Zuiko OM on the Fuji X-Pro 1

I bought an adapter to use my Olympus OM Zuiko lenses on the X-Pro.  With the APS-C crop factor and manual focus, the X-Pro is no longer a fully digital age camera.  But whatever.  I'm not addicted to autofocus, and if I can figure out how to do it with the X-Pro, I can accomplish manual exposure.

The adapter adds depth to the OM lenses, negating their small size.  Sigh.  With the superb Zuiko 21/2 (equivalent to 32mm on a 35mm "full frame" camera,) the combination is almost as large as the 18-55 zoom that came with my X-Pro.

My initial attempts with the 21/2 were ho-hum, but that has nothing to do with the lens.  I was just learning.  But with the 28/2.8 (equivalent to 42mm "normal",) combined with a little more skill, I seemed to find a sweet spot.

I missed focus (on the eyes) a bit, but this was low light and the EVF is not the best under those conditions.

I'll be using the combination more.  

Converting to B&W With the Fuji X-Pro1

I shoot in both black and white and colour.  But essentially I see in b&w and feel most satisfied with it.  With the acquisition of the digital(!) Fuji X-Pro1 I have been learning not only the controls and (too many) options, but how to take the RAW files and convert to black and white that looks like film.

Yes, the Fuji X cameras can produce really nice b&w jpeg files in camera, but the b&w settings are, by necessity, somewhat limited and generic.  To a significant degree b&w films are defined by their spectral sensitivity - that is, how the level to which they respond to red, green, blue, UV and IR content of the original scene.  Digital sensors don't work that way.  A built-in computer takes the information from the sensor and saves it in a "RAW" file which essentially contains all the data that is translated from the light hitting the sensor cells.  (It's more complicated than that, but that's essentially it.)

All digital cameras have modes which can manipulate that information into a modified type of image, normally stored in a JPG file, which represents a combination of settings which are simply manipulations of the data to produce a specific look.

Throughout the absolutely glorious history of black and white film emulsions there have been hundreds of formulations, each with unique renderings.  And as b&w is an abstraction of how most people see a colourful world, none of them is "right".  Some are classics, such as Kodak Tri-X, Fuji Acros,  Iflord HP4, dozens of others, and my favourite, Agfa APX100.

So how the hell do I get a particular look of a specific b&w film from an original RAW file?  It turns out there are two essentials:

1. Using the appropriate controls in image editing software such as Photoshop, GIMP, Lightroom, etc., which basically involves changing the amount of primary colours (Red, Green and Blue) content and 
2. Knowing (or discovering) what the levels of each colour should be for a particular b&w film type

From those changes, you tell the image editing software to convert to monochrome.  You can then add brightness and contrast changes as desired, and even add grain effects to complete the conversion.  I haven't mastered this -- I've just discovered these steps, and haven't even played with applying grain.  

So, I'm a beginner in the "digital darkroom" - which has always seemed so foreign to me, a somewhat accomplished traditional darkroom worker.  But I've been helped immensely by my friend Gene Wilburn, whose series on b&w digital workflow starting here pointed me in the right direction.  And, quite by chance, I stumbled across an incomplete but highly helpful list of levels for several b&w emulsions about half-way down the page here.

So with a little work tonight, using GIMP for Mac, here are some samples.  I used the Fuji 18-55 zoom set at 18mm (approximately equivalent 28mm field of view in 35mm film terms) on the Fuji X-Pro1.

The first picture shows the original colour image.  The day was mostly cloudy with low contrast light, so I bumped up the contrast, then sharpened a little bit and resized.  After applying the appropriate levels for the colour channels in the GIMP channel mixer, I then used the exact same brightness, contrast and sharpness settings for the b&w conversions.  Naturally I don't have shots made with the actual corresponding films (and I haven't tried all the settings listed on the linked site,) but the results are very interesting.

Edited colour image:

Agfapan 25

Agfa APX 100

Agfa APX 400

Ilford PanF

Kodak Tmax 400-2

As I work through other settings, I will add to this post.  Some day I may even learn how to save the settings in GIMP so as to automate the conversion process.  And if anyone can figure out the settings for Adox films, that would be super!

Of course, I could just keep shooting film.  Which I will do.

Kalli

A little over three years ago we adopted a rescue dog.  Kalli had been abandoned in a field in North Carolina, not an uncommon occurrence in some areas.

