So I walk into a music store that prides itself in buying your used
musical instruments. I show them my mint condition Gemeinhardt 2SP
flute. The owner (actually the son of the owner) comes over and looks at
the flute. He then says that I have a beautiful "student" flute and he
hasn't bought any "student" flutes in a year. I wasn't miffed and to be
honest I wasn't surprised. This is my life in the world of low-cost
musical instruments.
Right now I own too many guitars. I have a plectrum banjo I love and
a cheap banjo I keep at a bandmate's house where we practice. I have a
ukulele I love and another ukulele with a modified string set. I have
one flute and ten tin whistles. I love six of the whistles because they
are a set of Generation brass whistles that were tweaked by a
professional tweaker. Those instruments I love are the ones that I have
no intention of ever selling. I don't have the dreaded acquisition
syndrome that wants me to keep buying and buying. I have extra whistles
because these are the inexpensive kind (whistles can go for up to over
$1k) and I am experimenting with my own tweaking.
So I have the right banjo, ukulele and tin whistles. The same can't
be said about the guitars or the flute. Now these cannot be compared.
The student flute is designed so that parents can buy a flute for their
kids without breaking the bank before they know whether or not the kids
will stick to it. A good flute costs over $1,250 and the low end of that
price range is still compromising the quality but with the ability to
improve the existing flute for only over another $1,000. On the other
hand the market is flooded with cheap guitars to fill the demand of kids
who want to be rock stars some day. Finding a low end guitar that a
musician can love is purely a matter of luck. And that only applies to
electric guitars. Now, I'm content with my electric guitars because I've
finally decided that rock music is not my musical destination in life.
The Epiphone Les Paul I own is modified for the alternate tuning I play
and the neck is stable. The two other guitars have unstable necks.
My acoustic guitars, on the other hand, are okay at best, but not
performance-level. Acoustic guitars on the low end aren't loveable as a
matter of luck. They just aren't capable of sounding like the better
guitars. I hear good thinks about Godin's Seagull guitars but I have
never heard their tones come from the audio tracks of noted acoustic
players. My Korean-built Songbird guitar sound nice, but I can't play it
with the other acoustic players I know (one has a Martin HD-28.)
The music store incident is indicative of the low-cost instrument
dilemma. A good musical instrument, especially acoustic, will retain
their value after the initial sell. The others won't. A good acoustic
instrument will sound better with time. The others won't. Good acoustic
instruments can be passed down from generation to generation. The others
can't. I may never get a better guitar now that I'm getting away from
them. I'll use what I have to make recordings that other instruments
will be focused over and will continue to pursue the whistle and flute.
The reason I wanted to sell the flute was to get away from the
Boehm-style metal concert flute to play an Irish flute. The fingering of
the Irish flute is similar to the tin whistle and I can already play my
whistles better than my flute. I wanted the money to get the
entry-level flute and if I liked playing it, get a pro-level one for
Christmas. A good keyless Irish flute costs less than the concert flutes
and acoustic guitars of the same quality. Note I said keyless.
Eight-key Irish flutes cost between $3,000 and $5,000. I don't see a
need for a keyed flute as long as the songs are in D or G (I can expand
using cross-fingering to produce some extra accidentals, thereby playing
in more keys.)
I have improved on my attitude over this issue and writing this has
helped more. I am making a flute out of PVC to try my hand at making a
musical instrument as well as having a flute to try.
Thursday, July 26, 2012
Thursday, April 12, 2012
Why Watches? Why Now?
After years of not wearing a watch, last fall I started wearing one. It
wasn't the one I stopped wearing almost ten years ago. I still have no
interest in that watch. Until this week it was a cheap Stauer
Chinese-movement automatic mechanical watch that I saw in a SkyMall
catalog while flying to Las Vegas. This week I bought an Invicta
Swiss-movement copy of a Rolex Submariner. Why did my interest in these
watches happen? Why will I not consider other watches?
