lmTrying Loc: WV Northern Panhandle

Hey Fred:

Glad to see you are still out there going!

Several years ago, i carried my DSLR around one of DWD's parks for an afternoon because I thought I wanted some better photos of something. I don't even remember what it was now. Eehh, no. From then on, I only carried my Canon XS710HS. Small, light, one heck of a zoom, and carries easily on my belt. Security doesn't even stop me. That big DSLR is not worth the effort.

Now, when I studied your cell phone photo, and I studied it very closely, I have to say that I have not seen any better photo taken of Machu Picchu. I found details that I have never seen in any other photo. Several years back, Google sent their mapping team and cameras to Machu Picchu and did an extensive photo survey of the entire main plaza. After studying the stonework in those photos for days, I decided that Machu Picchu has seen at least three different civilizations of stone builders, and that it has been there a whole lot longer than the learned archaeologists want to admit. Also, I'm willing to bet that all that stone was quarried from the actual site. What???? Why is that commons field so much lower than everything else? Where is the ridge??

I, and several others, am looking foreword to whatever photos you chose to post. The color is good, the focus is good, the exposure is good, the depth of field is good. In fact, they are all beyond good, way beyond. So, ignore Imagemaster and everyone else like him. Keep up the good work and keep posting. Please.