rec.photo.digital
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital?hl=en
rec.photo.digital@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Why EVFs will replace reflex systems - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/ddb39c7b20935920?hl=en
* Video will help kill DSLR mirrors - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/7a0439ccfcb8a458?hl=en
* Ten years of digital photography - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/853e018d5181a0e6?hl=en
* Scenic areas in England - 21 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/1076be556766c491?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Why EVFs will replace reflex systems
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/ddb39c7b20935920?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 3:00 pm
From: ray
On Mon, 11 May 2009 15:16:32 -0500, HEMI-Powered wrote:
> Rich added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...
>
>> Aside from the sensor (and in the case of 4/3rds it's possible the
>> sensor come second) the most expensive parts in a DSLR are the mirror
>> mechanism and the pentaprism. By getting rid of these and replacing
>> them with an EVF, they eliminate a large amount of cost. Particularly
>> with higher-end cameras where the shooters demand (and don't in all
>> cases get them) an optical viewfinder with a 100% field of view. All
>> LCDs/EVFs that I am aware of provide a 100% view of the scene to be
>> imaged. Most optical viewfinders do not because of cost. The cost of
>> a pentaprism in a full frame digital is not inconsiderable.
>>
> EVFs also eliminate quite a bit of the quality of a DSLR and also eat
> batteries at a prodigious rate. But, what difference does this make to
> you? YOu simply buy what you like and let the other fools spend their
> money they way they want to.
I take it you have not tried one lately. My Kodak P850 does not "eat
batteries at a prodigious rate".
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Video will help kill DSLR mirrors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/7a0439ccfcb8a458?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 3:20 pm
From: Alfred Molon
In article <gu2clo$sk7$1@news.motzarella.org>, Charles says...
>
> Many DSLR consumers could care less
> about video.
I ordered an Olympus E420 for my wife because it's the most compact &
light DSLR currently on the market and she needs fast AF to photograph
the kids. But she also does video occasionally with her current P&S so
it's a pity Olympus hasn't incorporated this function into the E420.
--
Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Ten years of digital photography
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/853e018d5181a0e6?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 3:21 pm
From: Gary Edstrom
May 18th will mark 10 years since I took my first digital picture with
my first digital camera: A Kodak DC-265
At only 1.5MP, it was definitely no match for a 35mm camera, but it was
a start and I had a lot of fun with it.
For some reason, I only saved 19 of the first 100 pictures I took. I
saved 84 of the second 100 pictures. Since then, I have saved every
single picture I have ever taken. I keep off-site backups of
everything.
Here is a summary of all of the pictures I have taken with my various
digital cameras.
Kodak DC-265: 5,117 (1.5MP)
Olympus E-10: 17,744 (4 MP)
Canon 20D: 12,772 (8 MP)
Canon SD550: 5,091 (7.1 MP) (My current P&S camera)
Canon 50D: 1,052 (14.4 MP) (My current DSLR camera)
Total: 41,776
For comparison, in all the 27 years I used my 35mm film camera starting
in 1974, I only took a total of 2,859 pictures. That's 14.6 times as
many pictures in a little over a third as much time.
Sure, they are not all masterpieces. That was not the point. My
primary idea is to create memories. I was always disappointed that my
father had so few pictures of the back woods cabin he grew up in in
Michigan. He only had 4 B&W pictures that all showed the cabin from the
same general view from about 1920. I was determined that the same was
not going to happen with my mother's house that she lived in for 40
years before she died. Over the years, I have taken over 1,800 images
inside and out from every view conceivable. I also shot a number of
close ups of a number of objects in the house. I also photographed the
neighborhood in detail. Sure, I may have gone overboard, but I don't
think that anyone in the future will say that they wished they had more
pictures of the place.
I wonder how many images I will have in another 10 years?
Gary
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 3:42 pm
From: "Frank Deux"
"Gary Edstrom" <GEdstrom@PacBell.Net> wrote in message
news:7l7h05pk4evue5slhv0qgtkpo9fn93iq4c@4ax.com...
