[SI] Shoot-In comments (Road Less Travelled)

Paul Furman wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
Robert Coe wrote:

Alan 1
Out of gas in a mud hole somewhere north of Enumclaw, under a still
overcast sky? Been there; done that. (Well, almost.) I'm not as drawn
to this as I am to some of the others, but it's certainly
an OK shot.

Somewhere between Creede and Silverton CO.
Not out of gas, happily, but Microsoft Streets and Trips is to blame
for us being there. What was indicated as a "County Road" turned out
to be a narrow, rough, boulder strewn, crossing streams, steep climbs
and so on. (The photo shows the "superhighway" portion). We were
defeated by a muddy hill a little after this shot was taken and had to
go back.

The comparable shot I posted in reply was where I turned back... only
had a crappy little paper map and was really hoping to get through that
pass!

Didn't see your other post...

Good thing you did turn back there! The "pebbles" where your shot is
located are nothing compared to the rocks further up the trail. We had
a 4WD (Explorer (or whatever the Mercury v. is)) with a fairly good
ground clearance). Further up, it's boulders on steep inclines with
running water and slippery debris. Fun to drive (ignoring occasional
bumps and scraping noises.)




(Going down the hill I was not sure we would ever get out if later
forced to turn back, 4WD but ordinary SUV tires. So in an abundance
of caution backed out and turned around). Took over an hour to go
about 20 miles or so - and the same to get out. If ever back there, I
will attempt it again - hopefully in dryer weather.

Alan Browne wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
Robert Coe wrote:

Alan 1
Out of gas in a mud hole somewhere north of Enumclaw, under a still
overcast sky? Been there; done that. (Well, almost.) I'm not as
drawn to this as I am to some of the others, but it's certainly
an OK shot.

Somewhere between Creede and Silverton CO.
Not out of gas, happily, but Microsoft Streets and Trips is to blame
for us being there. What was indicated as a "County Road" turned out
to be a narrow, rough, boulder strewn, crossing streams, steep climbs
and so on. (The photo shows the "superhighway" portion). We were
defeated by a muddy hill a little after this shot was taken and had
to go back.

The comparable shot I posted in reply was where I turned back... only
had a crappy little paper map and was really hoping to get through
that pass!

Didn't see your other post...

Good thing you did turn back there! The "pebbles" where your shot is
located are nothing compared to the rocks further up the trail.

This was above Tin Cup ghost town, between Gunnison & Buena Vista,
northwest of the dunes. I actually turned around because I couldn't get
traction with 2wd but yeah I knew I was in way over my head g.


We had
a 4WD (Explorer (or whatever the Mercury v. is)) with a fairly good
ground clearance). Further up, it's boulders on steep inclines with
running water and slippery debris. Fun to drive (ignoring occasional
bumps and scraping noises.)

The beauty of a rental car g.


(Going down the hill I was not sure we would ever get out if later
forced to turn back, 4WD but ordinary SUV tires. So in an abundance
of caution backed out and turned around). Took over an hour to go
about 20 miles or so - and the same to get out. If ever back there,
I will attempt it again - hopefully in dryer weather.



--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam

Paul Furman wrote:

The beauty of a rental car g.

Shh

On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 00:05:09 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:
: On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 22:38:59 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:
:
: On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 09:19:26 -0400, Bowser wrote:
: : Robert Coe wrote:
: : Bowser
: : An attractive shot that isn't helped by the ugly telephone pole. But
: : I suppose Bowser would have ended up in the clink if he had chopped
: : it down. The tie to the mandate is a bit strained, but he did as well
: : with it as most of us did.
: :
: : I had asked one of the priests to [pose], and had plans to include a
: : close-up of his collar with the church in the background and it was
: : supposed to represent the lack of men interested in the priesthood. But
: : he backed out, so I used this as a stretch. And quite a stretch, too.
:
: If you really wanted to make a point, you could show a dejected woman
: outside a seminary's walls while the few remaining male seminarians go
: about their business, ignoring her. You might even have found a woman
: willing to pose. You might even have found a *nun* willing to pose.
:
: That would be "The Road Not Traveled", not "The Road Less Traveled".

Of course, and let me be clear that my point was that the Catholic church is
shooting itself in the foot big-time by not allowing women into the
priesthood. It will happen eventually, of course, but the Establishment is
determined that the shortage of priests that Bowser cites will get worse
before it is allowed to get better.

BTW, it's far off-topic, but I know exactly how it would happen if I were the
Pope (a perfectly absurd assumption for a wide variety of reasons, but it's
fun to play imagination games). :^)

Bob

Paul Furman wrote:
Robert Coe wrote:

Alan 2
A much more artistic effort than Alan's other picture. I place this
one on the edge of the Great Sand Dunes in southern Colorado.
The scene is, of course, stolen by that poor stick, arm outstretched,
trying to somehow make it to the next water hole.
A quirky, interesting picture.

I could swear I shot the same bleached log at the Sand Dunes too g
that's crossing a flat wash where floods drag trees out into the open.

OK here it is:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/edgehil...7617631415944/
Finally almost a year later I finished posting the pics from that trip.
I think actually this log in the sand dunes shot lacks for not having
any background context... oh and it's not the same log g.

--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam

Annika1980 wrote:
On Jul 19, 10:47 pm, Robert Coe wrote:
This was a fairly difficult mandate, in view of the "We don't want no clichés"
restriction we were asked to obey.

