Friday, February 26, 2010
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Event photos
The assignment was to cover the annual UW-Madison Collegiate FFA "Hockey Extravaganza." The goals are to document the event, get pictures of CFFA members in leadership roles, and capture the spirit of a pep rally with pizza, a marching band and Bucky Badger, the UW school mascot.
A moment in the crowd:
A moment in the crowd:
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Picasa v Flickr
Since both Picasa and Flickr are free in their standard versions, you don't have to choose. I use both. The two are different enough that I find the strengths and weaknesses complement each other. A long time ago I opened a Flickr account and let it languish unused. Google's Picasa came along and based on the Google brand, I signed up and started using Picasa as my main photo management tool.
With the Picasa tool, you download the software and install it to your computer. After a few journeys into Picasa I quickly learned to appreciate its ability to help me keep track of photos. There have been several upgrades since I first jumped in and each upgrade has added incremental improvements. Face recognitions is cool. But being able to quickly find a photo on the hard drive is a wonderful feature for me.
Picasa's photo editor is also a time-saver and offers a full set of commonly needed photo editing tools such as crops, highlights, sharpen and even the cute "I'm feeling lucky" exposure adjustment works in a surprising number of instances. For the heavy lifting or to indulge in deep image manipulations there's still Photoshop.
The online "Picasa web albums" feature is a great way to back up your photos and to share them with other people. From a business perspective, I use Picasa online to deliver photos to my freelance clients. There's an upload option that allows you to choose if you want to upload full resolution images or other less bandwidth intensive versions. You can choose to make the albums public, private or hidden. For only a few dollars a year you can upgrade your account and get something on the order of 80 GB of storage.
Flickr and Picasa part ways the most online. In Flickr, the photo editor is online. The Flickr editor works well but is a touch slower to use since it's online not on your computer. The edits you do are applied to the photo online so if you want a copy of your edited image you need to then download the file. All good, but I prefer the Picasa software for editing.
Flickr is better at showing photos online and far better in terms of "community." Flickr is a social networking program built around photos. In that regard Flickr is a lot more sensible than Facebook. But I digress. If you like to participate in the wide world of photography, Flickr is hands down better than Picasa. That's not a criticism of Picasa because there are some social networking features available and they do work. It's just that Flickr beat Picasa to the punch and offers a greater sense of community and participation.
When it comes to sharing photos, the two programs are both excellent with only subtle differences. You blog photos from Flickr online and you blog photos from Picasa with the desktop software. In both it's a simple push-button process with similar options for sizing the photo. Both work well for photo hosting images for use on web sites. I do think I like the Flickr photo to blog options slightly better. The photo is hosted in Flickr and it shows up on your blog with a thin, black border. It's attractive. Picasa uploads the image to the blog for hosting. Not surprising, I guess, Picasa works most seamlessly with Blogger, another Google product.
A Flickr Pro account is $25/year and that gives you unlimited uploads and storage and a handful of features to help with marketing and having fun. For the storage upgrade in Picasa you pay $20 for 80 GB of storage and it's good for a couple of years. Google has continued to offer more and more storage space over time. My volume is pretty low compared to many people so by the time I get to 80 GB, Picasa will probably have unlimited storage, too.
You may use one or the other if you choose. Me? I think I'll keep using both.
With the Picasa tool, you download the software and install it to your computer. After a few journeys into Picasa I quickly learned to appreciate its ability to help me keep track of photos. There have been several upgrades since I first jumped in and each upgrade has added incremental improvements. Face recognitions is cool. But being able to quickly find a photo on the hard drive is a wonderful feature for me.
Picasa's photo editor is also a time-saver and offers a full set of commonly needed photo editing tools such as crops, highlights, sharpen and even the cute "I'm feeling lucky" exposure adjustment works in a surprising number of instances. For the heavy lifting or to indulge in deep image manipulations there's still Photoshop.
The online "Picasa web albums" feature is a great way to back up your photos and to share them with other people. From a business perspective, I use Picasa online to deliver photos to my freelance clients. There's an upload option that allows you to choose if you want to upload full resolution images or other less bandwidth intensive versions. You can choose to make the albums public, private or hidden. For only a few dollars a year you can upgrade your account and get something on the order of 80 GB of storage.