> Sure, they are not all masterpieces. That was not the point. My
> primary idea is to create memories. I was always disappointed that my
> father had so few pictures of the back woods cabin he grew up in in
> Michigan. He only had 4 B&W pictures that all showed the cabin from the
> same general view from about 1920. I was determined that the same was
> not going to happen with my mother's house that she lived in for 40
> years before she died. Over the years, I have taken over 1,800 images
> inside and out from every view conceivable. I also shot a number of
> close ups of a number of objects in the house. I also photographed the
> neighborhood in detail. Sure, I may have gone overboard, but I don't
> think that anyone in the future will say that they wished they had more
> pictures of the place.
>
> I wonder how many images I will have in another 10 years?
>
> Gary
Yeah, I do the same (although I am quite picky what I keep). At the time,
they maybe just normal photos, but even boring photos can become fascinating
in time.
For example, an old photo of a street where you used to live is interesting
just to see the old cars people used to drive, or an old photo of a living
room, with an old fashioned TV, furniture, etc. People's fashion, haircuts,
buildings that no longer exist, etc... At the time they were taken, they
were just 'normal' everyday photos.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Scenic areas in England
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/1076be556766c491?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 21 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 3:31 pm
From: Ron Hunter
Mike wrote:
> On Sat, 09 May 2009 08:22:48 -0500, Ron Hunter <rphunter@charter.net>
> wrote:
>
>> I doubt it, or you would know that
>> there are a LOT of things that change from one US state to the next, and
>> the farther you travel, the more differences you find. Laws vary a LOT,
>> as do language, culture, attitudes, and customary things like how
>> traffic flows. About the only really consistent thing you will see in
>> traveling through the US is the currency.
>
> no national restaurant chains?
Sure there are, but I usually try to find the local ones. Some parts of
the US have rather unique cuisine. Shoo-fly pie from Lancaster, County,
Pennsylvania, or Pecan pie in Georgia. Texas barbecue, Cajun food,
Creole, Buffalo steaks (American Bison). Why go to chain restaurants
when traveling?
== 2 of 21 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 3:34 pm
From: Ron Hunter
Chris Malcolm wrote:
> In rec.photo.digital Mike <rubbish@live.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 10 May 2009 17:50:34 +0100, Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org>
>> wrote:
>
>>> However due to Television regional accents are fading somewhat which is
>>> a shame.
>
>> I wish somebody would tell the lowland scots.
>
> They tried hard! School teachers used to punish us for speaking "bad
> English". We had to take over the Government in London, and
> re-establish a parliament in Edinburgh, to finally stop that kind of
> Southern English linguistic snobbery and imperialism :-)
>
Sounds like my college speech teacher. He was dedicated to eliminating
any sign of a regional accent. I guess it worked because in 4 years in
the USAF, no one figured out I was from Texas.
== 3 of 21 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 3:39 pm
From: Ron Hunter
Mike wrote:
> On Sat, 09 May 2009 21:09:59 -0500, Doug McDonald
> <mcdonald@NoSpAmscs.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>
>> In some places owning handguns is (officially) prohibited, in some it is
>> (officially, though not in practice) compulsory.
>
> ahhh, Switzerland?
>
>> And unless you have traveled widely in the USA, you would
>> be surprised at how different the isolated cultures can be.
>> We're all Americans i a big sense (even the illegal Mexicans ...
>> why do you think they are here?), not Japanese,
>> but the differences are very wide.
>
> I'm sure there are loads of differences but I think you are fooling
> yourself they are as great as the differences between a Frenchman, a
> Brit and a spaniard, this sounds like the start of the many jokes
> based on those very differences.
Hummm. We have the Inuit in Alaska, the Hopi and Navajo in Arizona, and
the Hawaiians, in Hawaii. LOTS of French-Canadians intermarried with
the Native Americans in Louisiana, and countless other Native American
tribes throughout the midwest. My wife is 1/4 Cherokee. Lots of
differences, and many of these people keep to their language, and customs.
