Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Always carry a camera ...Doh!

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 2:22:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I always carry a camera.
But yesterday I was in too much of a hurry, so the dogs got a fast walk and
the camera stayed at home.
Just as the walk was ending I heard a tremendous cacophony of birds
alarming.
Next thing, a buzzard landed on a branch 20 yards in front, and almost level
with my eyes. (It was down-slope)
When I looked through my binoculars (hardly necessary) I could see a
fledgling in its beak. A pair of Magpies were mobbing it, but it sat there
calmly for over a minute while it gulped its meal down.
Then, swoosh! It was gone.
And so was one of the best 'photo opportunities of my life.
Doh! :o (

More about : carry camera doh

Anonymous
May 6, 2005 2:22:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Fri, 6 May 2005 10:22:45 +0100, "Tumbleweed" <Shovels@five.paces> wrote:

>Next thing, a buzzard landed on a branch 20 yards in front, and almost level
>with my eyes. (It was down-slope)
>When I looked through my binoculars (hardly necessary) I could see a
>fledgling in its beak. A pair of Magpies were mobbing it, but it sat there
>calmly for over a minute while it gulped its meal down.
>Then, swoosh! It was gone.
>And so was one of the best 'photo opportunities of my life.

Not to worry -- just come here to DC, hang around outside the Capitol, and you
can shoot that kind of action every day when they're in session.

-- Larry
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 2:22:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Tumbleweed wrote:
> I always carry a camera.
> But yesterday I was in too much of a hurry, so the dogs got a fast walk and
> the camera stayed at home.
> Just as the walk was ending I heard a tremendous cacophony of birds
> alarming.
> Next thing, a buzzard landed on a branch 20 yards in front, and almost level
> with my eyes. (It was down-slope)
> When I looked through my binoculars (hardly necessary) I could see a
> fledgling in its beak. A pair of Magpies were mobbing it, but it sat there
> calmly for over a minute while it gulped its meal down.
> Then, swoosh! It was gone.
> And so was one of the best 'photo opportunities of my life.
> Doh! :o (
>
>
Fate conspires to make sure such opportunities occur to punish you. Grin.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Related resources
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 2:56:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

So...you saw the world through your own eyes and not through a lens. You saw
something unforgettable...so why do you need a snap shot for something you
don't need to be reminded of. The bird is not rare so the Smithsonian won't
need the evidence of its existence.

I don't take a camera everywhere. Sometimes its more important to see and
experience what's around rather than record the image so you can see what
you could have enjoyed if you weren't trying to photograph it.


"Tumbleweed" <Shovels@five.paces> wrote in message
news:D 5fd17$3un$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...
> I always carry a camera.
> But yesterday I was in too much of a hurry, so the dogs got a fast walk
and
> the camera stayed at home.
> Just as the walk was ending I heard a tremendous cacophony of birds
> alarming.
> Next thing, a buzzard landed on a branch 20 yards in front, and almost
level
> with my eyes. (It was down-slope)
> When I looked through my binoculars (hardly necessary) I could see a
> fledgling in its beak. A pair of Magpies were mobbing it, but it sat there
> calmly for over a minute while it gulped its meal down.
> Then, swoosh! It was gone.
> And so was one of the best 'photo opportunities of my life.
> Doh! :o (
>
>
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 2:56:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

A few years back, before digital was big, a construction worker who always
kepted one of these cheap plastic ten dollar Vivitar 35mm cameras in his
truck to photograph construction progress at job sites. He snapped a photo
of a huge fireball following the crash of a military jet in a field. It
might have been the photo of his life. It got him a color front page
headline photo in the newspaper and probably was featured in other papers
around the country as well.