It has to do with the movement in the watch. When I was a child my father bought me a Caravelle watch. It was a manual mechanical meaning I had to wind it every day. Quartz battery-powered watches were just starting to enter the market. I didn't know anything but that I liked being able to tell the time anywhere I went. I loved my watch. As time went by I bought other watches. I thought I made the big time when I bought a Seiko in the service. The only thing I disliked was the battery. I didn't think that it mattered and after I wore out the Seiko I looked at cheap Swatches, Timex and Casio LCD watches. The complexity of the features made it hard for me to make any adjustments without an instruction book. I just didn't like the watch anymore.
But that was before I realized that my nature as a curious engineer realized while reading the SkyMall ad for the Stauer Meisterzeit watch that the mechanics behind a self-winding watch is fascinating. Springs, gears, levers - I wanted a marvel of old-world technology on my wrist. And that Stauer didn't let me down. The watch has an exhibition back that shows the weighted rotor that moves 360 degrees to wind the watch anytime my arm moves. Now the ad talked about the first patent for the modern automatic in 1923 and how this watch mimicked that first automatic. I googled and wikied for all the information I could find regarding the technology. I discovered that the Chinese movement was not a replica of the bumper automatic but rather the Rolex-patented in 1930, full-rotating automatic movements that are in all automatics today. I also discovered what a hacking watch is. The $100 watch could hack - meaning the second hand stops when the crown is pulled out to adjust the time. That allows the watch to synchronize to another time source.
I didn't expect much accuracy with this watch because an electric signal from a quartz crystal is more accurate than a spring, a gear and a lever. For the first few weeks the watch was off by two minutes a week. But amazingly, it got more accurate as time went by and now it is off by a dozen seconds or so a week. Seeing the balance-wheel move through the exhibition back was another love of mine. This was brought even further by blogs displaying hand-made watches that were designed to show all of the mechanics of that watch. In particular are the Tourbillon movements. Those are found in watches that generally sell for more than $20,000.
This Stauer has a sweeping second hand. Just to show my ignorance, I was taught that a person could spot a fake Rolex watch by looking at the second hand. The fake ones I saw had the kind of second hand that clicks every second. Now I know that it has to do with quartz movements - all automatic mechanical movements have sweeping hands. The Chinese-movement in my Stauer could be in a Rolex-copy and I would be fooled. Never-the-less I still view the sweeping hand a sign of luxury - at any price.
I love the Stauer watch and recommend it to those with a low budget but I needed to move on to what I hope to be my final watch. My friend Larry wears a Rolex. It's not that he could afford one as much as it is that he always wanted one. I can't say the same so it's smart that my wife has no intention of getting me one. I would not appreciate it. But I do appreciate having a Swiss-made automatic movement on a nicer watch. I was considering getting a Hamilton watch someday. But I came across Invicta and found some really wonderful options. Invicta has a series called "Pro Diver." In the series are a half-dozen or so watches that look just like a Rolex Submariner. All of them are automatics and cost between $90 and $300.
I was opting for the Invicta model 8626 with a Japanese Miyota movement. But like my guitars, buying the inexpensive one would not satisfy me. The fact that the back display shows a plain movement and a plain rotor along with the fact that it's not a Swiss movement and it is non-hacking, with a mineral (scratchable) crystal would not have satisfied me. Fortunately I got a bonus from my boss and was able to get the $300 model 9937 with everything I want in a watch. I don't want a Rolex or anything costing close to that much. I hope that this watch will last me because the Sellita SW200 Swiss movement isn't proven yet and I'm not sure what Invicta means by calling the crystal "Flame-Fusion." I know what it means but the name is used as a trademark. Supposedly it is more durable than a straight sapphire crystal but it may only be a cost saver. Time will tell. The bottom line is that the watch looks great and already someone mistook it for a Rolex.
Why now? I don't know. Maybe I'm thinking back to when I was a kid with my Caravelle watch. Maybe it was discovering that I could afford a watch that looks like a Rolex. Maybe it's the marvel of the engineering. But I'm happy to own this watch and I will wear one from now on.
