What's your technique for such a rock steady handheld shot? Very good job!

No, I'm afraid not Phrank. The next time I go there (better
equipped) I may get the nerve up to trim those weeds out of
the way and reshoot it.

Many of the stones are in very poor condition. Some are made
of what appears to be sand stone and are so badly weathered
that they are now completely illedgable. Many are broken as
well.

Next weekend, weather permitting, I'll go back and see if
I can find the oldest stone there. The cemetary was established
in the early to mid sixteen hundreds, so it should be quite
interesting.

Bev: Those are the STRANGEST looking polar bears I've EVER SEEN!

Number two is outstanding. The simple clean lines of the
buildings and the texture of the lawn make me think of old
flight simulator landscapes. The angle of the small
foreground trees as they recede across the frame, and the
similarity of their shape add a truly surreal flavor to the
image.

Very good work.

I like the first version best. The other day, I had a brief moment to browse at the local library, so naturally I trotted over to the photography section and looked for Ansel Adams. I found a book called "Ansel Adams: Letters and Images". The first print was of a stand of aspen trees, and it absolutely blew me away. I was struck by the range of tones, the way he was able to get the bark of the trees to look just like glittering burnished silver with the background dark and mysterious. This is the first time I'd gotten a chance to see an Adams print on paper. Even though it was just a print in a book (I'm sure an actual full-sized print on good paper must be a thousand times better), I found myself whispering "whoooa!", like Keanu Reeves, to myself. Unfortunately I didn't have time to look further. I'm finding more and more that B&W photographs can be extraordinarily beautiful if one knows how to take advantage of the film's characteristics and subjects are carefully chosen to suit it. Very nice image, Taltos.

Wow Phrank, it's a shame you had so little time. That building looks more like an old church than an "eye sore," to quote the key man. I'm looking forward to seeing the film shots you took.

Heh! Well hush my mouth! :-)

Well I for one think that Jordy should make his dreams come true and buy a plane ticket to TEXAS to meet Michelle! You'll be waiting for him, won't you Michelle? Har har!

Bev, I think I agree with you, but to better understand,
how would you recompose this image to have the lines lead
into the scene? I'm having a hard time envisioning that.

Hi Sue, Welcome, and thanks for the help.

I'm not an expert in photography, but my first "good" 35mm
camera was (and is) a Pentax K1000. It's a strictly manual
camera. Some refer to it as a "student" camera. I learned
how to use it on my own, after reading up on the subject,
and it was fairly easy to do. It has a built in (averaging)
light meter, and that allows you to concentrate a bit more
on composition etc.

My philosophy when deciding to buy it was that I wanted to
have as much creative control and flexibility as possible.
I knew that at that point I didn't have any experience in
photography, but that's never scared me off of anything
before :-) With some time and good books on the subject I
knew that I'd either learn or would sell the camera off.

Looking back, the only regret I have about the K1000 is the
lack of high quality lenses to fit it. I generally prefer
primes (i.e. fixed focal length, non-zooms) because I think
they are better optimized for their given focal length.

If I had it to do over again I would've gotten a Nikon, if
for no other reason than there is a much better selection
of quality (e.g. Nikkor) prime lenses on the market for it.
It's a very well supported brand of camera.

I currently also have a Canon Powershot G2 digital camera,
which has lots of automatic features. The only automatic
mode I use is Aperture Priority mode. This allows me to
control the f-stops manually, and therefore control the
depth of field. And that's just for quick shots when I
don't want to be slowed down by having to set the shutter
speed. Otherwise I shoot in Manual mode. With that in mind,
I figure that I spent extra money on a lot of fancy features
that I never use. That's a shame.

The moral of this story is, if you buy a strictly automatic
camera, you'll outgrow it in no time. If you buy a good
manual camera, you'll grow into it in no time.

I'd recommend Nikon. Buy a good used one from a reputable
camera shop and you'll save even more money.

Very nice website, PC. I especially like the shrinking
spring-thing at the enterance! Very slick and easy to
navigate layout, too.

PS: I found "Bollard" in your photography gallery. Never
saw that one before. Nicely done.

I hope that server mix-up never happens again!

(It is sweet though, to see the lengths that a father
will go to entertain his child.) :-)

We've never talked before Aldoron, but congratulations on
your success. While I've never even thought of trying
to sell my photographs, I'd be happy to just cover the
expense of film and processing (and I use a digital camera,
so that wouldn't be much at all!).

Again, congratulations.