How to improve photographs for beginners

How to improve photographs for beginners.

Candy songs

Wow, man, I just figured out that songs like My Boy Lollipop and I Want Candy are not really about candy! I'm shocked! Shocked, I tell ya!



Apparently this video is a classic. I'm not sure why. But then it seems to me that rock videos from the eighties pretty much sucked all over.

A nice punky version from Good Charlotte. (Though I do think this song should be sung by a girl.) Used it Not Another Teen Movie, which is excellent.

There was another version I found as MP3 and liked, nice girl voice and nice instrumentation, until I saw the video and found out it's not a girl singing but apparently a 12-year-old boy... ew.

This seems to be one of those songs which have been covered endlessly. And while some of the boys sing about boys, some of the girls sing about girls. I wonder if Melanie C is gay or if she changed it to get attention.

Interfacial

Operational interfaces are very hard to make well, that's clear. Here's an example of a poor detail in an otherwise well done design and interface.
On the Canon Ixus camera, if the camera achieves correct focus, there's a beeb, and the focus frame is green. If it can't achieve focus, there's a slightly different beeb, and the frame is yellow. Both these differences are way too subtle, I did not notice at all until I stumbled over these data in the manual. And I've used Ixuses (Elph) for years.
At a minimum there should be a blinking light, or the focus frame should be blinking. And they might even add "can't focus" in blinking text on the screen or summin like that.

Real-time model airplane video

Real-time model airplane video. Looks like a fun way to get a flying experience without risking life and limb. And if you put it in a model helicopter, you need not be zipping by all you're looking at. (There's even a simple "helicopter" with four small soft propellers, which is harmless even indoors. I forget what it's called.)

The truth about cell phones

You heard cell phones fry your brain? The truth is much worse.

Rainy weather thankfully

Rain enhances colors because all the dispersing micro-reflections get cancelled in lieu of bigger ones.



Update: it turns out that regular commenter Alex is not a bad photographer.

Passions

I've never been one for soap opera, except for a brief flirtation with Victoria Principal (not to be confused with principal Victoria) when I was a kid. But I got a little curious about Passions because it was mentioned repeatedly on Buffy. And it apparently has a lot of supernatural elements. But frankly I don't think I could stand all the romance and all the melodramatics.
Also, who has the time: five hour-long shows per week?! Man, it's gotta be junk, no? I can't imagine anybody producing quality storytelling at that pace.

From wikipedia:
"In 2005, so many plotlines came to involve an element of rape that fans began to refer to that year as the "Year of the Rapes".[citation needed] Early that year, Paloma Lopez-Fitzgerald was sexually assaulted and nearly raped during a club raid. The show then carried a plotline over whether they should do a rape test while Paloma was in a coma (at the time she was a virgin) and Jessica Bennett was also raped a few weeks later while at a club. Also early in the year, Alistair Crane repeatedly raped his wife, Katherine Crane, while at the Crane Compound. Late in May, heiress Fancy Crane was nearly raped by a man in Las Vegas who demanded "payment" for letting her into a party after she lost her invitation. During the tsunami and later in November, Liz Sanbourne attempted to rape Julian Crane at knifepoint. In August, Theresa Lopez-Fitzgerald was raped by Alistair Crane when she refused to pay him (with sex) for helping her with visitation of her infant daughter, Jane; Theresa later married Alistair, and he continued to rape her throughout their marriage."

Gee! Saucy stuff for the housewives!
I've heard from people in the know that rape is de rigueur in romance novels. And not only that, but it's the hero who rapes the heroine, and later gets her in the end, as it were. Not sick at all. No wonder these women freaks out if their husband likes to look at naked girls on the Internet, they are so morally superior.

Marge and the children

Just watching the Simpsons episode from season nine, with Marge and Homer's balloon ride. I can't believe that they got away with showing Marge Simpson nude. And I can't believe I liked it so much. That's just twisted.

Also I was not aware that "Think of the children! Won't somebody please think of the children!?" was a quote, and a satirical one. I love it. I wonder if this was the first appearance of it? (Man, the concept even has a wikipedia entry.) (Update: this guy has a comment on it.)

Update: the episode ("Natural Born Kissers") did not only have female nudity (which for some reason seems more controversial than male) (seriously, what's that about?), but was also about Marge and Homer's sex life. And apparently it was the only one ever where Fox actually wanted to ax it. And it was banned for children in Australia. -- In the commentary they mention that the episode "belonged to a different era", they couldn't do it today. Though the rerun is still shown. What kind of a hell must it be inside the minds of people who get offended by a cartoon boob?

