Wednesday, March 31, 2010

Party Store No More

When I heard that the Village Paper Party store over on Greenwich Ave was destroyed by fire, I was a bit saddened. It's not that I knew the people, or even patronized the joint very often, but it did play a part in a Halloween I remember with great fondness.

Decision time...picture then story? Or story then picture. We'll go with the former:

Halloween, 1996:
I don't remember if George actually told me the idea before we hit the store. I do remember him saying that we needed werewolf makeup. He said it would look more "natural" when we spread it on our skin. As for the clothes, I wore a nondescript blue hooded sweatshirt over a "TUPAC R.I.P." shirt that I got on 14th for five bucks (or maybe ten, tops). Then there was the hair. I don't remember where it came from. It was a beaded and braided wig a la Stevie Wonder (blindness not included). I think I borrowed it from George. On the evening of Halloween, George and I suited up, got in the car, and headed to the evening's destination, the place for which we went through all this preparation in the first place — Newark, New Jersey.

We were playing a show at the now only alive in our memories Pipeline. We were opening up for the Blanks 77, who were in full KISS regalia. Our drummer, Michael, dressed in his annual drunken clown costume. Or should I say that he dresses as a clown every year and just gets really drunk. It's his thing. The show went well, such as I remember it. After you play enough shows they all become a giant blur, except for the really great and the really awful ones.

After the show we walked on down to a Dunkin' Donuts for a post-show snack. None of the locals seemed to take any notice of us. I'd like to think it's because we blended in so well. We drove back to the city, and not wanting to waste good makeup, we took to the streets, and again, nobody said anything either way. We just were.

Our last stop that night was The Continental over on 3rd just by St. Mark's. It was mostly empty, but we spied a friend of ours (who shall remain nameless for reasons you'll see shortly) sitting alone in a booth. George and I knew just what to do and flopped ourselves down, one across and one next to him, and gave him a hearty greeting. He just looked at us, stunned, before he realized who it was and we all lost it. After regaining our composure, he said, "When you guys sat down the first thing I thought was, who the fuck are these niggers?"

Given that response, I'd say the night was a rousing success.

Goodnight Village Paper Party Store, wherever you are.

Tuesday, March 30, 2010


The cop cars had their sirens going as they drove on the sidewalk at Union Square East. Being ever so eager to catch some action shots with the Medalist, I trucked my little self over to the action, which was in front of Starbucks (where there's always some high-caffeinated action to be had!). I took some shots of the cops as they seemed to be doing not much besides milling about, and talking to a slightly out of sorts white person. Being all for naught, I went to the corner of 15th and waited for the light to change.

Mirna noticed the camera and commented just as we started walking. During our trek across the street I gave her my spiel and she agreed to a shot. This gives her the honor of the first person to compliment one of my non-YashMat cameras and have their photo on the site.

She's a Texan, in Brooklyn via Austin via Dallas and by the end of the year will be back deepinahearta. But on this day she told me she was looking for an address on West 15th. It turned out to be Tibet House, which she decided to visit on her lunch break. If you haven't been or don't, Tibet House is a museum, meditation place, bookstore, and shrine all combined. It's a must see.

I took Mirna's photo in front of Tibet House. It was pretty underexposed, and I was surprised I was able to manipulate it to the point that it doesn't look too terrible. Though I really should have taken more care.

Mirna, I owe you a better shot.

Monday, March 29, 2010

And now, another installment of..."AS THE FLEA MARKET TURNS..."

It was an orphan bottom. Allow me to explain. It was the bottom half of a 1950's era 127 Brownie, still with a roll of film sitting in it, about halfway wound. Heeding some advice I got earlier in the week, I rolled up the film and approached the seller. "I found this in with your camera pile. Could I buy it?"

"You know," he said, "That could be very important."


"The last time somebody bought an old roll of film from me, it turned out to have Bettie Page pictures on it." He paused as he contemplated what price to charge me for this roll of potential treasures. What could it contain? Pictures of Lee Harvey Oswald and Jack Ruby enjoying a game of cribbage? Spiro Agnew paying his taxes? Richard Nixon giving Jane Fonda a footrub?

"Five bucks," he tells me. Fortunately for him, that's just what I was willing to pay.

