40D SWIMS WITH THE FISHES !

On Mar 1, 4:56*am, "Douglas" wrote:
"Helen" wrote in message

...
On Mar 1, 3:49 am, Helen wrote:

On Mar 1, 2:16 am, "Jon Pope" wrote:

HEY DOUGLAS THE FAGGOT Y CANT U TAKE PICS LIKE BRET LOL

"Douglas" wrote in message

...

"Helen" wrote in message
...
On Feb 28, 10:35 pm, Annika1980 wrote:
Went down to the aquarium today to take a few shots.
(Scroll down to see them all.)

http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/93552221/original.jpg

One would never guess these pics were taken through a thick glass. It
truly is impressive work. My fav. is the jellyfish and the
butterfly. The lighting and colors are breathtaking. The Aquarium
should be selling these pics for you in their gift shop.
Helen

Hey now there's a chance for some gender swapping, mate!

Get your bra and wig on and trot on down. Tell 'em you're the
marketing
manage. If you go early enough they won't need to see the 5 O'clock
shadow. ROTFL. Can you talk with a female voice too?

Hey Helen... How is it my email to your hotmail address last year
ended up
in Hotmail's Nashville server farm and not the Toronto one?

Is that how you do the "type word for word exactly what she says
before
posting it to Usenet" thing? Boy... I'd just love to see that phone
bill
mate!

Why can't I play golf like Tiger Woods?
Simple answer and right to the point: Talent.
Helen

Lets' not forget Skill!

Ahhh right. Helen is golfer then?
That big fat joker with the double choc malt and donuts is the caddie! I get
it now.


The truth is Douglas, Bret has inspired me in so many ways.
Photography is only one example. Golf is another of many. I'm no
where near his caliber as a player or caddy but who knows, someday I
might be. Whatever endeavour I take on, I take seriously, and work
hard at it.
Helen

On Mar 1, 6:28*am, -hh wrote:

Several of them would have been significantly improved by putting the
camera into an UW housing and getting in the water with the subjects,
rather than suffer the artifacts from that interposing glass wall.

No doubt.
Unfortunately, I don't know too many aquariums that allow you to get
in there with the fishies.

On Mar 1, 4:54*am, "Douglas" wrote:
"Helen" wrote in message

...
On Feb 29, 3:30 am, "Douglas" wrote:

"Helen" wrote in message

...
On Feb 28, 10:35 pm, Annika1980 wrote:

Went down to the aquarium today to take a few shots.
(Scroll down to see them all.)

http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/93552221/original.jpg

One would never guess these pics were taken through a thick glass. It
truly is impressive work. My fav. is the jellyfish and the
butterfly. The lighting and colors are breathtaking. The Aquarium
should be selling these pics for you in their gift shop.
Helen

Hey now there's a chance for some gender swapping, mate!

Get your bra and wig on and trot on down. Tell 'em you're the marketing
manage. If you go early enough they won't need to see the 5 O'clock
shadow.
ROTFL. Can you talk with a female voice too?

Hey Helen... How is it my email to your hotmail address last year ended up
in Hotmail's Nashville server farm and not the Toronto one?

Is that how you do the "type word for word exactly what she says before
posting it to Usenet" thing? Boy... I'd just love to see that phone bill
mate!

"Hey Helen... How is it my email to your hotmail address last year
ended up
in Hotmail's Nashville server farm and not the Toronto one? "

Douglas, did you do LSD in the sixties?! *It just seems to fit the
state of mind you're in, because I have no idea what the hell you're
talking about.

BTW, I'm still waiting for Margie's phone number. *Emails are indeed
too impersonal.
Helen

Well you published it all over the 'net last year. Haven't forgotten that
too have you?


"Well you published it all over the 'net last year. Haven't forgotten
that
too have you?"

There you go again! Accusing me of things I never did. Perhaps it's
one of your multiple personalities who betray you. Who knows what
kind of psychological frenzy you go through from time to time.

On Mar 1, 6:28*am, -hh wrote:
On Feb 28, 11:11*pm, Helen wrote:

On Feb 28, 10:35*pm, Annika1980 wrote:

Went down to the aquarium today to take a few shots.
(Scroll down to see them all.)

http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/93552221/original.jpg

One would never guess these pics were taken through a thick glass.

YMMV. * While it isn't obvious in a couple of shots, it *is* obvious
in a couple others that this wasn't conventional UW photography, but
something else.

It truly is impressive work.

It is (inconsistently) good work given its limitations, but hardly
'impressive'.

Several of them would have been significantly improved by putting the
camera into an UW housing and getting in the water with the subjects,
rather than suffer the artifacts from that interposing glass wall.

*My fav. is the jellyfish and the butterfly.

The best of this bunch are the split-water image penguin, as these are
incredibly hard to do in the wild with the subject being a wild
penguin. *For an outdoor real-world shot, wave action is almost always
present and will to affect your split-water framing, even more than
what was seen here, and those buggers are fast and not particularly
cooperative, which adds a second level of complexity on framing, plus
your exposure settings and focus distance is dynamic too, so there's
at least 8 degrees of freedom to try to manage to make each shot.