She was clearly scared, having been mistreated (we later learned,) gone through clean-up, veterinary treatment, a foster home and then to our family already populated by three cats plus a male dog who is definitely an alpha.

It took her several weeks to become comfortable with us.  At first she wouldn't come in after she had been let out into the back yard for exercise and essential duties.

The adoption group called her a Border Terrier mix, and she does have some of those characteristics.  Only genetic testing would be definitive.  Personally I think she has Pekingese traits; my wife disagrees, but I know I'm right. :)

Every once-in-awhile I make some photos of her.  Her underbite is clearly adorable, and the various lengths of her coat give her lots of different looks.

Everyone agrees she is sweet and adorable.  I love her.

© Earl Dunbar December 02 2015

Fuji X-Pro1

And here is her ADORABLE underbite, courtesy of the really nice iPhone 6s camera.

The following shot was made with an Olympus Zuiko OM System 28/2.8 lens.  Focusing legacy, manual focus lenses on the X-Pro 1 is not easy.  "Focus peaking" is a camera feature that highlights the area in focus; it appears as brightness, sort of like shimmering.  I slightly missed focus on this.  The first version is the JPG straight out of the camera.  For the second version I applied some sharpening, but no other editing.

My Letter to the Senate of Canada

I am writing to urge you to vote against Bill C-51.  I am convinced that not only will this bill not offer any further significant protection against terrorism, but it is actually likely to make “terrorist” attacks more likely.

This is because Bill C-51 strikes against the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which has justifiably been praised around the world as brilliant constitutional document.  How can eroding the sacred trust contained in the Charter enhance the trust that Canadians need to have in their government?  In fact, the less trust citizens have in their government, the more likely there will be those who, however unjustly, take violent action against the government and, indeed, innocent citizens.

As a country we are at a crossroads.  The two roads that intersect are Fear and Freedom.  Fear St. is the one chosen by those who act without sober thought and would sacrifice the very freedoms they claim to protect.  Freedom St. is chosen by those who have the vision and strength to not only protect citizens physical security, but the very freedoms that make a nation strong.

Again, I urge you to vote against Bill C-51 which, at its core, bears frightening resemblance to laws which have been enacted and used by fascist, dictatorial regimes against which our citizens have fought and died.

Easter Thoughts on Faith and Politics

Yesterday evening I sent an email to my youngest sister and my nephew that contained a link to a Daily Kos article, You Cannot Be A Republican And A Christian -- please take the time to read the article.

My sister is a devout Protestant and my nephew (her son) is a political operative for a state Republican party.

My sister seemed to take offense, which wasn't especially surprising, though I perceived it (maybe I'm wrong) as emotionally stronger than I expected.  I certainly never mean to offend, but rather want to provoke thought and reflection.

To be honest, I pretty much agree with what the author writes, and his conclusion "You can’t have it both ways. You have to choose, because, today, you cannot be both a Republican and a Christian" is pretty close to the mark.  The conclusion and article title are hyperbole, of course, but only slightly so in my view.

While I was raised in a evangelical and moderately fundamentalist church and home, I left organized religion many years ago.  Even now, as non-theistic Buddhist, I am not presently engaged with any group, though I have a very loose affiliation with a local Zen centre.  (My sense is that most Western Buddhists are either non-theistic or atheists.  There are many Buddhist traditions and lineages, some of which embrace the existence of deities, though usually the role of any god(s) is not central.)

I belong to no political party.  I have never been registered as a Republican, Democrat, or any other  party in the US, nor have I ever been a member of the Liberal Party of Canada, the NDP, the Progressive Conservatives, et al.  In my current jurisdiction, I am registered as an independent.  I don't see that changing.

Enough preamble ... I have met people whom I consider to be "true Christians".  I don't mean that to be a reverse judgment on those who call themselves Christians but don't seem to act accordingly.  But my sister is one who pretty much walks the walk.

Both political parties are "guilty" of using faith for political purposes that do not align with the tenets of the faith.  The GOP gained traction and ascendency partly because of the hypocrisy and outright bigotry of southern Democrats - Dixiecrats.  So I would say the same of Christians who belonged to or supported the Democratic party of the 50s and 60s - you can't have it both ways.

Since the start of my Buddhist practice, I have frequently contemplated the similarities between the teachings of Jesus and the Buddha.  I challenge anyone to read only what Jesus supposedly said and what Buddha directly taught and not come away with substantially the same conclusion.