Well, I didn't get any images of historical import, or even of people, but there were four pictures of this lumber truck:

And here's the last viewable shot:

I think it's sort of fitting that the grave shot was the last one taken before fading into the light...

Sunday, March 28, 2010

Back of the Flat

Oh, you'd think it would be easy to point a camera at the Flatiron Building head-on and get a great picture, but it's actually a pain in the ass. Unless it's overcast, you have the sun aiming right in your face, and you get a contrast nightmare. People never bother with taking pictures of its backside, so why shouldn't I start a trend:

And then there's the off-angle approach:

I gotta eat something.

Saturday, March 27, 2010

Street Coffee (detail)

Starbucks had this thing going on set up in the "Bloomberg Zone" in front of the Flatiron Building. I think I overheard that they were using all of these different colored cups of coffee, I mean, white cups filled with different colors of coffee to form some picture of a tree or something. I think it was some attempt by a multi-billion dollar corporation to say that they care about the environment or something, and aren't just about the profit margin (of course!):

Yes, this is a detail of a larger, less interesting shot. They also had a table there where they were asking you if you liked coffee and if you said yes, they gave you some kind of portable reusable cup. I didn't stick around long enough for them to ask.

I fucking hate coffee.

Friday, March 26, 2010

The Fountain Crowd

So yesterday I picked up my newly overhauled Kodak Bantam Special. Actually, I guess you could call it more of a Frankenspecial. Whether I'll end up calling it that (a la "YashMat") I can't say. But basically I had the middle and rear elements of one transplanted into another. I think it worked out okay:

So today I found myself walking along the north side of 12th between forth and third (I think that's where I was), and came across this ultra-hip thrift store whose sole mission is to cure diabetes. I mean, I don't think they have a lab in the back or anything, I think it's more a front for diabetes research. I had never heard of the place until today, even though I found out they have been around for two years already.

They were having some sort of annual event, like a spring opening with a whole spread of dietetic goodies for the insulin-challenged, and all the while I could barely contain myself as I walked around with a cooler full of pudding.

Thursday, March 25, 2010

Getting the Brush

As awesome as the Kodak Medalist is, unfortunately it's saddled with a fixed 100mm lens. I mean, that's great for a lot of things, but when you see a dog getting brushed and making all sorts of faces, you just wish you could zoom in a little:

Or you can always just post a detail:

Of course, the little feller (or miss feller) was making more exciting faces earlier on, but it reminds me of something I've been thinking a lot about lately, and something that I might have even written about somewhere in this blog. Say, I'm not only possibly repeating myself, but I'm even repeating myself when I say that I'm repeating myself!

So anyways, I was having a discussion with someone last week about the merits of film vs. digital, and they said that even though they're film born and bred, they recently went on a trip with a digital camera and felt the better for it because, "I would have missed so many moments if I had film."

It's only yesterday that I remembered that I had this same conversation with someone else a while back, who was worried about missing "moments." I think the idea of having to capture every moment can become an obsession or even a sickness. Having been out on the street with film for almost a year now, I've come to accept that you're always going to miss moments. But I've also learned that for every missed moment, there's always another one coming.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure I did write about this very thing on this site, but way way back, so if you feel like searching through 200+ posts and reading each one to figure out if this opinion is a rerun of sorts, well, you have a greater stomach for it than I.

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Lost in a Crowd

Yeah, I could say that I set this all up and waited around for some dude to come by in the background amidst all these Shakyamunis, but that's not the case. I just pointed and shotted with my new, yet ever-increasinly favored camera, the Baby Brownie. It's a nifty thing, just a little bakelite box that fits in the palm of your hand and nobody knows what you're holding. It might as well be a spy camera. As you can see, there was some high espionage going on at the flea market last Sunday:

Tuesday, March 23, 2010


What the hell's this broad's deal thinking she's better than everybody else?

Okay, if I'm getting dizzy I think that means it's soon time to eat. Lots of work to get done here.

I'm also working on a rant. I think it's going to be one of those things I'll actually have to prepare beforehand instead of just typing it into the box here. I won't be cheeky and keep any secrets, but it's about my love/hate relationship with the Lomography company. There's so much about them I absolutely can't stand, yet they're directly responsible for me re-getting into taking pictures. I think I mentioned it briefly in the very first post of this page. But it's soon time I got into way more detail about the situation.


Not now, but soon.

How soon is now? I don't know.