-hh


"It is (inconsistently) good work given its limitations, but hardly
'impressive'. "

You have your opinion, I have mine. They are impressive IMO.

"Several of them would have been significantly improved by putting
the
camera into an UW housing and getting in the water with the subjects,
rather than suffer the artifacts from that interposing glass wall."

First of all, no public Aquarium will allow that. Besides I'm not too
keen on getting into the water with sharks..

"The best of this bunch are the split-water image penguin, as these
are
incredibly hard to do in the wild with the subject being a wild
penguin. For an outdoor real-world shot, wave action is almost
always
present and will to affect your split-water framing, even more than
what was seen here, and those buggers are fast and not particularly
cooperative, which adds a second level of complexity on framing, plus
your exposure settings and focus distance is dynamic too, so there's
at least 8 degrees of freedom to try to manage to make each shot."

This I agree with. The split-water image of the penguins are
awesome. You bet they're hard to shoot in the water. They are indeed
very fast and uncooperative, but I like how Bret captured them. They
actually seem to be drawn to the camera.
Helen

On Mar 1, 6:28*am, -hh wrote:
On Feb 28, 11:11*pm, Helen wrote:

On Feb 28, 10:35*pm, Annika1980 wrote:

Went down to the aquarium today to take a few shots.
(Scroll down to see them all.)

http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/93552221/original.jpg

One would never guess these pics were taken through a thick glass.

YMMV. * While it isn't obvious in a couple of shots, it *is* obvious
in a couple others that this wasn't conventional UW photography, but
something else.

It truly is impressive work.

It is (inconsistently) good work given its limitations, but hardly
'impressive'.

Several of them would have been significantly improved by putting the
camera into an UW housing and getting in the water with the subjects,
rather than suffer the artifacts from that interposing glass wall.

*My fav. is the jellyfish and the butterfly.

The best of this bunch are the split-water image penguin, as these are
incredibly hard to do in the wild with the subject being a wild
penguin. *For an outdoor real-world shot, wave action is almost always
present and will to affect your split-water framing, even more than
what was seen here, and those buggers are fast and not particularly
cooperative, which adds a second level of complexity on framing, plus
your exposure settings and focus distance is dynamic too, so there's
at least 8 degrees of freedom to try to manage to make each shot.

-hh


"It is (inconsistently) good work given its limitations, but hardly
'impressive'. "

You have your opinion, I have mine. They are impressive IMO.


"Several of them would have been significantly improved by putting
the
camera into an UW housing and getting in the water with the subjects,
rather than suffer the artifacts from that interposing glass wall."


First of all, no public Aquarium will allow that. Besides I don't
think Bret is too
keen on getting into the water with sharks..


"The best of this bunch are the split-water image penguin, as these
are
incredibly hard to do in the wild with the subject being a wild
penguin. For an outdoor real-world shot, wave action is almost
always
present and will to affect your split-water framing, even more than
what was seen here, and those buggers are fast and not particularly
cooperative, which adds a second level of complexity on framing, plus
your exposure settings and focus distance is dynamic too, so there's
at least 8 degrees of freedom to try to manage to make each shot."


This I agree with. The split-water image of the penguins are
awesome. You bet they're hard to shoot in the water. They are
indeed
very fast and uncooperative, but I like how Bret captured them. They
actually seem to be drawn to the camera.
Helen

On Mar 1, 6:28*am, -hh wrote:
On Feb 28, 11:11*pm, Helen wrote:

On Feb 28, 10:35*pm, Annika1980 wrote:

Went down to the aquarium today to take a few shots.
(Scroll down to see them all.)

http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/93552221/original.jpg

One would never guess these pics were taken through a thick glass.

YMMV. * While it isn't obvious in a couple of shots, it *is* obvious
in a couple others that this wasn't conventional UW photography, but
something else.

It truly is impressive work.

It is (inconsistently) good work given its limitations, but hardly
'impressive'.

Several of them would have been significantly improved by putting the
camera into an UW housing and getting in the water with the subjects,
rather than suffer the artifacts from that interposing glass wall.

*My fav. is the jellyfish and the butterfly.

The best of this bunch are the split-water image penguin, as these are
incredibly hard to do in the wild with the subject being a wild
penguin. *For an outdoor real-world shot, wave action is almost always
present and will to affect your split-water framing, even more than
what was seen here, and those buggers are fast and not particularly
cooperative, which adds a second level of complexity on framing, plus
your exposure settings and focus distance is dynamic too, so there's
at least 8 degrees of freedom to try to manage to make each shot.

-hh


"It is (inconsistently) good work given its limitations, but hardly
'impressive'. "

You have your opinion, I have mine. They are impressive IMO.


