Sunday 1 February 2015

Getting the picture


First of all, I'm sorry I took down the photo of me without responding to comments. You see, The Boy came round last night and showed us the photos he had taken in London and H.I. wanted me to scan that one. As I was scanning it, I thought I might as well post it up too - we had had a few beers - and I later regretted it. It broke a few rules for me. Have this old one instead.

The Boy is a very keen photographer and usually goes nowhere without the 35mm Olympus we gave him because we never use it ourselves any more, now that digital has settled down. I wondered how much money he spends on it with rolls of film, but it's about half the price it used to be. Strange.

There are people who use photography as an art form - like Em - and people who use it as a tool - like me - but even people like me occasionally hit it right and somehow get a charming or well-composed image by accident.

I have to borrow a decent camera soon, and by decent I mean at least £2000 worth. My Olympus is sort of fine for basic recording of things, but I need a camera which will produce an image good enough to project on a building in full scale, and also make a video capable of the same thing. I have earmarked some projectors for this, and they somehow throw out light at thousands of lumens, making ordinary ones look like Magic Lanterns. You'll see the finished result on You Tube, somewhere around July - if I can raise the funding.

I have a friend who owns a £4000 digital SLR, and he tells me that the photo chip in it is of the same size and quality as the ones they use to make feature films. The only difference is that you need to be able to light everything properly to get any result worth broadcasting, plus a decent lens for it to go through.

There has been a little comedy radio show on recently, and the whole premise is that an Irish angel came down to Earth when God fell asleep for 100 years, and bestowed 1000 years of progress by accident.

Now I think of it, that would explain the break-neck speed at which all this stuff has raced forwards since I was a kid.

Now let me think... what would be an irritating title I could make up for this post - the sort favoured by the editors of magazines like 'Interiors'...? (I was in 'Interiors' once, photographed carving the face on a classical godess. The title for that article was, 'Finely Chiseled Features'. Hmm.)


24 comments:

  1. By breaking the rules, you mean that you showed your full face !

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's right. I'm easy enough to find as it is.

      Delete
  2. Have you a photo of that two man bike I mentioned previously?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Two versions of comment I just deleted in this comment-box - so time is up, I have to learn Italian - but just this: I'm curious to see your clip on youtube. As to headlines: what about "Incognito" - fuels people's minds. (As deleted comments).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I will tell you about it when it's up on You Tube.

      Yes, I know the more mysterious you behave, the more people want to know. In my real life, I have no secrets for that reason.

      Delete
  4. Oh well, I still remember it! And you're a nice looking man...with a hint of mischief in your face. :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There's more than a hint of mischief about my face - I would be lousy at poker.

      Delete
  5. I was asleep so I never saw it to make a comment. I saw in on my dashboard this morning. Mostly you look like I thought your looked like. White hair. I couldn't see the mischief in your face on dashboard but I'll take Jennifer's word for it. You didn't tell me about the Hatts purchase of a property in Norwich. So I discovered it myself this morning. I am a grown up after all so I wrote a comment and they wrote back. It is all okay. Funny and I have just been to Budapest.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do you have a picture of Jesus on your dashboard as well?

      Delete
    2. More St Christopher than Jesus in hounds tooth, I don't really see Jesus in that jacket. I could publish it and ask for guesses who it is.....

      Delete
  6. It's a shame that you didn't leave your photograph up …. it was a good one. It looked as though you'd had a haircut ? You looked very dapper !!
    …. and, thank you so much for your birthday wishes Tom. I'm off to enjoy myself now ! XXXX XXXX

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You enjoy yourself - it's only twice a year, after all.

      Delete
  7. I was also going to mention that it still shows up in my feed; but I cannot save it and I don't know how to do a screen shot. So, unless the WayBack machine captured it, I think you're safe.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I know it's there forever, but only as a thumbnail - unlike me.

      Delete
  8. Love the gear in the photo - especially the hat.
    The prove I am not a robot thingy came of its own accord Tom. Incidentally is my blog still accompanied by singing?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I haven't heard any singing for a while, Weave.

      Currently, I am being pestered by a robot that wants H.I. to look at her big 'boobies' - at MY email address. I don't like it.

      Delete
    2. Why does the robot want her to look at her own boobies? Wouldn't the robot prefer to see them himself?

      Delete
    3. Let me make it clear - the criminals pretend to be a woman of different names and.... oh, never mind.

      Delete
    4. Sorry, you know I always take things rather literally

      Delete
  9. Damn. I blinked and missed it.

    ReplyDelete