Monday, March 22, 2010

Enjoying the Show

I really dig this shot for a number of reasons. Before you say anything, yes, I know the band is a bit fuzzy, but that's because I was focusing on the little girl in the foreground. Well, I wasn't so much "focusing" as I was "rangefinding." On this day I was taking a new acquisition out for a test run, namely a Kodak Medalist. It's a pretty badass camera. From what I've read it was issued to naval officers in WWII (the big one). It weighs three pounds, so in a pinch it could be used in hand to hand combat. Or you can use it for less lethal purposes:

I also took a shot of this tree, not because I thought it had some kind of great artistic value, but I wanted to see how accurate the rangefinder on the camera was. I'd say it's pretty darn well calibrated:

I think this might have the best lens next to the Nettar, if not better. I'm looking forward to finding out.

Sunday, March 21, 2010


Keith was selling his wares in Union Square the day I ran into him. That's his stuff behind him and to the left. He was impressed that I recognized his photo of the Thunderbolt roller coaster in Coney Island. It sat in decrepitude for years before it was finally torn down.

I really should have asked him to remove his hat so I could have shed more light on his eyes/eyeglasses. But you know how I am when it comes to making demands...

You can also see that little half-moon in the left side center of the image. That's me still trying to get the hang of loading 120 film into steel reels.

Silly me.

Saturday, March 20, 2010


Adam was going against the grain. Whereas most people set up their wares in Union Square, Adam took his art (mainly photos) to Washington Square Park. He said it was somewhat of an experiment, testing the waters to see if the masses would take to his vision.

The young lady in the background doesn't seem to mind, but I didn't stick around to see if she backed her smile up with some cash.

Friday, March 19, 2010


I ran into Al on Greenwich Ave. He and his co-worker (and friend I'm assuming) Michael (or Mike? Am I even remembering the right name? Hey, I'm back in my old form of taking people's pictures and not remembering their name because I didn't write things down!) were catching a smoke outside a bar that has $1 beers every Thursday. They work in construction, building fancy lofts in fancy apartments for fancy people.

Fancy that.

But my problem with this picture, well, I had a problem which version I fancied more. The above, which is the straight-up color scan of the black and white negative, or the more traditional black and white version you see below:

I kept switching between the two in preview and just couldn't decide. Both seemed to have their merits. In the black and white, Al seems to be set more apart from the background, especially around his head and face. However, the straight-up scan has more interesting tones, and shows better detail.

Oh, but this is the price we pay for being "artists," right?

That reminds me, someone please punch me the next time I call myself an "artist." I think my work on this site proves I am anything but.

Thursday, March 18, 2010


"Should I smile?"

"It's your picture," I said, giving my stock response.

"I don't usually smile," she said, even though I think she was smiling and laughing during almost all the shots I took of her (or maybe she was just wondering when the creep with the camera would just get the hell away from her). And her teeth even got into the act:

This one is my favorite. She wasn't busking in the park yesterday, just enjoying some sleeveless, open-air practice time. After she indulged me to take some shots, she went back to playing:

But pictures don't tell her whole story, so you can find out more here.

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

Four Pillars, Three Handrails, Two Girls and No Cup

Thank God:

Got outside in this cocktease of spring today and got some shots. Even a few shots that fall under the, "Hey Nice Camera" standard. I realize I haven't really gotten many shots of that ilk here in a long time. I think part of it (well, most of it) goes back to that day in the winter (like when it was cold cold), when one of the YashMats froze up. So I was without my best bait. There's something about a twin lens reflex that just catches people's eye (or eyes, assuming they have two, unless you're Robert Thurman or Peter Falk). People rarely seem to notice or make a comment when I have any number of cameras out, and most of them older than the YashMats, be they old folding cameras or even less than convenient Brownie boxes. But today was a great day to have the bait out, and I got a few bites. One of my photo guys does same day slide film turnaround, so hopefully we'll have something tomorrow night.

It was a bit of a weird day too. There was this dude I saw and he bothered me somewhat. Allow me to explain. Oh, and I'm not talking about the dude that was staring at my camera and who kept on staring at me and not saying anything since I was definitely being cruised by the dude. Too bad for him I only like oysters (or is that snails? I really need to see Spartacus again).

