diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | TODO | 2 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | bus-todo.txt | 39 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | film-wired.txt | 39 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | film.txt | 48 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | published/2017-01-15_wilds-of-winder.txt | 14 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | ready.txt | 19 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | stack.txt | 43 |
7 files changed, 130 insertions, 74 deletions
@@ -9,5 +9,7 @@ post on living outside, tiny homes mean you're outside more. public spaces are m "It seems to me that we all look at nature too much, and live with her too little." -Oscar Wilde, De Profundis +The average person spends 87% of their time indoors and another 6% in enclosed vehicles https://indoor.lbl.gov/sites/all/files/lbnl-47713.pdf + --- diff --git a/bus-todo.txt b/bus-todo.txt index f8c5234..0ad846b 100644 --- a/bus-todo.txt +++ b/bus-todo.txt @@ -1,48 +1,21 @@ To BUY: water tank $650 -floor $500 -foam and padding from couch: $150 -copper piping type k 25 ft $50? - -total: ~$1500 - - - -finish the bus interior: - -* ceiling strips - cut - sand - install -* kitchen - hook up stove -kid's bedroom - buy fan for dresser - -Table area - cut new table top bathroom re-install water lines - new shower head - -Cockpit - insulation - paint dash - -floor - buy and install - install 1/4 round trim solar: mmpt controller 2 x 200w panels 12v battery + battery isolator + +windows + curtains in the back 53x27 and two at 30x22 Finish bus engine: - exhaust needs to be redone $1000, maybe more - what's going on with carburator/choke/cold start? - tires need air + new tailpipe and muffler + new tires, call porterfield suspension feels sloppy diff --git a/film-wired.txt b/film-wired.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..a6a248b --- /dev/null +++ b/film-wired.txt @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ +I recently acquired a manual focus film camera from the early 1980s and it is the most exciting piece of technology I have purchased in several years. + +I know what you're thinking, this is going to be yet another piece about how great film was and how we should all hold hands and sing kumbayah together with our various archaic, full mechanical, full hipster cameras around our necks. + +But no. It's not like that. + +My flirtation with film proved an expensive reminder of how awesome digital cameras really are. To my chagrin all film did was remind me that I had forgotten how to compose a scene, forgotten how to meter a scene in my head, forgotten even how to focus quickly. I produced crap because digital had allowed me to forget all the fundamentals of film photography. + +So I went back to digital, but I couldn't shake the feeling that something was missing. Not film though. No, what I missed was the smooth manual focus and the clicking of the shutter ring. I missed the mechanics of photography that serve to pull me into the experience in a way that just doesn't happen with autofocus lenses and fiddly little dials. I also find, for the style of shooting I do (a mix of landscape and street photography) I get more reliable results with manual focus. + +Okay, now if you'll join hands with the person next to you and we can start singing. + +Now it's true that you can manual focus with today's digital cameras and autofocus lenses. It's usually not a great experience though. Few lenses these days have nice mechanical, clicky aperture wheels or smooth focusing rings. Fuji lenses are among the exceptions here, often possessing aperture rings that are, as [Charlene Winfred aptly puts it](charlenewinfred.com/2017/01/07/fujinon-xf-23mm-f2-another-lens-gorgeous-flare/), "rotationally happy". That's what I was looking for, lenses with a certain rotational happiness too them. + +And I found them. For next to nothing. There's a wealth of really good, largely forgotten manual focus lenses out there in the world. They're full of quirks, lack the edge to edge sharpness of today's best lenses, and they're sometimes in dubious condition. But they're usually cheap and for the price of one high end fast, autofocusing masterpiece of today's glass you can get four or five really nice manual focus lenses. + +And here's the kicker: they'll work great on any of today's mirrorless cameras. + +One of the fringe benefits of mirrorless cameras is that, ahem, there's no mirror. That means you don't have to worry about the mirror clearing the back of the lens. A camera lens is designed to sit at a very precise distance from the sensor. If the lens isn't at that distance it won't focus properly. But with DSLRs the lens also has to keep clear of the mirror. Mirrorless camera bodies are thinner and leave more room for adapters to get the lens to its proper distance from the sensor. Adapters range from the very cheap (there's plenty of adapters on eBay for around $10) to the rather pricey ($100+). So far I have only used the cheap ones and have had no problems with them though in some cases the very expensive adapters might be worth it. + +Really all you need to do is figure out which vintage lenses you'd like to use and then go get an adapter for that brand. For example I used to have a film Minolta camera with a Minolta Rokkor 58 f/1.2, which is still my favorite lens I've ever owned. Slap a $10 adapter on your favorite mirrorless camera and it's ready to go. + +Which mirrorless camera is largely irrelevant though if you want to get the actual FOV the lens was designed for you need a full frame mirrorless camera like the Sony A7 series. On a Sony A7 the Minolta Rokkor 58mm is a 58mm lens. + +If you're shooting with a APS-C sensor (for example on the of the Fuji