View allAll Photos Tagged weakness
The replica fort at Old Fort Harrod State Park was closed when I got there, so I couldn't go inside, but I did find a weakness in the defenses that let me poke my camera through the wall and get this picture. You wouldn't think that wooden stockade would be enough to defend a bunch of scared settler types from a hundred angry Shawnee people with guns, but walls like this held up well in places like Boonesborough.
"Say, Clint," you might be saying if you know anything at all about Kentucky history. "You mentioned Boonesborough up there, but you didn't say anything in that last picture about Daniel Boone. Isn't he supposed to be a thing?"
Well, friends, the fun thing about Kentucky history is that Daniel Boone gets a lot of history's press when it comes to early settlement, but Boone wasn't really the settling kind of guy. Sure, his wanderings kicked off the land rush that would eventually result in Kentucky's mad dash to statehood, but Boone wasn't the guy to turn to when you wanted to build a civilization. Civilization was what Boone was trying to escape, and he was really annoyed that it just kept chasing him down wherever he went.
Here's where Harrodsburg and Boone fit together. Daniel Boone was born in Pennsylvania in 1734, and he spent the next 30-someodd years roaming around Virginia and North Carolina. He was always wandering off into the woods, though, trying to find someplace where people weren't so that he could hunt all the deer and periodically get kidnapped by indigenous people. In 1769, his wandering took him through a relatively easy pass in the Appalachians that came to be known as the Cumberland Gap, and he found himself in a beautiful, untouched land of meadows. Eventually, that land would be called Kentucky.
As goes with all these settlement stories, "untouched" isn't really an accurate adjective. People had been living and roaming around Kentucky for 10,000 years at this point, but Boone happened to duck through the Gap in the middle of a unique set of decades. Eastern Kentucky had traditionally been home to the Cherokee and the Shawnee people, but over the previous hundred-someodd years, the Iroquois had come down from New York and tried grabbing all the territory for themselves. They were probably doing this as a response to white colonial encroachment on their own territory. The Iroquois push had proven successful, and the Cherokee were pushed south into Tennessee while the Shawnee were mostly forced north of the Ohio River into future Indiana and Illinois. But then things went badly for the Iroquois back in the New York homeland, so they never really did anything with Kentucky, and the place was left empty for a while. The Shawnee were using it as a winter hunting ground when Boone showed up.
Boone, meanwhile, was at the forefront of a colonial surge just itching to cross the mountains from Virginia. English folks had been heading west almost from the moment the first settlers landed at Jamestown in 1607, but the Appalachians were a daunting barrier to settler types, so they'd hesitated in expanding beyond the foothills. But eastern Virginia was getting crowded by about 1770 -- that's a big reason Virginians were so eager to join the Massachusetts revolt against King George III -- and a few adventurous types started poking their noses through the mountain gaps. Once everybody heard about Daniel Boone's 1769 adventure, the dam broke, and the setters started trickling in.
In 1774, at roughly the same time James Harrod and his Pennsylvania buddies were hopping in their boats on the Monongahela, a North Carolina judge and real estate schemer named Richard Henderson came up with a plan to claim an enormous patch of western Virginia west of the Appalachians and south of the Ohio for himself, which he would then turn around and sell. He had no legal basis for this claim, but then neither did anybody else (at least as far as colonial law was concerned), and a lot of wealth in those days came from bluffing people into thinking you had it. So Henderson invented a land speculation firm he called the Transylvania Company and told everybody that Kentucky was Transylvania Company property, and he tried to make it legit by hiring Daniel Boone to build a road and a fort. And so in early 1775, Boone blazed the Wilderness Road through the Cumberland Gap and built the fort on the Kentucky River south of future Lexington that came to be known as Fort Boonesborough. (Just like at Harrodsburg, today there's a state park built around a replica fort at Boonesborough's site to show you a little of what that might have looked like.)
And so, after having left Kentucky alone for the previous 167 years of English Colonial settlement, the white folks started coming into Kentucky all at once. James Harrod finished his Harrodsburg fort just ahead of Boone by a matter of weeks. A few other groups came into Kentucky at roughly the same time and established similar forts. In May of 1775, Richard Henderson called for a convention of representatives from all the little settlements to meet at Boonesborough and establish something resembling a government. James Harrod made the trip from Harrodsburg with several of his associates, and a guy named Benjamin Logan came up with a few friends from a little outpost at a place called St. Asaph's (also known as Logan's Station, now called Stanford), and they all convened a little congress beneath a Boonesborough elm tree. And that was the start of Kentucky government.
It wasn't the end of it, though, because Richard Henderson didn't have the political sense it took to pull off his speculation scheme, and he ticked off everybody back in Virginia or North Carolina who might have given him legitimacy. I mean, seriously, the dude told Thomas Frickin' Jefferson to take a hike. The Transylvania Company fell apart over the next few years when the new United States Congress declined to recognize Henderson's claim, and Henderson slunk back to North Carolina. (He was eventually given a claim along the Ohio in western Kentucky, where Henderson County exists today.) Meanwhile, Boone, who'd been promised all sorts of land by Henderson and about half a dozen other people, wound up with nothing. He spent the next decade working as a surveyor, but he was really bad at that and wound up falling deeply into debt. Eventually, he got mad enough at the civilization rising around him -- the civilization he had helped usher in -- that he ran off to Missouri and tried the whole thing again.
My weakness is starting things and not finishing them. Partly this is due to the humid weather but partly my own love of starting new things. The minifee and the girl at the bottom are now away but all the others still lurk in boxes of spooky parts.
The Creature Walks Among Us, 1956
youtu.be/cfLKIq8XZ0M?t=2s Full Feature
This is the third "Creature" movie. Universal left their options open at the end of second with the exact same ambiguous ending. While sequels to sequels tend to be poor fare, gill-man fans tend to regard Creature Walks Among Us (CWAU) as being as good as the first.
CWAU shares many B-movie weaknesses. It follows formula plot elements that were hallmarks of the first movie, but it also ventures into some new material. This new ground gives CWAU some muscle of its own. The first movie had a tiny bit of science blather about evolution. The second movie didn't bother. The third, however, tried to re-inject some science into the fiction.
Synopsis
A rich scientist mounts an expedition to find the gill-man who has escaped into the Florida swamps. A local fisherman reports being attacked by a man-like "diablo" so they investigate. Using an underwater radar device (not sonar), they track him down to a narrow bayou. Here he attacks their small boat, but is set on fire by spilled gasoline. Badly burned, the gill-man collapses. The scientists take him back aboard their 100' yacht and head for San Francisco. They've bandaged him up (head to toe) and are monitoring his vital signs. During the trip the complex soap opera develops. Dr. Barton (Jeff Morrow) is the rich, but jealous husband. Mrs. Barton (Liegh Snowden) is the blonde babe no longer in love and resentful of her husbands attempts to control her. Dr. Morgan (Rex Reason) is the concerned friend. Jed Grant is the buff playboy helper. Innuendo and misunderstandings keep the pot simmering.
Along the way, the doctors find that gill-man's gills are too badly burned to supply his body with oxygen. An x-ray reveals that he has lungs but that they're collapsed and closed off. They operate to open them. He can breathe air now. They also comment about how the burns have cause the fish-like layer to fall away, and a more human-like layer of skin to develop. Gillman awakens and interrupts Jed forcing himself on Marcia. He then dives into the sea, but must be rescued before he drowns.
Back in San Francisco, Gill is taken to Dr. Barton's estate and put into an electrified pen with some other animals. He looks somewhat longingly to the water's edge, but is docile. When a mountain lion gets into the pen and kills a sheep, Gill kills the big cat. When Dr. Barton pistol-whips Jed and puts the body in Gill's cage (to frame him for the murder), Gill goes nuts, tears up the house looking for Dr. Barton, finally killing him. Gill then wanders off the estate. With everyone in funeral attire, there's a mild suggestion that Dr. Morgan will come to call on the widow Barton when a respectful time has passed. The movie closes with Gill walking down the beach towards the sea. The End.
Once you've gotten into the gill-man saga, the plot of CWAU takes it to a new level which is more thoughtful than simply another monster movie. It's also fun to see the team of Jeff Morrow and Rex Reason again -- two good actors -- who starred in This Island Earth ('54).
The original movie had two gill-man suits -- a smaller one for the underwater shots, and a larger one for the above-water shots. The second movie, Revenge, made two new gill-man suits along the same lines. For the third movie, they didn't put too much into a new gill-man suit. They created a new gill-man head and hands, but dressed him the crude sailcloth shirt and pants so as to not have to make more. For the pre-changed gill-man, they used footage from the first two movies. The only scenes which needed a new gill-man suit was where he attacked the small boat and was burned. These scenes are so quick and dark, that the lower quality Gill-Man III is not apparent.
Arthur Ross, who co-wrote the original opted for a more thoughtful script. Are we what we are because of our genes, or because of our environment? Dr. Barton is excited that the gill-man is becoming more human. The fire burned away his "old self", releasing the new. "Change the metabolism and man will change." Dr. Morgan disagrees. Science can't create a new species. They may have altered gillman's skin, but inside he's the same. As though mankind would not be fit for space travel until he evolved into something better. This is a natural sort of thought for scientism which denies there being any divine element to man. How else to define man? Our human physiology is all we have. This is reminiscent of the premise underlying The Island of Dr. Moreau. Give animals human shape, human features, and they'll become people.
The Nurture part comes where the scientists theorize that the Gill-man as a "new" man will behave good or bad, depending on how he's treated. The assumption of the Tabula Rasa.
A notion floated in the dialogue is that ordinary humans are "built" for the earth and not suitable to space. The scientists pontificate about how the aquatic gill-man was "built" for life in the water. Man, therefore, was "built" for terrestrial life. That build would not work in space, they say. "We all stand at a crossroads between the jungle and the stars." If gill-man could become a new creature, maybe man could too. Since the changed gill-man could not really become human, the inference is that man can't become this Nietzchean over-man either.
Some aspects of CWAU have spiritual parallels. The before-creature is the old "animal" nature -- rash, violent, lustful. The after-creature is the new "human" self. He's no longer lustful or rash. He's violent only as defense. At the end, he's violent but driven by a sense of justice. There's also a parallel to the biblical "fall of man" described in the Book of Genesis, in that the before creature was innocent. He needed no clothes. After the change, he needed clothing. There's also a parallel to New Testament verses which talk of the old man having to die (metaphorically) before the new man could emerge. This adds some twist to the movie's title. Our own struggles with our animal side with our divine. Dr. Barton and Jed Grant are examples of those who gives in to their animal side. Dr. Morgan and even Marcia Barton are examples of people who maintained morality.
Old Home -- Dr. Barton's estate was one of Universal's stock houses. Used in many movies, such as Tarantula
Bottom line? CWAU will appeal to gill-man fans. Since it's not simply a re-remake of the first two "Creature" films, it has some appeal to others too. It's a bit lighter on the action but more cerebral. It's worth a watch.
Better than REVENGE, but nowhere near the glorious heights of the first film (which is really the only CREATURE that you absolutely must see).
I have a weakness for cow snouts. Everytime I see one, I hope I can stroke her warm, gently, dry (!) snout.
The Allgäu Alp cows are friendly and photogenic (used to tourism). This one pushes herself to the fore. She´s a model and I love her.
A birthday present for Andrea, who said this was her favorite quote after starting to read Anna Karenina this summer.
Capital A drawn from this lettering, lowercase font found here (#24), top border found here, bottom border replicated out of a cross in this pattern.
276/365
"Show your weakness
Let your tears fall when you're
feeling blue
Show your weakness
I'll be on your side
even when you lose
I know what
it's like to build a wall
I know
what it's like to be alone
I know
what it's like to need someone."
~ Show Your Weakness~Amber Rubarth"
1. This is almost sooc, meaning I didnt bring it into ps to fix the greusome bruise on my arm, so ignore it, if you can see it (i fell down the stairs)
2. I love black and white pictures.
3. Tomorrow I will not be in my house from 7:30am-10:30pm. I dont know if I will get a picture done.
4. I actually took a really lame picture, which i will put in comments for ya, but then decided you guys deserved more. and....
5. Its Slider Sunday!! So I did some sliding on the basic windows gallery thing :)
TWITTER | BLOG | FB FANPAGE
Soldiers assigned to the 3d U.S. Infantry Regiment (The Old Guard) compete in The Old Guard Ceremonial Olympics. The competition is regiment-wide and used to identify each element's strengths and weaknesses performing in various Old Guard ceremonies. At the end of the competition, the winning element will be named. (U.S Army photo by Sgt Charlotte Carulli)
A good thing continues
Some six months ago, I posted almost 100 images and a few thoughts I felt were missing from the many existing RX1 reviews. The outpouring of support and interest in that article was very gratifying. When I published, I had used the camera for six full months, enough time to come to a view of its strengths and weaknesses and to produce a small portfolio of good images, but not enough time to see the full picture (pun intended). In the following six months, I have used the camera at least as frequently as in the first six and have produced another small set of good images. It should be noted that my usage of the RX1 in the last six (and especially in the last 3) months has involved less travel and more time with the family and around the house; I will share relatively few of these images but will spend some time sharing my impressions of its functionality for family snapshots as I am sure there is some interest. And let it be said here: one of the primary motivations to purchase the camera was to take more photos with the family, and after one full year I can confidently say: money well spent.
The A7/r game-changer?
