sparky192 wrote:
64??? You young pup, I will be 70 in March.
I guess part of my problem is reluctance... It used to be that a photograph was proof positive of an event. Now you could put a stock car on a picture of the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel and folks would believe it.
It just seems that we have a whole new art form that has destroyed a former science.
Before he got his "jingles...jangled" flying that kite in a lightning storm, ole Ben Franklin uttered something like "believe half of what you see and none of what you hear." I can remember when "it must be true, I read it in the newspaper." Slowly we've lost credibility across the board. With digital...and the likes of Photoshop...you truly can't believe anything you see. We are at the mercy of individual photojournalist. Sure, the pros from Dover can most likely uncover any cheating on an image with the mere click of a mouse but I ask you...do you really think photo editors, under deadline at various desks around the world take time to check anything...??? In the days of digital photography, the net, electronic printing, etc....well....it's just a matter of trust. If you watch MSNBC you can easily see how that trust is betrayed on a daily basis....
architect wrote:
snazz23 wrote:
I love taking B&W pictures, but read somewhere that it is better to shoot all your pictures in color then edit to B&W later. What do you guys think about this?
I always shoot with color in mind, but find that some images work well in B&W as well. Here is a good example. I would never have considered B&W when shooting in the Caribbean because of the gorgeous colors. I used a polarizing filter for the color shot, and converted to B&W using a red channel filter and modifying from there.
quote=snazz23 I love taking B&W pictures, but... (
show quote)
- I Aways Shoot In Color So I Can Make a B&W/Color Hybrid
I've seen some Ansel Adams color from a certain period. The B/W is the best by far. I'd hate to think about dragging that 4x5,( or larger), tripod, etc. all over Yosemite and elsewhere and trying to shoot color and B/W.
Now people gripe about their DSLR and lenses being a burden when shooting in the great outdoors. :lol:
Well said. They should take a look at what the civil war photographers endured. My daughter uses a 5D mkII and complains it's heavy...She and her friends think I'm nuts because all my Canon bodies use battery grips with two batteries loaded in each...with a 5DII, fully loaded battery grip and a 70-200mm lens it's a chunk...I sort of like the weight for stability.
Marcormack, you are haf right. It is a modle 300 wide frontend. gasoline engine it was built in the 50's I still have the orginal seat. Yes I own it as well as photographed it. It is a working modle so there is no fancy paint job. Its a 40 horse tractor. When the tractor was bult it was one of the most versitle tractors on the market for its time 3 different fueled engines, it could have a 3 point hitch or a fixed hitch and it could have hydrolics or a pulley for a belt. this machine was the predescor to the "H" serise or super "H"
Thanks for all the coments :)
Blake wrote:
Marcormack, you are haf right. It is a modle 300 wide frontend. gasoline engine it was built in the 50's I still have the orginal seat. Yes I own it as well as photographed it. It is a working modle so there is no fancy paint job. Its a 40 horse tractor. When the tractor was bult it was one of the most versitle tractors on the market for its time 3 different fueled engines, it could have a 3 point hitch or a fixed hitch and it could have hydrolics or a pulley for a belt. this machine was the predescor to the "H" serise or super "H"
Thanks for all the coments :)
Marcormack, you are haf right. It is a modle 300 ... (
show quote)
Here's some clipped info on Farmall tractors from Wikipedia that you might find interesting:
In late 1939, the famous Letter series of Farmall tractors was introduced (A, B, BN, C,{Which replaced the B and BN in 1948}, H, M, and MD).
The H and M series provided extra plowing capability and power, while the Model H proved most popular with customers.
The Letter series tractors were updated to the Super series beginning in 1947 with the Super A, 1951 for the Super C, 1952 for the Super M and 1953 for the Super H.
In 1955, the numbered or so-called Hundred series tractors appeared. The Hundred series models used numbers instead of letters to identify the model. The new models were given slightly different looks and a few new features, but were still essentially the famed Letter series tractors.
The Farmall H, produced from 1939 to 1952, became the number two-selling tractor model of all time in North America with over 390,000 sold.
So your 3-hundred series tractor has to be 1955 or newer while our A, H, Super H, and M tractors had to be 1954 or older. In any case, they were built like military tanks and had the power to plow at full throttle until burying themselves all the way down to the axle and still try to jump out of the holes they created.
I have had my Tractor burried and used a logging come-a-long to pull it out. When I got it it had been converted to a 12volt system. so when I touch the key it will start, if it doesn't there is something wrong. You are right it is built lake a tank and it is easy to work on. Thank you for your comments and the information it and other pieces of my farm equipment have been subjects for me
Here is the color version
an old A frame mower, It's a McCormick I believe
Blake wrote:
I have had my Tractor burried and used a logging come-a-long to pull it out. When I got it it had been converted to a 12volt system. so when I touch the key it will start, if it doesn't there is something wrong. You are right it is built lake a tank and it is easy to work on. Thank you for your comments and the information it and other pieces of my farm equipment have been subjects for me
Looking at your 300 for a while, I see the resemblance to the H now. The 300 was listed in Wikipedia as being able to pull a 3-bottom plow compared to the H pulling a 2X16"-bottom plow. So I assume the 300 has the same drive train and engine as the Super H.
When I would bury our H's or Super H, I would pull the hitch pin, the tractor would normally jump itself right out of the holes if it wasn't pure slick mud and even then sometimes it still would come out (usually with a wheelie that had to be controlled carefully) and then I'd come back to the plow on a 45 degree angle and re-hook while pulling the lift lever of the plow. Of course you carried a shovel for those times when it wouldn't jump out! :-(
Good memories. I suspect there's probably vintage tractor shows in your area that you could get some shots of other Farmalls if you felt a creative urge happening about tractors. I've never really pondered B&W of vintage tractors before so you've opened up a new path of interest for me. I have a tendency to lean toward classic cars, probably because I was a car nut during the 50s and 60s more than I was a tractor nut! Thanks.
I love this shot. I use layers to get some color in my B&W pics. Do you do the same? :thumbup:
Marcormacks,
classic wheels of all kinds are still classics. They all have stories to tell :)
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.