mirrorless models) that Minolta will have the equivalent FOV of an 87mm lens on a full frame sensor. With any kind of "crop" sensor the FOV of the lens will be smaller. For Micro Four Thirds multiply the length of the lens by 2, for APS-C multiply by 1.5. So, sticking with the 58mm example, on a Micro Four Thirds sensor the effective field of view will be the same as a 116mm lens on a 35mm camera. In other words, while the 58mm was a good all-around "normal" lens on my film Minolta, it's now a good portrait lens on Micro Four Thirds. + +Many people like to shoot at the focal length the lens was made for, and in that case one of the Sony A7 series cameras is your best bet. I can see that angle, but personally I sometimes like the crop factor. For instance I've never liked the FOV of 28mm lenses. I find it too narrow to call wide, too wide to call normal. However there are some really great 28mm lenses out there. If I buy one of those lenses and attach it to an APS-C camera I have a really wonderful lens that's suddenly seeing the world at the equivalent of a 42mm lens, which for me is the perfect FOV for an everyday lens. Similarly the Rokkor 58mm f1.2 mentioned earlier makes a wonderful 85mm (roughly) portrait lens on APS-C. + +That's all there is to adapting old lenses to work with modern cameras. You'll only be shooting in either A mode or full manual and you'll have to focus yourself of course, but thanks to tools like focus peaking and 10X view mode, focusing a full manual lens on a digital body is actually considerably easier than it is on a SLR. You also lose some EXIF data -- the camera won't record what f-stop you're shooting at -- but that doesn't bother me. There's probably an app for recording such data, but I just use a notebook on the occasions when it matters to me to have a record of what f-stop I'm at (typically only when I'm testing sharpness or some other aspect of a new lens). + +It's also worth noting that if your primary criteria for what makes a good lens is edge-to-edge sharpness with no distortion or other "quirks" then older lenses are not for you. While there are some old lenses with very good optics in them it's rare to find something that beats the best of what's available today. Old lenses aren't right for every situation either. I wouldn't shoot sports with them and I probably wouldn't shoot a wedding either. + +If all this sounds a bit esoteric, well, it is. If you've made it this far you are, whether you know it or not, poised at the top of a very deep and potentially expensive rabbit hole. While many vintage lenses have next to no value, others, especially those with the word Leica on the rim, still command full retail value, or more. And prices are likely going up too as more people get into the world of vintage lenses. + +There are plenty of others out there who have already been deep down the rabbit hole and are willing to share their experiences. If you're looking for somewhere to start I'd suggest reading [Phillip Reeve's blog](https://phillipreeve.net), which is mainly aimed at Sony A7x users, but contains a wealth of information on vintage lenses and very thorough reviews. Other vintage lens enthusiasts including photographers like [Jonas Rask](https://jonasraskphotography.com/) and [Tom Leonard of Out for 30](https://outfor30.com/), both of whom often review old lenses. + +Also check out the vintage/adapted lens forums at [DPReview](http://forum.mflenses.com/), [Fred Miranda](http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/board/55), [Fuji X Series](http://www.fujixseries.com/forums/forum/17-adapted-manual-lenses/) and other forums where photographers congregate. There's also several forums dedicated to manual focus lenses, like [MFLenses.com](http://forum.mflenses.com/). At this point there's typically a somewhat detailed site for nearly every brand of lens out there, though few are as good as [The Rokkor Files](http://www.rokkorfiles.com/), which is devoted to Minolta Rokkor lenses. + +In the end I kept the film camera. I've remembered/relearned a few things, my percentage of keepers is slowly creeping back up. But for me the big takeaway was not the transformative power of film, but the return to manual focus lenses for digital cameras. To my mind this gives the best of both worlds -- the convenience, cost savings and tremendous post processing power of digital and the solidly built, smooth focusing, aperture clicking mechanics of manual focus lenses. @@ -1,31 +1,51 @@ I recently acquired a manual focus film camera from the early 1980s and it is the most exciting piece of technology I have purchased in several years. I bought it for a variety of reasons, ranging from nostalgia -- I am old enough to have shot film longer than I have digital -- to the simple fact that it was so cheap -- camera and a well worn, though optically fine, 50mm f/1.4 lens were $99 shipped to my door. Another $100 worth of Velvia and I was ready to go. -I know what you're thinking, this is going to be some piece about how film has physicality and digital is too ephemeral and we should all hold hands and sing kumbayah together with our various full hipster, full mechanical archaic camera's around our necks. +I know what you're thinking, this is going to be another piece about how film has physicality and digital is too ephemeral and we should all hold hands and sing kumbayah together with our various archaic, full mechanical, full hipster cameras around our necks. -But no. It's not like that. +But no. It's not like that. The first few rolls of film I shot with my new $99 wonder were absolute rubbish. -So were the next two after that. So I shoved the thing to the back corner of my desk and went off to review the very shiny Yi M1. After I packed the M1 in the box and shipped it off I went back to the film