It has to do with the movement in the watch. When I was a child my father bought me a Caravelle watch. It was a manual mechanical meaning I had to wind it every day. Quartz battery-powered watches were just starting to enter the market. I didn't know anything but that I liked being able to tell the time anywhere I went. I loved my watch. As time went by I bought other watches. I thought I made the big time when I bought a Seiko in the service. The only thing I disliked was the battery. I didn't think that it mattered and after I wore out the Seiko I looked at cheap Swatches, Timex and Casio LCD watches. The complexity of the features made it hard for me to make any adjustments without an instruction book. I just didn't like the watch anymore.
But that was before I realized that my nature as a curious engineer realized while reading the SkyMall ad for the Stauer Meisterzeit watch that the mechanics behind a self-winding watch is fascinating. Springs, gears, levers - I wanted a marvel of old-world technology on my wrist. And that Stauer didn't let me down. The watch has an exhibition back that shows the weighted rotor that moves 360 degrees to wind the watch anytime my arm moves. Now the ad talked about the first patent for the modern automatic in 1923 and how this watch mimicked that first automatic. I googled and wikied for all the information I could find regarding the technology. I discovered that the Chinese movement was not a replica of the bumper automatic but rather the Rolex-patented in 1930, full-rotating automatic movements that are in all automatics today. I also discovered what a hacking watch is. The $100 watch could hack - meaning the second hand stops when the crown is pulled out to adjust the time. That allows the watch to synchronize to another time source.
I didn't expect much accuracy with this watch because an electric signal from a quartz crystal is more accurate than a spring, a gear and a lever. For the first few weeks the watch was off by two minutes a week. But amazingly, it got more accurate as time went by and now it is off by a dozen seconds or so a week. Seeing the balance-wheel move through the exhibition back was another love of mine. This was brought even further by blogs displaying hand-made watches that were designed to show all of the mechanics of that watch. In particular are the Tourbillon movements. Those are found in watches that generally sell for more than $20,000.
This Stauer has a sweeping second hand. Just to show my ignorance, I was taught that a person could spot a fake Rolex watch by looking at the second hand. The fake ones I saw had the kind of second hand that clicks every second. Now I know that it has to do with quartz movements - all automatic mechanical movements have sweeping hands. The Chinese-movement in my Stauer could be in a Rolex-copy and I would be fooled. Never-the-less I still view the sweeping hand a sign of luxury - at any price.
I love the Stauer watch and recommend it to those with a low budget but I needed to move on to what I hope to be my final watch. My friend Larry wears a Rolex. It's not that he could afford one as much as it is that he always wanted one. I can't say the same so it's smart that my wife has no intention of getting me one. I would not appreciate it. But I do appreciate having a Swiss-made automatic movement on a nicer watch. I was considering getting a Hamilton watch someday. But I came across Invicta and found some really wonderful options. Invicta has a series called "Pro Diver." In the series are a half-dozen or so watches that look just like a Rolex Submariner. All of them are automatics and cost between $90 and $300.
I was opting for the Invicta model 8626 with a Japanese Miyota movement. But like my guitars, buying the inexpensive one would not satisfy me. The fact that the back display shows a plain movement and a plain rotor along with the fact that it's not a Swiss movement and it is non-hacking, with a mineral (scratchable) crystal would not have satisfied me. Fortunately I got a bonus from my boss and was able to get the $300 model 9937 with everything I want in a watch. I don't want a Rolex or anything costing close to that much. I hope that this watch will last me because the Sellita SW200 Swiss movement isn't proven yet and I'm not sure what Invicta means by calling the crystal "Flame-Fusion." I know what it means but the name is used as a trademark. Supposedly it is more durable than a straight sapphire crystal but it may only be a cost saver. Time will tell. The bottom line is that the watch looks great and already someone mistook it for a Rolex.
Why now? I don't know. Maybe I'm thinking back to when I was a kid with my Caravelle watch. Maybe it was discovering that I could afford a watch that looks like a Rolex. Maybe it's the marvel of the engineering. But I'm happy to own this watch and I will wear one from now on.
