In Northwest Portlnd, Oregon the East-west streets were originally letters. A st, B st, C st, etc. They were renamed after people but they kept the first letter, so now its Ankeny, Burnside, Couch, Davis, Everett, Flanders, Gleason, Hoyt, Irving, Johnson... They get to have it both ways, and they could be renamed if there was a desire to do so without impeding the general purpose. (One of my joking tests to see if someone is a True Portlander is if they can get up to Marshall, Northrup, Overton, etc.)
I live in a section of Brooklyn (the "flat south section" per this fantastically detailed Wikipedia entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_lettered_Brooklyn_aven...) in which the avenues (which run east to west, like Bogotá's calles) are lettered. Some of them, mostly early in the alphabet, were named or renamed in this same way (Albemarle, Beverly, Cortelyou, Ditmas, and so on). The streets running north/south are numbered.
(Interestingly, Avenue Q was renamed Quentin Road to avoid confusion with Avenue O.)
Either way, lettered or named in alphabetical order, I appreciate the lettered/numbered combination. It's a good mix of character and practicality, and it sounds good when you say it out loud ("It's at E 14th and K"). The doubly numbered intersections of Queens always drive me nuts.
A final sidenote: some real estate developers in the early 20th century decided to rename sections of E 11th through 16th from Prospect Park South down through West Midwood to fancy-sounding anglicized names like Stratford, Westminster, Argyle, Rugby, and Marlborough (the SWARM backronym here is useful) so they could make more money selling homes on those streets. It worked. Yet another example of nefarious street naming...
When we moved to Portland about 7 years ago, our first apartment was in the Pearl District on Couch (asking someone to pronounce it correctly is another good Portlander test). I'm a huge fan of the alphabetic street names. It made it really easy to get around a new city. I know the system eventually breaks down when you hit the 27th street, but I still think it's great. Anyways, I'm back in Chicago now and memorizing street locations.
"It's called Megawatt charging because it delivers 1,000 kilowatts of electrical power at 1,000 volts, which is twice as powerful as the fastest chargers we have here in the United States."
I observed this in New England while living in a city with evenly distributed population. The polling locations were more abundant in the wealthier side of the city. This may not have been straight racism; there was no way for me to determine why this was the case. Looking at a map of median income and polling locations made it pretty obvious to me at least that polling location choice was biased.
It could be as simple as "wealthy areas get more county services." There are practical considerations when choosing polling places, like the availability of parking and enough space to accommodate a line, check-in tables, voting booths, and ideally separate entrance and exit doors. Public schools and county rec centers are go-to locations because the county (who administers the election) already owns them and they have the space needed. Churches are great too, but they require having an agreement with a private organization.
By New England I guess you just mean Boston and the Boston area right? I'm unaware of any other huge concentrations of African Americans in that region. Boston is well known for its racism, I actually had a friend from Boston when I was living in Vicksburg MS and they got along there much better than me.
This is a viewfinder camera with scale focus. Rangefinders have a complex mechanism to measure distance which would be beyond the scope of this project. In early Leica cameras, the rangefinder and view finder were separate mechanisms on the same camera, and were combined in the Leica M series in the 1950s.
Are you familiar with how you focus a rangefinder camera like a Leica?
You are NOT looking through the lens but a small viewfinder offset from the lens. The viewfinder is usually on the far left. Then there is another window a few inches away that are reflected at various angles by mirrors into the main viewfinder. When you focus the lens that angle of that mirror moves.
In an SLR or compact camera or iphone the camera sensor or viewfinder is seeing through the lens that is used for taking the picture. So you adjust the lens until you see with your eye that it is in focus and that's it.
With the rangefinder camera the viewfinder is ALWAYS in focus. So you use this secondary image (see the sheep in the first link) and when the 2 images overlap then you know the lens is now in focus.
This camera in the article does not seem to be an optical rangefinder that I described above. When you look through the viewinder everything will be in focus as it is not looking through the lens.
So how do you focus? Instead it uses LiDAR to measure the distance and display that within the viewfinder. It also displays the distance that the lens is currently focused at. Many lenses will have focus scales like this.
Here is the description from the camera's web site.
"LiDAR" range-finding with high accuracy and distance up to 12m
In-viewfinder display with
Light-meter with aperture range set by selected lens
Lens focus distance display, and LiDAR rangefinder distance display
Focus accuracy indicator
So I think you get 2 numbers, the lens focus distance, and the LiDAR distance and it is up to you to adjust the lens until the 2 numbers match. Or move closer or further away using your feet.
I was in a second floor bedroom in an old creaky wooden house for the "Spring Break Quake" in Salem, Oregon in 1993. The whole house rocked back and forth and I got out of bed to see if there had been an explosion. Its spooky how people expect things of relatively low probability to just be zero. I turned on a radio and the DJ had interrupted the song to explain that an earthquake had occurred. The Willamette valley has lots of brick buildings that aren't really prepared for what's going to happen.
Should we blame an old timey basic webpage for its lack of complexity or should we blame a modern browser for not accommodating the web in its most simple form?
There is a specification that says how it should be rendered. I definitely don't want every browser to decide how to render my webpage, that would just make development so much harder and complex.
I have a QoocamEgo and have found it pretty disappointing even at that price point. It takes about 30 seconds to start up, chews through battery quickly, and has poor autofocus. I set focus manually by guessing and then use "sport mode" (1/120second) otherwise it will use low shutter speeds which produce motion blur handheld. Also, even though it will shoot close up items, I've found that the offset is too great for most viewing scenarios. So, I would say composing images that include subjects 3m to infinity is about the best.
I walked by the Starbucks in my neighborood recently and there were about 30 customers inside sitting at long tables. Every single person was staring at an electronic device. Maybe that's how a public square works nowdays.
About a year ago, I had an opportunity to use an 8x10 field camera. This description is correct. I didn't have any film, so I loaded the film holder with paper and developed it under a safelight in the darkroom. This isn't a typical process though and film has very low ISO. I then contact printed through the paper. The resulting image wasn't particularly sharp. It was a fun exercise though, and I'd like to borrow the camera again. Using it is a very slow and formal process. The film is as one would expect, expensive.
Paper negatives are interesting, but yes even when you’ve got a subject that sits still long enough and the camera is on a really steady tripod the result will still be a lot less than critically sharp when printed because the paper diffuses any light passed through it. Cheaper than film, but but vastly sharper than paper, are wet plate collodion processes like anbrotypes and tintypes, though you’ll either have to make (or have made) a back appropriate for glass or metal as the substrate.
I photo/video lights from Neweer that use a Sony standard battery which may or may not be made by Sony. This seems to be because media creators already have these batteries/chargers. So maybe sometimes the market does give people what they want. It has to be enough to influence the puchasing decision.
reply