I don't know if "Red Letter Editions" of the Bible are still published, but I would hope so.  We had them when we were kids, and even then I liked them; their existence actually made a big impact on me and helped me decide to leave organized Christianity.  The words and teachings that have been credited to Jesus stand in stark contrast to most of the Old Testament, some of the writings of the apostles in the New Testament, and, as pointed out in the article, how Christianity is predominately practiced and promulgated in North America.

When was the last time the GOP supported a non-military path to peace?  When was the last time they condemned limiting voting rights in state legislatures by the use of non-constitution trickery?  When was the last time they supported helping the poor with legislation that would actually work?  Jesus never said that government should not engage in social welfare or justice.

There are a lot of things that Jesus never said but self-identified Christians use his name to try and justify their political and social agenda.

I leave with one example.  The next time a Christian trots out "God helps those who help themselves" as validation of any political view or position on social policy, ask them to quote chapter and verse.

I'll welcome with open arms a follower of Jesus any day.

On Farming -- Family Farms Under Siege

Long time no blog.  Sorry -- though some of you may have enjoyed the respite. :)

On Twitter I follow a wonderful person who is both a farmer (mainly dairy) and a lawyer.  It may seem odd to some, but I think it is a wonderful combination.  Farmers need advocacy, and when that advocacy comes from one of their own, it stands a chance of being more helpful.

It is no secret that small "family" farms have been under extreme pressure for several decades.  Large scale farming, driven by "agribusiness" and other factors were the initial forces feeding the change.  Corporations that produce genetically engineered crop seed have been a big factor.  The public claims by Monsanto, Syngenta, Dow and others in this space has been that not only that yields can be dramatically increased through GMO (genetically modified organism) technology, but that it is necessary to feed an exploding global population -- that the available arable land and "conventional" farming methods cannot feed the planet.

Without going to deep, I totally disagree with that claim and am convinced that GMO technology's true purpose is to sell pesticides and trap farmers into purchasing only from the Monsantos of the world.  My Twitter contact (whom I won't name because I haven't asked permission) and thousands of other farmers become financially unable to break away.  As my "Tweep" posted, "since we can't afford to buy non gmo grain to supplement our cows diet , yet another strike against us"  Isn't that the definition of serfdom -- the rural equivalent of a company town?

Fundamentally I am anti-GMO because of biology.  My undergraduate degree is in biology, with an emphasis in invertebrate zoology, aquatics and ecology.  Even though I do not work in the field, my concern for the health of the planet, its ecosystems and the essentials of life -- food, clean water, healthy food -- is incredibly deep.  And so is my commitment to basing my opinions on reliable data.  That isn't easy, and I freely admit I don't always succeed.  But if I find myself wandering away, I yank myself back and try to do my homework.  Eventually. 

Enter the anti-GMO and foodie movement.  I will be the first to admit that at times the anti-GMO signal-to-noise ratio is so bad that "sane" people have to switch off.  Activism itself is good, a force for change.  But rabid activism driven by 1% fact, 9% myth and 90% rabid, frothing emotion is destructive.  Suddenly, anti-GMO rage turns against farmers who care deeply about their land, about food, about farming, but for their own good reasons, whether financial or other circumstances, do not have non-GMO certification.

Small farmers, once "only" pressured by corporate farming operations, are suddenly demonized by crazy-eyed, wealthy urbanites who can afford the higher prices of non-GMO products.  And the local food movement eschews anything not grown within 100 miles -- or 161 kilometres in Canada.  The financial impact can be real, resulting in more families having to abandon the profession and lives they have loved.  The emotional shock reverberates through the countryside.

It is no wonder then that any anti-GMO discussion, especially in the shortened 140-character Twitterverse, is a huge emotional trigger for small farmers.  Those of us who respectfully disagree with genetic engineering on scientific grounds get lumped in with the "nattering nabobs of negativity".  Meaningful dialogue, a true exchange of ideas, stops or is at least delayed or diminished.

Thus went the Twitter thread with my friend, more than once.  I hope my observation on what lies beneath does not come across as somewhat harsh, or even condescending, but I want to offer it in a true spirit of friendship.