Sunday, January 29, 2012
Portrait of My Cameras
I wanted to get a picture of all of my cameras. Since I was a kid I had cameras. I recall having a plastic camera with a fixed lens that shot 127 roll film (for remembering this detail I thank my dad.) When I was a pre-teen I was allowed to shoot picture with my dad's Mamiya C330 Twin Lens Reflex. My high school graduation present was a Minolta SRT-201, all black from Ritz Camera (In Wilmington Delaware in 1977, Ritz was the big camera store downtown.) I took that camera with me into the Army where the light meter broke. I sold it and bought one of my favorite cameras, a Yashica Electro 35 GSN.
Throughout my adult life I owned a Minolta Maxxum 7000, Pentax K1000, various point-and-shoot 35mm and digital, a Yashica (FX-7?), Contax RTS II, Yashica Mat-124G, Mamiya C330, Nikon F, Soviet-era Lubitel 166B, Nikon D50, Minox EC, Canon EOS 60D and HTC Inspire 4G (okay, the last one is a cellphone.) Today I have many of these cameras. I have my third Electro 35, a GS model (I love these cameras) plus six other cameras for my portrait. I used my cellphone to take the picture with a program called Night Camera. Night Camera brackets three shots to make the final picture and unlike a good DSLR, there is a major lag between shots.
I couldn't hold the camera steady enough to get a good alignment with the shots (my Canon 60D has a nice grip and a much better weight and bracketing three shots hand-held is no problem.) I needed to brace the phone in order to get the picture.
So first, here's the picture:
Now here's my cellphone on my tripod:
I used a clamp made by Cullman that I purchased in the 80s to mount lights to my tripod. This provided the perfect stillness for the three shots that resulted in the final image. I'm not sure but clamps like this one should still be available to mount on your tripod.
Throughout my adult life I owned a Minolta Maxxum 7000, Pentax K1000, various point-and-shoot 35mm and digital, a Yashica (FX-7?), Contax RTS II, Yashica Mat-124G, Mamiya C330, Nikon F, Soviet-era Lubitel 166B, Nikon D50, Minox EC, Canon EOS 60D and HTC Inspire 4G (okay, the last one is a cellphone.) Today I have many of these cameras. I have my third Electro 35, a GS model (I love these cameras) plus six other cameras for my portrait. I used my cellphone to take the picture with a program called Night Camera. Night Camera brackets three shots to make the final picture and unlike a good DSLR, there is a major lag between shots.
I couldn't hold the camera steady enough to get a good alignment with the shots (my Canon 60D has a nice grip and a much better weight and bracketing three shots hand-held is no problem.) I needed to brace the phone in order to get the picture.
So first, here's the picture:
Now here's my cellphone on my tripod:
I used a clamp made by Cullman that I purchased in the 80s to mount lights to my tripod. This provided the perfect stillness for the three shots that resulted in the final image. I'm not sure but clamps like this one should still be available to mount on your tripod.
Sunday, January 22, 2012
Use HDR Without Making It Look Like It
Okay digital photographers, have you produced HDR (High Dynamic Range) photos? When I first saw HDR back around 2006, I thought of how wonderful the images were but I didn't want my images to necessarily look like a 'HDR image.' Today I was going over photos I shot on my trip to Las Vegas with my wife in September. I came across a photo I shot of the Beverly Hills City Hall on a day trip we took to California.
To get the perfect exposure of City Hall I lost a lot of detail of the trees. The old days of making prints meant I would have to dodge and burn to get more detail and film didn't necessarily capture the detail in underexposed sections. Digital sensors do capture details in under or overexposed sections better making dodging and burning details produce better results. But that's still a pain in the butt to me. Another method would have been to shoot a series of bracketed shots and mask sections to blend together the different sections where the details show. That's exactly what HDR software does - bracket a high contrast image and it merges them together.
But I only shot this image one time. No problem. I used Nik Software's HDR Efex Pro software and going through a series of preset samples I found the image that gave me all the detail in one image.
As you can see it did so without making it look like a 'HDR Image.' The only problem I had with the final image was that the added detail brought out a lot of chromatic noise. I didn't save the noisy example. I recommend using commercial noise rection software to eliminate as much noise as possible. I used Nik Software's Dfine 2.0 to produce this almost noise-free final image.