IIRC, no one was injured. The pilot punched out when he knew the jet was
doomed.
-S

"Gene Palmiter" <palmiter_gene@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:53Iee.5129$Vu.3273@trnddc07...
> So...you saw the world through your own eyes and not through a lens. You
saw
> something unforgettable...so why do you need a snap shot for something you
> don't need to be reminded of. The bird is not rare so the Smithsonian
won't
> need the evidence of its existence.
>
> I don't take a camera everywhere. Sometimes its more important to see and
> experience what's around rather than record the image so you can see what
> you could have enjoyed if you weren't trying to photograph it.
>
>
> "Tumbleweed" <Shovels@five.paces> wrote in message
> news:D 5fd17$3un$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...
> > I always carry a camera.
> > But yesterday I was in too much of a hurry, so the dogs got a fast walk
> and
> > the camera stayed at home.
> > Just as the walk was ending I heard a tremendous cacophony of birds
> > alarming.
> > Next thing, a buzzard landed on a branch 20 yards in front, and almost
> level
> > with my eyes. (It was down-slope)
> > When I looked through my binoculars (hardly necessary) I could see a
> > fledgling in its beak. A pair of Magpies were mobbing it, but it sat
there
> > calmly for over a minute while it gulped its meal down.
> > Then, swoosh! It was gone.
> > And so was one of the best 'photo opportunities of my life.
> > Doh! :o (
> >
> >
>
>
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 2:56:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Gene Palmiter wrote:
> So...you saw the world through your own eyes and not through a lens. You saw
> something unforgettable...so why do you need a snap shot for something you
> don't need to be reminded of. The bird is not rare so the Smithsonian won't
> need the evidence of its existence.
>
> I don't take a camera everywhere. Sometimes its more important to see and
> experience what's around rather than record the image so you can see what
> you could have enjoyed if you weren't trying to photograph it.
>
>
> "Tumbleweed" <Shovels@five.paces> wrote in message
> news:D 5fd17$3un$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
I don't take pictures for MYSELF. I take them so others can see what I
saw, and marvel at my ability to capture my own visual impressions. Grin.
Really, I have a VERY visual memory, and often 'snapshot' things I see,
into permanent memory. Sometimes these things aren't pleasant, and I
wouldn't take a picture of them, but if I am to share the good things, a
camera is the method, until someone develops a printer that can print
from 'wet ware' memory.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
May 6, 2005 2:56:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Gene Palmiter wrote:
> I wonder if that construction worker is still alive or if maybe he
was
> concentrating on taking photos as a cement truck backed over him.
>
> I think I might have seen that fireball on TV. But, you say, that is
not the
> same as being there and seeing it with your own eyes. Maybe...but it
is
> pretty much the same as seeing it through a viewfinder.
>
> I take my camera when to a party when I am paid to take a camera to a
> party...otherwise I party. Do we use a camera to avoid interacting
with the
> real world?

Nope. We use a camera so that, in 15 years, when our teenagers are
smoking weed, failing school, and talking back we can look back and
remind ourselves why the heck we fell in love with them in the first
place.....:-)

Seriously, though, you're right. when I first got into video and
digital cameras I noticed I was holding back from the family fun,
watching for the shots rather than participating. I've learned to put
the camera away after a few representative shots; the camcorder gets
put on a tripod in the corner and turned on and off by a remote (when
we remember it). No, it ain't Speilberg, but then it never was; it does
capture the moment for later - which is the point. And all of a sudden
I'm IN a lot of the moments.....

Sure, I make special trips just to play photographer, but then, that's
the hobby part.... and it's usually a place I've already been without
the camera so I know there's at least a chance of a few nice images.

ECM
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 3:52:43 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I wonder if that construction worker is still alive or if maybe he was
concentrating on taking photos as a cement truck backed over him.

I think I might have seen that fireball on TV. But, you say, that is not the
same as being there and seeing it with your own eyes. Maybe...but it is
pretty much the same as seeing it through a viewfinder.