In the past six months, Sony have announced and released two full-frame, interchangeable lens cameras that clearly take design cues from the RX1: the A7 and the A7r. These cameras are innovative and highly capable and, as such, are in the midst of taking the photography world by storm. I think they are compelling enough cameras that I wonder whether Sony is wasting its energy continuing to develop further A-mount cameras. Sony deserve credit for a bold strategy—many companies would have been content to allow the success of the the RX1 (and RX1R) generate further sales before pushing further into the white space left unexplored by camera makers with less ambition.This is not the place to detail the relative advantages and disadvantages of the RX1 versus the A7/r except to make the following point. I currently use a Nikon D800 and an RX1: were I to sell both and purchase the A7r + 35mm f/2.8 I would in many ways lose nothing by way of imaging capability or lens compatibility but would pocket the surplus $1250-1750. Indeed this loyal Nikon owner thought long and hard about doing so, which speaks to the strategic importance of these cameras for a company trying to make inroads into a highly concentrated market.Ultimately, I opted to hang onto the two cameras I have (although this decision is one that I revisit time and time again) and continue to use them as I have for the past year. Let me give you a quick flavor of why.
The RX1 is smaller and more discrete
This is a small a point, but my gut reaction to the A7/r was: much smaller than the D800, not as small as the RX1. The EVF atop the A7/r and the larger profile of interchangeable mount lenses means that I would not be able to slip the A7/r into a pocket the way I can the RX1. Further, by virtue of using the EVF and its loud mechanical shutter, the A7/r just isn’t as stealthy as the RX1. Finally, f/2 beats the pants off of f/2.8 at the same or smaller size.At this point, some of you may be saying, “Future Sony releases will allow you to get a body without an EVF and get an f/2 lens that has a slimmer profile, etc, etc.” And that’s just the point: to oversimplify things, the reason I am keeping my RX1 is that Sony currently offers something close to an A7 body without a built-in EVF and with a slimmer profile 35mm f/2.
The D800 has important functional advantages
On the other side of the spectrum, the AF speed of the A7/r just isn’t going to match the D800, especially when the former is equipped with a Nikon lens and F-mount adapter. EVFs cannot yet match the experience of looking through the prism and the lens (I expect they will match soon, but aren’t there yet). What’s more, I have made such an investment in Nikon glass that I can’t yet justify purchasing an adapter for a Sony mount or selling them all for Sony’s offerings (many of which aren’t to market yet).Now, all of these are minor points and I think all of them disappear with an A8r, but they add up to something major: I have two cameras very well suited to two different types of shooting, and I ask myself if I gain or lose by getting something in between—something that wasn’t quite a pocket shooter and something that was quite a DSLR? You can imagine, however, that if I were coming to the market without a D800 and an RX1, that my decision would be far different: dollar for dollar, the A7/r would be a no-brainer.During the moments when I consider selling to grab an A7r, I keep coming back to a thought I had a month or so before the RX1 was announced. At that time I was considering something like the NEX cameras with a ZM 21mm f/2.8 and I said in my head, “I wish someone would make a carry-around camera with a full frame sensor and a fixed 35mm f/2.8 or f/2.” Now you understand how attractive the RX1 is to me and what a ridiculously high bar exists for another camera system to reach.
Okay, so what is different from the last review?
For one, I had an issue with the camera’s AF motor failing to engage and giving me an E61:00 error. I had to send it out to Sony for repairs (via extended warranty and service plan). I detailed my experience with Sony Service here [insert link] and I write to you as a very satisfied customer. That is to say, I have 3 years left on a 4 year + accidental damage warranty and I feel confident enough in that coverage to say that I will have this beauty in working order for at least another 3 years.For two, I’ve spent significantly less time thinking of this camera as a DSLR replacement and have instead started to develop a very different way of shooting with it. The activation barrier to taking a shot with my D800 is quite high. Beyond having to bring a large camera wherever you go and have it in hand, a proper camera takes two hands and full attention to produce an image. I shoot slowly and methodically and often from a tripod with the D800. In contrast, I can pull the RX1 out, pop off the lens cap, line up and take a shot with one hand (often with a toddler in the other). This fosters a totally different type of photography.
My “be-there” camera
The have-everywhere camera that gives DSLR type controls to one-handed shooting lets me pursue images that happen very quickly or images that might not normally meet the standards of “drag-the-DSLR-out-of-the-bag.” Many of those images you’ll see on this post. A full year of shooting and I can say this with great confidence: the RX1 is a terrific mash-up of point-and-shoot and DSLR not just in image quality and features, but primarily in the product it helps me create. To take this thinking a bit further: I find myself even processing images from the RX1 differently than I would from my DSLR. So much so that I have strongly considered starting a tumblr and posting JPEGs directly from the RX1 via my phone or an iPad rather than running the bulk of them through Lightroom, onto Flickr and then on the blog (really this is just a matter of time, stay tuned, and those readers who have experience with tumblr, cloud image storage and editing, etc, etc, please contact me, I want to pick your brain).Put simply, I capture more spontaneous and beautiful “moments” than I might have otherwise. Photography is very much an exercise in “f/8 and be there,” and the RX1 is my go-to “be there” camera.
The family camera
I mentioned earlier that I justified the purchase of the RX1 partly as a camera to be used to document the family moments into which a DSLR doesn’t neatly fit. Over the past year I’ve collected thousands and thousands of family images with the RX1. The cold hard truth is that many of those photos could be better if I’d taken a full DSLR kit with me to the park or the beach or the grocery store each time. The RX1 is a difficult camera to use on a toddler (or any moving subject for that matter); autofocus isn’t as fast as a professional DSLR, it’s difficult to perfectly compose via an LCD (especially in bright sunlight), but despite these shortcomings, it’s been an incredibly useful family camera. There are simply so many beautiful moments where I had the RX1 over my shoulder, ready to go that whatever difficulties exist relative to a DSLR, those pale in comparison to the power of it’s convenience. The best camera is the one in your hand.
Where to go from here.
So what is the value of these RX1 going forward, especially in a world of the A7/r and it’s yet-to-be-born siblings without an EVF and a pancake lens? Frankly, at its current price (which is quite fair when you consider the value of the the body and the lens) I see precious little room for an independent offering versus a mirrorless, interchangeable lens system with the same image quality in a package just as small. That doesn’t mean Sony won’t make an RX2 or an RX1 Mark II (have a look at it’s other product lines to see how many SKUs are maintained despite low demand). Instead, I see the RX1 as a bridge that needed to exist for engineers, managers, and the market to make it to the A7/r and it’s descendants.A Facebook friend recently paid me a great compliment; he said something like, “Justin, via your blog, you’ve sold a ton of RX1 cameras.” Indeed, despite my efforts not to be a salesman, I think he’s right: I have and would continue to recommend this camera.The true value of the RX1 going forward is for those of us who have the thing on our shoulders; and yes, if you have an investment in and a love for a DSLR system, there’s still tremendous value in getting one, slinging it over your shoulder, and heading out into the wide, bright world; A7/r or no, this is just an unbelievably capable camera.
Mirit Ben Nun: Shortness of breath
'Shortness of breath' is not only a sign of physical weakness, it is a metaphor for a mental state of strong desire that knows no repletion; more and more, an unbearable glut, without repose. Mirit Ben Nun's type of work on the other hand requires an abundance of patience. This is a Sisyphean work (requiring hard labor) of marking lines and dots, filling every empty millimeter with brilliant blots. Therefore we are facing a paradox or a logical conflict. A patient and effortful work that stems from an urgent need to cover and fill, to adorn and coat. Her craft of layering reaches a state of a continuous ceremonial ritual.
This ritual digests every object into itself - useful or discarded -- available and ordinary or rare and exceptional -- they submit and devote to the overlay work. Mirit BN gathers scrap off the streets -- cardboard rolls of fabric, assortments of wooden boards and pieces, plates and planks -- and constructs a new link, her own syntax, which she alone is fully responsible for. The new combination -- a type of a sculptural construction -- goes through a process of patching by the act of painting.
In fact Mirit regards her three dimensional objects as a platform for painting, with a uniform continuity, even if it has obstacles, mounds and valleys. These objects beg her to paint, to lay down colors, to set in motion an intricate weave of abstract patterns that at times finds itself wandering the contours of human images and sometimes -- not. In those cases what is left is the monotonous activity of running the patterns, inch by inch, till their absolute coverage, till a short and passing instant of respite and than on again to a new onset.
Next to this assembly of garbage and it's recycling into 'painted sculptures' Mirit offers a surprising reunion between her illustrated objects and so called cheap African sculpture; popular artifacts or articles that are classified in the standard culture as 'primitive'.
This combination emphasizes the difference between her individualistic performance and the collective creation which is translated into cultural clichés. The wood carved image creates a moment of peace within the crowded bustle; an introverted image, without repetitiveness and reverberation. This meeting of strangers testifies that Mirit' work could not be labeled under the ´outsiders art´ category. She is a one woman school who is compelled to do the art work she picked out to perform. Therefore she isn't creating ´an image´ such as the carved wooden statues, but she produces breathless ´emotional jam' whose highest values are color, motion, beauty and plenitude. May it never lack, neither diluted, nor dull for even an instant
Tali Tamir
August 2010
I have a slight weakness for a fine single malt. I usually try to make a 1 litre bottle like this one last me for at least a year.
So as well as the whiskey being strong, I have to be strong to achieve the expected longevity of the bottle.
In this pic I am the small colour smudge reflected in the curved base of the bottle.
#57 Strong for 116 pictures in 2016
"a moment of weakness"
- camilla engman
12x16 in acrylic on board
please check the other wonderful artwork pieces from the "sour chandelier" ^-^
junc gallery, los angeles
2006 feb 25
© woolloomooloo / woolloomooloosky. all rights reserved.
A good thing continues
Some six months ago, I posted almost 100 images and a few thoughts I felt were missing from the many existing RX1 reviews. The outpouring of support and interest in that article was very gratifying. When I published, I had used the camera for six full months, enough time to come to a view of its strengths and weaknesses and to produce a small portfolio of good images, but not enough time to see the full picture (pun intended). In the following six months, I have used the camera at least as frequently as in the first six and have produced another small set of good images. It should be noted that my usage of the RX1 in the last six (and especially in the last 3) months has involved less travel and more time with the family and around the house; I will share relatively few of these images but will spend some time sharing my impressions of its functionality for family snapshots as I am sure there is some interest. And let it be said here: one of the primary motivations to purchase the camera was to take more photos with the family, and after one full year I can confidently say: money well spent.
The A7/r game-changer?
In the past six months, Sony have announced and released two full-frame, interchangeable lens cameras that clearly take design cues from the RX1: the A7 and the A7r. These cameras are innovative and highly capable and, as such, are in the midst of taking the photography world by storm. I think they are compelling enough cameras that I wonder whether Sony is wasting its energy continuing to develop further A-mount cameras. Sony deserve credit for a bold strategy—many companies would have been content to allow the success of the the RX1 (and RX1R) generate further sales before pushing further into the white space left unexplored by camera makers with less ambition.This is not the place to detail the relative advantages and disadvantages of the RX1 versus the A7/r except to make the following point. I currently use a Nikon D800 and an RX1: were I to sell both and purchase the A7r + 35mm f/2.8 I would in many ways lose nothing by way of imaging capability or lens compatibility but would pocket the surplus $1250-1750. Indeed this loyal Nikon owner thought long and hard about doing so, which speaks to the strategic importance of these cameras for a company trying to make inroads into a highly concentrated market.Ultimately, I opted to hang onto the two cameras I have (although this decision is one that I revisit time and time again) and continue to use them as I have for the past year. Let me give you a quick flavor of why.
The RX1 is smaller and more discrete
This is a small a point, but my gut reaction to the A7/r was: much smaller than the D800, not as small as the RX1. The EVF atop the A7/r and the larger profile of interchangeable mount lenses means that I would not be able to slip the A7/r into a pocket the way I can the RX1. Further, by virtue of using the EVF and its loud mechanical shutter, the A7/r just isn’t as stealthy as the RX1. Finally, f/2 beats the pants off of f/2.8 at the same or smaller size.At this point, some of you may be saying, “Future Sony releases will allow you to get a body without an EVF and get an f/2 lens that has a slimmer profile, etc, etc.” And that’s just the point: to oversimplify things, the reason I am keeping my RX1 is that Sony currently offers something close to an A7 body without a built-in EVF and with a slimmer profile 35mm f/2.
The D800 has important functional advantages
On the other side of the spectrum, the AF speed of the A7/r just isn’t going to match the D800, especially when the former is equipped with a Nikon lens and F-mount adapter. EVFs cannot yet match the experience of looking through the prism and the lens (I expect they will match soon, but aren’t there yet). What’s more, I have made such an investment in Nikon glass that I can’t yet justify purchasing an adapter for a Sony mount or selling them all for Sony’s offerings (many of which aren’t to market yet).Now, all of these are minor points and I think all of them disappear with an A8r, but they add up to something major: I have two cameras very well suited to two different types of shooting, and I ask myself if I gain or lose by getting something in between—something that wasn’t quite a pocket shooter and something that was quite a DSLR? You can imagine, however, that if I were coming to the market without a D800 and an RX1, that my decision would be far different: dollar for dollar, the A7/r would be a no-brainer.During the moments when I consider selling to grab an A7r, I keep coming back to a thought I had a month or so before the RX1 was announced. At that time I was considering something like the NEX cameras with a ZM 21mm f/2.8 and I said in my head, “I wish someone would make a carry-around camera with a full frame sensor and a fixed 35mm f/2.8 or f/2.” Now you understand how attractive the RX1 is to me and what a ridiculously high bar exists for another camera system to reach.
