GlennS

<p>The Annas hummingbird I posted a photo of recently, hatched two eggs. This shot from yesterday shows the last chick to fledge. <br> Leaves of the pear tree have filled in so this photo is from the other side with 70-300 Tamaron @ 300mm on D800E (cropped).<br> It looks like the round white object on the side of the nest may be a fragment of egg shell. Do hummers ever reuse nests the following season? I'll have to be careful with next years pruning if that's the case.</p><div></div>

<p>The feeder gets defended by mom....</p> <p>Andrew,... I like the train shots. The one with the engineer is superb.</p><div></div>

<p>I've got a hummingbird nesting in one of my backyard fruit trees so didn't have to go very far for these shots. </p><div></div>

<p>Thanks Jeff, I wouldn't have found that without your help. Sure was easy to find places to buy into the cloud though.</p>

<p>For small stuff A scanner like Lex mentions works very well. I've done some macro stuff of butterflies and other insects with excellent results. The DOF is not too bad and perhaps even better than using a macro lens on camera. With scanner lid up I usually cover the subject with a dark bowl, or use a piece of black velvet over everything.<br> Have also experimented scanning liquid samples. A short section of 4" PVC pipe had a window of Saran kitchen wrap stretched over one end. Secure with an elastic band and it's water tight. I was scanning seawater samples to image the different plankton, worked great. Mushrooms are fun, leave a mushroom on the scanner glass for a while, then carefully lift and move it to the side for an image of the gills plus the spore print.</p>

<p>What a surprise when I found that a hummingbird had built its nest in one of my backyard pear trees. This was a good time to try out an ultimate long lens rig that I'd been putting together. A number of years ago a used Questar 3.5" telescope came into my hands at a price I could afford. It's possible to remove a plug from these scopes and connect a camera for a 1400mm focal length, but only f/11. Got the rig together, mounted on top my old Tiltall tripod and was set. The camera used was a Nikon D3200, the scope only covers a crop sensor and it's not too heavy for the astro mount.<br> It was very difficult even finding the nest in the finder from 25 feet away with such high magnification. This is a lens for stationary subjects only. Sharpness seems good, I'm seeing single strands of spider silk in the nest structure.<br> Location, Southern Vancouver Island. Not sure if the bird is an Anna's or a Rufous. Lots of Anna's in the area so that's probably what it is.</p><div></div>

<div></div>

<p>Interesting thread, I've done a little bit of 3D to figure out how it worked. Started by shooting two photos with lateral displacement. Didn't have a slide bar so just used the so called Cha-Cha method, a step sideways. It helps a lot if there's nothing in the close foreground, and nothing is moving, otherwise the very different images cause eye strain. Stereophoto Maker software was used to turn the two JPGs into a file the 3D TV could read. Link --> http://stereo.jpn.org/eng/index.html</p> <p>My experience is that this method is best for landscapes, shooting anything moving needs a proper 3D camera or two identical cameras and lenses, coupled together. This is what GoPro does for their 3D system. I'm tempted to buy another GoPro 4 just so I could shoot HiDef stereo video, both 1080 and 4K. If you shoot your stereo pairs with a wider spacing you get into what some people call Hyper-3D. Shots of distant mountains are simply amazing in Hyper-3D.</p> <p>The TV I use is a Panasonic plasma screen with I.R. controlled shutter glasses. I believe they run the glasses at 240 Hz to reduce flicker. When I got the unit several years ago the LCD screens maxed out at 120 Hz.</p> <p> </p>

<p>If you're driving an interesting place to stop is Cathedral Grove off Highway 4 east of Port Alberni. It's a bit of old growth forest that's escaped logging.<br> Link---> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacMillan_Provincial_Park</p> <p> </p>

<p>Stairs.....</p><div></div>

<p>Procrastination day has been posponed yet again. Still have not gotten into the darkroom to soup some current stuff so here's one from the archives. At the bank...... M4, 35mm Summilux pre-asph. , Tri-X. </p><div></div>