"Several of them would have been significantly improved by putting
the
camera into an UW housing and getting in the water with the subjects,
rather than suffer the artifacts from that interposing glass wall."


First of all, no public Aquarium will allow that. Besides I don't
think Bret is too
keen on getting into the water with sharks..


"The best of this bunch are the split-water image penguin, as these
are
incredibly hard to do in the wild with the subject being a wild
penguin. For an outdoor real-world shot, wave action is almost
always
present and will to affect your split-water framing, even more than
what was seen here, and those buggers are fast and not particularly
cooperative, which adds a second level of complexity on framing, plus
your exposure settings and focus distance is dynamic too, so there's
at least 8 degrees of freedom to try to manage to make each shot."


This I agree with. The split-water image of the penguins are
awesome. You bet they're hard to shoot in the water. They are
indeed
very fast and uncooperative, but I like how Bret captured them. They
actually seem to be drawn to the camera.
Helen

On Mar 1, 4:31*pm, "Rita Berkowitz" wrote:
"Helen" sock of Bret wrote:

First of all, no public Aquarium will allow that.

BULL****!

http://www.aqua.org/guestdiverprogram.html

Besides I don't think Bret is too
keen on getting into the water with sharks..

Geez, you know so many intimate details about "Bret" that I bet you wash his
panties too? *Of course, he sends them overnight via FedEx so you can get
them while they are still warm and fresh.

Rita


"Geez, you know so many intimate details about "Bret"

You think the only communication we have is on newsgroups?!
It's called being close friends.
Helen

I THOUGHT IT WAS UR WIFE BRIDEZILLA

"Douglas" wrote in message
...

"Helen" wrote in message
...
On Mar 1, 3:49 am, Helen wrote:
On Mar 1, 2:16 am, "Jon Pope" wrote:

HEY DOUGLAS THE FAGGOT Y CANT U TAKE PICS LIKE BRET LOL

"Douglas" wrote in message

...

"Helen" wrote in message
...
On Feb 28, 10:35 pm, Annika1980 wrote:
Went down to the aquarium today to take a few shots.
(Scroll down to see them all.)

http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/93552221/original.jpg

One would never guess these pics were taken through a thick glass. It
truly is impressive work. My fav. is the jellyfish and the
butterfly. The lighting and colors are breathtaking. The Aquarium
should be selling these pics for you in their gift shop.
Helen

Hey now there's a chance for some gender swapping, mate!

Get your bra and wig on and trot on down. Tell 'em you're the
marketing
manage. If you go early enough they won't need to see the 5 O'clock
shadow. ROTFL. Can you talk with a female voice too?

Hey Helen... How is it my email to your hotmail address last year
ended up
in Hotmail's Nashville server farm and not the Toronto one?

Is that how you do the "type word for word exactly what she says
before
posting it to Usenet" thing? Boy... I'd just love to see that phone
bill
mate!

Why can't I play golf like Tiger Woods?
Simple answer and right to the point: Talent.
Helen

Lets' not forget Skill!

Ahhh right. Helen is golfer then?
That big fat joker with the double choc malt and donuts is the caddie! I
get it now.

Annika1980 wrote:
-hh wrote:

Several of them would have been significantly improved by putting the
camera into an UW housing and getting in the water with the subjects,
rather than suffer the artifacts from that interposing glass wall.

No doubt.
Unfortunately, I don't know too many aquariums that allow you to get
in there with the fishies.

You would be surprised at how many public aquariums have "volunteer"
scuba diver programs. Afterall, maintaining a tank takes work, and
when there's a pool of volunteers who will do it for free, just to get
a dive in, its worth doing.

Rita mentioned the Baltimore, MD Aquarium.

I know that the NJ State Aquarium (Camden, NJ) also does this too. I
believe I've heard of similar programs in TN, GA, CA at the very
least.

Plus down at Disney World in Florida, they have a program with which
you can pay for a dive in the "Living Seas" aquarium. No personal
cameras allowed when I went, but things could have always changed.

FWIW, I recall talking with a volunteer for the NJ Aquarium a few
years ago and he related one of his aquarium dive experiences: he was
in the tank and wearing a full face mask with intercom that they used
as part of their interactive presentation, down in the deepest part of
the tank where they had an amphitheater with easily ~100 seats facing
the big glass wall.

On this eventful day, the seats were filled with a several classes of
5th Grade kids on a field trip...and gosh, wouldn't you know it that
as soon as he and his partner started the show for the kids that the
sharks in the tank had collectively decided that a large old Mola mola
(Ocean sunfish) had just reached its retirement age.

As the sharks swarmed and tore into the 4ft diameter ocean sunfish, he
dove for cover. Within 3 minutes, it was all gone. Eaten. Outside
the tank, all of the adults witnessing this were utterly horrified . .
and the diver in the tank needed to "rinse his wetsuit". In the
meantime, the kids were like: "YAY! DO IT AGAIN!!".



-hh


And in any event, there's no reason why to limit yourself to just
aquariums - - there's the real oceans too.