Okay, so what is different from the last review?
For one, I had an issue with the camera’s AF motor failing to engage and giving me an E61:00 error. I had to send it out to Sony for repairs (via extended warranty and service plan). I detailed my experience with Sony Service here [insert link] and I write to you as a very satisfied customer. That is to say, I have 3 years left on a 4 year + accidental damage warranty and I feel confident enough in that coverage to say that I will have this beauty in working order for at least another 3 years.For two, I’ve spent significantly less time thinking of this camera as a DSLR replacement and have instead started to develop a very different way of shooting with it. The activation barrier to taking a shot with my D800 is quite high. Beyond having to bring a large camera wherever you go and have it in hand, a proper camera takes two hands and full attention to produce an image. I shoot slowly and methodically and often from a tripod with the D800. In contrast, I can pull the RX1 out, pop off the lens cap, line up and take a shot with one hand (often with a toddler in the other). This fosters a totally different type of photography.
My “be-there” camera
The have-everywhere camera that gives DSLR type controls to one-handed shooting lets me pursue images that happen very quickly or images that might not normally meet the standards of “drag-the-DSLR-out-of-the-bag.” Many of those images you’ll see on this post. A full year of shooting and I can say this with great confidence: the RX1 is a terrific mash-up of point-and-shoot and DSLR not just in image quality and features, but primarily in the product it helps me create. To take this thinking a bit further: I find myself even processing images from the RX1 differently than I would from my DSLR. So much so that I have strongly considered starting a tumblr and posting JPEGs directly from the RX1 via my phone or an iPad rather than running the bulk of them through Lightroom, onto Flickr and then on the blog (really this is just a matter of time, stay tuned, and those readers who have experience with tumblr, cloud image storage and editing, etc, etc, please contact me, I want to pick your brain).Put simply, I capture more spontaneous and beautiful “moments” than I might have otherwise. Photography is very much an exercise in “f/8 and be there,” and the RX1 is my go-to “be there” camera.
The family camera
I mentioned earlier that I justified the purchase of the RX1 partly as a camera to be used to document the family moments into which a DSLR doesn’t neatly fit. Over the past year I’ve collected thousands and thousands of family images with the RX1. The cold hard truth is that many of those photos could be better if I’d taken a full DSLR kit with me to the park or the beach or the grocery store each time. The RX1 is a difficult camera to use on a toddler (or any moving subject for that matter); autofocus isn’t as fast as a professional DSLR, it’s difficult to perfectly compose via an LCD (especially in bright sunlight), but despite these shortcomings, it’s been an incredibly useful family camera. There are simply so many beautiful moments where I had the RX1 over my shoulder, ready to go that whatever difficulties exist relative to a DSLR, those pale in comparison to the power of it’s convenience. The best camera is the one in your hand.
Where to go from here.
So what is the value of these RX1 going forward, especially in a world of the A7/r and it’s yet-to-be-born siblings without an EVF and a pancake lens? Frankly, at its current price (which is quite fair when you consider the value of the the body and the lens) I see precious little room for an independent offering versus a mirrorless, interchangeable lens system with the same image quality in a package just as small. That doesn’t mean Sony won’t make an RX2 or an RX1 Mark II (have a look at it’s other product lines to see how many SKUs are maintained despite low demand). Instead, I see the RX1 as a bridge that needed to exist for engineers, managers, and the market to make it to the A7/r and it’s descendants.A Facebook friend recently paid me a great compliment; he said something like, “Justin, via your blog, you’ve sold a ton of RX1 cameras.” Indeed, despite my efforts not to be a salesman, I think he’s right: I have and would continue to recommend this camera.The true value of the RX1 going forward is for those of us who have the thing on our shoulders; and yes, if you have an investment in and a love for a DSLR system, there’s still tremendous value in getting one, slinging it over your shoulder, and heading out into the wide, bright world; A7/r or no, this is just an unbelievably capable camera.
A good thing continues
Some six months ago, I posted almost 100 images and a few thoughts I felt were missing from the many existing RX1 reviews. The outpouring of support and interest in that article was very gratifying. When I published, I had used the camera for six full months, enough time to come to a view of its strengths and weaknesses and to produce a small portfolio of good images, but not enough time to see the full picture (pun intended). In the following six months, I have used the camera at least as frequently as in the first six and have produced another small set of good images. It should be noted that my usage of the RX1 in the last six (and especially in the last 3) months has involved less travel and more time with the family and around the house; I will share relatively few of these images but will spend some time sharing my impressions of its functionality for family snapshots as I am sure there is some interest. And let it be said here: one of the primary motivations to purchase the camera was to take more photos with the family, and after one full year I can confidently say: money well spent.
The A7/r game-changer?
In the past six months, Sony have announced and released two full-frame, interchangeable lens cameras that clearly take design cues from the RX1: the A7 and the A7r. These cameras are innovative and highly capable and, as such, are in the midst of taking the photography world by storm. I think they are compelling enough cameras that I wonder whether Sony is wasting its energy continuing to develop further A-mount cameras. Sony deserve credit for a bold strategy—many companies would have been content to allow the success of the the RX1 (and RX1R) generate further sales before pushing further into the white space left unexplored by camera makers with less ambition.This is not the place to detail the relative advantages and disadvantages of the RX1 versus the A7/r except to make the following point. I currently use a Nikon D800 and an RX1: were I to sell both and purchase the A7r + 35mm f/2.8 I would in many ways lose nothing by way of imaging capability or lens compatibility but would pocket the surplus $1250-1750. Indeed this loyal Nikon owner thought long and hard about doing so, which speaks to the strategic importance of these cameras for a company trying to make inroads into a highly concentrated market.Ultimately, I opted to hang onto the two cameras I have (although this decision is one that I revisit time and time again) and continue to use them as I have for the past year. Let me give you a quick flavor of why.
The RX1 is smaller and more discrete
This is a small a point, but my gut reaction to the A7/r was: much smaller than the D800, not as small as the RX1. The EVF atop the A7/r and the larger profile of interchangeable mount lenses means that I would not be able to slip the A7/r into a pocket the way I can the RX1. Further, by virtue of using the EVF and its loud mechanical shutter, the A7/r just isn’t as stealthy as the RX1. Finally, f/2 beats the pants off of f/2.8 at the same or smaller size.At this point, some of you may be saying, “Future Sony releases will allow you to get a body without an EVF and get an f/2 lens that has a slimmer profile, etc, etc.” And that’s just the point: to oversimplify things, the reason I am keeping my RX1 is that Sony currently offers something close to an A7 body without a built-in EVF and with a slimmer profile 35mm f/2.
The D800 has important functional advantages
On the other side of the spectrum, the AF speed of the A7/r just isn’t going to match the D800, especially when the former is equipped with a Nikon lens and F-mount adapter. EVFs cannot yet match the experience of looking through the prism and the lens (I expect they will match soon, but aren’t there yet). What’s more, I have made such an investment in Nikon glass that I can’t yet justify purchasing an adapter for a Sony mount or selling them all for Sony’s offerings (many of which aren’t to market yet).Now, all of these are minor points and I think all of them disappear with an A8r, but they add up to something major: I have two cameras very well suited to two different types of shooting, and I ask myself if I gain or lose by getting something in between—something that wasn’t quite a pocket shooter and something that was quite a DSLR? You can imagine, however, that if I were coming to the market without a D800 and an RX1, that my decision would be far different: dollar for dollar, the A7/r would be a no-brainer.During the moments when I consider selling to grab an A7r, I keep coming back to a thought I had a month or so before the RX1 was announced. At that time I was considering something like the NEX cameras with a ZM 21mm f/2.8 and I said in my head, “I wish someone would make a carry-around camera with a full frame sensor and a fixed 35mm f/2.8 or f/2.” Now you understand how attractive the RX1 is to me and what a ridiculously high bar exists for another camera system to reach.
Okay, so what is different from the last review?
For one, I had an issue with the camera’s AF motor failing to engage and giving me an E61:00 error. I had to send it out to Sony for repairs (via extended warranty and service plan). I detailed my experience with Sony Service here [insert link] and I write to you as a very satisfied customer. That is to say, I have 3 years left on a 4 year + accidental damage warranty and I feel confident enough in that coverage to say that I will have this beauty in working order for at least another 3 years.For two, I’ve spent significantly less time thinking of this camera as a DSLR replacement and have instead started to develop a very different way of shooting with it. The activation barrier to taking a shot with my D800 is quite high. Beyond having to bring a large camera wherever you go and have it in hand, a proper camera takes two hands and full attention to produce an image. I shoot slowly and methodically and often from a tripod with the D800. In contrast, I can pull the RX1 out, pop off the lens cap, line up and take a shot with one hand (often with a toddler in the other). This fosters a totally different type of photography.
My “be-there” camera
The have-everywhere camera that gives DSLR type controls to one-handed shooting lets me pursue images that happen very quickly or images that might not normally meet the standards of “drag-the-DSLR-out-of-the-bag.” Many of those images you’ll see on this post. A full year of shooting and I can say this with great confidence: the RX1 is a terrific mash-up of point-and-shoot and DSLR not just in image quality and features, but primarily in the product it helps me create. To take this thinking a bit further: I find myself even processing images from the RX1 differently than I would from my DSLR. So much so that I have strongly considered starting a tumblr and posting JPEGs directly from the RX1 via my phone or an iPad rather than running the bulk of them through Lightroom, onto Flickr and then on the blog (really this is just a matter of time, stay tuned, and those readers who have experience with tumblr, cloud image storage and editing, etc, etc, please contact me, I want to pick your brain).Put simply, I capture more spontaneous and beautiful “moments” than I might have otherwise. Photography is very much an exercise in “f/8 and be there,” and the RX1 is my go-to “be there” camera.
The family camera
I mentioned earlier that I justified the purchase of the RX1 partly as a camera to be used to document the family moments into which a DSLR doesn’t neatly fit. Over the past year I’ve collected thousands and thousands of family images with the RX1. The cold hard truth is that many of those photos could be better if I’d taken a full DSLR kit with me to the park or the beach or the grocery store each time. The RX1 is a difficult camera to use on a toddler (or any moving subject for that matter); autofocus isn’t as fast as a professional DSLR, it’s difficult to perfectly compose via an LCD (especially in bright sunlight), but despite these shortcomings, it’s been an incredibly useful family camera. There are simply so many beautiful moments where I had the RX1 over my shoulder, ready to go that whatever difficulties exist relative to a DSLR, those pale in comparison to the power of it’s convenience. The best camera is the one in your hand.
Where to go from here.
So what is the value of these RX1 going forward, especially in a world of the A7/r and it’s yet-to-be-born siblings without an EVF and a pancake lens? Frankly, at its current price (which is quite fair when you consider the value of the the body and the lens) I see precious little room for an independent offering versus a mirrorless, interchangeable lens system with the same image quality in a package just as small. That doesn’t mean Sony won’t make an RX2 or an RX1 Mark II (have a look at it’s other product lines to see how many SKUs are maintained despite low demand). Instead, I see the RX1 as a bridge that needed to exist for engineers, managers, and the market to make it to the A7/r and it’s descendants.A Facebook friend recently paid me a great compliment; he said something like, “Justin, via your blog, you’ve sold a ton of RX1 cameras.” Indeed, despite my efforts not to be a salesman, I think he’s right: I have and would continue to recommend this camera.The true value of the RX1 going forward is for those of us who have the thing on our shoulders; and yes, if you have an investment in and a love for a DSLR system, there’s still tremendous value in getting one, slinging it over your shoulder, and heading out into the wide, bright world; A7/r or no, this is just an unbelievably capable camera.
I have a weakness for eye shadow... And I really really like the eyecolors at Bare Escentuals... This is the newest collection I purchased... It's called The Women of B.E. Collection... There are 20 colors and they all have girl names... Your name might be among them... There's Autumn, Lisa, Melodie, Susan, Margo, Michelle, Tina, Kathleen, Laura, Sandra, Tara, Victoria, Casey, Catherine, Karen, Leigh Ann, Gigi, Joeli, Terri and Rebecca...
We all have one. My friend Andy's just happens to be bananas and cats. You hear that super-villains? BANANAS and CATS.
Tea and fried bread is my foible and I think, I can't survive without it. No matter whether it is morning, afternoon, evening or midnight, I prefer tea to take.
“This isn't something I was directly involved in, but the pot was assembled by our pottery specialist after she noticed that lots of fragments from the same area had similar decoration, and they turned out to be from the same object.”
About the project: “With generous support from a Concordia Foundation Fellowship for excavation and research, I was able to return last summer for a fourth season of participation in Oberlin College’s regional archaeological project in the Sangro Valley, located in the Abruzzo region of Italy. As a full staff member, I was primarily in charge of database administration and field recording.