<p>Some vintage graffiti from Sydney Australia at the time of a royal visit.... </p><div></div>

<p>Same trip but at Pondicherry in South India. While waiting for fares a motor rickshaw driver was trying to learn how to spin a ball on his fingertip Globetrotter style. Caught a glimpse of movement out of the corner of my eye while walking past and got this grab shot. The 21mm has long been one of my favorite lenses for street.</p><div></div>

<p>2012, Allahabad India. A quick grab shot with the 21mm Super Angulon on M4. Tri-X in D76 1:1</p> <div></div>

<p>The offset tripod mount is a PITA. A neat gadget if tripods are your thing is the old Canon camera holder R2. It's a perfect fit for M Leicas and gives a mount point centered under the lens. There's even an extra mount on the end for verticals. Got it in a box of junk for nothing, use it a couple times a year. </p> <p>Something I've added to both my M4s is a finder safety catch to avoid loss. Started a thread about this 10 years ago. I've been using a finder-keeper for 45 years with a 100% safety record, ...quickly touching wood. Wonder if anyone ever made their own?<br> Link to the thread -> http://www.photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00EIeC</p> <p>I usually make my own straps with no buckles to adjust and cut to custom fit. Less stuff to snag or scratch an exposed camera. </p> <div></div>

<p>Loading the things is a bit of a knack. Here's link to a thread on another site that may be of help.<br> http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22421</p> <p> Glenn</p>

<p>Some very nice stuff this week. Greg, I suspect you're another 21mm addict like me? Nice shot of the jungle.<br> My shot was with M4 and 21mm Super Angulon while out camping in the mountains.... </p><div></div>

<p>Thanks for the links Michael, enjoyed seeing Darrens work. I've been dabling in light painting myself. With several minute exposures it's amazing what you can do. I've jury rigged LED bulbs onto the end of a stick which I spin while turning in a circle to produce light spheres. What's interesting is the fact the person in the middle does not show up, only the LED records. For this shot, after making a sphere I tried painting myself in with a glow stick. All this happened on the mud flats at low tide under a full moon while I'm up my ankles in mud, what fun. In other shots the broken dinghy in the foreground got painted in with a white LED to get some detail.</p> <p> </p><div></div>

<p>This is a thread I can certainly relate to Lex. Got my start in photography and street stuff using my fathers Rolleiflex way back in the fifties. Around 1965 I got into SLRs and used Canon cameras during a year long work trip to Australia. For travel and street the Canons were a bit too large, so there was a switch to Leicas, both M's and LTM. <br> By 1969 I was getting more into street and carried a Leica everywhere while trying to be alert to possible decisive moments. A first trip to India and Nepal in 1970 got me started on a genre I've come to call "exotic street". Through the seventies the travel bug bit hard and any leave I could obtain from my research job got used going walkabout. India seemed to be the focus of many of my trips which included two ATW ones. On the way home from second around the world trip in 1977 I stayed for a while in French Polynesia. While at BoraBora I met some of the cruising yacht people and my life took an abrupt change. Back in Canada I resigned my position and moved to the west coast starting a new career in oceanography. Much of my time was in shore based labs but there was enough sea time to keep the travel bug satisfied. Life aboard ship and ports around the Pacific were often what my lenses got aimed at. <br> After taking early retirement I finally had time to scan all those negatives and slides that a lifetime of shooting has generated. There were lots of gems that I'd never bothered wet printing because they would have needed too much darkroom work. <br> At some point I found that two negatives were of the same street scene but six years different in time. There were obvious changes which got me wondering what the street would be like four decades after the first photo. Turning to Google earth I found that one of the shops in my photos was still in business. How cool would it be to go back and shoot the same street again and do it with the same camera as the first photo from 1970. Was finally able to do this in 2012 and even took along prints of the early photos to leave with the shop people. It was a fun experience giving them the photos and photographing the encounter. For the next couple months I tried to return to places visited in the seventies for a time travel series. <br> Trying to re-shoot old photos does have its dangers. While trying to photograph a group of women working in a field, I had a close encounter of the cobra kind. And yes I got a photo of the snake, but not the women at work.<br> After the recent "Calling Christchurch" motorcycle thread I've been tempted to post the time travel series here. Would they be out of place in this forum?<br> Glenn<br> The attached photo was from the Marrakesh bazaar during Ramadan. Food stalls were busy after sunset when fasts were broken. Ca. 1971 </p> <p> </p><div></div>

