PaddleWise by thread

From: Wayne <wrf_at_hypatia.unh.edu>
subject: [Paddlewise] pentax WR 105
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 13:07:03 -0500
LIke others that have posted on this subject I also have a Pentax WR 105- water 
resistant camera.  The pictures are generally good and in focus except at maximum 
zoom where I find most pictures fuzzy.  Also the light meter is an averaging meter 
which means if you sit offshore and zoom in on some wee beastie foraging through the 
kelp you are likely to have a very dark picture since the meter will read the sky not the 
subject you focused on.  I wish the camera had a spot meter for zoom shots- a lense 
cover would also be nice.  I also keep a Kodak disposable waterproof camera in my 
PFD pocket for times when I can not get to the Pentax in the deck bag.  It also takes 
reasonably good pictures.  It has a small lens (28mm I think) so subjects get very 
small fast if they are any distance from the camera.  Picture quality nearly equals that 
of the Pentax.
***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed
here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire
responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author.
Submissions:     PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net
Subscriptions:   PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net
Website:         http://www.paddlewise.net/
***************************************************************************
From: <Sidney_Stone_at_amsinc.com>
subject: Re: [Paddlewise] pentax WR 105
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 07:21:19 -0500
I actually keep the pentax on my boat deck or around my head when paddling.
I've used it on rainy days and it has sustained going under water.  I wouldn't
take it down in the water.  I have found in general that point and shoot cameras
without any exposure control are going to have trouble taken long range scenic
shots and I tend to avoid them or simply accept the results as documenting my
trip but not as fine photography.

sid


***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed
here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire
responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author.
Submissions:     PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net
Subscriptions:   PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net
Website:         http://www.paddlewise.net/
***************************************************************************
From: Gabriel L Romeu <romeug_at_erols.com>
subject: Re: [Paddlewise] pentax WR 105
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 10:38:07 -0500
Sidney_Stone_at_amsinc.com wrote:
> 
> I actually keep the pentax on my boat deck or around my head when paddling.

The mental picture of a camera around your head is very funny to me
Sid.  Sorta like a miner's light?

> I've used it on rainy days and it has sustained going under water.  I wouldn't
> take it down in the water.  I have found in general that point and shoot cameras
> without any exposure control are going to have trouble taken long range scenic
> shots and I tend to avoid them or simply accept the results as documenting my
> trip but not as fine photography.

I think this is a very good point.  These are wonderful to spark the
memory for all the associations that we conjure recalling an experience.

The other 2 points about this is that one, 35mm is really not as
appropriate as large format for this type of work.  This has been
illustrated by the work of William Henry Jackson's early pictures of
Yellowstone, Carlton Watkins of Yosemite (both of which were responsible
in the preserving these wildernesses.  Jackson's photographs went to
Congress and resulted in Yellowstone becoming a national park, Watkin's
went to the governor of California) to the more recent Richard Misrach
and that calendar guy from the Sierra Club that promotes zone systems
and previsualization.
The second is that a photograph, when used as this formal object, is
never as impressive, to me anyway, as the actual visual display.  A
sunset, for example, is beautiful for it's wide vista and uncontained
nature in the visual periphery. By slicing a frame out of it in a
photograph seems to make it something less.  To the original witness
however, this image may incite a valuable memory.

Photography provides a good record of a changing scenery around us. 
Eugene Atget provided us with a document of a changing Paris at the turn
of the century that proves valuable and interesting to the average
viewer and historian.

I try to think how the media, while taking an impression of a 'real'
scene out there, transforms it into a photographic object with all it's
own inherent properties.  What makes this image different than what was
really going on?  How does my selection of frame alter my interpretation
of the original event?  How does my 'slice of time' recontextualize the
original event?  Makes this medium the most surreal of all- we interpret
the photograph as a direct representation of reality, proof so to
speak.  Yet, it is totally based on what we decide on the elimination
and inclusion within the frame, changing the meaning with each
decision.  A lie cloaked in an assumption of reality.  
The photograph of value to me is the one that lets me discover a new or
different way of seeing.

But then again, this is only one guys opinion that spends a lot of time
thinking about such trivial matters.

-- 
                            Gabriel L
Romeu                                                    
http://studiofurniture.com        İİİİİ   furniture from the
workshop               
http://studiofurniture.com/diary  İİİİİ   life as a tourist, daily
journal         
http://studiofurniture.com/paint  İİİİİ   paintings, photographs,
etchings, objects
***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed
here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire
responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author.
Submissions:     PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net
Subscriptions:   PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net
Website:         http://www.paddlewise.net/
***************************************************************************
From: Wes Boyd <boydwe_at_dmci.net>
subject: Re: [Paddlewise] pentax WR 105
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 13:17:07
At 10:38 AM 1/21/01 -0500, Gabriel L Romeu wrote:
>
>The other 2 points about this is that one, 35mm is really not as
>appropriate as large format for this type of work.  This has been
>illustrated by the work of William Henry Jackson's early pictures of
>Yellowstone, Carlton Watkins of Yosemite (both of which were responsible
>in the preserving these wildernesses.  Jackson's photographs went to
>Congress and resulted in Yellowstone becoming a national park, Watkin's
>went to the governor of California) to the more recent Richard Misrach
>and that calendar guy from the Sierra Club that promotes zone systems
>and previsualization.

Yeah, but I can't see hauling an 8x10 view camera around in a kayak,
although they give wonderful photos. I thought about getting a 4x5 view
camera one time for other uses, like architectural photography. The cost of
the camera itself wasn't so bad, but when you think of all the other gear
that's involved, it gets a little scary. Sort of like kayaking . . .

-- Wes

***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed
here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire
responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author.
Submissions:     PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net
Subscriptions:   PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net
Website:         http://www.paddlewise.net/
***************************************************************************

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:33:20 PDT