Love and saccharine

It's funny, on the one hand universal love and beauty are to me obviously the most important things in the world, on the other hand when this point is made in just the wrong way, it makes me want to puke. I'm not really sure what it is.

Wide-angle compact: Canon Ixus 860

Somebody wrote me and asked for advice about finding a compact digital camera with a wide-angle lens, and I didn't think any existed. But then I got curious and googled around for it, and I found one which seems like it's really nice, the Canon Ixus 860 (in the US it's called SD870). The reviews are good, and I have its brother, which is excellent. Review and review and review. Update: I had not noticed this video review.

Compared to the one I have (960), it has 8MP instead of 12MP, which is not important. And it has no optical viewfinder, which is good because it allows for a bigger LCD screen. And the zoom goes out to 28mm equivalent, which I love. And it keeps the image stabilization feature, which you shouldn't be without, it saves so many pictures in dubious light, like indoors.

Oh, and personally I think the "black" version as pictured looks much better than the 960 with its super-gloss "iPod" parts. Also, it's marginally smaller and lighter. But like the 960 it has the nice ISO-auto-shift feature, which is surprisingly useful. For instance when I photographed a place like this, I walked in and out of light and shadow, and even in and out of doors, and that feature made sure the low-light pictures were not shaken, while still setting a low ISO for the strong-light settings so the image quality was optimal, without me having to give it a thought. This is one of those pleasant modern features I could not have dreamed up myself.

It's funny, by the way, the feature that Canon don't promote prominently (like on the box) is the wide-angle zoom. I would have thought this was the raison d'être of the camera.

Quote from DPreview:
"Like other cameras in this range what makes the SD870 IS so appealing - aside from the high quality design and construction - is the 'point and shoot' reliability, which produces good, sharp, well exposed results in a wide range of shooting conditions, something you simply can't say about a lot of competitors. We were also very impressed with the lens; a wide lens usually results in a compromise between the really useful ability to 'zoom out' and a degree of chromatic aberration and corner softness that can dent image quality. Our tests and experiences of real-world shooting show very little evidence of these expected shortcomings, helping the 870 IS stand out from competing wideangle ultra compact cameras."

Update: I think the Canon Ixus cameras are tremendous. I have owned several. I remember seeing the first one, pre-digital, in a camera shop. I asked the clerk: "what's that weird looking camera?" He got sort of offended, which is funny. But the high-quality metal construction (update: the 860 is actually part plastic, but at least it looks nice, unlike most silvery plastic), the strong design factor, and the overall high quality are just neato.

This photo set was taken with my first Ixus, at just 2 megapixels.

Update: funny thing, sites such as imaging-resource.com make such detailed reviews that I find it easier to learn about the features of a new camera by reading their review than by reading the manual!
Quote from that site:
"The SD870's 8-megapixel sensor delivers resolution capable of delivering good quality 11x14-inch prints up to ISO 400, an impressive feat indeed. Canon has increased the size of the LCD but removed the optical viewfinder; optical viewfinders being something of a joke on most digital cameras with extraordinary optics, most users won't miss it. The 3-inch LCD more than makes up for the lack of a viewfinder, and works well in bright sunlight. At 180 grams (6.3 oz), the Canon SD870 IS can fit in almost any pocket, and uses a battery that can take a pretty decent number of photos. It's a lot of camera fit into a small package, and I think it's a great fit for the experienced digital camera user who needs a reliable, take-anywhere shooter that shows off its photos well. And I can't emphasize enough how great it is to have a 28mm wide angle lens in such a small package..."

Erowid drug reports

Erowid is an interesting site: it's about drugs and includes unregulated reports from thousands of readers about their experiences with all kinds of drugs. I think it's valuable because drugs is one of those areas where the hysteria is so great that it's hard to find information which is not strongly tinted by some political agenda. For the "establishment", drugs (unless sold by highly profitable pharmacies) are the Great Evil. For the anti-establishment, drugs are the way to "go free and beyond". I suspect both extremes are BS.

Minds of killers

I'm interested in what happens in the minds of killers, especially those who you can't explain away as psychotics, like people who actively participate in genocides like the holocaust or Rwanda 1994. If we overlook those who merely participate out of fear of becoming victims themselves, it still leaves way too many people who one would never expect to be murderers, but yet takes machettes or guns to neighbors who they know are innocent. What is happening in their minds? What do they think? How do they experience it? Is it a rush of bloodlust? Does it feel like they are possessed? Do they feel taken over by mob emotion? Do they feel rage against another ethnic group? Do they not think at all? What?