Not all photographs are taken for their artistic or technical merit.

Some taken for reasons of news. That applies to the following.

Some of you may remember that I have taken a series of photographs of
the reconstruction and commissioning flights of what at the time was
the only Mosquito bomber to fly.

Today I took a trip out to the workshop of Avspecs who rebuilt it, to
see what was going on. I found it overflowing.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501942.jpg shows
progress on Mosquito number 2. They have it scheduled for it's maiden
flight in July this year. Note the very non-mosquito wings in the
foreground. They belong to a Cessna of some kind which for the moment
is outside in the yard. There are more aicraft on the other side of
the blue-frame shelves.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501947.jpg is
another view of Mosquito 2.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501949.jpg shows the
other corner of the workshop with a partly rebuilt Spitfire 16 in the
foreground. Behind it is the very corroded fuselage of a Grumman
Widgeon undergoing reconstruction.

The interesting thing to me is the Mosquito number 3 is in the next
building waiting it's turn to be fitted out. As if this is not enough
the owner of Mosquito number 4 is disconcerted at how long he has to
wait to have his flying.

To top it all off, all of these mosquitos have/will-have their
fuselages rebuilt or replaced on jigs made by Glynn Powell. Glynn
intends to build his own Mosquito which will make Mosquito number 5.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Jan 14, 2016, Eric Stevens wrote
(in ):

Some taken for reasons of news. That applies to the following.

Some of you may remember that I have taken a series of photographs of
the reconstruction and commissioning flights of what at the time was
the only Mosquito bomber to fly.

Today I took a trip out to the workshop of Avspecs who rebuilt it, to
see what was going on. I found it overflowing.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501942.jpg shows
progress on Mosquito number 2. They have it scheduled for it's maiden
flight in July this year. Note the very non-mosquito wings in the
foreground. They belong to a Cessna of some kind which for the moment
is outside in the yard. There are more aicraft on the other side of
the blue-frame shelves.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501947.jpg is
another view of Mosquito 2.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501949.jpg shows the
other corner of the workshop with a partly rebuilt Spitfire 16 in the
foreground. Behind it is the very corroded fuselage of a Grumman
Widgeon undergoing reconstruction.

The interesting thing to me is the Mosquito number 3 is in the next
building waiting it's turn to be fitted out. As if this is not enough
the owner of Mosquito number 4 is disconcerted at how long he has to
wait to have his flying.

To top it all off, all of these mosquitos have/will-have their
fuselages rebuilt or replaced on jigs made by Glynn Powell. Glynn
intends to build his own Mosquito which will make Mosquito number 5.

It seems like a good and interesting place to visit. The good news is the
progress report on the nascent global airworthy Mossie squadron. I understand
there is also restoration projest on the go somewhere in the UK. I am
surprised the Canadians haven’t got involved in some way, as they were the
most prolific of the Mosquito builders.


--

Regards,
Savageduck

On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 20:59:29 -0800 (PST), Rich A
wrote:

On Thursday, January 14, 2016 at 11:06:03 PM UTC-5, Eric Stevens wrote:
Some taken for reasons of news. That applies to the following.

Some of you may remember that I have taken a series of photographs of
the reconstruction and commissioning flights of what at the time was
the only Mosquito bomber to fly.

Today I took a trip out to the workshop of Avspecs who rebuilt it, to
see what was going on. I found it overflowing.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501942.jpg shows
progress on Mosquito number 2. They have it scheduled for it's maiden
flight in July this year. Note the very non-mosquito wings in the
foreground. They belong to a Cessna of some kind which for the moment
is outside in the yard. There are more aicraft on the other side of
the blue-frame shelves.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501947.jpg is
another view of Mosquito 2.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501949.jpg shows the
other corner of the workshop with a partly rebuilt Spitfire 16 in the
foreground. Behind it is the very corroded fuselage of a Grumman
Widgeon undergoing reconstruction.

The interesting thing to me is the Mosquito number 3 is in the next
building waiting it's turn to be fitted out. As if this is not enough
the owner of Mosquito number 4 is disconcerted at how long he has to
wait to have his flying.

To top it all off, all of these mosquitos have/will-have their
fuselages rebuilt or replaced on jigs made by Glynn Powell. Glynn
intends to build his own Mosquito which will make Mosquito number 5.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

The one question I have (not for your work) is that just because some photos are documentarian, news-oriented, why do they have to be taken with inferior (phones, etc) equipment in a sloppy way?

Who says they have to be?
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , Rich A
wrote:

The one question I have (not for your work) is that just because
some photos are documentarian, news-oriented, why do they have to be
taken with inferior (phones, etc) equipment in a sloppy way?

Photos like this:

https://cdn2.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/xI6...20x0/cdn0.vox-
cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/2847110/19-ELENA-GRIMAILO-
1stLandscape.1402550202.jpg

https://cdn3.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/uM2...20x0/cdn0.vox-
cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/2847100/52-AARON-PIKE-
1stTrees.1402550190.jpg

https://cdn0.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/FjF...20x0/cdn0.vox-
cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/2847094/38-ATHENA-TAN-
2ndPeople.1402550188.jpg

https://cdn0.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/4Oh...20x0/cdn0.vox-
cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/2847120/12-MELISA-BARILLI-
3rdChildren.1402550215.jpg

All taken with an professional SLR... No wait, an iPhone.

--
Sandman

On 01/14/2016 11:59 PM, Rich A wrote:
On Thursday, January 14, 2016 at 11:06:03 PM UTC-5, Eric Stevens wrote:
Some taken for reasons of news. That applies to the following.

Some of you may remember that I have taken a series of photographs of
the reconstruction and commissioning flights of what at the time was
the only Mosquito bomber to fly.