Flickr and Picasa part ways the most online. In Flickr, the photo editor is online. The Flickr editor works well but is a touch slower to use since it's online not on your computer. The edits you do are applied to the photo online so if you want a copy of your edited image you need to then download the file. All good, but I prefer the Picasa software for editing.
Flickr is better at showing photos online and far better in terms of "community." Flickr is a social networking program built around photos. In that regard Flickr is a lot more sensible than Facebook. But I digress. If you like to participate in the wide world of photography, Flickr is hands down better than Picasa. That's not a criticism of Picasa because there are some social networking features available and they do work. It's just that Flickr beat Picasa to the punch and offers a greater sense of community and participation.
When it comes to sharing photos, the two programs are both excellent with only subtle differences. You blog photos from Flickr online and you blog photos from Picasa with the desktop software. In both it's a simple push-button process with similar options for sizing the photo. Both work well for photo hosting images for use on web sites. I do think I like the Flickr photo to blog options slightly better. The photo is hosted in Flickr and it shows up on your blog with a thin, black border. It's attractive. Picasa uploads the image to the blog for hosting. Not surprising, I guess, Picasa works most seamlessly with Blogger, another Google product.
A Flickr Pro account is $25/year and that gives you unlimited uploads and storage and a handful of features to help with marketing and having fun. For the storage upgrade in Picasa you pay $20 for 80 GB of storage and it's good for a couple of years. Google has continued to offer more and more storage space over time. My volume is pretty low compared to many people so by the time I get to 80 GB, Picasa will probably have unlimited storage, too.
You may use one or the other if you choose. Me? I think I'll keep using both.
Friday, February 12, 2010
Thoughts of summer
Anybody seen any good seed catalogs yet?
Time to start thinking about the 2nd Great Recession Garden.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Two Zamboni
Often wondered what it'd be like to be on the ice with two machines. Having one out there always seemed complicated enough for me.
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Islands
An all-time favorite of mine.
Always felt there was a dream-like quality to this book
not found in the same way in other Hemingway books.
Always felt there was a dream-like quality to this book
not found in the same way in other Hemingway books.
Tuesday, February 09, 2010
Monday, February 08, 2010
Sunday, February 07, 2010
Start of 2nd period
This made for a long and interesting day: two hockey games outside, a "warm up" pep rally, and a day with my brother. All good.
Friday, February 05, 2010
Wednesday, February 03, 2010
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Once a year
About once a year you get this kind of frost. This time it actually happened on a day when I could take a few pictures.
Friday, January 22, 2010
Saturday, January 09, 2010
Thursday, January 07, 2010
Wednesday, January 06, 2010
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Another round!
They come in shifts. This time for Christmas.Going to be tough sledding over the hillsand
through the woods to Granny's house.
Oh, wait. She's in a nursing home.
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Wednesday, December 09, 2009
Monday, December 07, 2009
White Christmas - oh yeah!
NWS: Winter Storm Watch...AND WILL LIKELY HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON SOCIETY.
Thursday, December 03, 2009
Historic track @ Churchill Downs
Of all the places where a hoof meets earth, the race track at Churchill Downs in Louisville ranks among the most famous. The surface that hosts the Kentucky Derby and 800 other races each season gets more than its fair share of attention and care.
Managing the track at Churchill Downs is a multimillion-dollar business and the focus of daily conditioning.
The surface is considered "hard" by horse-racing enthusiasts, as are Belmont Park in New York and Pimlico near Baltimore, the three tracks that make up the Triple Crown of horse racing.
Churchill Downs keeps its track the same mixture of 75 percent sand, 23 percent silt and 2 percent clay. "All the material used here at the track comes from southern Kentucky," explained a track guide. "It's all stored in big piles here and mixed and added whenever it's needed.”
A hard surface makes for a fast track. Track technology is changing and new materials are in use at other tracks. For example, Keeneland in nearby Lexington, Ky., has a synthetic track. The mixture is a blend of sand, polyfibers and a tarlike compound, making for a much softer track.
"If you pick up a handful of the synthetic track and squeeze it, it'll crumble apart when you let go. If you squeeze this track material it'll stay in a clump
when you let go." the guide said.
Consistency is of even more value than texture. Churchill Downs wants the same track for every race so a horse taking to the field for the 2010 Kentucky Derby has the same track that Secretariat had in 1973 when he set a record of 1:59 2/5.