“Last summer, the Sangro Valley Project (SVP) transitioned to its third phase while at the same time moving to a new site toward the base of Monte Pallano in the town of San Giovanni, an area that had never been excavated, but appeared very promising in earlier field surveys. As a part of this third phase, the directors and I decided that it was the perfect time to transition to a more modern form of archaeological recording. Following the success of the University of Cincinnati’s Pompeii Archaeological Research Project: Porta Stabia in using the Apple iPad for paperless recording in 2010, I began developing an integrated excavation database in FileMaker Pro for use on both computers and iPads. The team at the University of Cincinnati, particularly Dr. Steven Ellis and John Wallrodt, were very helpful while I was developing our database, and we were able to exchange some ideas for future avenues of exploration and experimentation.
“During the previous sixteen years, the SVP had employed paper records, Microsoft Access databases, fillable PDFs, Microsoft Excel spreadsheets, and numerous other data formats, with no direct relationships between any sets of data. This meant that it was very difficult to see all of the relevant information about any object, sample, or context (stratigraphic unit). My prior experience as a field school student and trench supervisor allowed me to approach database development from the viewpoint of end users (i.e., the excavators), and I also understood what the strengths and weaknesses of the previous recording methods were. Therefore, three of my primary goals with the project were to improve communication between the labs and the field, cut down on human error, and put much more data at the fingertips of excavators and specialists.”
-Christopher Motz, classical archaeology graduate student
Unani and Herbal medicine for general weakness treatment, Naturo Power buy online unani dawakhana bhiwandi www.younani.com
Unani Treatment of Weakness, Weakness, Causes of Weakness. Unani & Ayurvedic Natural Home Remedy for General Weakness in Bhiwandi
General Debility & Weakness | Medicines For Health Disorders - Unani medicines, herbal products, health supplements,
Hi, I am 27 years old. My problem is of weakness, I am getting tired or fatigued, having body pain daily specially at waist. Please advise me for same.
Buy online Naturo Power is Remedies for General Weakness treatment available from Unani Dawakhana bhiwandi www.younani.com.
Information about Weakness, Causes of Weakness, Signs & Symptoms of Weakness, Unani treatment and Unani medicines.
Ignorance of these problems can also cause severe weakness in sex power, general health problems and seminal weakness.
Natural cure for Joint,Skin and abdominal problems,premature ejaculation
Package for General Weakness
Herbal treatment for Sexual Weakness,Obesity,Hairloss
Sexual Weakness - Herbal / Unani medicines
What is the treatment of general body weakness
Unani Treatment For Sexual Weakness and Sexual
Natural UnaniTreatment for Masturbation Effects, Sexual Weakness, Night
Home Remedy for Sexual Weakness
For over 3 generations we havae been catering to the needs of people and have been trusted for our renowned products. With such immense trust and goodwill, the need was felt to diversify into other areas of health care.We have introduced unani products, all manufactured with pure natural ingredients of the highest quality, manufactured with modern processes. Subjected to stringent quality controls tests to give our customer complete Satisfaction.
All our products and ideas are innovative, as we believe in Customer Satisfaction.
Thus was born an idea called TAZEEN.
108/87, KHOTALA SHOPPING CENTRE, MANGAL BAZAR SLAB,HAFSAN ALI, NEAR TEEN BATTI, BHIWANDI, DIST.THANE, MAHARASHTRA,INDIA - 421 302.
Mobile : +91 9921922904
Email : unanidawakhana1@gmail.com
Email : order@younani.com
website : www.younani.com
Mirit Ben Nun: Shortness of breath
'Shortness of breath' is not only a sign of physical weakness, it is a metaphor for a mental state of strong desire that knows no repletion; more and more, an unbearable glut, without repose. Mirit Ben Nun's type of work on the other hand requires an abundance of patience. This is a Sisyphean work (requiring hard labor) of marking lines and dots, filling every empty millimeter with brilliant blots. Therefore we are facing a paradox or a logical conflict. A patient and effortful work that stems from an urgent need to cover and fill, to adorn and coat. Her craft of layering reaches a state of a continuous ceremonial ritual.
This ritual digests every object into itself - useful or discarded -- available and ordinary or rare and exceptional -- they submit and devote to the overlay work. Mirit BN gathers scrap off the streets -- cardboard rolls of fabric, assortments of wooden boards and pieces, plates and planks -- and constructs a new link, her own syntax, which she alone is fully responsible for. The new combination -- a type of a sculptural construction -- goes through a process of patching by the act of painting.
In fact Mirit regards her three dimensional objects as a platform for painting, with a uniform continuity, even if it has obstacles, mounds and valleys. These objects beg her to paint, to lay down colors, to set in motion an intricate weave of abstract patterns that at times finds itself wandering the contours of human images and sometimes -- not. In those cases what is left is the monotonous activity of running the patterns, inch by inch, till their absolute coverage, till a short and passing instant of respite and than on again to a new onset.
Next to this assembly of garbage and it's recycling into 'painted sculptures' Mirit offers a surprising reunion between her illustrated objects and so called cheap African sculpture; popular artifacts or articles that are classified in the standard culture as 'primitive'.
This combination emphasizes the difference between her individualistic performance and the collective creation which is translated into cultural clichés. The wood carved image creates a moment of peace within the crowded bustle; an introverted image, without repetitiveness and reverberation. This meeting of strangers testifies that Mirit' work could not be labeled under the ´outsiders art´ category. She is a one woman school who is compelled to do the art work she picked out to perform. Therefore she isn't creating ´an image´ such as the carved wooden statues, but she produces breathless ´emotional jam' whose highest values are color, motion, beauty and plenitude. May it never lack, neither diluted, nor dull for even an instant
Tali Tamir
August 2010
As pictured in his book, Pitching in a Pinch or, Baseball from the Inside By Christy Mathewson (1912). [In the PUBLIC DOMAIN] This edition issued under arrangement with the publishers G. P. Putnam’s Sons, New York and London; The Knickerbocker Press, New York.
[Pg 1] Pitching in a Pinch
I The Most Dangerous Batters I Have Met
How “Joe” Tinker Changed Overnight from a Weakling at the Plate to the Worst Batter I Had to Face—“Fred” Clarke of Pittsburg cannot be Fooled by a Change of Pace, and “Hans” Wagner’s Only “Groove” Is a Base on Balls—“Inside” Information on All the Great Batters.
I HAVE often been asked to which batters I have found it hardest to pitch.
It is the general impression among baseball fans that Joseph Faversham Tinker, the short-stop of the Chicago Cubs, is the worst man that I have to face in the National League. Few realize that during his first two years in the big show Joe Tinker looked like a cripple at the plate when I was pitching. His “groove” was a slow curve over the outside corner, and I fed him slow curves over that[Pg 2] very outside corner with great regularity. Then suddenly, overnight, he became from my point of view the most dangerous batter in the League.
Tinker is a clever ball-player, and one day I struck him out three times in succession with low curves over the outside corner. Instead of getting disgusted with himself, he began to think and reason. He knew that I was feeding him that low curve over the outside corner, and he started to look for an antidote. He had always taken a short, choppy swing at the ball. When he went to the clubhouse after the game in which he struck out three times, he was very quiet, so I have been told. He was just putting on his last sock when he clapped his hand to his leg and exclaimed:
“I’ve got it.”
“Got what?” asked Johnny Evers, who happened to be sitting next to Tinker.
“Got the way to hit Matty, who had me looking as if I came from the home for the blind out there to-day,” answered Joe.
“I should say he did,” replied Evers. “But if you’ve found a way to hit him, why, I’m from away out in Missouri near the Ozark Mountains.”
[Pg 3]“Wait till he pitches again,” said Tinker by way of conclusion, as he took his diamond ring from the trainer and left the clubhouse.
It was a four-game series in Chicago, and I had struck Tinker out three times in the first contest. McGraw decided that I should pitch the last game as well. Two men were on the bases and two were out when Tinker came to the bat for the first time in this battle, and the outfielders moved in closer for him, as he had always been what is known as a “chop” hitter. I immediately noticed something different about his style as he set himself at the plate, and then it struck me that he was standing back in the box and had a long bat. Before this he had always choked his bat short and stood up close. Now I observed that he had his stick way down by the handle.
Bresnahan was catching, and he signalled for the regular prescription for Tinker. With a lot of confidence I handed him that old low curve. He evidently expected it, for he stepped almost across the plate, and, with that long bat, drove the ball to right field for two bases over the head of George Browne, who was playing close up to the infield, scoring both runs and eventually winning the game.
[Pg 4]“I’ve got your number now, Matty!” he shouted at me as he drew up at second base.
I admit that he has had it quite frequently since he switched his batting style. Now the outfielders move back when Tinker comes to the plate, for, if he connects, he hits “’em far” with that long bat. Ever since the day he adopted the “pole” he has been a thorn in my side and has broken up many a game. That old low curve is his favorite now, and he reaches for it with the same cordiality as is displayed by an actor in reaching for his pay envelope. The only thing to do is to keep them close and try to outguess him, but Tinker is a hard man to beat at the game of wits.
Many a heady hitter in the Big League could give the signs to the opposing pitcher, for he realizes what his weakness is and knows that a twirler is going to pitch at it. But, try as hard as he will, he cannot often cover up his “groove,” as Tinker did, and so he continues to be easy for the twirler who can put the ball where he wants it.
Fred Clarke, of Pittsburg, has always been a hard man for me to fool on account of his batting form. A hitter of his type cannot be deceived by a change of pace, because he stands up close to[Pg 5] the plate, chokes his bat short, and swings left-handed. When a pitcher cannot deceive a man with a change of pace, he has to depend on curves. Let me digress briefly to explain why a change of pace will not make the ball miss Clarke’s bat. He is naturally a left-field hitter, and likes the ball on the outside corner of the plate. That means he swings at the ball late and makes most of his drives to left field.
How is a batter fooled by a change of pace? A pitcher gives him a speedy one and then piles a slow one right on top of it with the same motion. The batter naturally thinks it is another fast ball and swings too soon—that is, before the ball gets to him. But when a man like Clarke is at the bat and a pitcher tries to work a change of pace, what is the result? He naturally swings late and so hits a fast ball to left field. Then as the slow one comes up to the plate, he strikes at it, granted he is deceived by it, timing his swing as he would at a fast ball. If it had been a fast ball, as he thought, he would have hit it to left field, being naturally a late swinger. But on a slow one he swings clear around and pulls it to right field twice as hard as he would have hit it to left field because[Pg 6] he has obtained that much more drive in the longer swing. Therefore, it is a rule in the profession that no left-handed batter who hits late can be deceived by a change of pace.
“Rube” Ellis, a left-handed hitter of the St. Louis Club, entered the League and heard complimentary stories about my pitching. Ellis came up to bat the first day that I pitched against him wondering if he would get even a foul. He was new to me and I was looking for his “groove.” I gave him one over the outside corner, and he jabbed it to left field. The next time, I thought to work the change of pace, and, swinging late, he hauled the ball around to right field, and it nearly tore Fred Tenny’s head off en route over first base. Five hits out of five times at bat he made off me that day, and, when he went to the clubhouse, he remarked to his team mates in this wise:
“So that is the guy who has been burning up this League, huh? We’ve got better ’n him in the coast circuit. He’s just got the Indian sign on you. That’s all.”
I did a little thinking about Ellis’s hitting. He used a long bat and held it down near the end and “poled ’em.” He was naturally a left-field hitter[Pg 7] and, therefore, swung late at the ball. I concluded that fast ones inside would do for Mr. Ellis, and the next time we met he got just those. He has been getting them ever since and now, when he makes a hit off me, he holds a celebration.
“Hans” Wagner, of Pittsburg, has always been a hard man for me, but in that I have had nothing on a lot of other pitchers. He takes a long bat, stands well back from the plate, and steps into the ball, poling it. He is what is known in baseball as a free swinger, and there are not many free swingers these days. This is what ailed the Giants’ batting during the world’s series in 1911. They all attempted to become free swingers overnight and were trying to knock the ball out of the lot, instead of chopping it.
In the history of baseball there have not been more than fifteen or twenty free swingers altogether, and they are the real natural hitters of the game, the men with eyes nice enough and accurate enough to take a long wallop at the ball. “Dan” Brouthers was one, and so was “Cap” Anson. Sherwood Magee and “Hans” Wagner are contemporary free swingers. Men of this type wield a heavy bat as if it were a toothpick and[Pg 8] step back and forth in the box, hitting the ball on any end of the plate. Sometimes it is almost impossible to pass a man of this sort purposely, for a little carelessness in getting the ball too close to the plate may result in his stepping up and hitting it a mile. Pitchers have been searching for Wagner’s “groove” for years, and, if any one of them has located it, he has his discovery copyrighted, for I never heard of it.
Only one pitcher, that I can recall, always had it on Wagner, and that man was Arthur Raymond, sometimes called “Bugs.” He seemed to upset the German by his careless manner in the box and by his “kidding” tactics. I have seen him make Wagner go after bad balls, a thing that “Hans” seldom can be induced to do by other twirlers.
I remember well the first time I pitched against Wagner. Jack Warner was catching, and I, young and new in the League, had spent a lot of time with him, learning the weaknesses of the batters and being coached as to how to treat them. Wagner loomed up at the bat in a pinch, and I could not remember what Warner had said about his flaw. I walked out of the box to confer with the catcher.
“What’s his ‘groove,’ Jack?” I asked him.
[Pg 9]“A base on balls,” replied Warner, without cracking a smile.
That’s always been Wagner’s “groove.”
There used to be a player on the Boston team named Claude Ritchey who “had it on me” for some reason or other. He was a left-handed hitter and naturally drove the ball to left field, so that I could not fool him with a change of pace. He was always able to outguess me in a pinch and seemed to know by intuition what was coming.
