Delayed arrival
My blog about my vacation to Ontario has been delayed mainly because it has grown beyond my control. It is too long for a blog, sizing up at almost 6000 words. It’s more like a New Yorker-style memoir or essay than a blog.
I have finished a first draft, but I want at least a day to let it cool. I may add more to it, or I may find a way to cut it. Originally, I began writing it in diary format based on notes from my handwritten diary. I may alter that format. I mix up my past and present tense quite a bit, which bothers me. I am also going to make the essay available as a download in PDF format. I would suggest printing it out for ease of reading.
In the meantime, feel free to browse my photos. I have posted them to my .Mac site. Click on the “Start Slideshow” link in the upper right corner.
http://homepage.mac.com/matthewmccrady/PhotoAlbum6.html
A couple points about the photographs, which won’t mean anything to you until you read my memoir:
1. In the photograph titled “The old codgers on the hill,” the Fat Lady’s cabin, “Fee-Fee,” is directly behind the old guys.
2. In the picture “View from the hill,” the point of land off which the Fat Lady would anchor and fish is directly in the center of the picture. Kingston Penitentiary can be seen (barely) in the distance behind it, a white structure on the horizon.
3. I am terrible at taking photographs of nature. Thus in the photos labeled “Crane catches carp” and “Another view of the crane,” you probably won’t be able to spot the crane. Dad and I were treated to a pretty spectacular display, however, when we watched a giant crane kill and eat a carp that was at least twelve or fourteen inches long.
4. Similarly, in the photo “Fernando the llama’s rock cliff,” Fernando is the tiny, white animal near the top of the rocks. He looks more like a billy goat than a llama in my picture.
Why is it that when I get my prints of my pictures, objects that seemed very close and distinct to the naked eye appear far away and indistinct in the print?
Why is it so difficult to capture natural beauty on film? Ansel Adams makes it look so easy.
9 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
After hearing about this trip for the last decade and a half it is nice to actually see some pictures! The best picture, imo, is that of the International Harvester. I like that a lot–what it says about nature’s power over technology and human-made creations.
Comment by Todd — Wednesday, 13 July 2005 @ 1:07 pm
That one is my favorite, too. It struck me looking at it that here was an irony: a “harvester” being devoured by plants.
After years of taking pictures of people holding fish, the last couple years I’ve tried to look for the unexpected. I think I actually found it just that one time.
Comment by Matthew — Wednesday, 13 July 2005 @ 3:02 pm
I agree. I’d like a print of it actually. I wonder how it would look in black and white?
Comment by Todd — Wednesday, 13 July 2005 @ 4:19 pm
I’ve already emailed you a couple low-res (800 x 600) versions of the photo. One copy is in grayscale. I may have a higher res image on my iBook; I’ll have to check.
I also like that picture of the cluttered basement for some reason. I don’t know why, but it struck me as attractive in its own way as well. Something about the steel-blue walls maybe, or the angle of the pool table. I don’t know.
I took these pictures with a disposable camera, the Kodak zoom, which has two different speed shutters. I left it in zoom mode most of the time. I had Walgreens put digital prints on CD when they developed the film, so I’d still call these first gen digital items, not scans of prints.
Comment by Matthew — Wednesday, 13 July 2005 @ 4:50 pm
Thanks, Matt.
Comment by Todd — Wednesday, 13 July 2005 @ 5:53 pm
Nice pix! I like the gathering stormclouds, the harvester, and the northern pike picture (mainly because it reminds me of the pike Dad and I used to catch from the KOA lake across the road from our house). I always loved the taste of northern pike, maybe more than any other fish (except for those pesky Y-bones you have to watch out for. So do you eat the fish you catch on these trips?
Comment by Dawn — Wednesday, 13 July 2005 @ 7:24 pm
All will be explained as soon as I get this darned memoir/essay published. But in short, we eat the bass. We don’t eat the pike. In fact, we generally try our best to avoid catching pike, for reasons I explain in my memoir. And we don’t eat them for the reasons you mention: the bones. Bass are much better tasting (in my opinion) and have no bones. Also, pike smell bad, and since you can’t hold them by the lip to get your hook out, you have to get your hands slimy taking them off the hook.
In the picture you mention, Dad had that pike attack his lure and miss. He said it felt more like a bass when it hit, and he said that he had not sunk any steel in it so there was a chance it might hit again. I cast my line out in the same spot and reeled it in slowly, and that pike took the bait. It was big enough to be worthy of a picture. The real nuisances are the little “hammer handles” as we call them. These are the small pike roughly the size of a hammer handle that harass your bait and sometimes clip your line. Pike in general are just a nuisance, though.
Comment by Matthew — Wednesday, 13 July 2005 @ 8:12 pm
You know, Ansel Adams didn’t have a disposal camera.
Actually, I don’t know what he shot with, but you can bet normal people can’t just get that.
Btw… you should also post some on flickr. If for no other reason that I’ve got you as a contact and so that means I have a picture of yours in my welcome screen, and it’s some old AP photo or something. Rather look at one of your new pics. 
I’d say some of these pictures were pretty darned good! I loved the sunrise. The stormclouds were fabulous! The view on the hill is vivid and unexpected.
And my favorite…the another shot of the crane. You’re right. I don’t see the crane, but I just love the light and the composition of this shot. Sometimes the best pictures are the unexpected.
Also liked the lily pads, and the basement, which was interesting and has an almost painting-like feel. I like the grain in the actual photo. It gives it an additional grittiness.
And the fish pictures had charm.
Comment by Mel B. — Wednesday, 13 July 2005 @ 11:47 pm
I, too, am a big fan of Adams and dream that one day I could take a picture that looks as good as his.
As far as your pictures go, I really like the sunrise, storm clouds, lily pads, and international harvester. These look like pictures that one would see in a calendar.
That gives me an idea. We all could provide a pictures we took and make a 2006 Sod’s Brood Calendar! The problem is, however, I wouldn’t know how to do it with all this fancy technology that is out there. . . What do you guys and gals think?
Comment by Brandi — Saturday, 16 July 2005 @ 12:08 am