So this dude (not the one that cruised me). I took some pictures of him on the sly, and am wondering if I'll put them up here or not. Why did he bug me? He didn't say anything to me. He wasn't obnoxious or anything. I could see he took notice of the camera but didn't say anything to me. But here's what got me about the dude.

He was in Union Square Park in the crowd watching these two acrobats who totally were ripping off Tic and Tacs' routine, and doing it very poorly at that. Now this dude was dressed up for yesteryear. Black shoes, black pants, a narrow pinstriped sport jacket (the pinstripes were narrow), some kind of button down shirt, and a fuzzy fedora with a feather in it. I don't mean fuzzy like felt, but fuzzy like fuzzy. Like you'd think it was old except they didn't make hats like that back then (for men at least). Oh yeah, there was one other thing. He had a digital camera.

Now I'm not one of those "death before digital" people, but it struck me as odd and quite contradictory that this dude would take such pains to set himself aside stylistically from the rest of the pack, yet had a modern digital SLR like any other tourist who thinks they're half-serious about photography. And there I was in my modern day workboots, jeans, and a jacket that I've had for about 13 years (does that make it "vintage?"), and yet I had my YashMat hanging off my neck, and other cameras on my person dating back to the mid-30s.

Oh yeah, and the dude had a man-purse too. I fucking hate man purses. If you can't leave the house without everything you need on your person and have to put it in a small bag that you sling over your shoulder, you're not a man. And it wasn't a camera bag either. Now admittedly, when I go out with several cameras, I do have a bag with me, but it's the bag that I also use to carry my school stuff in, and it has a handle, so I don't have to have the thing slung around me like I'm going off to war. And yeah, if I'm out with more than a few cameras with me, maybe I will have the thing slung diagonally across my chest. But I'm not just out for the sake of being out. The bag is serving a function, more of one than just to keep all my makeup in one place, or maybe I have that Kafka book in there that I sit at the end of a dive bar at in the middle of the day reading pretending to be inconspicuous when I'm anything but hoping some hipster chick (or more likely, a non-hipster chick that wants to live "on the edge") will come over and go, "You read Kafka? That's so cool!" Dostoyevsky can also be used in a pinch if Kafka is not available.

What does any of this have to do with me, my pictures, or anything? Nothing. Just a short not quite voluted statement (treatise? manifesto?) about how real men don't carry around purses.

We now return you to our regularly scheduled programming.

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

On the High Line

Not much to say here really. He didn't have much to say either, Just kept going on his merry way:


Monday, March 15, 2010

Morningside Afternoon

I do realize this shot could probably have benefitted from a person, maybe just a lone person walking on the pathway through the leafless trees in the park, but it was a pretty quiet day last Thursday:

But that's not entirely true. As I was walking out of the park there were these two teenage girls that passed my slow, meandering self and one said to the other, "You're in love with him physically but not emotionally."

Unfortunately it wasn't anything like the gem I overheard a few weeks ago in downtown Brooklyn, as one Planned Parenthood employee said to another, "That lady had 18 fuckin' abortions."

"Really?" the other replied.

"That one was just her 18th!"

Much as I wanted to continue listening in about other people's sex lives, I had to head back to the city to get some work done.

18 abortions...I wonder who the lucky guy is!

Sunday, March 14, 2010

What Price Fleas?

Why do I hear a bad Andy Rooney impression in my head going, "Why do they call them flea markets?" They don't sell any fleas there, and I've never seen a flea going to market at one either..." But a-flea marketing I did go this weekend. One of the fleas I spotted was a Six-16 Brownie Junior. The seller was asking $35 which was way over cost. like by $30. These things were made in the millions, and were cheap box cameras (though they did have a nice deco thing going on with the faceplate). Not only that, the handle was busted and it was rusted. Rusted and busted. But once I picked it up and looked at the little red window in back, I realized it still had a roll of film inside.

"I'll give you $20."

"twenty-five" she responded.

"Come on, these things were made in the millions, and it's rusted."

"I already came down ten for you."

For some reason I forgot to mention the broken handle and relented at $25. Yeah, I knew I was grossly overpaying for a box with a hole in it (but then again, that's all what any camera is when you get down to it, right?), but the mystery of what was on that film was eating at me too much. I doubt she even knew there was film inside, or even knew how to open it up. Actually, I wasn't too sure how to open it up either, but the internet solved that problem but fast.