and forced myself to wade through the crap. +So were the next two after that. -It was immediately obvious that I had forgotten how to compose a scene, forgotten how to meter a scene in my head, forgotten even how to focus for christsakes. I had produced crap because I had forgotten all the fundamentals. With digital it's easy to not worry too much about composition because you can just keep shooting, look at the results and tweak your composition a bit and shoot again. The same is true of exposure, perhaps moreso give how much you can tweak exposure after the fact in a good RAW editor. I mean I know you still do it the old fashioned way with care and attention every time you delicately push the shutter, but me I tend to just point and mash that thing 20 times and sort out the results in post. +It was immediately obvious that I had forgotten how to compose a scene, forgotten how to meter a scene in my head, forgotten even how to focus quickly. I had produced crap because I had forgotten all the fundamentals of photography. -In film none of that works. Unless you're fantastically rich, or it's a heck of a scene, you aren't going to shoot more than one or two exposures of any scene, which means you have to have your exposure dialed in ahead of time and the scene composed the way you want it. You have to spend more time thinking when you shoot film. I had forgotten how to think like a film camera. +With digital it's easy to not worry too much about composition because you can just keep shooting, look at the results and tweak your composition a bit and shoot again. The same is true of exposure, perhaps more so given how much you can tweak exposure after the fact in a good RAW editor. Oh I know, *you* still do it the old fashioned way with care and attention every time you delicately push the shutter, but me, I tend to just point and mash that thing 20 times and sort out the results in post. -So I went to the library and checked out an incredible old, worn and faded copy of John Hedgecoe's Complete Photography Course and reread it cover to cover. I pretended like I was back in college, I took notes, I wrote out exposure formulas. One night I had an anxiety dream in which my old college photography teacher scolded me for considering a crop: "The image is made out there, not in here" she used to say. +In film that doesn't work. -The next day I pulled Martin Parr's Small World off the shelf and spent the afternoon pondering why it is that we seem to want photography to be so serious when in fact it seem to not really want that. I reread my Galen Rowell books and thought, well, maybe it is serious. +Unless you're fantastically rich, or it's a heck of a scene, you aren't going to shoot more than one or two exposures of any scene, which means you have to have your exposure dialed in ahead of time and the scene composed the way you want it. You have to spend more time thinking when you shoot film. And without daily practice, I had forgotten how to think like a film camera. -All the while I didn't take any film pictures. I did however start taking a lot more digital shots. I dusted off my old GF1 and slapped the Panasonic 20mm lens on the front. What it lacks in resolution it makes up for in portability. I don't know why I like the GF1 so much, but I do. I've yet to find a digital camera that I enjoy quite as much (save perhaps the Fuji XPro 2). +So I went to the library and checked out an incredible old, worn and faded copy of John Hedgecoe's Complete Photography Course and reread it cover to cover. I pretended like I was back in college, I took notes, I wrote out exposure formulas. Then I'd get frustrated with the seriousness of it all. I dusted off my old GF1 and slapped the Panasonic 20mm lens on the front. I went off and just mindlessly mashed the shutter a few hundred times just because I could. I pulled Martin Parr's <cite>Small World</cite> off the shelf and spent the afternoon pondering why it is that we seem to want photography to be so serious when in fact it seems to not really want that. Then I went and mashed the digital shutter some more. And I liked it. But there was something missing, I missed a certain mechanicalness of the film camera. -The more I shot digital the more I realized that it wasn't the film I missed. The digital medium is fine with me -- both have their pros and cons. No, what I missed was the manual focus and the shutter ring. I missed the mechanics of photography that, silly though it sounds to write this, seem to somehow pull me into the experience in a way that just doesn't happen with autofocus lenses and A mode and a dial to turn. Now if you'll just join hands with the person next to you and we can start singing. +The more I shot digital the more I realized that it wasn't film I missed. The digital medium is fine with me. No, what I missed was the smooth manual focus and the clicking of the shutter ring. I missed the mechanics of photography that, silly though it sounds to write this, seem to somehow pull me into the experience in a way that just doesn't happen with autofocus lenses and fiddly little dials. Okay, now if you'll join hands with the person next to you and we can start singing. -And yes, I know you can manual focus even with my old GF1. It's not a great experience though. I've never used a m4/3 lens that was any fun at all to manual focus and there are all too few lens these days with nice mechanical, clicky aperture wheels. Step up to full frame from Nikon or Canon and there are plenty of lenses with nice satisfying clicks and buttery smooth focus wheels but most of them are older. +And yes, I know you can manual focus even with my old GF1. It's not a great experience though. I've never used a m4/3 lens that was any fun at all to manual focus and there are all too few lenses these