On occasion, making HDR images with bright colors and surreal contrast work very well. But don't overlook HDR software to correct shooting images in high contrast situations.
To get the perfect exposure of City Hall I lost a lot of detail of the trees. The old days of making prints meant I would have to dodge and burn to get more detail and film didn't necessarily capture the detail in underexposed sections. Digital sensors do capture details in under or overexposed sections better making dodging and burning details produce better results. But that's still a pain in the butt to me. Another method would have been to shoot a series of bracketed shots and mask sections to blend together the different sections where the details show. That's exactly what HDR software does - bracket a high contrast image and it merges them together.
But I only shot this image one time. No problem. I used Nik Software's HDR Efex Pro software and going through a series of preset samples I found the image that gave me all the detail in one image.
As you can see it did so without making it look like a 'HDR Image.' The only problem I had with the final image was that the added detail brought out a lot of chromatic noise. I didn't save the noisy example. I recommend using commercial noise rection software to eliminate as much noise as possible. I used Nik Software's Dfine 2.0 to produce this almost noise-free final image.
On occasion, making HDR images with bright colors and surreal contrast work very well. But don't overlook HDR software to correct shooting images in high contrast situations.
Saturday, December 17, 2011
I am testing the posting of my images. I have no desire to write political comments anymore but that could change. I would rather be a photographer and show the beauty of life whether still or moving, whether breathing or not, whether man-made or not (everything's natural or it wouldn't exist.) I took this photo in October. More to come soon...
Monday, October 10, 2011
Dart : Structured web programming
Dart is officially released (but limited.) I've started looking at it so I won't comment on its structure but I think it will be real easy for Java programmers to pick up.
Dart : Structured web programming:
'via Blog this'
Dart : Structured web programming:
'via Blog this'
Thursday, October 6, 2011
Steve Jobs
Steve Jobs was one of the most important people in my life as well as many others. His business partnership with Steve Wozniak moved a cadre of niche products to the forefront of the computer industry by offering something better than the others (at the time.) Later, his return to run that same company made it bigger than its rival competitor (Microsoft) and number two in the country.
My first computer was an Apple II and it was vital in getting me to where I am today. I wrote machine-level code in order to understand the inner workings of a CPU and how it interfaced with memory and other devices. Although the memory-mapped I/O method was completely taken over by Intel's I/O approach, the understanding remained. The Apple II helped me realize that I could make a machine do what it wanted it to do. I had abandoned Apple after I bought an Apple IIe but now I own a Mac and an iPod. Jobs made Apple produce products that mattered to people and did so without stealing ideas.
When Jobs said he'd step down if he could not run the company I knew his days were numbered. I still was surprised to see the news last night. It shows how quickly cancer can cause someone to go downhill quickly. Tuesday's big announcement of the iPhone 4s was quite lame compared to past announcements. Had I known that Jobs was going to pass away the next day I would have seen the announcement in a different light. Tim Cook did a good job considering the circumstances.
I wish the company continued success and I thank Steve Jobs for the job I have now.
My first computer was an Apple II and it was vital in getting me to where I am today. I wrote machine-level code in order to understand the inner workings of a CPU and how it interfaced with memory and other devices. Although the memory-mapped I/O method was completely taken over by Intel's I/O approach, the understanding remained. The Apple II helped me realize that I could make a machine do what it wanted it to do. I had abandoned Apple after I bought an Apple IIe but now I own a Mac and an iPod. Jobs made Apple produce products that mattered to people and did so without stealing ideas.
When Jobs said he'd step down if he could not run the company I knew his days were numbered. I still was surprised to see the news last night. It shows how quickly cancer can cause someone to go downhill quickly. Tuesday's big announcement of the iPhone 4s was quite lame compared to past announcements. Had I known that Jobs was going to pass away the next day I would have seen the announcement in a different light. Tim Cook did a good job considering the circumstances.
I wish the company continued success and I thank Steve Jobs for the job I have now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)