The source of suffering is attachment -- this is the Second Noble Truth.  When I am so emotionally attached to something, I will suffer.  We all find this out the hard way -- I know I did.  Two failed relationships, both tragedies in my life which sent out ripples, if not small tsunamis, of karmic hurt, finally brought me up short.  There were hundreds of other, seemingly smaller, attachments that inevitably led to the two major blow outs.  Even if I am "right" about something and others are "wrong", being emotionally invested at a very high level will bring about suffering.  And not just my own.

We all need to separate emotion from objective evaluation.  I hear you, and I totally agree -- that's not at all easy to do.  It takes practice.  It takes the recognition that while emotions are completely valid and an essential part of our true selves, being out of balance is not healthy.  It takes learning to treat ourselves gently and to treat others gently.  When we fail to do either, we need to forgive and regenerate the commitment and effort.  Or suffer.

This is about letting go.  My stuff is my stuff; the stuff of others isn't mine.  If someone else, if that frothing-at-the-mouth-rich-SOB-faux-foodie won't listen even to calm, dispassionate, logical discussion delivered in the most loving way ... that's their stuff.  And behind that stuff is more stuff -- layers and layers about which we have no idea.  There is pain, suffering and who knows what.   It is theirs alone to acknowledge and confront.

The sooner I recognize that, acknowledge it, let it go and honour my self, the sooner I can continue to breathe and be psychologically healthy.

I grow some of my own food -- not nearly as much as I want, and not nearly as much as I plan to grow.  Every year I bring more of our land out of ornamental grass (sod be gone!) into production.  I put no chemicals in the ground.  Yes, I am fortunate to have the gift of good land, and no, I have not had any drastic infestations or other challenges.  So I don't judge others who are faced with adversity, even while sticking to my convictions to grow organically and plant non-GMO stock.

My small farm friends, I am with you.  If I disagree with you on genetic engineering, pesticides, herbicides, the place of meat production, please don't lump me in with the shrieking crowd.  Believe me, I want you to be successful and happy.  Happiness makes for good food.  Stick to your guns, but know when to tune out the noise and to not return fire with the same ammunition.

Stand for the CBC

I have been a listener and viewer of CBC since 1971. Many things can be said about CBC's contribution to Canada, Canadian society and the rest of the world. What I think is its most important contribution, however, is that it is brings Canada together as a nation. I don't feel it is hyperbole to say that it is the modern equivalent of the building of the Canadian Pacific.

Many of CBC's program, especially Radio One, are family affairs, that bring not only prominent Canadians and international persons into closer dialog with "ordinary" Canadians, but also provide a forum and kitchen table for all those not-so-ordinary Canadians to have a family chat, a debate, or celebration.

As the current government actually conserves nothing, they are, of course, seeking to destroy the CBC. This agenda has in plain sight for decades, and now with a Conservative government that has kicked its progressive sensibilities to the septic field, please stand with me to make your voice heard.

One Month+ with the MacBook Air

I suppose all love affairs have to end at some point, but I don't foresee my feelings about the MBA changing.  If anything, after more than month with it, my admiration for it, if not my crush on it, has increased. 

There has not been one hiccough (yeah, I know ... old spelling; I'm old,) and I only see the MacBook line getting better as the technology that drives the Air migrates to the MacBook Pro line.  The only drawback I see to the machine is that RAM is not upgradeable.  The RAM module(s) is/are soldered to the system board, so upgrading would be difficult and somewhat costly.

 The other limitation is the lack of Ethernet port.  Designed as an ultralight laptop replacement, this makes sense.  WiFi may not be ubiquitous, but it is normally readily available.  It is at home or office that an Ethernet port would be an advantage, especially when uploading a lot of data to a network drive.


You can, of course, get a USB-to-Ethernet adapter, but that limits you to 10/100 speeds, as the Air's USB port is 2.0 -- no Gigabit speeds for this machine.  The Air's Thunderbolt port is faster than even USB 3.0, so this makes sense.  But there are precious few Thunderbolt devices, much less adapters, available at this time, and the jury will be out on Thunderbolt for awhile, perhaps for a long time.  A Thunderbolt to gigabit Ethernet adapter would be really, really handy.

Which brings us to Thunderbolt itself.  Happily, there are some display port to HDMI available, and I purchased the Kanex which works perfectly and seems to be solidly built.  In our spare room we have a 22"  HDTV set (720p), and I wanted to use that as a larger display for photo editing and to have a dual display setup available.