== 4 of 21 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 3:43 pm
From: Ron Hunter
Mike wrote:
> On Sat, 09 May 2009 12:56:28 -0400, tony cooper
> <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> There is also the issue of foreign travel without sampling the culture
>> of other countries. There are foreign tourists who come here to
>> Orlando and spend their entire holiday in Disney and the other theme
>> parks. They go home knowing no more about the culture here than they
>> did when they arrived.
>>
>> One tourist that I chatted with after he asked me for directions to
>> the airport observed that the US was full of strip malls (he used some
>> other term), fast food restaurants, and cheap souvenir shops. He had
>> just spent 10 days in a resort hotel smack in the middle of the
>> tourist corridor. What did he expect?
>>
>> Americans do this too, of course. They go to some foreign destination
>> and trek from one "must see" tourist site to another and never see
>> anything that isn't the guide book.
>
> all of this is universal to tourists, the way to learn about a place
> is to ignore the sights, drive to somewhere on the map and see what
> happens when you do what you do at home, do not include driving on the
> wrong side of the road in that.
Yes, that happens often. People visit Hawaii, and get a hotel on the
beach, and never leave the hotel grounds, and tell people they have
'seen Hawaii'. Rather like people who visit Houston, or Dallas, and say
they have 'seen Texas'. I have been here 66 years, I haven't seem all
of it yet.
== 5 of 21 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 3:47 pm
From: Ron Hunter
Mike wrote:
> On Sun, 10 May 2009 03:12:32 -0500, Ron Hunter <rphunter@charter.net>
> wrote:
>
>> The US is very large, with some states that are larger than any European
>> country, and there is a lot of ethnic, and topographical variety. Even
>> our climates vary from subtropical to desert, and arctic wilderness. WE
>> have temperate rainforests, and desert, in the same state (Washington).
>> Lots of variety, without even leaving many of the states.
>
> but largeness makes it harder, not easier to go somewhere different,
> isn't that the whole point? The US is a long way from most places but
> believes its at the centre of everything.
Given that the earth is generally spherical, any point can be the center
of everything. Grin.
In California, it is probably easier to 'go somewhere different' in only
a few hours drive. In Texas, it is much more difficult. In Rhode
Island, there isn't ROOM for much difference... Grin.
== 6 of 21 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 3:51 pm
From: Ron Hunter
Mike wrote:
> On Mon, 11 May 2009 08:42:54 -0400, tony cooper
> <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> Cultural difference is not limited to being around people who speak a
>> different language, native costumes, traditional dances, or cuisine.
>> These are cultural factors, but culture encompasses what is around us
>> in daily life. There's a major cultural difference between Manhattan
>> and Orlando. For the person who simply seeks change and different
>> experiences - and that's what most of us want on our holidays - travel
>> within the United States can offer that.
>
> I think while there are many differences between those two places
> there will also be many common factors that an American traveler will
> not realize are such. For instance, London is probably more similar
> to New York than Florida in some senses but the American traveler will
> probably only be confronted by the relative prevalence of atheism,
> lack of patriotism (less so recently), zero interest in "the
> constitution", zero advocacy for the right to bear arms, the different
> understanding and acceptance of what "socialism" is, wearing your
> pants under your trousers and certainly not patting a woman on her
> fanny in public, even if you know her intimately :-)
> In short only leaving the US will show you those areas where the US
> citizen does not realize that there is an alternate view, because
> there isn't the debate going on in the states or the debate has
> concluded with a different answer.
> If you just want tourism, maybe home can provide, if you want to
> broaden your mind, its far more likely outside your own country.
I guess that depends on how broad you want your mind to get. Grin.
I had a few experiences in Europe that certainly did enlighten me about
European attitudes, like the hard time some people gave a couple of guys
who were noticeably drunk in an Austrian Inn. That would have started a
fight around here. The hard part was NOT laughing at them.