I take my camera when to a party when I am paid to take a camera to a
party...otherwise I party. Do we use a camera to avoid interacting with the
real world?
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 3:52:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Gene Palmiter wrote:
> I wonder if that construction worker is still alive or if maybe he was
> concentrating on taking photos as a cement truck backed over him.
>
> I think I might have seen that fireball on TV. But, you say, that is not the
> same as being there and seeing it with your own eyes. Maybe...but it is
> pretty much the same as seeing it through a viewfinder.
>
> I take my camera when to a party when I am paid to take a camera to a
> party...otherwise I party. Do we use a camera to avoid interacting with the
> real world?
>
>
At a party, I try to run about and get a picture of everyone there, then
put the camera away, and enjoy the people.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 6:19:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Gene Palmiter" <palmiter_gene@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:53Iee.5129$Vu.3273@trnddc07...
> So...you saw the world through your own eyes and not through a lens. You
> saw
> something unforgettable...so why do you need a snap shot for something you
> don't need to be reminded of. The bird is not rare so the Smithsonian
> won't
> need the evidence of its existence.
>
> I don't take a camera everywhere. Sometimes its more important to see and
> experience what's around rather than record the image so you can see what
> you could have enjoyed if you weren't trying to photograph it.
>
All of which is very true, but ignores the fact that a great many people
derive inordinate amounts of pleasure from taking (and sharing) photographs.
The moment would have been enhanced by the sequence of framing and securing
the shots, all the time pumping adrenaline and fearful that the subject
would fly before I was ready.
When I got home I would have had the pleasure of showing the shots to my
neighbours - all avid wildlife freaks - and then sitting down and poring
over all that extra detail that the camera caught when my eye couldn't.
And in a year's time I would still have that photograph instead of a failing
memory.

A final thought: I once taught photography. One of my star pupils, Anne
Burley, went from being a basic "snapper" to achieving many competition
successes. I met her many years later and was disappointed that she had
abandoned photography as a serious hobby. She left me with a great parting
shot:
"Photography taught me to see. Wherever I go my world is filled with images
that no-one else notices."

How selfish!
She once brought all of that to an audience who were blind but now she
savours it herself while leaving them in the dark.
May 7, 2005 1:42:55 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Tumbleweed" <Shovels@five.paces> wrote in
news:D 5fd17$3un$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk:

> I always carry a camera.
> But yesterday I was in too much of a hurry, so the dogs got a fast
> walk and the camera stayed at home.
> Just as the walk was ending I heard a tremendous cacophony of birds
> alarming.
> Next thing, a buzzard landed on a branch 20 yards in front, and almost
> level with my eyes. (It was down-slope)
> When I looked through my binoculars (hardly necessary) I could see a
> fledgling in its beak. A pair of Magpies were mobbing it, but it sat
> there calmly for over a minute while it gulped its meal down.
> Then, swoosh! It was gone.
> And so was one of the best 'photo opportunities of my life.
> Doh! :o (

They say that good fortune favours the prepared. If you had your camera
with you and got the shot you could have said you were lucky, though the
luck would have been due more to being prepared.

Maybe this illustrates the value of those slim pocket sized digicams?


--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 3-May-05)
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"
Anonymous
May 7, 2005 3:16:04 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

MarkH <markat@atdot.dot.dot> writes:

> > Next thing, a buzzard landed on a branch 20 yards in front, and almost
> > level with my eyes. (It was down-slope)
> > When I looked through my binoculars (hardly necessary) I could see a
> > fledgling in its beak. A pair of Magpies were mobbing it, but it sat
> > there calmly for over a minute while it gulped its meal down....
>
> Maybe this illustrates the value of those slim pocket sized digicams?

I think they would not have enough reach to get a good bird picture
from 20 yards. My Olympus E-100RS (10x zoom with VR, size of a small
35mm SLR) might be able to do it, and there are some smaller cameras
now with 10x zoom, but nothing pocket sized.
Anonymous
May 7, 2005 6:49:22 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Paul Rubin wrote:
> MarkH <markat@atdot.dot.dot> writes:
>
>
>>>Next thing, a buzzard landed on a branch 20 yards in front, and almost
>>>level with my eyes. (It was down-slope)
>>>When I looked through my binoculars (hardly necessary) I could see a
>>>fledgling in its beak. A pair of Magpies were mobbing it, but it sat
>>>there calmly for over a minute while it gulped its meal down....
>>
>>Maybe this illustrates the value of those slim pocket sized digicams?
>
>
> I think they would not have enough reach to get a good bird picture
> from 20 yards. My Olympus E-100RS (10x zoom with VR, size of a small
> 35mm SLR) might be able to do it, and there are some smaller cameras
> now with 10x zoom, but nothing pocket sized.