Today I took a trip out to the workshop of Avspecs who rebuilt it, to
see what was going on. I found it overflowing.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501942.jpg shows
progress on Mosquito number 2. They have it scheduled for it's maiden
flight in July this year. Note the very non-mosquito wings in the
foreground. They belong to a Cessna of some kind which for the moment
is outside in the yard. There are more aicraft on the other side of
the blue-frame shelves.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501947.jpg is
another view of Mosquito 2.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501949.jpg shows the
other corner of the workshop with a partly rebuilt Spitfire 16 in the
foreground. Behind it is the very corroded fuselage of a Grumman
Widgeon undergoing reconstruction.

The interesting thing to me is the Mosquito number 3 is in the next
building waiting it's turn to be fitted out. As if this is not enough
the owner of Mosquito number 4 is disconcerted at how long he has to
wait to have his flying.

To top it all off, all of these mosquitos have/will-have their
fuselages rebuilt or replaced on jigs made by Glynn Powell. Glynn
intends to build his own Mosquito which will make Mosquito number 5.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

The one question I have (not for your work) is that just

because some photos are documentarian, news-oriented, why do they

have to be taken with inferior (phones, etc) equipment in a sloppy way?

You use what you got?

If I saw a Zepplin hitting a mooring mast, and the only camera I had
with me was an iPhone, I wouldn't be going back to my truck for the
Speed Graphic.

(For the record, I do not own either an iPhone or a Speed Graphic. Until
a few months ago, I did have a 4x5 view camera.)

--
Ken Hart

On 1/14/2016 11:59 PM, Rich A wrote:
On Thursday, January 14, 2016 at 11:06:03 PM UTC-5, Eric Stevens wrote:
Some taken for reasons of news. That applies to the following.

Some of you may remember that I have taken a series of photographs of
the reconstruction and commissioning flights of what at the time was
the only Mosquito bomber to fly.

Today I took a trip out to the workshop of Avspecs who rebuilt it, to
see what was going on. I found it overflowing.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501942.jpg shows
progress on Mosquito number 2. They have it scheduled for it's maiden
flight in July this year. Note the very non-mosquito wings in the
foreground. They belong to a Cessna of some kind which for the moment
is outside in the yard. There are more aicraft on the other side of
the blue-frame shelves.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501947.jpg is
another view of Mosquito 2.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501949.jpg shows the
other corner of the workshop with a partly rebuilt Spitfire 16 in the
foreground. Behind it is the very corroded fuselage of a Grumman
Widgeon undergoing reconstruction.

The interesting thing to me is the Mosquito number 3 is in the next
building waiting it's turn to be fitted out. As if this is not enough
the owner of Mosquito number 4 is disconcerted at how long he has to
wait to have his flying.

To top it all off, all of these mosquitos have/will-have their
fuselages rebuilt or replaced on jigs made by Glynn Powell. Glynn
intends to build his own Mosquito which will make Mosquito number 5.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

The one question I have (not for your work) is that just because some photos are documentarian, news-oriented, why do they have to be taken with inferior (phones, etc) equipment in a sloppy way?


STOP THIEF!! I need to get a better camera.


--
PeterN

Rich A:
The one question I have (not for your work) is that just because some photos
are documentarian, news-oriented, why do they have to be taken with inferior (phones, etc) equipment in a sloppy way?

Eric Stevens:
Who says they have to be?

RichA is still an idiot. Firstly, smartphone cameras are not inferior.
They may not be suited for all kinds of photography, but they are well
suited for on-the-spot news photography and other documentary work. The
iPhone has become the world's most popular camera. Draw a bell curve
representing all smartphone photos. On the left are really bad photos.
In the center are the majority, OK photos. On the right you will find
photos that are technically and artistically a match for those made by
any camera used by any photographer.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

On Jan 15, 2016, Davoud wrote
(in article ):

Rich A:
The one question I have (not for your work) is that just because some
photos
are documentarian, news-oriented, why do they have to be taken with
inferior (phones, etc) equipment in a sloppy way?

Eric Stevens:
Who says they have to be?

RichA is still an idiot. Firstly, smartphone cameras are not inferior.
They may not be suited for all kinds of photography, but they are well
suited for on-the-spot news photography and other documentary work. The
iPhone has become the world's most popular camera. Draw a bell curve
representing all smartphone photos. On the left are really bad photos.
In the center are the majority, OK photos. On the right you will find
photos that are technically and artistically a match for those made by
any camera used by any photographer.

Before Rich or anybody sneers at the current capability of smartphone cameras
they should take a look at some of the quality work being produced with these
cameras. Just because the phone is the choice of the
snapshot/selfie/Instagram crowd does not mean it is not a serious
photographic tool.
https://www.twenty20.com/explore/signature

--

Regards,
Savageduck

Davoud wrote:
On the right you will find
photos that are technically and artistically a match for those made by
any camera used by any photographer.


Among other problems, cellphone cameras are usually fitted with a wide
angle lens, which can be a problem in certain types of pictures,
especially portraits.

Mort Linder

Davoud:
On the right you will find
photos that are technically and artistically a match for those made by
any camera used by any photographer.

Mort Linder:
Among other problems, cellphone cameras are usually fitted with a wide
angle lens, which can be a problem in certain types of pictures,
especially portraits.

That was an odd thing to quote from my post, as it is meaningless out
of context. Why didn't you quote the part in which I said "They
[smartphones] may not be suited for all kinds of photography..."

As for smartphone portraits, I have seen many fine ones, this iPhone
portrait included
https://www.flickr.com/photos/mytripsmypics/6387237017.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm