When I get tired of reading something. I stop. You ought to try it.

Right On Brother!!!

I think we are pretty much in agreement. I enjoy this site. There are some amazing photography being done. A couple days ago there was a reference to Charles Glatzer who had an instagram site. An amazing wildlife photographer. I know there are those who say "Well, yeah, but he has that high dollar equipment". I agree that having good gear helps, but I suspect that Glatzer could walk out his front door carrying nothing but a kodak 110 instamatic and come back with images that would be considered worthy.
It sounds like you were a cross country trucker? Did you ever get by St Joseph, Mo ? That is where I have been living for the last 40 years. Or on Highway 30 (Lincoln highway) in western Iowa or on Interstate 29 between Omaha and Sioux City. This was where I grew up. When you were on the road were you able to take photographs or did this come about after your retirement.

What a coincidence, I just now came back from the kitchen after a glass of milk and some of those selfsame cookies you photographed. Get out and take pictures. Experiment with different settings. Don't use the auto setting crutch, but don't miss getting the picture because you didn't use it. Have fun. I am looking forward to seeing some of your pictures.

Here is something I have noticed about on line interaction in general and not just here behind the Hedge and that is people are much more snotty and rude behind the mask of the internet than they would be if they were talking face to face with people. I didn't think the "spray and pray" remark was actually that bad. I have seen much worse as I am sure you have as well.

What you write seems absolutely true and yet in a sense so grim. Do you ever find yourself in a situation where you just take pictures for the joy of doing so. One of your "countless duds" might be someone else's treasure even if it not photographically pristine. I agree that there is nothing wrong in thinking through what you are doing, and I don't mind working for an image, but I don't want my photography to be a chore.

As with good photography, there is more to Emily than meets the eye.

Thanks for sharing. For some reason, I want to read some Emily Dickinson.

Thank you for your post. He does wonderful work and seems to be a great guy in addition to that.

Terry do you have CD's made from your SD cards and want to be able to bring these cards into Walgreens or wherever and be able to get pictures printed if you should choose to do so. If so you are in the same situation as I am. I actually carry my cards into the store, sit at kiosk and edit my my images and have prints made. I also have a CD made at that time. For my purposes, I can concentrate my attention better at the kiosk than I can amid the distractions of home. I also wonder if the editing program at kiosk is better than whats on my old computer. Good luck with your CD issue.

I like your lizard photographs and am glad you are in the forum. I would like to see some photographs of your work around your place. How about some pictures of your dog? What is his name?

I think this is a great picture. Perhaps a future Hog discussion could be "What are the characteristics that help to make some things 'photogenic'?" Here I am not talking about beautiful people, or stunning sunsets or mountain vistas and etc but instead I mean an old pickup abandoned in a field, a shuttered store front, or an old barn such as the one you shared with us.

Dwayne's Photo Parsons Kansas. You can google it or someone will probably send you a link.

[quote=Bipod]You're right, RodeoMan. It was mean-spirited of me to say that. Sorry.

It's just that we get so much cheering about [i]brands[/b]. And most of the fuss made
about Kodachrome beng discontinued was for the sake of nostalgia, not photography.[/quote]

Thanks for the reply. I agree that many of the people bemoaning the loss of Kodachrome probably would not use it themselves. I did use it and it was a great sunny day film, but catch yourself outside on an overcast cloudy day with K-25 in your camera and you would be looking for a fence post or something to brace your camera on so you could make an image. I guess that it had great archival qualities and that is good. Perhaps the large imaging companies, kodak, Fuji, Ilford, etc) should be stepping up their efforts to increase the longevity of their product. On the digital side, the question is whether images will make it to next year let alone to the next century. I will occasionally visit a second hand or antique store and there will be photographs of people and places made in the 1800's. I think of all the images imprisoned on SD cards, photo dvds, hard drives, the cloud and etc and wonder what the odds are that these will be available to look at in the 22nd or 23rd century. I know that many of the photographs stored are not worthy of posterity, but many are. It is a shame for these great pictures to be lost. This sounds like a Hedge Hog topic. Anyway back to Kodachrome, I look at it as a group of bright pigments an artist would have available to dip his brush into if he should choose to do so. That is my poetic romantic argument for keeping kodachrome available. On the pragmatic business side, the cost of production including environmental concerns made its continued manufacture untenable. When you (kodak) are on a sinking ship, you look for what you can throw over board. I think Kodachrome was an obvious choice. Have a great rest of your day and beyond. Oh, yes thanks for the information about Process One. I actually live just north of where it is located. I compared its prices with Dwayes's in Parsons, Kansas and Dwayne's has the better of the comparison. I'll see you on the Hog.

Regarding Jane Mansfield who is buried elsewhere, cenotaph is the name for a marker that acknowledges a person who is actually interred at another location.