With the Kanex adapter, it works perfectly! Well ... as perfectly as the Sylvania (Funai) technology permits.  As a TV, the Sylvania is not bad.  Video from my satellite receiver via HDMI and Nintendo via component is good.  But at only 720p and with an older, lower spec'd panel from an unknown manufacturer, it's really not going to cut it for serious photo editing.

What I would like is a 27" IPS display that can also serve as a TV monitor.  At that size, an IPS display is going to run serious money.  Models from NEC, Dell, HP are going to be north of $1K, and an Eizo FlexScan SX2762W, which is pretty much an industry standard for the graphics environment, is over $1600.

Enter, then, the Apple Thunderbolt at $999 (less with employee purchase plan discount,) which not only starts to look "cheap" but adds 10Gb peripheral port capability -- and that's full duplex.

The fly in that ointment is that to date there are no adapters available to connect HDMI sources such as AV receivers, satellite and cable boxes to the Thunderbolt display.   This is after the first release of Thunderbolt technology about 9 months ago.  If I have any criticism of Apple at all, it is that they have repeatedly developed and implemented new I/O technologies that have not gone mainstream.  Firewire ... DisplayPort ... these and others were proprietary enough to keep them from becoming standards.  In this case, my understanding is that Apple initiated Thunderbolt and transferred IP  to Intel for development so that indeed it could become a standard.  That's hopeful, but it's not a guarantee of success.

Another option would be for Apple to manufacture or purchase as many adapters and devices for Thunderbolt as possible and flood the market.  Hell, make PCI-e to TB adapters and practically give them away.  Entice Windows PC owners and at the very least you they will sell some devices that are either Apple branded or branded by 3rd party suppliers closely associated with Apple.  How many Windows users have iPods and iPhones?  Make the next gen of those devices Thunderbolt-enabled for super-fast syncing (yeah, I know ... iCloud is replacing tethered syncing,) and watch how many of those users eventually buy a Mac. 

Such a strategy is not technically difficult.  On the Intel page referenced above, Intel states:

"Extend to reach other I/O technologies by using adapters that use widely available PCI Express* controllers. It's simple to create a Gigabit Ethernet, FireWire, or eSATA adapter using existing device PCI Express* drivers."

Did you get that Apple and Apple partners? 

Of course, Jason Hiner thinks the whole Thunderbolt strategy is a block on wireless USB 3.0

If so, Apple (the only "major" user of TB that I know of) and Intel better get really, really busy. Anyone who comes out with wireless USB is going to have at least a reasonable chance of having a major impact on technology.  And making a lot of money.

Then there's the rumoured Apple Television (not the Apple TV set-top device) ... which I would hope would have HDMI input as well as Thunderbolt.

But back to my MacBook Air ... Will Moyer wrote a blog entry about his MBA purchase.  His only real negative was that he felt the cursor (arrow) keys were chintzy.  I don't find mine to be any different than the other keys, and they certainly don't feel chintzy.  I suspect Apple has more than one OEM vendor for keyboards, and I got lucky.

So all-in-all, I'm still thrilled.  It's like being on a really long honeymoon with an inanimate object. 

Yeah, I'm weird.  But you knew that.

My new name is Gene Wilburn

After all, I'm sitting in a coffee shop, writing on a MacBook Air. This is a good trick because the "real" Gene Wilburn is no doubt sitting across Lake Ontario (about 100 miles as the crow flies,) in a coffee shopt, writing on a MacBook Air.

There is a lovely symmetry to this, don't you think? Actually, it was my friend Gene's experience with his MBA that contributed to my final decision to make the jump.

Gene is a fellow photographer and fellow IT professional. With a long career as a techie, I figured someone who had been a Unix sysadmin, developer working on contract for a major, major online retailer, someone who dove into Apple and loved the experience, well ... what can you say?

Having been a long-time Wintel user, I had resisted Macintosh primarily for two reasons.

First there was the price. Mac fans will argue that there is more long-term value to the purchase of most Apple products, and won't argue that point as I really haven't been qualified to do so. But the fact remains that if you don't have the up-front cash, then you just don't have it. For some years I held that premise as a major barrier.

Second, there was familiarity. Once you're deep into knowledge and experience of a particular system, technical or otherwise, there is an inherent resistance to changing. Don't get me wrong, I am not stubbornly resistant to change. I just knew what a big, time-consuming effort it would be to make the leap.