So I got it home and removed the film to see that it was some Verichrome, judging from the backing paper probably from the 30s-early 40s. I couldn't wait to process it, especially now that I pretty much figured out which developer to use. So I got my juice ready, cooled it down to 18 degrees celsius, put it in for about ten minutes and...

I got nothing. $25 for nothing. But that's the chance you take with this sort of thing. But maybe I was trying to get too fancy with the developing times and temperatures. Maybe I should have just done it like when I was a bit more ignorant about things yet still getting results, you know, just dropping it in at 20 degrees for a shorter amount of time.

Well, that's what I did with the second roll I developed last night. It was also a 616, but Kodacolor, out of a Kodak Special Six-16 purchased via ebay (I bought the camera, the film was a bonus). So I took the, "Well, let's just be carefree and see what happens," approach.

And here's what happened:

I got five shots off the roll. Two of them were of this snowy scene, this one the with the more gooder composition. Then there were two that showed this scene:

It comforts me to know that even way back when people were forgetting to advance the camera. Unless of course this is an intentional triple exposure. The other shot of this scene was just doubly exposed.

The third shot was of a lonely lamppost. I'll scan that tomorrow and maybe have it up then. These big negatives take a while to scan, and well, we lost an hour this weekend and you know how I am with cutting things close when it comes to posting up on the site.

Do you ever worry that you're going to die during daylight savings time and never be able to get that hour back, or is it just me?

Saturday, March 13, 2010

Same Shots, Different Camera

The posts from the last two days, I mean, the day I took those shots, I had three cameras with me. One was the Zeiss Ikon Nettar, from which the pictures posted were taken. The other was my Bantam 4.5 loaded with vintage Kodachrome II film. The reason you haven't seen any shots from the latter is because I tried developing it with HC-110 (with the CORRECT dilution this time), yet nothing came out. As an aside, I tried developing two found films in HC-110 (which is supposedly the "preferred" developer for that sort of thing), yet I got bupkis each time. Well, you know what they say, Fool me once, shame on me, fool me twice don't fix it if it ain't broke, it's always darkest before the dawn, one day at a time, I'm a friend of Bill's, well not quite a friend but I know a guy who knows a guy that's sorta friendly with him..." What am I trying to say here? Oh yeah, screw HC-110 for found films, I'll go back to using Ilfosol 3. What does any of this have to do with today's pictures? Absolutely nothing. But oh yeah, here's where I was going with this...

The third camera I had out with me was an Ansco Flash Clipper. It takes 616 film. In fact, it came in the original box, with manual, and a roll of Ansco Plenachrome film that expired in April, 1950. I figured the only proper thing to do was to put the roll of film that came with the camera (presumably) through it. Wow. I'd like to think that I was the very first person to use this camera since it came off the line some 60 years ago.

But here are some of the scenes you've seen before, but taken with an old camera and old film. We remember that little kid that all the ladies loved, right:

And who could forget Archangel Michael:

And here's this third one. I can't really explain what the hell happened here other than that I'm really pleased with the result:

I think I might be some kind of idiot savant. Or maybe just one of those things. I'm not going to hazard a guess as to which.

Friday, March 12, 2010

Archangel Michael

I didn't know this was Archangel Michael. I just thought it was just your average everyday guy with wings and a sword that likes to hang out next to gothic cathedrals:

It was my friend Michael (no relation, I think) who told me this was Archangel Michael. I'm wondering if these shots could benefit from some creative cropping...

Thursday, March 11, 2010

A Real Charmer

Ladies, these are the kind of guys your mother warned you about. Really smooth operators that get the chicks swooning at their feet:

Then he dragged them down to his level. Even their dog couldn't resist his charms:

It didn't matter how busy things got in the park that day, they were rapt with attention:

I noticed that I lost a subscriber today. I went from an awe-inspiring 9 to a meager 8 viewers of this site. But that's just an observation, not what I'm here to talk about.

I got an email today. It was a very nice email from someone who I met a few weeks ago and ended up striking up a conversation (as opposed to those people you meet and don't talk to). Somehow it came out that I had this ongoing site/project/whathaveyou. I don't even remember how it came out, but I know I didn't lead with it. It's not like I meet people and say, "Hi, it's nice to meet you, check out my photos..." Or maybe I do and aren't aware of it...that would be awful.