days with nice mechanical, clicky aperture wheels (Fuji lenses are among the exceptions here, often possessing aperture rings that are, as [Charlene Winfred aptly puts it](charlenewinfred.com/2017/01/07/fujinon-xf-23mm-f2-another-lens-gorgeous-flare/), "rotationally happy"). Step up to full frame from Nikon or Canon and there are plenty of lenses with nice satisfying clicks and buttery smooth focus wheels but most of these lenses hail from an older era when everything was manual. -In fact, I realized that I didn't care at all about the camera. I never had, except for a brief flirtation with an utterly amazing Toyo 4x5. Holy shit that was a camera. That I could never afford. No screw cameras, they're expensive, lose value the minute you buy them and all more or less do the same thing. And they're all pretty good these days. Just buy one you can afford and move on to what matters, what's always been the only thing that mattered: the lens. +In fact, I realized that I didn't care much at all about the camera. I never have really, except for a brief flirtation with an utterly amazing Toyo 4x5. Now that was a camera. Didn't really fit in your pocket though. No, screw cameras, they're expensive, lose value the minute you buy them and all more or less do the same thing at this point. The good news is they're all pretty good these days. Just buy one you can afford and move on to the hardware that really matters: the lenses. -I ended up keeping the film camera. I've remembered a few things, my percentage of keepers is slowly creeping back up. But for me the big takeaway was not the transformative power of film, but the return to manual focus lenses. I'm not alone. Forums and blogs about manual focus abound. And the best part is that most people don't want theses lenses, which means there are some really fantastic lenses out there for next to nothing. A Tokina AT-X 2.5/90 Macro, probably the sharpest lens I've ever used, for less than $400? Yes please. Or grab my favorite "normal" lens, the Minolta MC Rokkor-PG 58mm F1.2 for about $350. +And what I discovered during my brief flirtation with film is that there's a wealth of really good, largely forgotten manual focuses lenses out there in the world. They're full of quirks, sometimes in dubious condition but usually cheap. And they'll work great on any of today's mirrorless cameras. -Thanks to an abundance of adapters you can use these on virtually any mirrorless camera out there. I plan to invest in full frame mirrorless because I want to use them at their intended focal length, but they'll work on an APS-C or even micro four thirds camera, you'll just be using them at 1.5x and 2x their origial focal length. So the Tokina attached to say a Sony A7ii is a 90mm lens, slap it on a Fuji X-E2 and it becomes a 120mm equivalent. And on the GF1 it would be a 180mm equivalent. +One of the fringe benefits of mirrorless cameras is that, ahem, there's no mirror. That means you don't have to worry about the mirror clearing the back of the lens. A camera lens is designed to sit at a very precise distance from the sensor. If the lens isn't at that distance it won't focus properly. But with DSLRs the lens also has to keep clear of the mirror. Mirrorless camera bodies are thinner and leave more room for adapters to get the lens to its proper distance from the sensor. Adapters range from the very cheap (there's plenty of adapters on eBay for around $10) to the rather pricey ($100+). So far I have only used the cheap ones and have had no problems with them though in some cases the very expensive adapters might be worth it. -No matter which digital camera you chose you'll end up with, to my mind anyway, the best of both worlds, the conveniece, cost savings and tremendous post processing power of digital and the solidly built, smooth focusing aperture clicking mechanics of manual focus lenses. +Really all you need to do is figure out which vintage lenses you'd like to use and then go get an adapter for that brand. For example I used to have a film Minolta with a Minolta Rokkor 58 f/1.2, which is still my favorite lens I've ever owned. Slap a $10 adapter on the GF1 and it's ready to go. + +The only important thing to understand is that using a 58mm lens on a Micro Four Thirds sensor is that the effective field of view is actually the same as a 116mm lens on a 35mm camera. In other words, while the 58mm was a good all-around "normal" lens on my film Minolta, it's now a good portrait lens on my GF1. + +If I end up buying a Fuji X-E3 (should such a mythical beast ever see the light of day) that Minolta will have the equivalent FOV of an 87mm lens on a 35mm. With any kind of "crop" sensor the FOV of the lens will be smaller. For Micro Four Thirds multiply the length of the lens by 2, for APS-C multiply by 1.5. + +If you want to get the actual FOV the lens was designed for you need a full frame mirrorless camera like the Sony A7 series. On a Sony A7 the Minolta Rokkor 58mm is a 58mm lens. + +Many people like to shoot at the focal length the lens was made for, and in that case one of the Sony A7 series cameras is your best bet. I can see that angle, but personally I sometimes like the crop factor. For instance I've never liked the FOV of 28mm lenses. I find it too narrow to call wide, too wide to call normal. However there are some really great 28mm lenses out there. If I buy one of those lenses and attach it to an APS-C camera I have a really wonderful lens that's suddenly seeing the world at the equivalent of a 42mm lens, which for me is the perfect FOV for an everyday lens. Similarly the Rokkor 58mm f1.2 mentioned earlier makes a wonderful 85mm (roughly) portrait lens on APS-C. + +That's all there is to adapting old lenses to work with modern cameras. You'll only be shooting in either A mode or full manual and