Depends on the size of the person's pockets... Grin.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
May 7, 2005 3:24:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>>>>> "Gene" == Gene Palmiter <palmiter_gene@verizon.net> writes:

Gene> I take my camera when to a party when I am paid to take a
Gene> camera to a party...otherwise I party. Do we use a camera to
Gene> avoid interacting with the real world?

Having a camera can increase interaction with the "real world"(tm).

Several weeks ago I met an (approx) 5 year old cousin, and she
repeatedly insisted that I take her photo while holding our
dog. (small dog but large compared with my cousin).

Unfortunately, the dog wasn't particularly happy about this (the dog
has a one track mind and wanted to be held by my mother who also
happens to be the person who feeds it), and struggled, however, I got
some good photos regardless.

It also allowed me to interact with a cousin I don't often get to see.

Not to mention the ability to use such photos as gifts, personalized
greeting cards, etc.

I don't think a camera can be used as an excuse to avoid interaction,
as people always seem to notice you more when you have a camera.
--
Brian May <bam@snoopy.apana.org.au>
Anonymous
May 7, 2005 3:24:47 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Brian May wrote:
>>>>>>"Gene" == Gene Palmiter <palmiter_gene@verizon.net> writes:
>
>
> Gene> I take my camera when to a party when I am paid to take a
> Gene> camera to a party...otherwise I party. Do we use a camera to
> Gene> avoid interacting with the real world?
>
> Having a camera can increase interaction with the "real world"(tm).
>
> Several weeks ago I met an (approx) 5 year old cousin, and she
> repeatedly insisted that I take her photo while holding our
> dog. (small dog but large compared with my cousin).
>
> Unfortunately, the dog wasn't particularly happy about this (the dog
> has a one track mind and wanted to be held by my mother who also
> happens to be the person who feeds it), and struggled, however, I got
> some good photos regardless.
>
> It also allowed me to interact with a cousin I don't often get to see.
>
> Not to mention the ability to use such photos as gifts, personalized
> greeting cards, etc.
>
> I don't think a camera can be used as an excuse to avoid interaction,
> as people always seem to notice you more when you have a camera.

Well, it may help in some cases. On the other hand, I carried a VHS
Camcorder (the type you set on your shoulder and take the pictures, all
over the central part of Europe some years ago. I got some nice tape,
but carrying that thing was a PAIN. I wouldn't do it again.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
May 7, 2005 6:48:36 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Fri, 6 May 2005 10:22:45 +0100, "Tumbleweed" <Shovels@five.paces>
wrote:

>I always carry a camera.

My "always carry your camera, dummy" experience happened on the way to
work. I had blown off bringing it that day and, as I was walking down
the street, there was a nun in full habit washing windows with a
long-handled squeegee. My camera and I have since been inseperable.



Gary J Sibio
garysibio@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~garysibio/

There are 10 types of people: those who understand binary numbers and those who don't.
Anonymous
May 7, 2005 6:48:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

garysibio@earthlink.net wrote:
> On Fri, 6 May 2005 10:22:45 +0100, "Tumbleweed" <Shovels@five.paces>
> wrote:
>
>> I always carry a camera.
>
> My "always carry your camera, dummy" experience happened on the way
> to
> work. I had blown off bringing it that day and, as I was walking
> down
> the street, there was a nun in full habit washing windows with a
> long-handled squeegee. My camera and I have since been inseperable.
>

You reminded me of a favorite:
http://www.fototime.com/7E819B5189EFE13/orig.jpg


--
Frank ess
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 1:36:52 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Frank ess wrote:
> garysibio@earthlink.net wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 6 May 2005 10:22:45 +0100, "Tumbleweed" <Shovels@five.paces>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I always carry a camera.
>>
>>
>> My "always carry your camera, dummy" experience happened on the way to
>> work. I had blown off bringing it that day and, as I was walking down
>> the street, there was a nun in full habit washing windows with a
>> long-handled squeegee. My camera and I have since been inseperable.
>>
>
> You reminded me of a favorite:
> http://www.fototime.com/7E819B5189EFE13/orig.jpg
>
>
What a REACH! I didn't know the Plastic Man did windows! grin.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
!