Trainers and owners all want the track to stay the same as they race their horses and watch training times. A surface that changes would produce inconsistent results from one run to the next.
Daily care of Churchill Downs includes leveling, adding water, harrowing and packing.
"We don't need to level the track every day, but the harrowing and packing is done after every race and after every morning workout," the guide said. "The harrows fluff up the top 3 inches of the surface and then the packers come along and pack it down to make it hard."
Without the constant harrowing and packing, the 1-mile track would begin to erode from underneath and that would lead to soft spots and possibly holes in the surface, creating a dangerous condition for horses and riders. Water is sprayed ahead of the harrows and packers to help keep the track mixture consistent.
"On a hot day they'll add 100,000 gallons of water. How much water is applied is determined by the speed of the tank trucks. When it's hot you'll see the trucks creeping along,” the guide said.
When it rains, the surface is packed so hard that water will stand on the track.
"It's still a hard track even when it rains. But that's the kind of track that often favors the long shots (horses not generally favored to win). Some horses just really like a muddy track and that's why we call them ‘mudders,’" the guide said.
A recent flood at Churchill Downs illustrated how hard and well-maintained the track is. Hurricane-like rain and wind swept through the Louisville area in August, leaving the track under more than 2 feet of water. When the water drained, the track was still there and needed only spot repairs, officials said. The attached museum, however, sustained significant damage and many of the artifacts will require careful restoration.
Managing the track at Churchill Downs is a multimillion-dollar business and the focus of daily conditioning.
The surface is considered "hard" by horse-racing enthusiasts, as are Belmont Park in New York and Pimlico near Baltimore, the three tracks that make up the Triple Crown of horse racing.
Churchill Downs keeps its track the same mixture of 75 percent sand, 23 percent silt and 2 percent clay. "All the material used here at the track comes from southern Kentucky," explained a track guide. "It's all stored in big piles here and mixed and added whenever it's needed.”
A hard surface makes for a fast track. Track technology is changing and new materials are in use at other tracks. For example, Keeneland in nearby Lexington, Ky., has a synthetic track. The mixture is a blend of sand, polyfibers and a tarlike compound, making for a much softer track.
"If you pick up a handful of the synthetic track and squeeze it, it'll crumble apart when you let go. If you squeeze this track material it'll stay in a clump
when you let go." the guide said.
Consistency is of even more value than texture. Churchill Downs wants the same track for every race so a horse taking to the field for the 2010 Kentucky Derby has the same track that Secretariat had in 1973 when he set a record of 1:59 2/5.
Trainers and owners all want the track to stay the same as they race their horses and watch training times. A surface that changes would produce inconsistent results from one run to the next.
Daily care of Churchill Downs includes leveling, adding water, harrowing and packing.
"We don't need to level the track every day, but the harrowing and packing is done after every race and after every morning workout," the guide said. "The harrows fluff up the top 3 inches of the surface and then the packers come along and pack it down to make it hard."
Without the constant harrowing and packing, the 1-mile track would begin to erode from underneath and that would lead to soft spots and possibly holes in the surface, creating a dangerous condition for horses and riders. Water is sprayed ahead of the harrows and packers to help keep the track mixture consistent.
"On a hot day they'll add 100,000 gallons of water. How much water is applied is determined by the speed of the tank trucks. When it's hot you'll see the trucks creeping along,” the guide said.
When it rains, the surface is packed so hard that water will stand on the track.
"It's still a hard track even when it rains. But that's the kind of track that often favors the long shots (horses not generally favored to win). Some horses just really like a muddy track and that's why we call them ‘mudders,’" the guide said.
A recent flood at Churchill Downs illustrated how hard and well-maintained the track is. Hurricane-like rain and wind swept through the Louisville area in August, leaving the track under more than 2 feet of water. When the water drained, the track was still there and needed only spot repairs, officials said. The attached museum, however, sustained significant damage and many of the artifacts will require careful restoration.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Saturday, October 17, 2009
More of this
"This is the unsustainable path we’re on, and it’s the path the insurers want to keep us on. In fact, the insurance industry is rolling out the big guns and breaking open their massive war chest – to marshal their forces for one last fight to save the status quo. They’re filling the airwaves with deceptive and dishonest ads. They’re flooding Capitol Hill with lobbyists and campaign contributions. And they’re funding studies designed to mislead the American people.