== 7 of 21 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 3:55 pm
From: Ron Hunter
Mike wrote:
> On Mon, 11 May 2009 10:36:29 -0400, tony cooper
> <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>> I think while there are many differences between those two places
>>> there will also be many common factors that an American traveler will
>>> not realize are such. For instance, London is probably more similar
>>> to New York than Florida in some senses but the American traveler will
>>> probably only be confronted by the relative prevalence of atheism,
>>> lack of patriotism (less so recently), zero interest in "the
>>> constitution", zero advocacy for the right to bear arms, the different
>>> understanding and acceptance of what "socialism" is, wearing your
>>> pants under your trousers and certainly not patting a woman on her
>>> fanny in public, even if you know her intimately :-)
>> That is nothing short of bizarre. You have listed some points that
>> have some basis of truth in fact in the abstract, but absolutely
>> nothing - nothing - that an American tourist in London would notice,
>> think about, or consider.
>>
>> You think that the American tourist in London looks around and wonders
>> if the people on the street beside him believe in God? Questions that
>> the British have no written constitution? Thinks about your gun laws?
>
> wht ever not? Some travellers are interested in more than ticking off
> the sights.
>
>
>> Total bollocks. The American tourist in London is trying to get used
>> to looking right first when he steps off the curb (and doesn't care if
>> you spell it "kerb"), is trying to figure out what something costs in
>> a monetary system he's used to, and whether or not he's supposed to
>> tip the taxi driver.
>
> that should take the first five minutes, as theres no language barrier
> they could delve a bit deeper.
>
>> Nothing you've mentioned affects the tourist unless he
>
> thinks?
>
>> misplaces his
>> fanny pack and asks the clerk in Boots if they carry a replacement.
>
> and that was just a joke, fairly obviously.
>
>
>> He's more likely to have vocabulary problems if he rents a car. He's
>> got to go through the hires-not-rents, hooter, wing, boot, off-side,
>> petrol, windscreen nomenclature differences.
>
> especially if its a diesel
>
>>> In short only leaving the US will show you those areas where the US
>>> citizen does not realize that there is an alternate view,
>> Oh, for Christ's Sake. I'm glad that I've been to the UK several
>> times and that I read other newsgroups where there are some sane and
>> reasonable Brits who have an understanding that Americans come in all
>> flavors.
>
> Of course they do.
> That does not mean that it wouldnt be interesting to see that an issue
> where amercians hold opposing views, as in gun control, is a non issue
> in Europe.
I wouldn't even think of discussing such an issue in another person's
country.
I GO for the differences, and I respect their views (even when I
disagree with them), nor will I discuss American politics, or political
figures outside the US. Some things are just rude anywhere.
== 8 of 21 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 3:58 pm
From: Ron Hunter
Mike wrote:
> On Mon, 11 May 2009 17:08:42 +0100, "Mike" <rubbish@live.com> wrote:
>
>> yes, the people, of which notable differences are attitudes to gun
>> control etc and as you said, even Americans come in all flavours.
>
> badly written
>
> yes, study the people, of which a notable difference (US v UK) is
> attitudes to gun control etc.
I don't think you can generalize either country that way. I am sure
there are plenty of UK citizens who DON'T believe in gun control, and a
very large number in the US, who do.
== 9 of 21 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 4:00 pm
From: Ron Hunter
tony cooper wrote:
> On Mon, 11 May 2009 17:19:46 +0100, "Mike" <rubbish@live.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 11 May 2009 17:08:42 +0100, "Mike" <rubbish@live.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> petrol, windscreen nomenclature differences.
>>>>> especially if its a diesel
>>>> Why? You think we don't have diesel cars here? I owned one.
>>> No, I think they don't run on petrol
>> I think the problems here are either
>>
>> a) you don't understand a non American sense of humour
>
> If you come up with a sense of humor, I think I'll notice it.
>
>> b) you think eiropeans must all be stupid
>
> I think most of them spell better than you do.