There has been for a long time an ardent follower of the Giants named Mrs. Wilson, who raves wildly at a game, and is broken-hearted when the team loses. The Giants were playing in Boston one day, and needed the game very badly. It was back in 1905, at the time the club could cinch the pennant by winning one contest, and the flag-assuring game is the hardest one to win. Two men got on the bases in the ninth inning with the score tied and no one out. The crowd was stamping its feet and hooting madly, trying to rattle me. I heard Mrs. Wilson shrill loudly above the noise:
“Stick with them, Matty!”
Ritchey came up to the bat, and I passed him[Pg 10] purposely, trying to get him to strike at a bad ball. I wouldn’t take a chance on letting him hit at a good one. Mrs. Wilson thought I was losing my control, and unable to stand it any longer she got up and walked out of the grounds. Then I fanned the next two batters, and the last man hit a roller to Devlin and was thrown out at first base. I was told afterwards that Mrs. Wilson stood outside the ground, waiting to hear the crowd cheer, which would have told her it was all over.
She lingered at the gate until the fourteenth inning, fearing to return because she expected to see us routed. At last she heard a groan from the home crowd when we won in the fourteenth. Still she would not believe that I had weathered the storm and won the game that gave the Giants a pennant, but waited to be assured by some of the spectators leaving the grounds before she came around to congratulate us.
All batters who are good waiters, and will not hit at bad balls, are hard to deceive, because it means a twirler has to lay the ball over, and then the hitter always has the better chance. A pitcher will try to get a man to hit at a bad ball before he will put it near the plate.
[Pg 11]Many persons have asked me why I do not use my “fade-away” oftener when it is so effective, and the only answer is that every time I throw the “fade-away” it takes so much out of my arm. It is a very hard ball to deliver. Pitching it ten or twelve times in a game kills my arm, so I save it for the pinches.
Many fans do not know what this ball really is. It is a slow curve pitched with the motion of a fast ball. But most curve balls break away from a right-handed batter a little. The fade-away breaks toward him.
Baker, of the Athletics, is one of the most dangerous hitters I have ever faced, and we were not warned to look out for him before the 1911 world’s series, either. Certain friends of the Giants gave us some “inside” information on the Athletics’ hitters. Among others, the Cubs supplied us with good tips, but no one spread the Baker alarm. I was told to watch out for Collins as a dangerous man, one who was likely to break up a game any time with a long drive.
I consider Baker one of the hardest, cleanest hitters I have ever faced, and he drives the ball on a line to any field. The fielders cannot play for[Pg 12] him. He did not show up well in the first game of the world’s series because the Athletics thought they were getting our signs, and we crossed Baker with two men on the bases in the third inning. He lost a chance to be a hero right there.
The roughest deal that I got from Baker in the 1911 series was in the third game, which was the second in New York. We had made one run and the ninth inning rolled around with the Giants still leading, 1 to 0. The first man at the bat grounded out and then Baker came up. I realized by this time that he was a hard proposition, but figured that he could not hit a low curve over the outside corner, as he is naturally a right-field hitter. I got one ball and one strike on him and then delivered a ball that was aimed to be a low curve over the outside corner. Baker refused to swing at it, and Brennan, the umpire, called it a ball.
I thought that it caught the outside corner of the plate, and that Brennan missed the strike. It put me in the hole with the count two balls and one strike, and I had to lay the next one over very near the middle to keep the count from being three and one. I pitched a curve ball that was meant for the outside corner, but cut the plate better[Pg 13] than I intended. Baker stepped up into it and smashed it into the grand-stand in right field for a home run, and there is the history of that famous wallop. This tied the score.
A pitcher has two types of batters to face. One is the man who is always thinking and guessing and waiting, trying to get the pitcher in the hole. Evers, of the Cubs, is that sort. They tell me that “Ty” Cobb of Detroit is the most highly developed of this type of hitter. I have never seen him play. Then the other kind is the natural slugger, who does not wait for anything, and who could not outguess a pitcher if he did. The brainy man is the harder for a pitcher to face because he is a constant source of worry.
There are two ways of fooling a batter. One is literally to “mix ’em up,” and the other is to keep feeding him the same sort of a ball, but to induce him to think that something else is coming. When a brainy man is at the bat, he is always trying to figure out what to expect. If he knows, then his chances of getting a hit are greatly increased. For instance, if a batter has two balls and two strikes on him, he naturally concludes that the pitcher will throw him a curve ball, and prepares for it.[Pg 14] Big League ball-players recognize only two kinds of pitched balls—the curve and the straight one.
When a catcher in the Big League signals for a curved ball, he means a drop, and, after handling a certain pitcher for a time, he gets to know just how much the ball is going to curve. That is why the one catcher receives for the same pitcher so regularly, because they get to work together harmoniously. “Chief” Meyers, the big Indian catcher on the Giants, understands my style so well that in some games he hardly has to give a sign. But, oddly enough, he could never catch Raymond because he did not like to handle the spit ball, a hard delivery to receive, and Raymond and he could not get along together as a battery. They would cross each other. But Arthur Wilson caught Raymond almost perfectly. This explains the loss of effectiveness of many pitchers when a certain catcher is laid up or out of the game.
“Cy” Seymour, formerly the outfielder of the Giants, was one of the hardest batters I ever had to pitch against when he was with the Cincinnati club and going at the top of his stride. He liked a curved ball, and could hit it hard and far, and was always waiting for it. He was very clever at [Pg 15]out-guessing a pitcher and being able to conclude what was coming. For a long time whenever I pitched against him I had “mixed ’em up” literally, handing him first a fast ball and then a slow curve and so on, trying to fool him in this way. But one day we were playing in Cincinnati, and I decided to keep delivering the same kind of a ball, that old fast one around his neck, and to try to induce him to believe that a curve was coming. I pitched him nothing but fast ones that day, and he was always waiting for a curve. The result was that I had him in the hole all the time, and I struck him out three times. He has never gotten over it. Only recently I saw Seymour, and he said:
“Matty, you are the only man that ever struck me out three times in the same game.”
He soon guessed, however, that I was not really mixing them up, and then I had to switch my style again for him.
Some pitchers talk to batters a great deal, hoping to get their minds off the game in this way, and thus be able to sneak strikes over. But I find that talking to a batter disconcerts me almost as much as it does him, and I seldom do it. Repartee is not my line anyway.
[Pg 16]Bender talked to the Giant players all through that first game in the 1911 world’s series, the one in which he wore the smile, probably because he was a pitcher old in the game and several of the younger men on the New York team acted as if they were nervous. Snodgrass and the Indian kept up a running fire of small talk every time that the Giants’ centre-fielder came to the plate.
Snodgrass got hit by pitched balls twice, and this seemed to worry Bender. When the New York centre-fielder came to the bat in the eighth inning, the Indian showed his even teeth in the chronic grin and greeted Snodgrass in this way:
“Look out, Freddie, you don’t get hit this time.”
Then Bender wound up and with all his speed drove the ball straight at Snodgrass’s head, and Bender had more speed in that first game than I ever saw him use before. Snodgrass dodged, and the ball drove into Thomas’s glove. This pitching the first ball at the head of a batter is an old trick of pitchers when they think a player intends to get hit purposely or that he is crowding the plate.
“If you can’t push ’em over better than that,”[Pg 17] retorted Snodgrass, “I won’t need to get hit. Let’s see your fast one now.”
“Try this one,” suggested Bender, as he pitched another fast one that cut the heart of the plate. Snodgrass swung and hit nothing but the air. The old atmosphere was very much mauled by bats in that game anyway.
“You missed that one a mile, Freddie,” chuckled the Indian, with his grin.
Snodgrass eventually struck out and then Bender broke into a laugh.
“You ain’t a batter, Freddie,” exclaimed the Indian, as he walked to the bench. “You’re a backstop. You can never get anywhere without being hit.”
If a pitcher is going to talk to a batter, he must size up his man. An irritable, nervous young player often will fall for the conversation, but most seasoned hitters will not answer back. The Athletics, other than Bender, will not talk in a game. We tried to get after them in the first contest in 1911, and we could not get a rise out of one of them, except when Snodgrass spiked Baker, and I want to say right here that this much discussed incident was accidental. Baker was blocking[Pg 18] Snodgrass out, and the New York player had a perfect right to the base line.
Sherwood Magee of the Philadelphia National League team is one of the hardest batters that I ever have had to face, because he has a great eye, and is of the type of free swingers who take a mad wallop at the ball, and are always liable to break up a game with a long drive. Just once I talked to him when he was at the bat, more because we were both worked up than for any other reason, and he came out second best. It was while the Giants were playing at American League Park in 1911 after the old Polo Grounds had burned. Welchonce, who was the centre-fielder for the Phillies at the time, hit a slow one down the first base line, and I ran over to field the ball. I picked it up as the runner arrived and had no time to straighten up to dodge him. So I struck out my shoulder and he ran into it. There was no other way to make the play, but I guess it looked bad from the stand, because Welchonce fell down.
Magee came up to bat next, threw his hat on the ground, and started to call me names. He is bad when irritated—and tolerably easy to irritate, as shown by the way in which he knocked down[Pg 19] Finnegan, the umpire, last season because their ideas on a strike differed slightly. I replied on that occasion, but remembered to keep the ball away from the centre of the plate. That is about all I did do, but he was more wrought up than I and hit only a slow grounder to the infield. He was out by several feet. He took a wild slide at the bag, however, feet first, in what looked like an attempt to spike Merkle. We talked some more after that, but it has all been forgotten now.
To be a successful pitcher in the Big League, a man must have the head and the arm. When I first joined the Giants, I had what is known as the “old round-house curve,” which is no more than a big, slow outdrop. I had been fooling them in the minor leagues with it, and I was somewhat chagrined when George Davis, then the manager of the club, came to me and told me to forget the curve, as it would be of no use. It was then that I began to develop my drop ball.
A pitcher must watch all the time for any little unconscious motion before he delivers the ball. If a base runner can guess just when he is going to pitch, he can get a much better start. Drucke used to have a little motion with his foot just [Pg 20]before he pitched, of which he himself was entirely unconscious, but the other clubs got on to it and stole bases on him wildly. McGraw has since broken him of it.
The Athletics say that I make a motion peculiar to the fade-away. Some spit-ball pitchers announce when they are going to throw a moist one by looking at the ball as they dampen it. At other times, when they “stall,” they do not look at the ball. The Big League batter is watching for all these little things and, if a pitcher is not careful, he will find a lot of men who are hard to pitch to. There are plenty anyway, and, as a man grows older, this number increases season by season.
[Pg 21]
i002
Characteristic signs of a child, teenager or adult anemic are pale face, general weakness, fatigue, headache, loss of appetite, poor digestion, cold and sometimes wet hands.
If patients with anemia, is characteristic decrease below the normal number of red blood cells and hemoglobin.
The patient is well to rest as much as possible, make walks in the fresh air if possible to stay a while in high mountain environment, because blood is quickly renews mountain atmosphere.
We recommend an easily digestible food, rich in vitamins, with many raw fruits to bring the body iron, vitamins, minerals it needs.
It is best to drink herbal tea blend, fresh milk, fruit juice, a glass of red wine and a meal after a glass of beer.
Every morning on an empty stomach to eat 1-2 apples sweetened with honey races.
At breakfast given a raw egg yolk, fish that have put a few drops of brandy and mix well two or three pieces of liver fried over high heat on both sides, but the means to remain almost cruel.
Then dandelion salad with boiled potatoes bark or leaves early spinach salad ... read more ...
© 2016 Mike McCall..
_Pain is weakness leaving the body_.
North Carolina State University Women's RFC..
Buffalo State University RFC Women..
"The" St. Patrick's Day Rugby Tournament 2016,.
Daffin Park, Savannah, Chatham County, Georgia, USA.
Kenilworth probe for a weakness in Malvern's defence at the Jack Davies Memorial Ground during a third-verus-second clash in rugby union's Midlands Two West (South) league. Ken led 10-0, 17-5 and, with 15 minutes to go, 31-27 but went down 37-31. The opening 25 minutes of the second half saw visiting Malvern transform a 5-17 deficit into a 27-17 advantage, and both teams score two tries in as many minutes. Defeat almost certainly puts paid to Ken's promotion hopes. They now trail Malvern by 10 points and undefeated leaders Droitwich by 16, though they do have a game in hand.
Match statistics:
Admission: £3. Programme: 60 pages (w/a); Attendance: 135. Scoring sequence: 3-0 (9mins); 10-0 (26mins); 10-5 (29mins); 17-5 (42mins); 17-10 (47mins); 17-13 (49mins); 17-20 (53mins); 17-27 (55mins); 24-27 (63mins); 31-27 (65mins); 31-34 (69mins); 31-37 (72mins). Referee: Michael Essam (North Midlands Society).
Sony RX1 User Report.
I hesitate to write about gear. Tools are tools and the bitter truth is that a great craftsman rises above his tools to create a masterpiece whereas most of us try to improve our abominations by buying better or faster hammers to hit the same nails at the same awkward angles.
The internet is fairly flooded with reviews of this tiny marvel, and it isn’t my intention to compete with those articles. If you’re looking for a full-scale review of every feature or a down-to-Earth accounting of the RX1’s strengths and weaknesses, I recommend starting here.
