data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/923ac/923acf73bd29c042724fda49527044317414ceb5" alt=""
You can nominate a post too. Just leave a comment here with the URL or link - and tell us the name of the blogger you are nominating. Righty-o, then, it's over to you.
This sequence of shots was just a lucky result. They were taken last Friday, literally a few minutes after I had entered my link on this site for last week’s Sky Watch post.
I switched the computer on and I walked into the kitchen, as I always do each morning. The sun had not yet risen, but I could see some interesting bands of thick grey cloud across the horizon. I knew there was a chance that there would be some arresting colours to shoot a few minutes later.
After I’d done a few things on the computer and around the house, I checked the sky again from the kitchen window. This time I could see faint daubs of pink across the bottom of each cloud band. I knew that in a few minutes there would be a dramatic display of colours, but I also knew that it was one of those windy mornings when the hues would disappear rapidly.
About five minutes later, the pink started to intensify, so I picked up my camera and walked out into the back yard, where I shot four frames. Then I decided to walk to the front of the house for a different aspect and perhaps a wider range of colours.
I was outside for less than three minutes. All up, I took eight shots and when I walked around to the back door, the colours had gone completely and all that was left was grey cloud patterns. That’s the thing with Nature - you sometimes have to be very quick to capture its greatest beauty.
For other participants in Dot’s concept, go to Sky Watch HQ.
I was introduced to Singapore when I was just eleven years old. Wide-eyed, I took in everything about the island-state. It was still British territory at the time and I used to be fascinated by the RAF jets that flew overhead. I remember clearly going to a fair where the highlight, for me, was the skydiving display by British specialists.
I recall being dumbstruck by the fact that the taxis were Mercedes-Benz vehicles, no less. From memory, most of them ran on diesel. I wondered if my classmates in school would actually believe how many times I had sat in the plush interior of a Merc.
I even made an unexpected visit to an RAF base when I was stung while swimming at a Singapore beach. But more than anything else, I remember being fascinated by Orchard Road. Why? Not because of the architecture. Not because of the colonial history. Not because of anything remotely artistic.
The place grabbed my attention because of C. K. Tang’s, the department store where I was instantly fascinated by the huge area devoted to toys. Hey, I was only eleven years old, remember?
Over the years, I returned several times to Singapore on way to and from overseas assignments as a sportswriter covering cricket and tennis. More recently, I have been there on holiday or to visit friends. Orcahrd Road, which once fascinated me because of its retail nature, now holds me in thrall because of the many images I have been privileged to photograph.
A few years ago, we were there as a family and I took the first available opportunity to take our children to Orchard Road and, specifically, to C. K. Tang’s. But maybe things had changed. Maybe their toy section was smaller than it was during my childhood. Maybe our own perceptions had changed because of the arrival of mega toy stores that totally dwarf my own memories of the toy selection in this particular store.
During our week there, we also had an interesting experience. I took the Authorbloglets out for the day and took some travellers’ cheques with me, as well as my passport - just in case I needed some more money. As it turned out, I didn’t need any more cash. But when we got home, Mrs Authorblog - who had stayed home because she was unwell - fixed me with a gimlet eye.
She asked if I had managed to change my travellers’ cheques.
No, I replied, I still had some money in my wallet.
Which was probably a good thing. Because as my wife pointed out, I had erred badly. Instead of taking my own passport, I had taken my son’s by mistake.
For the home of ABC Wednesday, go to Mrs Nesbitt's Place.
Photograph copyright: DAVID McMAHON
This old tram stop on Dandenong Road is a wonderful reminder of what Melbourne looked like in the colonial era. The city is famous for its trams (trolley cars, to some of my readers) and there are not many of the old, preserved tram shelters left. I know there is at least one more on St Kilda Road and I’m sure there are a few others dotted around the city.
A couple of years ago, when the tram shelters along Dandenong Road (Dandy Road, to Melburnians) were being renovated, I wondered if this one would be retained or whether it would come down to make way for the slimline, no-fuss, alloy and glass constructions that seem so unobtrusive.
To my relief, it remained where it was. As you can see in the photograph below, back in the days when carpentry was about as hi-tech as anyone wanted to get, good seating and an adequate roof was all-important. It is painted in the green and gold colours that represent this country and its sturdy construction offers protection not just from the elements, but also from the whipping breeze that is such a part of Melbourne.
Dandy Road runs four lanes in each direction, while the trams run up and down the wide median strip. In this shot (below) taken from the opposite footpath, you can actually see a silver/grey minimalist structure between the camera and my subject. That is one of the new tram shelters, where display advertising panels face the traffic.
This last shot is actually a close-up of the roofline of the old tram shelter. It wasn’t so much the terracotta colour that drew my attention, as the graceful curves. Against the light sky, the contrast was perfect.
Visit the creative team behind That's MyWorld Tuesday.
This week's interview is with Tom,
who writes the blog The Fishing Guy.
Here’s a question that’ll make you think and make you smile. When was the last time you loaded film into a camera? In my case, it’s more than two years and I have a film-based Canon EOS that I haven’t used since 2005.
We all had our favourite brand of film, didn’t we? And we all bought a particular speed of film, in the fervent hope that we would be shooting every frame in the same weather conditions and in the same light. But in the case of most amateur photographers, it was customary to have the same film in the camera for weeks on end.
You’d take the film in to your local dealer and you’d stand there, looking at the prints and wondering why the final result was not always as good as you imagined. My local Kodak dealer has long gone, swept away by the commercial reality of digital technology.
Time was when I’d pay $15 for a roll of film, back in the days before you could buy multi-pack Kodak rolls. On top of that, developing and printing was another $15-$20. I generally opted for 24-frame film rolls, rather than 36-frame rolls, so that I could see the results quicker. Now it’s not uncommon for us to take that many shots - and more - in a few minutes on a digital camera.
If you were married before 2000, I’d say your wedding photos were taken on a film-based camera. When Mrs Authorblog and I were married, we were lucky to have several people using cameras in church and at the reception. Because of this, we stocked up on really good-quality film, which we gave to all our friends who planned to use their cameras on the big day.
I had a really good plan. Anyone who completed a roll of film that day would simply drop off the roll in a pre-arranged container (clearly marked) and would help themselves to a new roll of film from a different container (also clearly marked).
I even had a back-up plan in case someone - perish the thought - put a used film into the container for unused films. It was simple, yet foolproof. If a film spool was entirely wound off a camera, it was possible that a tab of film, a few millimetres long, would still protrude from the spool. I simply asked everyone to use the black knob above each spool to wind the last remnant into the spool entirely.
In such a case, if anyone picked up a used film by mistake, it would be impossible to load the film into a camera.
The concept was great, the execution was (almost) flawless.
After the wedding, I knew there would be several unused films in the appropriate container. So just before we flew out on our honeymoon, I grabbed a few spools of film and we departed for the airport. When we returned, I took these and all the films shot at the wedding to a special photography store.
A couple of days later, I went to pick up the prints and returned home with an armload. As the family members began looking at the prints, someone exclaimed: "Something’s not quite right here."
Bad feeling. B A D feeling.
The truth dawned very slowly. At our reception, someone had a) not wound off a film completely and b) dropped the film into the wrong container.
Each of the 36 prints was a double exposure. They were ghostly composite images. The first exposure in each case showed our closest friends beside us at the end of the wedding reception. The second exposure on each print was a view from the wonderful beachside resorts we had visited on our honeymoon.
For the home of ABC Wednesday, go to Mrs Nesbitt's Place.