you'll have to focus yourself of course, but thanks to tools like focus peaking and 10X view mode, focusing a full manual lens on a digital body is actually considerably easier than it is on a SLR. You also lose some EXIF data -- the camera won't record what f-stop you're shooting at -- but that doesn't bother me. There's probably an app for recording such data, but I just use a notebook on the occasions when it matters to me to have a record of what f-stop I'm at (typically only when I'm testing sharpness or some other aspect of a new lens). + +It's also worth noting that if your primary criteria for what makes a good lens is edge-to-edge sharpness with no distortion or other "quirks" then older lenses are not for you. While there are some old lenses with very good optics in them it's rare to find something that beats the best of what's available today. Old lenses aren't right for every situation either. I wouldn't shoot sports with them and I probably wouldn't shoot a wedding either. + +If all this sounds a bit esoteric, well, it is. If you've made it this far you are, whether you know it or not, poised at the top of a very deep and potentially expensive rabbit hole. While many vintage lenses have next to no value, others, especially those with the word Leica on the rim, still command full retail value, or more. And prices are likely going up too as more people get into the world of vintage lenses. + +There are plenty of others out there who have already been deep down the rabbit hole and are willing to share their experiences. If you're looking for somewhere to start I'd suggest reading [Phillip Reeve's blog](https://phillipreeve.net), which is mainly aimed at Sony A7x users, but contains a wealth of information on vintage lenses and very thorough reviews. Other vintage lens enthusiasts including photographers like [Jonas Rask](https://jonasraskphotography.com/) and [Tom Leonard of Out for 30](https://outfor30.com/), both of whom often review lenses. + +Also check out the vintage/adapted lens forums at [DPReview](http://forum.mflenses.com/), [Fred Miranda](http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/board/55), [Fuji X Series](http://www.fujixseries.com/forums/forum/17-adapted-manual-lenses/) and other forums where photographers congregate. There's also several forums dedicated to manual focus lenses, like [MFLenses.com](http://forum.mflenses.com/). At this point there's typically a somewhat detailed site for nearly every brand of lens out there, though few are as good as [The Rokkor Files](http://www.rokkorfiles.com/), which is devoted to Minolta Rokkor lenses. + +In the end I kept the film camera. I've remembered/relearned a few things, my percentage of keepers is slowly creeping back up. But for me the big takeaway was not the transformative power of film, but the return to manual focus lenses for digital cameras. To my mind this gives the best of both worlds -- the convenience, cost savings and tremendous post processing power of digital and the solidly built, smooth focusing, aperture clicking mechanics of manual focus lenses. diff --git a/published/2017-01-15_wilds-of-winder.txt b/published/2017-01-15_wilds-of-winder.txt index bb98f80..d2be989 100644 --- a/published/2017-01-15_wilds-of-winder.txt +++ b/published/2017-01-15_wilds-of-winder.txt @@ -35,13 +35,23 @@ We found a spot that backed up along what would have been a little inlet, but wa </span> </div> -We had intended to only stay one night, but Fort Yargo was running a two nights for the price of one special, so, why not? The first night was a little bit of a rough bed time, it's hard to fall asleep when you're excited and everything is new. By the second night it just felt like the way things are and the kids were asleep by their normal bed time. We sat up by the campfire, but if you look closely at the breakfast images above, you'll noticed that it's still dark out. That means we rarely stay up much later than the kids. +We had intended to only stay one night, but Fort Yargo was running a two nights for the price of one special, so, why not? + +As a test run for full time living it was an interesting trip. There's plenty of practical things we need to do, figure out systems that help us live comfortably in a small space. But beyond that it's difficult to explain what it's like to wake up and go outside. This sounds incredibly mundane, but for me it's not. It's revelatory, a complete paradigm shift that I did not want to stop. Could I do it at home? Sure, but for whatever reason I don't. + +Not everything was wonderful though. The first night we were there we had a rough time getting everyone to bed. It's hard to fall asleep when everything is new and different and exciting. But by the second night it had all become the new (very wonderful) normal and the kids were asleep by their usual bed time. + +We sat up by the campfire for a while, but if you look closely at the breakfast images above, you'll noticed that it's still dark out. In the end we rarely stay up more than an hour or two later than the kids. <img src="images/2017/2017-01-13_084959_fort-yargo.jpg" id="image-279" class="picwide caption" /> <img src="images/2017/2017-01-13_192213_fort-yargo.jpg" id="image-282" class="picwide" /> <img src="images/2017/2017-01-13_193237_fort-yargo.jpg" id="image-283" class="picwide" /> -Then we had to go home and yes, the stalling while accelerating thing did come back to bite me. I spent some quality time with the bus in a parking lot messing with the carburetor. Eventually I gave up and called Progressive road side assistance, which was a mistake. Progressive refused to tow to a mechanic of my choice and wanted to send me to a Ford dealership that didn't have the slightest idea how to work on a Dodge RV. I know because I called them[^1]. What a bucket of fail Progressive turned out to be. Really hope their insurance is better or we're screwed. +Friday afternoon we realized it was a long weekend. The campground filled up in a hurry and we decided to pack it in and head home. + +The stalling while accelerating thing was forced out of the back of my mind and into the forefront again. Things started off well enough. A bit of sputtering as we headed out of the campground, but it could have been that the engine wasn't completely warm. Then headed through downtown Winder it died at a stoplight, then another. Then I pulled off into a nice big parking lot where I spent some quality time messing with the carburetor. + +Eventually I gave up and called Progressive road side assistance, which was a mistake. I gave up in part because I wanted to test Progressive and man did it fail. Catastrophically failed. **Do not under any circumstances buy Progressive roadside assistance**. Progressive refused to tow to the mechanic I wanted and instead wanted to tow me to a Ford dealership that didn't have the slightest idea how to work on a Dodge RV. I know because I called them[^1]. What a bucket of fail Progressive turned out to be. Really hope their insurance is better or we're screwed if anything ever happens. Eventually I managed to coax the bus into running and together the bus and I limped home. It turned out... well, you wouldn't believe me if I told you so I'll just say I'm not sure how I did it exactly, but I did. Now she's headed in for a new carb, exhaust work and a new muffler. After that, I think it'll be time to get back on the road, whether the house is sold or not. diff --git a/ready.txt b/ready.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..120ede3 --- /dev/null +++ b/ready.txt @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ +Everything accelerates toward beginnings. But then there's that moment where things suspend there at the starting line, thin, ephemeral, balanced there with every decision waiting to propel you into the future. + +After we left Fort Yargo things got slightly crazy in a hurry. Work piled up, we got an offer on the house, then another. The first fell through, the second didn't. But then we waited, because it still could, it still could and it still could. Still we packed things, we order things, I worked on the bus. + +In finished out the cockpit area, repainted the dash and finally we made a decision on the floor and a week later it arrived. I laid in the floor and that's when things really started to pick up. Letters from closing attorneys arrived, details were negotiated and then we realized the house was really going to close this time. Oh crap, we're about to be homeless. + +Corrinne called around to find someone to recover the seats and after a few people declined or couldn't make our deadline we found someone about an hour a way who had a week between two big jobs and was will to take it on. I packed up the seats, drive to Atlanta and worked out the details. Two weeks later the bus was done. + +But that skips the part where neither of the two mechanics I trust could get the bus in until about four days before our closing date and we're moving out of the house and suddenly the bus is off to get a new carburator, electronic ignition, manual choke cabel, new exhaust mainfolds and half a dozen other odds and ends I wasn't going to have time (or the knowledge) to do in a week. + +We were forced to confront a problem most of you have not --where do you put your stuff when your home is at the shop? Answer: boxes? We shoved everything in boxes and stuffed them in the van, at my in-law's house and in the storage unit we rented to hold a few items. + +The best time of course for work to start pouring in is right about when all this is hitting fever pitch so of course jobs kept rolling in one on top of the next until I had to step back and say no to a couple and but others on some tight schedules. It mostly worked out. + +But you know, i'd be liying if I said it was all work and moving. We took a day off to visit a friend's farm so the kids could drive around in massive tracktors. Heck, even corrinne and I drove the tractors. How often do you get to drive something with a wheel that's taller than you are? + +Working farms, that is to say, real farms, not those little vegetrable patches on ten acres that the hipsters have been buying up, are a healthy reminder that I've never really worked a day in my life. Not worked like a farmer does. It's humbling just to listen to someone tell you about their day to day work on a farm. There are things I dislike about the modern world, but I am frequently thankful that I don't have to farm. + + @@ -1,18 +1,16 @@ -Find out enough about used lenses to be able to buy low and sell high via ebay and local. +People email me all the time to ask how I make luxagraf. I never know what to make of this. I just write, take pictures and combine them into stories, which I recognize is not particularly helpful. Or it is, I think, but it's not why people email me. They want to know about at the tools I use. Which is fine. I guess. Consumerism! Yeah! But seriously, don't buy any of this stuff, you don't need it. I don't need it. I could get by with less. I should get by with less. -People email me all the time to ask how I make luxagraf. It's easier to talk about tools than methods, so while I can't really explain how I do this to you in any meaningful way -- beyond saying, I just write, take pictures and combine them into stories, which I recognize is not particularly helpful -- here's a look at the tools I use. Because, consumerism! Seriously, don't buy any of this stuff, you don't need it. I don't need it. I could get by with less. I should get by with less. - -## Hardware +Still, for better or worse. Here are the tools I use. ### Notebook -My primary "device" is my notebook. I don't have a fancy notebook. I use whatever I happened to grab on my way out of the bus. I have quite a few (from moleskins to cheapo spirals). I'm not all that picky about notebooks, if they have paper in them I'm happy enough. But I could devote thousands and thousands of words to pens. For what seems like forever I was religiously devoted to the Uniball Roller Stick Pen in micro point, which I used to swipe from my dad's desk drawer back in high school. It's a lovely pen, but the last time I went to get a box they were out so I grabbed a couple of Uniball Vision pens, which also fill my two primary requirements in a pen: 1) it writes well 2) I can buy it almost anywhere for next to nothing. +My primary "device" is my notebook. I don't have a fancy notebook. I use whatever I happened to grab on my way out of the bus. I have quite a few (from moleskins to cheapo spirals). I'm not all that picky about notebooks, if they have paper in them I'm happy enough. But I could devote thousands and thousands of words to pens. For what seems like forever I was religiously devoted to the Uniball Roller Stick Pen in micro point, which I used to swipe from my dad's desk drawer back in high school. It's a lovely pen, I was gratified to note it was the pen of choice at the lawyer's office where we finalized the sale of our house. And yes, I totally took one. But truthfully I don't use these much anymore. The last time I went to get a box they were out so I grabbed a couple of Uniball Vision pens, which also fill my two primary requirements in a pen: 1) it writes well 2) I can buy it almost anywhere for next to nothing. In a moment of non-frugality I did once buy a fancy pen from Japan that takes Parker ink refills which I can never find so it ends up spending more time shoved in a drawer than in my hand. ### laptop -My laptop is a Lenovo <span class="strike">x230</span>, oops, x240. I bought it off eBay for $300. I upgraded the hard drives and put in an HD screen, which brought the total outlay to $550, which is really way too much to spend on a computer these days, but my excuse is that I make money using it. +My laptop is a Lenovo x240 I bought off eBay for $300. I upgraded the hard drives and put in an HD screen, which brought the total outlay to $550, which is really way too much to spend on a computer these days, but my excuse is that I make money using it. Why this particular laptop? It's small and the battery lasts quite a while (like 15 hrs when I'm writing, more 12 when editing photos). It also has a removable battery and can be upgraded by the user. I packed in almost 3TB of disk storage, which is nice. It does make a high pitch whining noise that drives me crazy whenever I'm in a quiet room with it, but since I mostly use it outdoors, sitting around our camps, this is rarely an issue. @@ -20,43 +18,38 @@ Still, like I said, I could get by with less. I should get by with less. ### Camera -I have used many different cameras at different points in time on this site. I went around the world the first time with a Canon point and shoot of some sort. Then I got a Panasonic GF-1, which I loved. There's also quite a few pics taken with other micro four-thirds cameras I tested for Wired. But, since 2016 I've been shooting primarily with two cameras, one digital, one film. - -The digital is a Sony A7ii, a full frame mirrorless camera. I bought it specifically because it's the only full frame digital camera available that lets me use the old lens that I love. Without the old lenses I find the Sony's output to be a little digital for my tastes. The RAW files from the A7ii have wonderful dynamic range, which was the other selling point for me. +I have used many different cameras at different points in time on this site. I went around the world the first time with a Canon point and shoot of some sort. Then I got a Panasonic GF-1, which I loved. There's also quite a few pics taken with other micro four-thirds cameras I tested for Wired. -All of my lenses are manual focus. After about 2016 there are no autofocus shots on this site. +But then I got into old lenses. Or I got into the idea of old lenses. And then I bought a very expensive Sony A7ii, a full frame mirrorless camera that makes it possible to use legacy film lenses. -I grew up using all manual focus cameras. Autofocus was probably around by the time I picked up a camera, but I never had it. My father had (probably still has) a screw mount Pentax. I bought a Minolta with money from a high school job. Eventually I upgraded to a Nikon F3. While there are advantages to autofocus, none of them are significant for the type of photos I like to make. +I bought it specifically because it's the only full frame digital camera available that lets me use the old lens that I love. Without the old lenses I find the Sony's output to be a little digital for my tastes. The RAW files from the A7ii have wonderful dynamic range, which was the other selling point for me. That said, it's very expensive. You should not buy one, the Sony a6000 is very nearly at good and costs $500 ($400 on eBay). In fact, having tested dozens of cameras for Wired over the years I can say with some authority that the a6000 is the best value for money on the market period. But doubly so if you want at cheap way to test out some older lenses. -####lenses +And all of my lenses are old and manual focus, which I prefer to autofocus lenses. I like the fact that they're cheap too, but really the main appeal for me with old lenses was the far superior focusing rings. -One thing about shoot manual lenses is that there are a tone of cheap manual lenses out there. I have seen amazing photos produced with $10 lenses. Learn to manual focus a lens is like opening a door into a secret