Instead, I’d like to provide you with a flavor of how I’ve used the camera over the last six months. In short, this is a user report. To save yourself a few thousand words: I love the thing. As we go through this article, you’ll see this is a purpose built camera. The RX1 is not for everyone, but we will get to that and on the way, I’ll share a handful of images that I made with the camera.
It should be obvious to anyone reading this that I write this independently and have absolutely no relationship with Sony (other than having exchanged a large pile of cash for this camera at a retail outlet).
Before we get to anything else, I want to clear the air about two things: Price and Features
The Price
First things first: the price. The $2800+ cost of this camera is the elephant in the room and, given I purchased the thing, you may consider me a poor critic. That in mind, I want to offer you three thoughts:
Consumer goods cost what they cost, in the absence of a competitor (the Fuji X100s being the only one worth mention) there is no comparison and you simply have to decide for yourself if you are willing to pay or not.
Normalize the price per sensor area for all 35mm f/2 lens and camera alternatives and you’ll find the RX1 is an amazing value.
You are paying for the ability to take photographs, plain and simple. Ask yourself, “what are these photographs worth to me?”
In my case, #3 is very important. I have used the RX1 to take hundreds of photographs of my family that are immensely important to me. Moreover, I have made photographs (many appearing on this page) that are moving or beautiful and only happened because I had the RX1 in my bag or my pocket. Yes, of course I could have made these or very similar photographs with another camera, but that is immaterial.
35mm by 24mm by 35mm f/2
The killer feature of this camera is simple: it is a wafer of silicon 35mm by 24mm paired to a brilliantly, ridiculously, undeniably sharp, contrasty and bokehlicious 35mm f/2 Carl Zeiss lens. Image quality is king here and all other things take a back seat. This means the following: image quality is as good or better than your DSLR, but battery life, focus speed, and responsiveness are likely not as good as your DSLR. I say likely because, if you have an entry-level DSLR, the RX1 is comparable on these dimensions. If you want to change lenses, if you want an integrated viewfinder, if you want blindingly fast phase-detect autofocus then shoot with a DSLR. If you want the absolute best image quality in the smallest size possible, you’ve got it in the RX1.
While we are on the subject of interchangeable lenses and viewfinders...
I have an interchangeable lens DSLR and I love the thing. It’s basically a medium format camera in a 35mm camera body. It’s a powerhouse and it is the first camera I reach for when the goal is photography. For a long time, however, I’ve found myself in situations where photography was not the first goal, but where I nevertheless wanted to have a camera. I’m around the table with friends or at the park with my son and the DSLR is too big, too bulky, too intimidating. It comes between you and life. In this realm, mirrorless, interchangeable lens cameras seem to be king, but they have a major flaw: they are, for all intents and purposes, just little DSLRs.
As I mentioned above, I have an interchangeable lens system, why would I want another, smaller one? Clearly, I am not alone in feeling this way, as the market has produced a number of what I would call “professional point and shoots.” Here we are talking about the Fuji X100/X100s, Sigma DPm-series and the RX100 and RX1.
Design is about making choices
When the Fuji X100 came out, I was intrigued. Here was a cheap(er), baby Leica M. Quiet, small, unobtrusive. Had I waited to buy until the X100s had come out, perhaps this would be a different report. Perhaps, but probably not. I remember thinking to myself as I was looking at the X100, “I wish there was a digital Rollei 35, something with a fixed 28mm or 35mm lens that would fit in a coat pocket or a small bag.” Now of course, there is.
So, for those of you who said, “I would buy the RX1 if it had interchangeable lenses or an integrated viewfinder or faster autofocus,” I say the following: This is a purpose built camera. You would not want it as an interchangeable system, it can’t compete with DSLR speed. A viewfinder would make the thing bigger and ruin the magic ratio of body to sensor size—further, there is a 3-inch LCD viewfinder on the back! Autofocus is super fast, you just don’t realize it because the bar has been raised impossibly high by ultra-sonic magnet focusing rings on professional DSLR lenses. There’s a fantastic balance at work here between image quality and size—great tools are about the total experience, not about one or the other specification.
In short, design is about making choices. I think Sony has made some good ones with the RX1.
In use
So I’ve just written 1,000 words of a user report without, you know, reporting on use. In many ways the images on the page are my user report. These photographs, more than my words, should give you a flavor of what the RX1 is about. But, for the sake of variety, I intend to tell you a bit about the how and the why of shooting with the RX1.
Snapshots
As a beginning enthusiast, I often sneered at the idea of a snapshot. As I’ve matured, I’ve come to appreciate what a pocket camera and a snapshot can offer. The RX1 is the ultimate photographer’s snapshot camera.
I’ll pause here to properly define snapshot as a photograph taken quickly with a handheld camera.
To quote Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, “Life moves pretty fast. If you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.” So it is with photography. Beautiful photographs happen at the decisive moment—and to paraphrase Henri Cartier-Bresson further—the world is newly made and falling to pieces every instant. I think it is no coincidence that each revolution in the steady march of photography from the tortuously slow chemistry of tin-type and daguerreotype through 120 and 35mm formats to the hyper-sensitive CMOS of today has engendered new categories and concepts of photography.
Photography is a reflexive, reactionary activity. I see beautiful light or the unusual in an every day event and my reaction is a desire to make a photograph. It’s a bit like breathing and has been since I was a kid.
Rather than sneer at snapshots, nowadays I seek them out; and when I seek them out, I do so with the Sony RX1 in my hand.
How I shoot with the RX1
Despite much bluster from commenters on other reviews as to the price point and the purpose-built nature of this camera (see above), the RX1 is incredibly flexible. Have a peek at some of the linked reviews and you’ll see handheld portraits, long exposures, images taken with off-camera flash, etc.
Yet, I mentioned earlier that I reach for the D800 when photography is the primary goal and so the RX1 has become for me a handheld camera—something I use almost exclusively at f/2 (people, objects, shallow DoF) or f/8 (landscapes in abundant light, abstracts). The Auto-ISO setting allows the camera to choose in the range from ISO 50 and 6400 to reach a proper exposure at a given aperture with a 1/80 s shutter speed. I have found this shutter speed ensures a sharp image every time (although photographers with more jittery grips may wish there was the ability to select a different default shutter speed). This strategy works because the RX1 has a delightfully clicky exposure compensation dial just under your right thumb—allowing for fine adjustment to the camera’s metering decision.
So then, if you find me out with the RX1, you’re likely to see me on aperture priority, f/2 and auto ISO. Indeed, many of the photographs on this page were taken in that mode (including lots of the landscape shots!).
Working within constraints.
The RX1 is a wonderful camera to have when you have to work within constraints. When I say this, I mean it is great for photography within two different classes of constraints: 1) physical constraints of time and space and 2) intellectual/artistic constraints.
To speak to the first, as I said earlier, many of the photographs on this page were made possible by having a camera with me at a time that I otherwise would not have been lugging around a camera. For example, some of the images from the Grand Canyon you see were made in a pinch on my way to a Christmas dinner with my family. I didn’t have the larger camera with me and I just had a minute to make the image. Truth be told, these images could have been made with my cell phone, but that I could wring such great image quality out of something not much larger than my cell phone is just gravy. Be it jacket pocket, small bag, bike bag, saddle bag, even fannie pack—you have space for this camera anywhere you go.
Earlier I alluded to the obtrusiveness of a large camera. If you want to travel lightly and make photographs without announcing your presence, it’s easier to use a smaller camera. Here the RX1 excels. Moreover, the camera’s leaf shutter is virtually silent, so you can snap away without announcing your intention. In every sense, this camera is meant to work within physical constraints.
I cut my photographic teeth on film and I will always have an affection for it. There is a sense that one is playing within the rules when he uses film. That same feeling is here in the RX1. I never thought I’d say this about a camera, but I often like the JPEG images this thing produces more than I like what I can push with a RAW. Don’t get me wrong, for a landscape or a cityscape, the RAW processed carefully is FAR, FAR better than a JPEG.
But when I am taking snapshots or photos of friends and family, I find the JPEGs the camera produces (I’m shooting in RAW + JPEG) so beautiful. The camera’s computer corrects for the lens distortion and provides the perfect balance of contrast and saturation. The JPEG engine can be further tweaked to increase the amount of contrast, saturation or dynamic range optimization (shadow boost) used in writing those files. Add in the ability to rapidly compensate exposure or activate various creative modes and you’ve got this feeling you’re shooting film again. Instant, ultra-sensitive and customizable film.
Pro Tip: Focusing
Almost all cameras come shipped with what I consider to be the worst of the worst focus configurations. Even the Nikon D800 came to my hands set to focus when the shutter button was halfway depressed. This mode will ruin almost any photograph. Why? Because it requires you to perform legerdemain to place the autofocus point, depress the shutter halfway, recompose and press the shutter fully. In addition to the chance of accidentally refocusing after composing or missing the shot—this method absolutely ensures that one must focus before every single photograph. Absolutely impossible for action or portraiture.
Sensibly, most professional or prosumer cameras come with an AF-ON button near where the shooter’s right thumb rests. This separates the task of focusing and exposing, allowing the photographer to quickly focus and to capture the image even if focus is slightly off at the focus point. For portraits, kids, action, etc the camera has to have a hair-trigger. It has to be responsive. Manufacturer’s: stop shipping your cameras with this ham-fisted autofocus arrangement.
Now, the RX1 does not have an AF-ON button, but it does have an AEL button whose function can be changed to “MF/AF Control Hold” in the menu. Further, other buttons on the rear of the camera can also be programmed to toggle between AF and MF modes. What this all means is that you can work around the RX1’s buttons to make it’s focus work like a DSLR’s. (For those of you who are RX1 shooters, set the front switch to MF, the right control wheel button to MF/AF Toggle and the AEL button to MF/AF Control Hold and voila!) The end result is that, when powered on the camera is in manual focus mode, but the autofocus can be activated by pressing AEL, no matter what, however, the shutter is tripped by the shutter release. Want to switch to AF mode? Just push a button and you’re back to the standard modality.
Carrying.
I keep mine in a small, neoprene pouch with a semi-hard LCD cover and a circular polarizing filter on the front—perfect for buttoning up and throwing into a bag on my way out of the house. I have a soft release screwed into the threaded shutter release and a custom, red twill strap to replace the horrible plastic strap Sony provided. I plan to gaffer tape the top and the orange ring around the lens. Who knows, I may find an old Voigtlander optical viewfinder in future as well.
It's always interesting to wander through our local railyard, near downtown. Not much to it actually, other than a couple of rusty siding tracks adjoining the main line. This is Norfolk Southern property. We're on one of their main trunk lines from Memphis to Atlanta, Knoxville and points east. The historic Huntsville train depot is right beside the track, but serves no function relative to train traffic, and isn't even owned by NS.
What never fails to catch my eye is scenes like that above -- piles of stuff that I never can figure out: is it scrap and junk, materials that they're in the process of using or going to use eventually, or what? I don't know if this is the norm for how railroads operate, or a local aberration. Despite such questions, though, NS is rolling along nicely from a financial standpoint:
According to a bit of investment advice I came across:
"TheStreet Ratings rates Norfolk Southern Corporation as a buy. The company's strengths can be seen in multiple areas, such as its robust revenue growth, solid stock price performance, impressive record of earnings per share growth, compelling growth in net income and notable return on equity. Although the company may harbor some minor weaknesses, we feel they are unlikely to have a significant impact on results."
Never mind their sloppy "housekeeping" (or lack of it) I guess.
Go to Page with image in the Internet Archive
Title: The medical adviser : a complete treatise on the formation, debility, and diseases of those organs peculiar in each sex, including spermatorrhoea, or seminal weakness, drawn up with a view to the treatment and cure of impotence, and the more effectual removal of the venereal disease, the result of thirty years' experience, with the latest discoveries
Creator: Watson, William
Publisher: New York : [William Watson]
Sponsor: U.S. National Library of Medicine
Contributor: U.S. National Library of Medicine
Date: 1860
Language: eng
Description: NLM copy: printed publisher's address "no. 658 Broadway", inked out and replaced in ms. by " no. 1, Great Jones' St. near Broadway; author's address on p.96 similarly inked out and replace in ms
Microfilm
will digitize
If you have questions concerning reproductions, please contact the Contributing Library.
Note: The colors, contrast and appearance of these illustrations are unlikely to be true to life. They are derived from scanned images that have been enhanced for machine interpretation and have been altered from their originals.
Read/Download from the Internet Archive
Wirral find a weakness in the Sandal defence at the Memorial Ground, Clatterbridge, during a 42-19 victory in rugby union's North Premier league. Having scored five tries, all converted, the hosts led 35-0 after 46 minutes before a belated show of spirit saw Sandal cross three times to reduce the deficit to 16 points. Wirral clinched victory with a sixth try, also converted, in stoppage time.
Match statistics:
Admission: £5. Programme: 28 pages (w/a). Attendance: 135. Wirral 42 Sandal 19 (HT 28-0). Scoring sequence: 7-0 (Rob Pearl try, Jimmy Annetts conversion, 9mins); 14-0 (Chris Speed try, Jimmy Annetts conversion, 14mins); 21-0 (Craig Harvey try, Jimmy Annetts conversion, 33mins); 28-0 (Jimmy Annetts try, Jimmy Annetts conversion, 40+6mins); 35-0 (Ryan Higginson try, Jimmy Annetts conversion, 46mins); 35-5 (Declan Thompson try, 52mins); Rob Pearl (Wirral, sinbinned, late tackle, 61mins); 35-12 (Simon Frewin try, Greg Wood conversion, 70mins); 35-19 (Jack Townend try, Greg Wood conversion, 75mins); 42-19 (Craig Harvey try, Jimmy Annetts conversion, 80+1mins). Referee: Michael Hurdley.