<p>Unfortunately I underexposed some shots, ISO 80 and f/3.5 isn't the best for this type of available light. And you don't get to see how badly you screwed up for several months. Digital guys sure got it east these days! ;-)<br> Never got a good print from this neg using wet methods, but scanning and Lightroom helped pull this out. Sure missed the 35mm Summilux that day. This one was down a dark muddy Kabul back alley, get your bike repaired and pick up some meat for dinner while it's fixed......</p> <p> </p> <div></div>

<p>Some great images this week, still haven't gotten into the darkroom so something old from the archives. In the earlier seventies Afghanistan was quite safe and it was possible to rent a pedal bike and ride out into the country. This road was just outside Kabul. Wonder how long a lone foreigner with a Leica would last these days?</p><div></div>

<p>I've read some where online that printers like the Epson 3880 have ink dampers that contain a very fine screen (filter).<br> It was suggested that these should be changed on a yearly basis to help prevent blockages. This is news to me, in the several years I've owned an 3880 have never changed the dampers, should I be worried? Has anyone changed theirs?<br> I've had a couple blockages that cleared up with a cleaning cycle.<br> These are what I'm talking about...<br> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Ink-Damper-for-Epson-Stylus-PRO-3800-3850-3880-3890-DP10-/280932176108</p>

<p>Heron Pi, which is nothing like alligator pie...... ;-!</p><div></div>

<p>I see it's OK to post a digital image if it was shot through a unique old lens. Fusion photography or digital hot rodding ???<br> Here's one through the Questar using the optional solar filter. Transit of Venus across the Sun in 2012, next time this happens will be in December 2117. The little black spots are sun spots, not sensor dust.</p><div></div>

<p>Interesting thread JDM! I used an MTO way back in the sixties after buying it from a camera store in Sydney Australia. There are a couple shots in the Canon FTb part of my gallery on PN that you might find interesting. They were shot at Bondi beach during a surf competition on a day of heavy surf. Seem to remember they were shot on Ektachrome.</p> <p>I tried it with a doubler an got decent results, will post some when I find them in the archives. Unfortunately the MTO was sold when I switched to Leica RF in the late sixties. Should have kept the Canon. Ah the decisions of youth, my copy was amazingly sharp. Fortunately after that I hung on to cameras and lenses rather than part with them. </p> <p>My present mirror lens is a 3.5" Questar (1400mm f/11). I've tried it with Visoflex and Tri-X and was not happy with the results compared to the Canon, perhaps focus issues. <br> Since then I've tried the Questar with a D300 and limited testing showed this had promise. Again problems, ISO 3200 and high shutter speed helped capture sharper images but I wasn't comfortable hanging such a large camera on the astro mount. The lens tilted at the sky unless a heavy counterweight was wrapped around the lens barrel. The Questar covers an APS-C sensor, but just. The next experiment will be done using a D3200 and truly solid tripod. Picked up an antique video tripod made in the USA by Majestic, what a monster, it must have been used with big double reel 35mm cameras. I live close to a wildlife preserve so looking forward to better weather to try the rig out. Oh! did I mention that it will focus down to about 8 feet giving a long distance microscope effect. They make versions for science use that focus on this feature. ;-)<br> Questars are on the pricey side, but USA made and still available. After seeing the ads in Scientific American I'd always wanted one. One day a local camera shop was selling a used one and the price was right. http://www.company7.com/questar/pricing.html<br> Glenn</p> <p> </p> <p> </p>