world. A secret world where lenses are cheap. The net result of my foray into this world is that I have a ridiculous collection of lenses. And we live in a bus, lord knows what I'd have if we had more space. +I grew up using all manual focus cameras. Autofocus was probably around by the time I picked up a camera, but I never had it. My father had (still has) a screw mount Pentax. I bought a Minolta with money from a high school job. Eventually I upgraded to a Nikon F3 which was my primary camera until 2004. While there are advantages to autofocus, and certainly modern lenses are much sharper in most cases, neither autofocus nor perfect edge to edge sharpness are significant for the type of photos I like to make. -That said, about 90% of the time I have a very fast, lightweight Voigtlander 40mm 1.4 attached to the A7. I love this lens. It gets a lot of hate on the internets. People don't like the bokeh I guess. I love it. +###lenses -I never felt right with 50mm lenses back in my film days. I played with 35mm, but it felt too wide to be normal, not wide enough to be wide. When I bought the GF1 I picked up a 40mm on Craig Mod's advice and fell in love with this length. This is how I see. I love this lens. Love it. - -At the wide end of the spectrum I have the Voigtlander 20mm. Between this and the previous I realize I've developed a weird obsession with Voigtlander. +One thing about shoot manual lenses is that there are a tone of cheap manual lenses out there. I have seen amazing photos produced with $10 lenses. Learn to manual focus a lens is like opening a door into a secret world. A secret world where lenses are cheap. The net result of my foray into this world is that I have a ridiculous collection of lenses. And we live in a bus, lord knows what I'd have if we had more space. -For macro and portraits I use the wonderful Tokina AT-X Macro 90mm. There's a great review of this lens over at [Phillip reeve's blog][https://phillipreeve.net/blog/tokina-x-macro-90mm-12-5-review/]. It blows my mind that you can buy a lens this good (complete with doubler) for less than $400. +That said, about 90% of the time I have a very fast, relatively lightweight Canon FD 50 f1.4. I love this lens. I really love it. -I also have a Rokinon 12mm f/2.8 fisheye because when your home is less than 26ft long and 8ft wide you need a fisheye. +At the wide end of the spectrum I have another Canon, the FD 20mm f2.8. For portraits I use the Minolta MD 100 f2. I also have this crazy Russian fisheye thing I bought one night on eBay after I'd been drinking. It's pretty hilarious bad at anything less than f8, but it's useful in the bus at times. -###Film +I also have, cough, a few other lenses that I don't use very often or that I use for a while and pass along via eBay. So far though the three listed above are my primary lenses. -The other camera is 35mm film, a Nikon FE that I picked up off eBay (notice a running theme here? Buy used and you can afford to travel more) for $75. That price blows my mind since once upon a time as a teenager I worked for months to afford nearly the same camera. Anyway, I worry that all our digital photos will disappear one day so I wanted to leave behind some physical artifacts for my kids to dig through later in life. And printing digital photos is not the same. I typically process the color film at Costco when we're in the U.S. and send off of the black and white to a lab. But the b&w is really expensive so I mainly shoot color these days. A handful of the prints stay with us in the bus, the rest are shipped to relatives for relatively safe keeping. ### Phone/Tablet/drone/wrist tracking device thingy -Don't have one. Yeah I know, I'm one of those people. I pay for everything in cash too. Terrible. My wife has a phone though. +Haha, you're kidding right? Yeah I Don't have any of those. I'm one of those people. I pay for everything in cash too. Fucking weirdo is what I am. I told you you didn't want to know how I make stuff. -## Software +### Software The laptop runs Linux because everything else sucks a lot more than Linux. Which isn't too say that I love Linux, it could use some work too. But it sucks a whole lot less than the rest. I run Arch Linux, which I have written about elsewhere. The main appeal of Arch for me is that once I set it up I never have to think about it again. Because I test software for a living I also have a partition that hosts a revolving door of other Linux distros that I use from time to time, but never when I want to get work done. When I want to get work done, I use Arch. I don't run a desktop GUI, just a window manager (Openbox) with a menubar (tint2). I launch apps and other stuff with dmenu. -Almost everything I do is done inside a single terminal (urxvt) window running tmux, which gives me four tabs. I write in Vim. For email I use mutt. I read RSS feeds with newsbeuter and I listen to music via mpd. I also have a command line calculator and a locally-hosted dictionary that I use pretty regularly. +Because I am hopelessly bored with technology, I stick mainly with simpel, text-based applications. Almost everything I do is done inside a single terminal (urxvt) window running tmux, which gives me four tabs. I write in Vim. For email I use mutt. I read RSS feeds with newsbeuter and I listen to music via mpd. I also have a command line calculator and a locally-hosted dictionary that I use pretty regularly. -I do use a few GUI apps: Tor for browsing the web, Darktable and GIMP for editing photos, Stellarium for learning more about the night sky, and LibreOffice Calc for speadsheets. That's about it. +I do use a few GUI apps: Tor for browsing the web, Darktable and GIMP for editing photos, Stellarium for learning more about the night sky, and LibreOffice Calc for spreadsheets. That's about it. |