Wirral RFC were founded in 1936 by former pupils of Wirral Grammar School, Bebington. After the Second World War the club leased facilities at Hooton Park Golf Club. In 1968 Wirral moved to Clatterbridge, their present home. The Old Wirralians Association Memorial Ground commemorates club players killed during the 1939-45 conflict. A major success came in 2009, when Chester were beaten 20-10 in the Cheshire Vase Final. The club maintain strong links with Wirral Grammar School.
Dear friend, in this video we are going to discuss about natural premature ejaculation cure oil. In order to stop sexual weakness in the reproductive system, you need to attain precise blood flow and energy to the genital region. This can be done with help of natural premature ejaculation cure oil that is Lawax oil which increases discharge time and helps men to last longer in bed naturally.
You can find more Lawax Oil at www.dropshipherbalsupplements.com/product/premature-ejacu...
Mirit Ben Nun: Shortness of breath
'Shortness of breath' is not only a sign of physical weakness, it is a metaphor for a mental state of strong desire that knows no repletion; more and more, an unbearable glut, without repose. Mirit Ben Nun's type of work on the other hand requires an abundance of patience. This is a Sisyphean work (requiring hard labor) of marking lines and dots, filling every empty millimeter with brilliant blots. Therefore we are facing a paradox or a logical conflict. A patient and effortful work that stems from an urgent need to cover and fill, to adorn and coat. Her craft of layering reaches a state of a continuous ceremonial ritual.
This ritual digests every object into itself - useful or discarded -- available and ordinary or rare and exceptional -- they submit and devote to the overlay work. Mirit BN gathers scrap off the streets -- cardboard rolls of fabric, assortments of wooden boards and pieces, plates and planks -- and constructs a new link, her own syntax, which she alone is fully responsible for. The new combination -- a type of a sculptural construction -- goes through a process of patching by the act of painting.
In fact Mirit regards her three dimensional objects as a platform for painting, with a uniform continuity, even if it has obstacles, mounds and valleys. These objects beg her to paint, to lay down colors, to set in motion an intricate weave of abstract patterns that at times finds itself wandering the contours of human images and sometimes -- not. In those cases what is left is the monotonous activity of running the patterns, inch by inch, till their absolute coverage, till a short and passing instant of respite and than on again to a new onset.
Next to this assembly of garbage and it's recycling into 'painted sculptures' Mirit offers a surprising reunion between her illustrated objects and so called cheap African sculpture; popular artifacts or articles that are classified in the standard culture as 'primitive'.
This combination emphasizes the difference between her individualistic performance and the collective creation which is translated into cultural clichés. The wood carved image creates a moment of peace within the crowded bustle; an introverted image, without repetitiveness and reverberation. This meeting of strangers testifies that Mirit' work could not be labeled under the ´outsiders art´ category. She is a one woman school who is compelled to do the art work she picked out to perform. Therefore she isn't creating ´an image´ such as the carved wooden statues, but she produces breathless ´emotional jam' whose highest values are color, motion, beauty and plenitude. May it never lack, neither diluted, nor dull for even an instant
Tali Tamir
August 2010
The weakness of medium format digital backs is no more. They can deal with reasonable ISO, with reasonable quality, reasonably often.
Mirit Ben Nun: Shortness of breath
'Shortness of breath' is not only a sign of physical weakness, it is a metaphor for a mental state of strong desire that knows no repletion; more and more, an unbearable glut, without repose. Mirit Ben Nun's type of work on the other hand requires an abundance of patience. This is a Sisyphean work (requiring hard labor) of marking lines and dots, filling every empty millimeter with brilliant blots. Therefore we are facing a paradox or a logical conflict. A patient and effortful work that stems from an urgent need to cover and fill, to adorn and coat. Her craft of layering reaches a state of a continuous ceremonial ritual.
This ritual digests every object into itself - useful or discarded -- available and ordinary or rare and exceptional -- they submit and devote to the overlay work. Mirit BN gathers scrap off the streets -- cardboard rolls of fabric, assortments of wooden boards and pieces, plates and planks -- and constructs a new link, her own syntax, which she alone is fully responsible for. The new combination -- a type of a sculptural construction -- goes through a process of patching by the act of painting.
In fact Mirit regards her three dimensional objects as a platform for painting, with a uniform continuity, even if it has obstacles, mounds and valleys. These objects beg her to paint, to lay down colors, to set in motion an intricate weave of abstract patterns that at times finds itself wandering the contours of human images and sometimes -- not. In those cases what is left is the monotonous activity of running the patterns, inch by inch, till their absolute coverage, till a short and passing instant of respite and than on again to a new onset.
Next to this assembly of garbage and it's recycling into 'painted sculptures' Mirit offers a surprising reunion between her illustrated objects and so called cheap African sculpture; popular artifacts or articles that are classified in the standard culture as 'primitive'.
This combination emphasizes the difference between her individualistic performance and the collective creation which is translated into cultural clichés. The wood carved image creates a moment of peace within the crowded bustle; an introverted image, without repetitiveness and reverberation. This meeting of strangers testifies that Mirit' work could not be labeled under the ´outsiders art´ category. She is a one woman school who is compelled to do the art work she picked out to perform. Therefore she isn't creating ´an image´ such as the carved wooden statues, but she produces breathless ´emotional jam' whose highest values are color, motion, beauty and plenitude. May it never lack, neither diluted, nor dull for even an instant
Tali Tamir
August 2010
My OM-2+Zuiko 50/1.4 with OM Winder 1 attached.
The winder has been in the drybox for a very long time. Might want to
give it a test run.
Taken with SE K810i camera phone.
Put through Lightroom 2.0 with 'Cyanotype' present and as usual some
vignette.
Mirit Ben Nun: Shortness of breath
'Shortness of breath' is not only a sign of physical weakness, it is a metaphor for a mental state of strong desire that knows no repletion; more and more, an unbearable glut, without repose. Mirit Ben Nun's type of work on the other hand requires an abundance of patience. This is a Sisyphean work (requiring hard labor) of marking lines and dots, filling every empty millimeter with brilliant blots. Therefore we are facing a paradox or a logical conflict. A patient and effortful work that stems from an urgent need to cover and fill, to adorn and coat. Her craft of layering reaches a state of a continuous ceremonial ritual.
This ritual digests every object into itself - useful or discarded -- available and ordinary or rare and exceptional -- they submit and devote to the overlay work. Mirit BN gathers scrap off the streets -- cardboard rolls of fabric, assortments of wooden boards and pieces, plates and planks -- and constructs a new link, her own syntax, which she alone is fully responsible for. The new combination -- a type of a sculptural construction -- goes through a process of patching by the act of painting.
In fact Mirit regards her three dimensional objects as a platform for painting, with a uniform continuity, even if it has obstacles, mounds and valleys. These objects beg her to paint, to lay down colors, to set in motion an intricate weave of abstract patterns that at times finds itself wandering the contours of human images and sometimes -- not. In those cases what is left is the monotonous activity of running the patterns, inch by inch, till their absolute coverage, till a short and passing instant of respite and than on again to a new onset.
Next to this assembly of garbage and it's recycling into 'painted sculptures' Mirit offers a surprising reunion between her illustrated objects and so called cheap African sculpture; popular artifacts or articles that are classified in the standard culture as 'primitive'.
This combination emphasizes the difference between her individualistic performance and the collective creation which is translated into cultural clichés. The wood carved image creates a moment of peace within the crowded bustle; an introverted image, without repetitiveness and reverberation. This meeting of strangers testifies that Mirit' work could not be labeled under the ´outsiders art´ category. She is a one woman school who is compelled to do the art work she picked out to perform. Therefore she isn't creating ´an image´ such as the carved wooden statues, but she produces breathless ´emotional jam' whose highest values are color, motion, beauty and plenitude. May it never lack, neither diluted, nor dull for even an instant
Tali Tamir
August 2010
Mirit Ben Nun: Shortness of breath
'Shortness of breath' is not only a sign of physical weakness, it is a metaphor for a mental state of strong desire that knows no repletion; more and more, an unbearable glut, without repose. Mirit Ben Nun's type of work on the other hand requires an abundance of patience. This is a Sisyphean work (requiring hard labor) of marking lines and dots, filling every empty millimeter with brilliant blots. Therefore we are facing a paradox or a logical conflict. A patient and effortful work that stems from an urgent need to cover and fill, to adorn and coat. Her craft of layering reaches a state of a continuous ceremonial ritual.
This ritual digests every object into itself - useful or discarded -- available and ordinary or rare and exceptional -- they submit and devote to the overlay work. Mirit BN gathers scrap off the streets -- cardboard rolls of fabric, assortments of wooden boards and pieces, plates and planks -- and constructs a new link, her own syntax, which she alone is fully responsible for. The new combination -- a type of a sculptural construction -- goes through a process of patching by the act of painting.
In fact Mirit regards her three dimensional objects as a platform for painting, with a uniform continuity, even if it has obstacles, mounds and valleys. These objects beg her to paint, to lay down colors, to set in motion an intricate weave of abstract patterns that at times finds itself wandering the contours of human images and sometimes -- not. In those cases what is left is the monotonous activity of running the patterns, inch by inch, till their absolute coverage, till a short and passing instant of respite and than on again to a new onset.
Next to this assembly of garbage and it's recycling into 'painted sculptures' Mirit offers a surprising reunion between her illustrated objects and so called cheap African sculpture; popular artifacts or articles that are classified in the standard culture as 'primitive'.
This combination emphasizes the difference between her individualistic performance and the collective creation which is translated into cultural clichés. The wood carved image creates a moment of peace within the crowded bustle; an introverted image, without repetitiveness and reverberation. This meeting of strangers testifies that Mirit' work could not be labeled under the ´outsiders art´ category. She is a one woman school who is compelled to do the art work she picked out to perform. Therefore she isn't creating ´an image´ such as the carved wooden statues, but she produces breathless ´emotional jam' whose highest values are color, motion, beauty and plenitude. May it never lack, neither diluted, nor dull for even an instant
Tali Tamir
August 2010
Sony RX1 User Report.
I hesitate to write about gear. Tools are tools and the bitter truth is that a great craftsman rises above his tools to create a masterpiece whereas most of us try to improve our abominations by buying better or faster hammers to hit the same nails at the same awkward angles.
The internet is fairly flooded with reviews of this tiny marvel, and it isn’t my intention to compete with those articles. If you’re looking for a full-scale review of every feature or a down-to-Earth accounting of the RX1’s strengths and weaknesses, I recommend starting here.
Instead, I’d like to provide you with a flavor of how I’ve used the camera over the last six months. In short, this is a user report. To save yourself a few thousand words: I love the thing. As we go through this article, you’ll see this is a purpose built camera. The RX1 is not for everyone, but we will get to that and on the way, I’ll share a handful of images that I made with the camera.
It should be obvious to anyone reading this that I write this independently and have absolutely no relationship with Sony (other than having exchanged a large pile of cash for this camera at a retail outlet).
Before we get to anything else, I want to clear the air about two things: Price and Features
The Price
First things first: the price. The $2800+ cost of this camera is the elephant in the room and, given I purchased the thing, you may consider me a poor critic. That in mind, I want to offer you three thoughts:
Consumer goods cost what they cost, in the absence of a competitor (the Fuji X100s being the only one worth mention) there is no comparison and you simply have to decide for yourself if you are willing to pay or not.
Normalize the price per sensor area for all 35mm f/2 lens and camera alternatives and you’ll find the RX1 is an amazing value.
You are paying for the ability to take photographs, plain and simple. Ask yourself, “what are these photographs worth to me?”
In my case, #3 is very important. I have used the RX1 to take hundreds of photographs of my family that are immensely important to me. Moreover, I have made photographs (many appearing on this page) that are moving or beautiful and only happened because I had the RX1 in my bag or my pocket. Yes, of course I could have made these or very similar photographs with another camera, but that is immaterial.
35mm by 24mm by 35mm f/2
The killer feature of this camera is simple: it is a wafer of silicon 35mm by 24mm paired to a brilliantly, ridiculously, undeniably sharp, contrasty and bokehlicious 35mm f/2 Carl Zeiss lens. Image quality is king here and all other things take a back seat. This means the following: image quality is as good or better than your DSLR, but battery life, focus speed, and responsiveness are likely not as good as your DSLR. I say likely because, if you have an entry-level DSLR, the RX1 is comparable on these dimensions. If you want to change lenses, if you want an integrated viewfinder, if you want blindingly fast phase-detect autofocus then shoot with a DSLR. If you want the absolute best image quality in the smallest size possible, you’ve got it in the RX1.
While we are on the subject of interchangeable lenses and viewfinders...
I have an interchangeable lens DSLR and I love the thing. It’s basically a medium format camera in a 35mm camera body. It’s a powerhouse and it is the first camera I reach for when the goal is photography. For a long time, however, I’ve found myself in situations where photography was not the first goal, but where I nevertheless wanted to have a camera. I’m around the table with friends or at the park with my son and the DSLR is too big, too bulky, too intimidating. It comes between you and life. In this realm, mirrorless, interchangeable lens cameras seem to be king, but they have a major flaw: they are, for all intents and purposes, just little DSLRs.
