one(s) I owned. I remember, however, they cost me $160 with a lens back then.
 


Top