So in this short little note was a compliment on the site, and that it's being enjoyed. No, that's a good thing of course, and it reminded me that people actually do read this thing, and that I really have to step up my game. I'm not just talking about the photographs, but moreso the writing.

As much as I like taking pictures, I can't see ever referring to myself as a "photographer." I just like taking pictures. My real love, and strength (I'd like to think, despite anything on this site to the contrary) is writing. Instead of writing about my writing here, I'll just write and you can judge whether it's worth something or not. But either way, I really do have to push myself with it, especially on those nights when I'm ultra-tired.

But the big importance of this email today is that I have to always remind myself that someone's reading this, even if they're not commenting. There are sites/blogs/whatever that I check on a daily basis yet never leave comments or email the author to give them my ultra-important opinion.

The game has to be raised.

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Caught in a Trap

I guess one of the real challenges of taking pictures of the same icon over and over again is trying to find a new way to present it. And since everybody is doing that, then why not just...oh I don't know.

You're just going to get another insight from the guy who has given you such gems as, "I'm tired," and, "Wow, I'm really tired."

Tuesday, March 9, 2010


I'll save the fascinating story behind the developing of this image for after the image. But one of the things I do like, and didn't discover until I looked at it large on the computer screen, is the dude in the background on the right hand side. I'd like to think it just might be Carmine Appice. Now I don't know what Carmine does in his spare time, or if he even lives in the city, or even if he buys his own groceries. Then again, maybe it's Tom Savini. Maybe it's their love child. A boy can dream...okay, I'm making no sense here.

So even though I'm a bit tired late last night, I was really excited to develop this roll of 3200 that I shot earlier in the day. It was the first time I was developing some 3200 at 3200 all by my very lonesome. So I head to the bathroom with an iPod full of Jack Benny and get to mixing and measuring chemicals.

Okay, I'm going to long story short this since I'm way tired at this early hour. I think I was bitten by a tsetse fly. Maybe someone who's keeping one as a pet lost it. That's totally possible, right?

Here's the deal. I only mixed half the amount of developer needed for a 120 size film, and only realized it two minutes into the 9 minute development time. So I just took the can and agitated constantly, hoping all of the film would get covered. I think this shot was the best exposed on the roll.

Goddamn, I shouldn't be so tired this early.

Monday, March 8, 2010

The Limelight

Or the "Slimelight" as we used to call it back in the day (oh we were so clever!). I wasn't there for all of the Michael Alig nuttiness, it wasn't my scene. Though as the 90s trudged along there were some decent goings on there from time to time. Offhand, I can recall seeing FEAR, Sheer Terror, Iron Prostate, and Tesco Vee's Hate Police there (not all on the same night).

Oh yeah, the last time I was there a few years ago I saw The Cramps. It was a Motherfucker party, actually, the last one I went to, and I think one of the last ones that went down (so to speak).

At first I wasn't sure about this shot. Even as I took it I knew there'd be issues with the stark contrast, but I think when it's viewed at a larger size it definitely looks better. This was shot with the 4.5, and was my last shot of the day from that earlier post that I did in the subway, and then forgot to take the camera off the B setting...well, this was after I realized my error of non-adjustment.

Oh silly me.

Sunday, March 7, 2010

Posing for Someone Else's Picture

I wish I could say that this was vintage found film, but I can't. It's some Kodachrome II from god knows when put into the Bantam F-8. As you can see, the processing was just marvy!

I do wish it had come out better. I mean, who doesn't like older white gentlemen sporting bling? Fortunately (or unfortunately, you choose) I have more KII 828 rolls to further experiment with...I did shoot another roll that day with the 4.5 but I mixed up the wrong dilution of HC-110 (A instead of B, for all you "in the know") and got nothing (the above was done with Ilfosol 3). I'll have to go out with the 4.5 again and see what happens under more controlled circumstances.


Saturday, March 6, 2010

Yet More Snow

Did somebody develop a roll of snow pictures yesterday? He sure did!

This was taken with the Bantam F-8, with Pan-F Plus, pulled to ISO25 (for all you photo types reading this, yeah right...). I really like the whole Kodak Bantam series, if you haven't been able to tell already. I'm really fond of the 4.5, and the F-8. I know I've written about the Special...Well, I had it fixed up, and there is an artifact on one of the lens elements that is unfixable. Unfortunately, it does affect the final image. Though I just got another Special on the supercheap. It's really beaten up and dirty on the outside (and in), though I think the inner lens elements look like they're intact. I'll take it to my camera fixer guy and see if he can perform a transplant. Even though I've become quite adept at camera surgery over the past few months, I have to leave the Bantam Special to a professional.