As I mentioned above, I have an interchangeable lens system, why would I want another, smaller one? Clearly, I am not alone in feeling this way, as the market has produced a number of what I would call “professional point and shoots.” Here we are talking about the Fuji X100/X100s, Sigma DPm-series and the RX100 and RX1.
Design is about making choices
When the Fuji X100 came out, I was intrigued. Here was a cheap(er), baby Leica M. Quiet, small, unobtrusive. Had I waited to buy until the X100s had come out, perhaps this would be a different report. Perhaps, but probably not. I remember thinking to myself as I was looking at the X100, “I wish there was a digital Rollei 35, something with a fixed 28mm or 35mm lens that would fit in a coat pocket or a small bag.” Now of course, there is.
So, for those of you who said, “I would buy the RX1 if it had interchangeable lenses or an integrated viewfinder or faster autofocus,” I say the following: This is a purpose built camera. You would not want it as an interchangeable system, it can’t compete with DSLR speed. A viewfinder would make the thing bigger and ruin the magic ratio of body to sensor size—further, there is a 3-inch LCD viewfinder on the back! Autofocus is super fast, you just don’t realize it because the bar has been raised impossibly high by ultra-sonic magnet focusing rings on professional DSLR lenses. There’s a fantastic balance at work here between image quality and size—great tools are about the total experience, not about one or the other specification.
In short, design is about making choices. I think Sony has made some good ones with the RX1.
In use
So I’ve just written 1,000 words of a user report without, you know, reporting on use. In many ways the images on the page are my user report. These photographs, more than my words, should give you a flavor of what the RX1 is about. But, for the sake of variety, I intend to tell you a bit about the how and the why of shooting with the RX1.
Snapshots
As a beginning enthusiast, I often sneered at the idea of a snapshot. As I’ve matured, I’ve come to appreciate what a pocket camera and a snapshot can offer. The RX1 is the ultimate photographer’s snapshot camera.
I’ll pause here to properly define snapshot as a photograph taken quickly with a handheld camera.
To quote Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, “Life moves pretty fast. If you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.” So it is with photography. Beautiful photographs happen at the decisive moment—and to paraphrase Henri Cartier-Bresson further—the world is newly made and falling to pieces every instant. I think it is no coincidence that each revolution in the steady march of photography from the tortuously slow chemistry of tin-type and daguerreotype through 120 and 35mm formats to the hyper-sensitive CMOS of today has engendered new categories and concepts of photography.
Photography is a reflexive, reactionary activity. I see beautiful light or the unusual in an every day event and my reaction is a desire to make a photograph. It’s a bit like breathing and has been since I was a kid.
Rather than sneer at snapshots, nowadays I seek them out; and when I seek them out, I do so with the Sony RX1 in my hand.
How I shoot with the RX1
Despite much bluster from commenters on other reviews as to the price point and the purpose-built nature of this camera (see above), the RX1 is incredibly flexible. Have a peek at some of the linked reviews and you’ll see handheld portraits, long exposures, images taken with off-camera flash, etc.
Yet, I mentioned earlier that I reach for the D800 when photography is the primary goal and so the RX1 has become for me a handheld camera—something I use almost exclusively at f/2 (people, objects, shallow DoF) or f/8 (landscapes in abundant light, abstracts). The Auto-ISO setting allows the camera to choose in the range from ISO 50 and 6400 to reach a proper exposure at a given aperture with a 1/80 s shutter speed. I have found this shutter speed ensures a sharp image every time (although photographers with more jittery grips may wish there was the ability to select a different default shutter speed). This strategy works because the RX1 has a delightfully clicky exposure compensation dial just under your right thumb—allowing for fine adjustment to the camera’s metering decision.
So then, if you find me out with the RX1, you’re likely to see me on aperture priority, f/2 and auto ISO. Indeed, many of the photographs on this page were taken in that mode (including lots of the landscape shots!).
Working within constraints.
The RX1 is a wonderful camera to have when you have to work within constraints. When I say this, I mean it is great for photography within two different classes of constraints: 1) physical constraints of time and space and 2) intellectual/artistic constraints.
To speak to the first, as I said earlier, many of the photographs on this page were made possible by having a camera with me at a time that I otherwise would not have been lugging around a camera. For example, some of the images from the Grand Canyon you see were made in a pinch on my way to a Christmas dinner with my family. I didn’t have the larger camera with me and I just had a minute to make the image. Truth be told, these images could have been made with my cell phone, but that I could wring such great image quality out of something not much larger than my cell phone is just gravy. Be it jacket pocket, small bag, bike bag, saddle bag, even fannie pack—you have space for this camera anywhere you go.
Earlier I alluded to the obtrusiveness of a large camera. If you want to travel lightly and make photographs without announcing your presence, it’s easier to use a smaller camera. Here the RX1 excels. Moreover, the camera’s leaf shutter is virtually silent, so you can snap away without announcing your intention. In every sense, this camera is meant to work within physical constraints.
I cut my photographic teeth on film and I will always have an affection for it. There is a sense that one is playing within the rules when he uses film. That same feeling is here in the RX1. I never thought I’d say this about a camera, but I often like the JPEG images this thing produces more than I like what I can push with a RAW. Don’t get me wrong, for a landscape or a cityscape, the RAW processed carefully is FAR, FAR better than a JPEG.
But when I am taking snapshots or photos of friends and family, I find the JPEGs the camera produces (I’m shooting in RAW + JPEG) so beautiful. The camera’s computer corrects for the lens distortion and provides the perfect balance of contrast and saturation. The JPEG engine can be further tweaked to increase the amount of contrast, saturation or dynamic range optimization (shadow boost) used in writing those files. Add in the ability to rapidly compensate exposure or activate various creative modes and you’ve got this feeling you’re shooting film again. Instant, ultra-sensitive and customizable film.
Pro Tip: Focusing
Almost all cameras come shipped with what I consider to be the worst of the worst focus configurations. Even the Nikon D800 came to my hands set to focus when the shutter button was halfway depressed. This mode will ruin almost any photograph. Why? Because it requires you to perform legerdemain to place the autofocus point, depress the shutter halfway, recompose and press the shutter fully. In addition to the chance of accidentally refocusing after composing or missing the shot—this method absolutely ensures that one must focus before every single photograph. Absolutely impossible for action or portraiture.
Sensibly, most professional or prosumer cameras come with an AF-ON button near where the shooter’s right thumb rests. This separates the task of focusing and exposing, allowing the photographer to quickly focus and to capture the image even if focus is slightly off at the focus point. For portraits, kids, action, etc the camera has to have a hair-trigger. It has to be responsive. Manufacturer’s: stop shipping your cameras with this ham-fisted autofocus arrangement.
Now, the RX1 does not have an AF-ON button, but it does have an AEL button whose function can be changed to “MF/AF Control Hold” in the menu. Further, other buttons on the rear of the camera can also be programmed to toggle between AF and MF modes. What this all means is that you can work around the RX1’s buttons to make it’s focus work like a DSLR’s. (For those of you who are RX1 shooters, set the front switch to MF, the right control wheel button to MF/AF Toggle and the AEL button to MF/AF Control Hold and voila!) The end result is that, when powered on the camera is in manual focus mode, but the autofocus can be activated by pressing AEL, no matter what, however, the shutter is tripped by the shutter release. Want to switch to AF mode? Just push a button and you’re back to the standard modality.
Carrying.
I keep mine in a small, neoprene pouch with a semi-hard LCD cover and a circular polarizing filter on the front—perfect for buttoning up and throwing into a bag on my way out of the house. I have a soft release screwed into the threaded shutter release and a custom, red twill strap to replace the horrible plastic strap Sony provided. I plan to gaffer tape the top and the orange ring around the lens. Who knows, I may find an old Voigtlander optical viewfinder in future as well.
The Creature Walks Among Us, 1956
youtu.be/cfLKIq8XZ0M?t=2s Full Feature
This is the third "Creature" movie. Universal left their options open at the end of second with the exact same ambiguous ending. While sequels to sequels tend to be poor fare, gill-man fans tend to regard Creature Walks Among Us (CWAU) as being as good as the first.
CWAU shares many B-movie weaknesses. It follows formula plot elements that were hallmarks of the first movie, but it also ventures into some new material. This new ground gives CWAU some muscle of its own. The first movie had a tiny bit of science blather about evolution. The second movie didn't bother. The third, however, tried to re-inject some science into the fiction.
Synopsis
A rich scientist mounts an expedition to find the gill-man who has escaped into the Florida swamps. A local fisherman reports being attacked by a man-like "diablo" so they investigate. Using an underwater radar device (not sonar), they track him down to a narrow bayou. Here he attacks their small boat, but is set on fire by spilled gasoline. Badly burned, the gill-man collapses. The scientists take him back aboard their 100' yacht and head for San Francisco. They've bandaged him up (head to toe) and are monitoring his vital signs. During the trip the complex soap opera develops. Dr. Barton (Jeff Morrow) is the rich, but jealous husband. Mrs. Barton (Liegh Snowden) is the blonde babe no longer in love and resentful of her husbands attempts to control her. Dr. Morgan (Rex Reason) is the concerned friend. Jed Grant is the buff playboy helper. Innuendo and misunderstandings keep the pot simmering.
Along the way, the doctors find that gill-man's gills are too badly burned to supply his body with oxygen. An x-ray reveals that he has lungs but that they're collapsed and closed off. They operate to open them. He can breathe air now. They also comment about how the burns have cause the fish-like layer to fall away, and a more human-like layer of skin to develop. Gillman awakens and interrupts Jed forcing himself on Marcia. He then dives into the sea, but must be rescued before he drowns.
Back in San Francisco, Gill is taken to Dr. Barton's estate and put into an electrified pen with some other animals. He looks somewhat longingly to the water's edge, but is docile. When a mountain lion gets into the pen and kills a sheep, Gill kills the big cat. When Dr. Barton pistol-whips Jed and puts the body in Gill's cage (to frame him for the murder), Gill goes nuts, tears up the house looking for Dr. Barton, finally killing him. Gill then wanders off the estate. With everyone in funeral attire, there's a mild suggestion that Dr. Morgan will come to call on the widow Barton when a respectful time has passed. The movie closes with Gill walking down the beach towards the sea. The End.
Once you've gotten into the gill-man saga, the plot of CWAU takes it to a new level which is more thoughtful than simply another monster movie. It's also fun to see the team of Jeff Morrow and Rex Reason again -- two good actors -- who starred in This Island Earth ('54).
The original movie had two gill-man suits -- a smaller one for the underwater shots, and a larger one for the above-water shots. The second movie, Revenge, made two new gill-man suits along the same lines. For the third movie, they didn't put too much into a new gill-man suit. They created a new gill-man head and hands, but dressed him the crude sailcloth shirt and pants so as to not have to make more. For the pre-changed gill-man, they used footage from the first two movies. The only scenes which needed a new gill-man suit was where he attacked the small boat and was burned. These scenes are so quick and dark, that the lower quality Gill-Man III is not apparent.
Arthur Ross, who co-wrote the original opted for a more thoughtful script. Are we what we are because of our genes, or because of our environment? Dr. Barton is excited that the gill-man is becoming more human. The fire burned away his "old self", releasing the new. "Change the metabolism and man will change." Dr. Morgan disagrees. Science can't create a new species. They may have altered gillman's skin, but inside he's the same. As though mankind would not be fit for space travel until he evolved into something better. This is a natural sort of thought for scientism which denies there being any divine element to man. How else to define man? Our human physiology is all we have. This is reminiscent of the premise underlying The Island of Dr. Moreau. Give animals human shape, human features, and they'll become people.
The Nurture part comes where the scientists theorize that the Gill-man as a "new" man will behave good or bad, depending on how he's treated. The assumption of the Tabula Rasa.
A notion floated in the dialogue is that ordinary humans are "built" for the earth and not suitable to space. The scientists pontificate about how the aquatic gill-man was "built" for life in the water. Man, therefore, was "built" for terrestrial life. That build would not work in space, they say. "We all stand at a crossroads between the jungle and the stars." If gill-man could become a new creature, maybe man could too. Since the changed gill-man could not really become human, the inference is that man can't become this Nietzchean over-man either.
Some aspects of CWAU have spiritual parallels. The before-creature is the old "animal" nature -- rash, violent, lustful. The after-creature is the new "human" self. He's no longer lustful or rash. He's violent only as defense. At the end, he's violent but driven by a sense of justice. There's also a parallel to the biblical "fall of man" described in the Book of Genesis, in that the before creature was innocent. He needed no clothes. After the change, he needed clothing. There's also a parallel to New Testament verses which talk of the old man having to die (metaphorically) before the new man could emerge. This adds some twist to the movie's title. Our own struggles with our animal side with our divine. Dr. Barton and Jed Grant are examples of those who gives in to their animal side. Dr. Morgan and even Marcia Barton are examples of people who maintained morality.
Old Home -- Dr. Barton's estate was one of Universal's stock houses. Used in many movies, such as Tarantula
Bottom line? CWAU will appeal to gill-man fans. Since it's not simply a re-remake of the first two "Creature" films, it has some appeal to others too. It's a bit lighter on the action but more cerebral. It's worth a watch.
Better than REVENGE, but nowhere near the glorious heights of the first film (which is really the only CREATURE that you absolutely must see).