>
>> c) you need to calm down and read what I'm actually saying rather than
>> jump to wild assumptions based on the preconceived idea I must be
>> critizising the US at every turn.
>>
>> you said the word "petrol" is a problem.
>
> Yes, hiring a car in the UK would require the American to adjust to
> several unfamiliar terms. They would include, but not be limited to,
> the word "petrol".
>
>> I said especially if your driving a diesel, thats a little joke, it
>> doesnt mean europeans think americans havent heard of deisels.
>>
>> and so on......
>
>
I am sure I could readily adjust to the minor terminology differences,
but driving on the wrong side of the road would take SOME doing. My
oldest brother spent two years in England during WWII, and nearly got
himself killed several times when he returned to the US.
== 10 of 21 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 4:04 pm
From: Ron Hunter
Mike wrote:
> On Mon, 11 May 2009 15:52:06 +0100, "Mike" <rubbish@live.com> wrote:
>
>>> Total bollocks
>
> do Americans use the terms "Bollocks" and "blathering" I just wondered
> if i'm being trolled?
I have been known to use both. But then I read a lot of UK fiction....
== 11 of 21 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 4:05 pm
From: Ron Hunter
tony cooper wrote:
> On Mon, 11 May 2009 17:28:22 +0100, "Mike" <rubbish@live.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 11 May 2009 15:52:06 +0100, "Mike" <rubbish@live.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Total bollocks
>> do Americans use the terms "Bollocks" and "blathering" I just wondered
>> if i'm being trolled?
>
> I assure you that I'm an American and always have been. Words are not
> proprietary to a nationality. I can adopt any word that I see fit to
> use; especially if I think it allows you to understand me better.
>
Please don't tell the French that!
> You make the claim that Americans don't understand other cultures, and
> then it confuses you when an American uses a word that is more common
> to another culture. Make up your mind.
>
>
== 12 of 21 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 4:08 pm
From: Ron Hunter
"mcdonaldREMOVE TO ACTUALLY REACH ME"@scs.uiuc.edu wrote:
> Mike wrote:
>
>> I think its a given the US has some great landscapes, they are of
>> course as far away from parts of US as Iceland or Russia is from me in
>> London. I can drive to the alps in a day, would I be right in assuming
>> there are places in the middle of the US where its quite a trek to get
>> anywhere interesting or some coast.
>
> There is no place in the US where it is more than a long day's drive to
> get to some place interesting and very nice. There are places where
> that would not be a coast, however, or very big mountains.
>
> Doug McDonald
I can drive to the coast in about 6 hours. To mountains (over 5000
feet), in about 8 hours. And that's in Texas. Most places are quite a
bit closer to either a coast, or mountains, than I am.
== 13 of 21 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 4:11 pm
From: Ron Hunter
J. Clarke wrote:
> tony cooper wrote:
>> On Mon, 11 May 2009 09:27:56 +0100, "Mike" <rubbish@live.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 10 May 2009 17:35:13 -0400, tony cooper
>>> <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Having said that, from where I live it is a few hours drive into,
>>>>> or over the Sierras, North into Coastal Redwoods or over to Death
>>>>> Valley. I think of Hwy1 and Big Sur as "Local" and I never tire of
>>>>> it.
>>>>> Then there is Alaska, the North West including B.C.
>>> I think its a given the US has some great landscapes, they are of
>>> course as far away from parts of US as Iceland or Russia is from me
>>> in London. I can drive to the alps in a day, would I be right in
>>> assuming there are places in the middle of the US where its quite a
>>> trek to get anywhere interesting or some coast. Everywhere in UK the
>>> coast is in range of a strong cyclist, I see this as an advantage
>>> although I would visit some of the US national parks if they were
>>> not so far away.
>> Doesn't that depend on what you considering to be "interesting"? The
>> coast is interesting, but it's not the only thing that is of interest
>> people.
>
> FWIW, the distance from the northern tip of Maine to the southwesternmost
> corner of California is greater than the distance from London to Moscow. On
> the other hand, using the shortest route, people with some regularity dip a
> toe in the Atlantic and 50 hours later dip one in the Pacific and it's
> possible to visit all 49 states in under 10 days. The US is quite large,
> but our roads are also for the most part very good, if boring.
>
I sure wouldn't want to try that. For long trips, I would much rather fly.
I have been to 37 of the 50 US states, and hope to visit the rest before
I die, or get too old to enjoy them.
Not bad for a guy who never got out of Louisiana and Texas until he was 23!.
== 14 of 21 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 4:12 pm
From: Ron Hunter
Mike wrote:
> On Sun, 10 May 2009 19:05:58 -0400, tony cooper
> <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> Disneyland Europe, or whatever it is they call it, was built so
>> Europeans wouldn't need to bother coming to the US.
>
> its much easier to not go to disney Europe than Disney US.
Not for ME, Mike. Grin.
== 15 of 21 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 4:13 pm
From: Ron Hunter
Chris Malcolm wrote:
> In rec.photo.digital Ron Hunter <rphunter@charter.net> wrote:
>> Wolfgang Schwanke wrote:
>>> tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote in
>>> news:246b051d42a3u96iv9e1akou2mn6a3qbja@4ax.com:
>>>
>>>> My wife and I have traveled to Europe, Africa, Central America, South
>>>> America, and some of the Caribbean islands. One of my wife's brothers
>>>> never traveled outside of Illinois in his life. He was an
>>>> intelligent, successful, interesting person. He simply had no
>>>> interest in travel.
>>>>
>>>> There are many Europeans exactly like my wife's brother. There are
>>>> other Europeans who travel extensively.
>>> But do those Europeans pretend that they can experience the same things
>>> at home?
>
>> The US is very large, with some states that are larger than any European
>> country, and there is a lot of ethnic, and topographical variety. Even
>> our climates vary from subtropical to desert, and arctic wilderness. WE
>> have temperate rainforests, and desert, in the same state (Washington).
>> Lots of variety, without even leaving many of the states.
>
> The point is that where cultural variety is concerned the US is too
> young and its people too mobile to have much of its own. That's why
> they've had to import it from foreign countries.
>
We have several native cultures that are in the area of 15,000 years old.
== 16 of 21 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 4:14 pm
From: Jack Campin - bogus address
>> In short only leaving the US will show you those areas where the
>> US citizen does not realize that there is an alternate view,
> Oh, for Christ's Sake. I'm glad that I've been to the UK several
> times and that I read other newsgroups where there are some sane and
> reasonable Brits who have an understanding that Americans come in all
> flavors.
Not observably to an outsider, the way Europeans do. In matters of
political opinion, Europe is far more varied and far more obviously
so. While there are minorities in the US holding every opinion you
could imagine, they are mostly very small and you'd have to try very
hard to find them. In almost every state in Europe, you can find a
*substantial* minority that either wants that state to stop existing
entirely, wants to have a state of its own, wants to be part of a
neighbouring state or wants to incorporate a neighbouring state.
(Portugal and the Scandinavian countries are the only exceptions I
can think of). You can go into any pub in Scotland or Belgium and
find people talking about political solutions that have been taboo
in US conversation ever since Sherman marched through Georgia. And
anywhere in Transylvania you will find overt expressions of Hungarian
irredentism - how often in the US do you come across comparably serious
demands that Texas and California ought to be handed back to Mexico?
==== j a c k at c a m p i n . m e . u k === <http://www.campin.me.uk> ====
Jack Campin, 11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland == mob 07800 739 557
CD-ROMs and free stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, and Mac logic fonts
****** I killfile Google posts - email me if you want to be whitelisted ******
== 17 of 21 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 4:15 pm
From: Ron Hunter
Mike wrote:
> On 11 May 2009 10:15:14 GMT, Chris Malcolm <cam@holyrood.ed.ac.uk>
> wrote:
>
>>> The US is very large, with some states that are larger than any European
>>> country, and there is a lot of ethnic, and topographical variety. Even
>>> our climates vary from subtropical to desert, and arctic wilderness. WE
>>> have temperate rainforests, and desert, in the same state (Washington).
>>> Lots of variety, without even leaving many of the states.
>> The point is that where cultural variety is concerned the US is too
>> young and its people too mobile to have much of its own. That's why
>> they've had to import it from foreign countries.
>
> this is all summed up by the old one, Americans think 100 years is a
> long times and Europeans think 100 miles is a long way.
>
> The US is big, I'm not convinced there's more landscape or cultural
> difference in any given 500 miles than in Europe, I'm not convinced
> any continent contains anything that makes it not worth visiting
> others (although I don't for other reasons)
Well, around here, 100 years is pretty old, but there are some homes in
New England with dates as old as 1611, and still inhabited. I know that
is quite young by European standards, but then there are the Navajo and
Hopi cultures, and habitats that are very old.
== 18 of 21 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 4:18 pm
From: Ron Hunter
tony cooper wrote:
> On Mon, 11 May 2009 08:03:47 +0100, Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org>
> wrote:
>
>> In message <uane059nfql6v52lghc7ob2ob7kshet4vr@4ax.com>, tony cooper
>> <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> writes
>>>> Well yes... I saw a program about the casinos in Las Vegas and the
>>>> Americans were looking at the recreations of Venice and the Eiffel tower
>>>> etc and saying it's all here we don't need to go to Europe... but I hope
>>>> they are the exception
>>> Disneyland Europe, or whatever it is they call it, was built so
>>> Europeans wouldn't need to bother coming to the US.
>> Interestingly it has not been that much of a success, apparently. A
>> lot of people do go but for some reason many like to go to Florida to
>> see "the real thing" . No figures just some half remembered news items
>> over the last few years.
>>
>> It has had a couple of re-branding and re-launches but I don't think it
>> has the success that the US version had. Mind you siting it in France
>> was possibly not the best idea.
>
> Let me preface this by saying that I have not been to Disney Europe,
> and that I have not personally experienced any more or less rudeness
> from the French than from the people of any other nationality.
>
> I have been to the Disney parks in Florida and California. Walking
> into a Disney-run place is like being enveloped in sweetness. Every
> employee is bright, chipper, friendly, helpful, and cheerful. I
> suspect that any employee who is not all of these things is taken to
> the subterranean tunnels and beaten on the soles of their feet and
> immediately deported.
>
> Given the perception that the French are rude to all but their
> immediate relatives, I can't imagine a Disney attraction in France
> being a destination of choice.
>
>
I don't know about French rudeness, but it seems that when I was in
Europe, any time I saw anyone doing something considered rude, or
inconsiderate, they were speaking French...
== 19 of 21 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 4:53 pm
From: Savageduck
On 2009-05-11 16:00:20 -0700, Ron Hunter <rphunter@charter.net> said:
> tony cooper wrote:
>> On Mon, 11 May 2009 17:19:46 +0100, "Mike" <rubbish@live.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 11 May 2009 17:08:42 +0100, "Mike" <rubbish@live.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>> petrol, windscreen nomenclature differences.
>>>>>> especially if its a diesel
>>>>> Why? You think we don't have diesel cars here? I owned one.
>>>> No, I think they don't run on petrol
>>> I think the problems here are either
>>>
>>> a) you don't understand a non American sense of humour
>>
>> If you come up with a sense of humor, I think I'll notice it.
>>> b) you think eiropeans must all be stupid
>>
>> I think most of them spell better than you do.
>>
>>> c) you need to calm down and read what I'm actually saying rather than
>>> jump to wild assumptions based on the preconceived idea I must be
>>> critizising the US at every turn.
>>>
>>> you said the word "petrol" is a problem.
>>
>> Yes, hiring a car in the UK would require the American to adjust to
>> several unfamiliar terms. They would include, but not be limited to,
>> the word "petrol".