Fortunately I overcame the first challenge with a really novel technique -- I saved. Shocking, I know. Every paycheque I put aside $75 into savings, moving some of it into a CD once I hit the minimum deposit for a CD. I created a spreadsheet predicting the date when I would be able to purchase a specific model of MacBook. I noticed that in general I would have sufficient funds just after the Air product line was likely to be refreshed.

This pleased me, since I deduced that I likely would be able to purchase a better, more powerful Air for the same money, or I could purchase a previous configuration for less in the event the refreshed models were not a significant upgrade. If you know Apple, you know that latter was not likely to happen. And it didn't.

I ended up with (delivered at 11:51 yesterday!)

MacBook Air 13"
4GB RAM
128 SSD
AppleCare
Apple One-to-One

I'll write another post (or several) about my experience, but for now I can summarize my impressions as follows

* Wow -- amazing design and build quality
* Smooooooth
* SILENT
* Fast

Thoughts on Interdependence Day

Yes, I know it's Independence Day in the US, and yes, I know there is an Interdependence Project, though I don't know anything, really, about that except that it's a secular Buddhist affiliation.

It occurred to me this morning, however, that one of the central ills of the US is the whole idea of what independence is. Somehow the issue of separation from a ruling government not of one's choosing has morphed into "We can do anything we want just because we are us/US."

This is trouble.

All things, all beings are interdependent. That's not an optional view or belief system.

It just is.

What is Enlightenment?

Enlightenment

Enlightenment seems to be greatly misunderstood. As it has no "definitive definition", all I can really say is that is not perfection; it is not achieving a permanent state of detachment from externalities.

Sitting outside, summer day

Silent. Total

Breeze ceased

Skin, air intertwined without notice

That big tree there

That colour of sky

Exist

Awake

Empty Mind

http://www.youtube.com/user/emptymindfilms

When Fear Begins to Weaken the Fabric

Two recent articles caught my attention today. Both have fear as their underlying theme. And underlying fear is illusion; the illusion that as individuals we are separate, when in reality we are all one. And the illusion that our thoughts and emotions ARE who we are.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/stiffer-rules-infuriate-quebec-border-town/article1516454/

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/28/opinion/28rich.html?src=tptw

While there will continue to be disruption and discomfort, I think disintegration is necessary before real change can happen. Some are ready for spiritual change, some not yet.

Golden Moment

Two Videos on Zen/Zazen

I encountered these on the Toledo Zen Center website. The first is a very good, and simple, explanation of zazen, i.e. Zen "meditation". The second puts zazen in the context of what Zen "is" ... if we can say such a thing, since Zen simply is, and therefore we can't really say anything. :)

An open letter to Justin

One day (in the future) you come home from work to find your house burned to the ground by an arsonist; everyone is safe, but pretty much only the foundation of the house remains. What does remain is soaked in water, and your most important personal possessions that might have survived (keyboard, photo album, etc.,) are soaked from the water used by firefighters.

You decide to sue the firec hief because he "ruined" your prized possessions.

Make sense?

Well, this is essentially the situation we have today. The current financial situation is a result of the Chicago school of economics (Milton Friedman, chief guru), which was promoted by successive administrations: Reagan, Bush I, (Clinton to some extent -- I'd have to do some more reading) and Bush II. Essentially it is the Libertarianism of economics, i.e. minimal, if any regulation, put "faith" in the "rational self interest" of the market, etc., etc.

Yet it is flawed, and we saw the results in 2007-2008. The recovery funds for the financial sector was put in motion by Bush. Essentially, he had to do it because the collapse was under his watch, the result of ideology that he espoused and supported. Without doing something, the banking system would have come to a complete collapse and a depression would have ensued. So that was in place before Obama took office, but regardless, Obama was faced with the same necessity.

Then the domestic auto industry came to the brink. GM and Chrysler went into bankruptcy. The federal governments of the US and Canada became creditors to enable the companies to survive in some form. This is standard business practice, with certain conditions that protect jobs in both countries. (Bankruptcy (although under different rules) is also available to individuals who experience financial disaster.) Assuming GM and Chrysler survive and return to health, the governments who have invested will be able to sell their shares and recover the investment, and perhaps even healthy profit.