Of course, like clockwork, we’ve seen folks on cable television who know better, waving these industry-funded studies in the air. We’ve seen industry insiders – and their apologists – citing these studies as proof of claims that just aren’t true."
President Barack Obama...
Of course, like clockwork, we’ve seen folks on cable television who know better, waving these industry-funded studies in the air. We’ve seen industry insiders – and their apologists – citing these studies as proof of claims that just aren’t true."
President Barack Obama...
Tuesday, October 06, 2009
Tuesday, September 01, 2009
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Wednesday, August 05, 2009
Manifesto not so much
A bag of Cheetos, a can of Mountain Dew, out of the convenience store, into the car and off to work. The scene may sound outrageous enough for comedy but chips, pop and off to work is a common act in a national drama with food. Michael Pollan thinks the play is a tragedy and wastes no time making his points in his latest book, "In Defense of Food: an eater's manifesto."
Pollan is deeply cynical in the details defining his attacks on nutrition, food science, and the health industry. While well-researched and compelling, In Defense gets diluted by lazy claims deriding the industrial food complex. Yes, everything in the book has been said before and Pollan makes sure to reference his points.
References are only as good as the sources and conclusions only as good as the underlying arguments. Processed foods might not be good for us all the time. But it's hard to draw a distinction between a bag of chips and a can of pop for breakfast and a bag of flour from reading In Defense. If it's processed it's bad.
Pollan's lashing about tends to reduce the value of the central themes found in the book important to an enlightened and much-needed discussion about food and eating. We've arrived at a point where we're both "overfed and undernourished," food and eating are cleaved from culture, and that diet and nutrition fads substitute for actual healthy living are among the valuable broader points Pollan brings forward.
Let's take a quick look. Pollan talks about wheat and bread explaining that the milling process removes the nutritional value of the flour used to make bread. The effects of milling on flour are well known and Pollan is hardly providing a news flash. It was modern food science that learned how to return the nutritional value to the flour used in baking bread. The bread you buy in the grocery store today isn't like what grandma used to bake. Grandma wasn't providing for millions of people either.
In Defense struggles with economics by encouraging "those of us who can" to spend more time and money on food. That's nice. The burgeoning obesity problem and associated health issues Pollan attributes to food and eating are more pronounced among the poor and working class where cheap sugar and carbohydrates fill empty stomachs. The same groups also struggle with time. In the best of situations you have two people working, and if there are children involved, a meal of "mac & cheese" out of a box is the path of least resistance and lowest cost.
In Defense is a worthwhile read for the thinking it should stimulate. Leaning on it as an actual "manifesto" of managing the global challenges to food security is thin gruel.
Pollan is deeply cynical in the details defining his attacks on nutrition, food science, and the health industry. While well-researched and compelling, In Defense gets diluted by lazy claims deriding the industrial food complex. Yes, everything in the book has been said before and Pollan makes sure to reference his points.
References are only as good as the sources and conclusions only as good as the underlying arguments. Processed foods might not be good for us all the time. But it's hard to draw a distinction between a bag of chips and a can of pop for breakfast and a bag of flour from reading In Defense. If it's processed it's bad.
Pollan's lashing about tends to reduce the value of the central themes found in the book important to an enlightened and much-needed discussion about food and eating. We've arrived at a point where we're both "overfed and undernourished," food and eating are cleaved from culture, and that diet and nutrition fads substitute for actual healthy living are among the valuable broader points Pollan brings forward.
Let's take a quick look. Pollan talks about wheat and bread explaining that the milling process removes the nutritional value of the flour used to make bread. The effects of milling on flour are well known and Pollan is hardly providing a news flash. It was modern food science that learned how to return the nutritional value to the flour used in baking bread. The bread you buy in the grocery store today isn't like what grandma used to bake. Grandma wasn't providing for millions of people either.
In Defense struggles with economics by encouraging "those of us who can" to spend more time and money on food. That's nice. The burgeoning obesity problem and associated health issues Pollan attributes to food and eating are more pronounced among the poor and working class where cheap sugar and carbohydrates fill empty stomachs. The same groups also struggle with time. In the best of situations you have two people working, and if there are children involved, a meal of "mac & cheese" out of a box is the path of least resistance and lowest cost.
In Defense is a worthwhile read for the thinking it should stimulate. Leaning on it as an actual "manifesto" of managing the global challenges to food security is thin gruel.
Sunday, August 02, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)