I was sure shocked by this turnout.
I predicted only a handful of tired, cliched pics, but boy was I
wrong.
We got a bunch of them!


Once in a while you come up with a fitting comment. I think
the last one was in 1996 but at least you're consistent.

alan2.jpg is the only shot with any artistic appeal. Cropped a
little differently it would make a regular seller as a canvas
wall print. The rest are as usual, just happy snaps.

And if you wonder at my seeming obsession with selling photos
it's because when you sell them, the public decide if they are
good enough to hang on their wall, not other photographers.

It's a real world test of how good your photos are. Very few
photos that win competitions (not that I'm calling shootin a
competition) actually make it to the gallery sales rooms.

You probably remember this one:
http://www.douglasjames.com.au/images/pelicans-pano.jpg

The girls are young ladies now but that photo is still earning
money. I recall the jealous cries of "poor use of flash" and
some certain cretin who owns a 5D Mk II asking on Ebay if it
was a fake... Yet it still sell in modest quantities five
years after I took it with a 20D... The public have judged it
an excellent photo, not other photographers, many of whom
condemned it.

Paul Furman wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
Robert Coe wrote:

Alan 2
A much more artistic effort than Alan's other picture. I place this
one on the edge of the Great Sand Dunes in southern Colorado. The
scene is, of course, stolen by that poor stick, arm outstretched,
trying to somehow make it to the next water hole.
A quirky, interesting picture.

I could swear I shot the same bleached log at the Sand Dunes too g
that's crossing a flat wash where floods drag trees out into the open.

OK here it is:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/edgehil...7617631415944/

Finally almost a year later I finished posting the pics from that trip.
I think actually this log in the sand dunes shot lacks for not having
any background context... oh and it's not the same log g.


At least you had undisturbed sand to work with. I like the tones ands
sand texture (I'll leave out the standard "but it's grainy!" comment).

Annika1980 wrote:
On Jul 19, 10:47 pm, Robert Coe wrote:
This was a fairly difficult mandate, in view of the "We don't want no clichés"
restriction we were asked to obey.

I was sure shocked by this turnout.
I predicted only a handful of tired, cliched pics, but boy was I
wrong.
We got a bunch of them!

What, no pictures of "the last spike."?

On 2009-07-23 14:33:31 -0700, Alienjones said:

Annika1980 wrote:
On Jul 19, 10:47 pm, Robert Coe wrote:
This was a fairly difficult mandate, in view of the "We don't want no clichés"
restriction we were asked to obey.

I was sure shocked by this turnout.
I predicted only a handful of tired, cliched pics, but boy was I
wrong.
We got a bunch of them!

Bret, what did you expect?
It was a mandate which demanded cliche of some sort or another, tired
or otherwise.
You were conspicuous in your absence. You could at least have joined us
to show us how it should be done.




Once in a while you come up with a fitting comment. I think the last
one was in 1996 but at least you're consistent.

alan2.jpg is the only shot with any artistic appeal. Cropped a little
differently it would make a regular seller as a canvas wall print. The
rest are as usual, just happy snaps.

And if you wonder at my seeming obsession with selling photos it's
because when you sell them, the public decide if they are good enough
to hang on their wall, not other photographers.

It's a real world test of how good your photos are. Very few photos
that win competitions (not that I'm calling shootin a competition)
actually make it to the gallery sales rooms.

You probably remember this one:
http://www.douglasjames.com.au/images/pelicans-pano.jpg

The girls are young ladies now but that photo is still earning money. I
recall the jealous cries of "poor use of flash" and some certain cretin
who owns a 5D Mk II asking on Ebay if it was a fake... Yet it still
sell in modest quantities five years after I took it with a 20D... The
public have judged it an excellent photo, not other photographers, many
of whom condemned it.

Doug,

It is in the nature of the SI to draw the cliche shots for many of the
mandates, and since it is not a competion or a market place leave the
ego stroking comments to your self.

If you are going to make comments in this regard, understand that what
is submitted comes from a diverse group of photographers, the great
majority of whom are amateur hobbyists. Certainly many who submit
images do so in the spirit of the concept of the SI. Many submissions
are quality photographs, and many are tongue in cheek (...and meant to
be viewed that way) and as a result will tend toward cliche in the
broadest sense.

You have chosen to be a non-participant in the SI, but still have the
nerve to comment when you do not have the courage of your convictions
to make a submission to any of the SI mandates.
That alone says much to your fear of criticism of anything you might
submit. So what that you have your ongoing war with Bret?
Relax, throw in a shot or two and suffer the comments with the rest of
us. It is something you expect us to take from you. So why not take a
compliment, or snide remark or two from us?

....and don't even think about sales, or avoiding the cliche as the
bench mark of excellence.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Thu, 23 Jul 2009 13:35:07 -0700 (PDT), Annika1980
wrote:
: On Jul 19, 10:47*pm, Robert Coe wrote:
: This was a fairly difficult mandate, in view of the "We don't want
: no clichés" restriction we were asked to obey.
:
: I was sure shocked by this turnout.
: I predicted only a handful of tired, cliched pics, but boy was I
: wrong.
: We got a bunch of them!

And none of them were from you, I perceive. At a minimum, you missed an
opportunity to show up D-Mac, who rarely if ever contributes to the SI.

Bob