Also, I don't have any more film to develop! This snow roll was the last one I did. Well the obvious solution to that would be to just go out and take pictures! Right? Today was a spectacular day to be outside, so I was told. I didn't leave the house but I did look out the window. You see, it's this school thing. I think I did more concentrated work today than I have the entire semester so far. I've really been struggling, fighting with myself. So why all the work today? Well, I'm putting together and outline for a presentation I'll be doing in a few weeks, though the outline is due tomorrow. I've been woefully unacquainted with my sources (not entirely unacquainted, but not well enough acquainted to be considered "familiar." You know how that is, right?). So I've been putting my mind to the issues of possible neanderthal burials, cannibalism, and all sorts of other stuff where you read an article by one guy and come away thinking,"this guy makes sense!" And then you read another article which takes the exact opposite viewpoint and say, "this guy makes sense!"

Okay, I'm babbling and rambling with no apparent point here. I think I'm just trying to keep my fingers moving before I have to hit those articles again.

Okay, okay, I'm going back. It's what's best for us all.

Friday, March 5, 2010

Snow Coming Down

Okay, I'm wiped. It's early on a Friday night and I'm wiped. I ain't giving much with this entry today. But this is last Friday, during the third "Storm of the Century" of 2010, as the weather assholes on TV like to scare the hell out of us with every time a snowflake might even be seen somewhere in the vicinity their viewership on a day that's not Christmas Eve, which everybody knows is the only day that TV meteorologists have sanctioned for snow to fall.

Is it possible to be tired from eating too many cookies, since I've eaten way too many cookies today and have been filling up on Diet Coke, and yet I'm fighting to stay awake just to write this darned post, and try to make it not so much like I'm mailing it in.

Thursday, March 4, 2010

A Bird in the Hand...

is worth how many in the bush?

I count twelve.

Wednesday, March 3, 2010

Some Leftover Pride

So when I got back from the Gay Pride Parade last June I said to a friend of mine,"I saw some fairy on the street blowing bubbles."

And he said to me, "Who's Bubbles!"

"No," I replied, "it was more like this":

With this next shot, I don't remember if it was an intentional double exposure or not.

Dig those crazy colors man...

Tuesday, March 2, 2010

Under 110th Street

You know, that almost sounds like a song. Somebody get Bobby Womack on the case immediately.

So I must say that I am a little proud of this shot. Not because of the composition or anything, just that I took it with the Bantam 4.5 on the "B" setting, that is, holding open the shutter as long as it was depressed with my little finger. I didn't take any meter readings, I just pushed the button, counted to 5 and released. And there it is, pretty well exposed at ISO 100, with no pushing. I think I had the aperture closed down. Actually, I must have, since as I'm writing this I'm realizing I didn't adjust it from my previous outdoor shots.

Of course, I forgot to take it off the "B" setting, so all my shots afterwards were shot.

Monday, March 1, 2010

One Fifth Avenue

Here's another shot from that mystery roll, the one I forgot what kind of film it was (That reminds me of a game..."open the door for your, mystery roll..." okay, maybe not). This is also a completely unretouched scan of the black and white negative:

I've always loved this building. It's really imposing, and I'd really like to catch that imposition on film. I like it here somewhat, with the clouds in the background that give it a little something, but I'm not sure if the tree in the foreground is helping any. Or maybe I could argue something about depth.

A lot of people think this is the building that inspired the Ghostbusters building. I don't know if it is or isn't. But I can see how it might have served as inspiration, or why people think it. I really can't see why they're making a Ghostbusters III.

I mean, if you're going to rape the classics, why not do a reinvention of Q, or Empire of the Ants, or even Longshot, that foosball movie starring Leif Garrett.

I should probably stop now, before someone gets ideas.

I'm going to develop a few Bantam rolls tonight. One from the Special, one from the 4.5, so maybe I'll have some variety for tomorrow (so he says). I'd like to try to at least do a roll a day (so he promises). If I'm not going to be doing schoolwork, why not do something constructive (so he rationalizes)?