Pages: 1 ... 104 105 [106] 107 108 ... 137   Go Down

Author Topic: Without Prejudice 2  (Read 574569 times)

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2100 on: November 02, 2016, 01:09:18 pm »

A tongue-in-cheek pic for Grahamby:



Rob

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5565
    • Photos
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2101 on: November 02, 2016, 08:26:57 pm »

playing with some long exposures

GrahamBy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1813
    • Some of my photos
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2102 on: November 03, 2016, 07:09:47 am »

A tongue-in-cheek pic for Grahamby:

Extérieur ! It's better that way :)

Should be called "Rear View"

Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2103 on: November 03, 2016, 09:10:04 am »

Extérieur ! It's better that way :)

Should be called "Rear View"


I looked for the photographic trace-memory in Exteriors, but to my surprise, found it in the first book: Interiors! As I say, never trust pundits: they wing it like the rest of us. I would never have edited the two books like that. Nor, of course, had anything to do with making them so Lilliputian. Bah! Humbug!

;-)

Rob

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2104 on: November 03, 2016, 10:40:12 am »

Anyway, with a nod to the Leica thread elsewhere, a reason I enjoy long lenses on reflex cameras. Would be nice, though, if they were a little bit smaller... In this case: D200 with 2.8/180 Nikkor wide open at 1/320th, ISO Auto (500). Tripodless, it's all a bit of a handful for me. I sometimes wonder why I bought the D700 and then, when I put on a wide angle again, I know. But still, on FF I would have required something at about 300mm to cover much the same area. Of course, if anybody wants to donate a pristine 2.8/300 Nikkor with af to me, then don't feel bashful - I won't!

;-)



Rob

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5565
    • Photos
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2105 on: November 03, 2016, 09:45:07 pm »

Few more long exposures. One thing I encountered was that with the neutral GD and the polarizer it was very difficult to see anything when you were composing, more like guessing the lines and then adjusting based on the prior shot.

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2106 on: November 04, 2016, 07:05:00 am »

A touch of colour, for a change. Reminded me of making lentil soup. It's one of my few culinary accomplishments, along with paella, that is.



Rob

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2107 on: November 04, 2016, 10:51:36 am »

Rob, please tell me they're sausages.

;-)

I can't: I ran away straight after I made the shot.

Yon didn't think I'd hang about, did you?

;-)

Rob
« Last Edit: November 04, 2016, 11:25:44 am by Rob C »
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2108 on: November 04, 2016, 10:58:45 am »

Whatever box they fit in, I like them. Grew up with my father's collections of (General Motors) Holden trucks, all of which had the swiveling quarter-vent windows, excellent when you wanted a raucous blast of wind in the face on a hot Sydney summer's day. They were a weak point for breaking into a car, not sure if that's why they disappeared, or it was just to lower production costs, or because the manufacturers had to start building ventilation systems that were capable of defogging windscreens: they were gone by '68.


Rubbish! Even on American cars they were too tiny for anyone tall enough to reach 'em to climb through!

;-)

Rob

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22813
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2109 on: November 04, 2016, 12:27:13 pm »

They sure don't look like lentils. But I like the shot.
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)

Chairman Bill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3352
    • flickr page
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2110 on: November 04, 2016, 01:56:21 pm »

.

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2111 on: November 04, 2016, 02:57:05 pm »

They sure don't look like lentils. But I like the shot.

This is true, Eric, but I use shorter versions - one being a sobrasada and the other chorizo, for lentil soup. These two get sliced - painful to contemplate - and thrown into an orange Le Creuset in which already resides a generous pouring of oil of pure virgins along with some apple vinegar, a couple of chopped onions, some cloves of garlic, several sliced carrots, an equally abused red pepper and several green ones too. A few potatoes also make their silent sacrifice here. Magical (variable according to the moment) measures of some various spices that my wife left behind for me play with at such times, as well as, always, a teaspoonful of Coleman's of Norwich mustard powder - only, ever, use mustard powder if you want mustard. (Avoid mustard that somebody else has prepared earlier for you in a factory; know that they despise your laziness.) If you have a leek, that can be thrown in too. Never forget the salt and some fine pepper, too. If you want exotic, drop in a couple of grains of dry chili, but this may well be overkill, as the chorizo can come in a hot version, too.

Boil and then simmer for about an hour. The lentils? Oh, they get added from a jar at the end of that time and simmered for another fifteen to twenty minutes. Longer, and they vanish. This works equally well with beans. Purists start from first principles and use uncooked lentils, I never do - take all day to do that. There'd then be no time to do anything else, not even eat.

Once done, the choice is between having a couple of bowls of this right away, or just storing it all in the freezer for those days when I can't bear the idea of eating out again, and am sick of making pasta or paella.

I have a lot of respect for lentils.

Rob

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22813
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2112 on: November 04, 2016, 06:06:59 pm »

Now you've made me hungry, Rob.

The best lentils I've had were some tiny ones we bought in Castelluccio in Umbria when we were there in 2005.

Here's a link to an article about them:  https://www.finedininglovers.com/stories/castelluccio-lentils/
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2113 on: November 05, 2016, 06:19:25 am »

Now you've made me hungry, Rob.

The best lentils I've had were some tiny ones we bought in Castelluccio in Umbria when we were there in 2005.

Here's a link to an article about them:  https://www.finedininglovers.com/stories/castelluccio-lentils/


Thank you for the link, Eric. There are so many 'humble' foods around - could you but lay hands on them - that restaurants keep you well away from in their frantic hunt for your buck...

I don't know if the old Italian sleuth series Montalbano has hit the States, but looking at the food is enough to whet all my remaining appetities. That little family restaurant by the sea where he has - or attempts to have - his always interrupted meals does the most delightful things with shellfish and pasts... I firmly bel¡eve that honest, simple food is far more attracive than those works of visual art that some mistake as the heights of kitchen artistry. Even in little local places here where I eat lunch, they insist on three-course deals, when all I really desire is one good, filling course of something delicious, accompanied by a glass of good house wine (and usually it is good) followed by a coffee. No need at all for starters and sweets... eating alone is about finding one's happiness again and going out comfortably satisfied and, as bonus, with the anticipation of getting some images - should the camera not have been forgotten at home in the rush to get out in the first place. (Of course, this might all be ruined if you decide you'd fitted a lens that no longer matches your mood.)

Rob

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2114 on: November 05, 2016, 07:31:40 am »



Rob C

GrahamBy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1813
    • Some of my photos
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2115 on: November 06, 2016, 01:01:54 pm »

Something for Saul...
Logged

GrahamBy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1813
    • Some of my photos
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2116 on: November 06, 2016, 01:35:31 pm »

And then back to the classics
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2117 on: November 06, 2016, 01:49:00 pm »

Saul's catchy... not sure about Warhol, though, but if you forget and forgive his multi-dupes then the portrait of him's pretty cool.

Nice catches. Nope, they wouldn't have been better on a Mono; don't torment yourself.

Rob

GrahamBy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1813
    • Some of my photos
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2118 on: November 06, 2016, 02:50:49 pm »

No torment at all... anyway, I need to use up the yellow ink in my printer...
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2119 on: November 06, 2016, 03:41:53 pm »

Good stuff, Graham, the last two.
Pages: 1 ... 104 105 [106] 107 108 ... 137   Go Up