>>
>>> I said especially if your driving a diesel, thats a little joke, it
>>> doesnt mean europeans think americans havent heard of deisels.
>>>
>>> and so on......
>>
>>
> I am sure I could readily adjust to the minor terminology differences,
> but driving on the wrong side of the road would take SOME doing. My
> oldest brother spent two years in England during WWII, and nearly got
> himself killed several times when he returned to the US.
It is not as difficult as you imagine. Driving on the right side of the
road in a left-hand drive vehicle, you are positioned just right of
center of the road. The same is true of driving on the left in a
right-hand drive vehicle.
The problem comes when making a right turn at an intersection, where
there is the incination to end up on the right side of the road. The
opposite is true for drivers accustomed to driving on the left, when
they make a left turn they tend to end up on the left side of the road.
It makes life interesting.
--
Regards,
Savageduck
== 20 of 21 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 4:57 pm
From: Savageduck
On 2009-05-11 16:14:45 -0700, Jack Campin - bogus address
<bogus@purr.demon.co.uk> said:
>>> In short only leaving the US will show you those areas where the
>>> US citizen does not realize that there is an alternate view,
>> Oh, for Christ's Sake. I'm glad that I've been to the UK several
>> times and that I read other newsgroups where there are some sane and
>> reasonable Brits who have an understanding that Americans come in all
>> flavors.
>
> Not observably to an outsider, the way Europeans do. In matters of
> political opinion, Europe is far more varied and far more obviously
> so. While there are minorities in the US holding every opinion you
> could imagine, they are mostly very small and you'd have to try very
> hard to find them. In almost every state in Europe, you can find a
> *substantial* minority that either wants that state to stop existing
> entirely, wants to have a state of its own, wants to be part of a
> neighbouring state or wants to incorporate a neighbouring state.
> (Portugal and the Scandinavian countries are the only exceptions I
> can think of). You can go into any pub in Scotland or Belgium and
> find people talking about political solutions that have been taboo
> in US conversation ever since Sherman marched through Georgia. And
> anywhere in Transylvania you will find overt expressions of Hungarian
> irredentism - how often in the US do you come across comparably serious
> demands that Texas and California ought to be handed back to Mexico?
You haven't heard of La Raza
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raza_Unida_Party have you?
--
Regards,
Savageduck
== 21 of 21 ==
Date: Mon, May 11 2009 5:26 pm
From: Ron Hunter
Jack Campin - bogus address wrote:
>>> In short only leaving the US will show you those areas where the
>>> US citizen does not realize that there is an alternate view,
>> Oh, for Christ's Sake. I'm glad that I've been to the UK several
>> times and that I read other newsgroups where there are some sane and
>> reasonable Brits who have an understanding that Americans come in all
>> flavors.
>
> Not observably to an outsider, the way Europeans do. In matters of
> political opinion, Europe is far more varied and far more obviously
> so. While there are minorities in the US holding every opinion you
> could imagine, they are mostly very small and you'd have to try very
> hard to find them. In almost every state in Europe, you can find a
> *substantial* minority that either wants that state to stop existing
> entirely, wants to have a state of its own, wants to be part of a
> neighbouring state or wants to incorporate a neighbouring state.
> (Portugal and the Scandinavian countries are the only exceptions I
> can think of). You can go into any pub in Scotland or Belgium and
> find people talking about political solutions that have been taboo
> in US conversation ever since Sherman marched through Georgia. And
> anywhere in Transylvania you will find overt expressions of Hungarian
> irredentism - how often in the US do you come across comparably serious
> demands that Texas and California ought to be handed back to Mexico?
>
> ==== j a c k at c a m p i n . m e . u k === <http://www.campin.me.uk> ====
> Jack Campin, 11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland == mob 07800 739 557
> CD-ROMs and free stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, and Mac logic fonts
> ****** I killfile Google posts - email me if you want to be whitelisted ******
Perhaps you should google "Texas Tea party".
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rec.photo.digital"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rec.photo.digital+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en
0 comments:
Post a Comment