This is not socialism, as the yelping running dogs of the far right scream. (Note: That's SARCASM, a reference to Communist propaganda-speak from before you were born.) Socialism refers to when entire industrial and business sectors are under permanent ownership of the state. No matter what, the US and Canadian governments will not end up owning the auto sector.


I am amused when I hear people address the health care reform debate as "socialized medicine"; nothing could be further from the truth! Private enterprise will still own the hospitals, clinics, insurance companies, etc. All that will change are rules and regulations that broaden coverage. I have my doubts as to how effective this will be, but I think it might be a step forwrd, so am prepared to wait and see how things unfold. (My main concerns are that it is NOT universal and that it still involves too many payers and players, resulting in gross inefficiency and opportunity for discriminatory care. The underlying principle that I hold is that health care is a basic human right, not a privilege or semi-guarantee. This, of course, is a distinctly different discussion, but is one which I think would be valuable for the American public.)


Emotion -- anger and fear -- are valid. But when they become the ground upon which people make decisions, facts go out the window. The US entered and escalated the war in Viet Nam based not so much on reason but on ideological attachment -- the "domino theory", which is fear translated into foreign policy. The 2003 attack on Iraq was the same -- using public fear to justify an unjustifiable action. How many people needlessly died in both of those conflicts?


The same process is occurring now, though the circumstances are different. People are in the dark and afraid. When that occurs, people get angry and act on that anger. The essential question is NOT public policy, e.g., should we reform health care or not, should we help struggling companies, etc. The essential question is "How do we approach social policy in a manner that allows for reasoned (though not dispassionate) discourse, that respects the opinions of all and respects the proper place of not only the majority but everyone?"


I realize that Facebook is a social networking site, and normally serves for one-off comments that range from funny to flippant, sarcastic to serious, birth to death, etc. So rather than fill up space with a status response, I post this here, on my own blog.


To me, the basics are this: understanding the true nature of self (self/not self) and compassion. As I reflect on my own speech and actions, I am increasingly brought back to those compass points. When I look at North American society, I see this as the most pressing need.


I recommend you take a longer view. Your grandparents endured a prolonged depression. While there was debate, both ideological and practical, over policies, the predominant impression I have of that period is that people simply worked together. The impatience of youth is valuable because it adds energy to situations. It can motivate people to take action, it can energize. But precipitate action can also derail thoughtful consideration and careful action. An angry populace is not necessarily a train on the right track.

Grain and Softness

Sometimes fine grain and sharp focus aren't really the sine qua non. (Click the pic for link to full size.)

Yeah, I wasn't crazy

I've been wondering if maybe my perception of politics in the US was a figment of my imagination. Apparently not.

Paranoia is in vogue ... again.

No resolutions

I started this blog a few years ago with a reference to my intention to lose weight. In the intervening years I've lost maybe a few pounds, but not what I wanted ... or intended.

New Years resolutions are useless for most of us because we imagine doing things directly contrary to our nature, our skill set and our patterning. Doomed.

The past year has been wonderful and, in some ways, amazing for me. Yeah, I know, you'd never know it from this blog, as I just haven't been a real blogger. Oh well.

So in 2010, I have some things I want to accomplish, but they're not resolutions. Yes, I've given myself permission to NOT do stuff, which, in a strange way, opens up the path to actually doing. So here goes, here's the things I envision for 2010. Hold me to them, but don't nag, OK?

1. Lose about 20 lbs, maybe a bit more. I figure a pound a week (on average) is doable, so that is about .35lb/week over the whole year. I'd love to say "and exercise more and get really fit", but hey, let's just start, OK? Exercising and getting really fit would be, like, gravy. Ooops!
2. Shoot more 4x5. Large format photography is REAL photography, and demands discipline and commitment in multiple areas. Let's say an average of two 4x5 outings per month, which accommodates for the reality that I probably won't do much in winter and until at least a few of those 20 lbs are shed. Carrying a 4x5, tripod and some film holders ain't easy.
3. Shoot at least 80% b&w. I "see" in b&w, but often pop colour in the camera ... well, who knows why. But I know, inside, that my strength is in monochrome.
4. Do structured and accurate tests for film speed and development. I used to do that, but have been lax since I resumed photographing.
5. Savagely edit my work. My flickr postings have included a lot of stuff that was just ... stuff to post. Bah.

Most importantly, pursue the path of Zen. That will inform all of the above.