Tag Archives: Quality

Telling the story. Reading the story.


I sit in an empty room.  The floor is grey, the walls are the same grey, and the ceiling is. . . invisible. It’s not really there.  The walls sort of keep rising until they fade into a fog that absorbs them.  This is either purgatory or stasis–God knows I’m not producing anything good these days.  The stats this year prove it.

———————————————

A San Francisco cable car holds 60 people. This blog was viewed about 430 times in 2014. If it were a cable car, it would take about 7 trips to carry that many people.

There were 49 pictures uploaded, taking up a total of 192 MB. That’s about 4 pictures per month.

The busiest day of the year was March 27th with 33 views. The most popular post that day was Portrait Portfolio.

———————————————

Compared to my two previous years (below), these stats indicate a flat line that seems to point right at my camera.  That’s mostly why I have decided to not purchase a new lens–what would I do with it, anyway?

This is not sadness or depression–it is a realization.  A reflection.  Knowledge.

All that now remains is acceptance.

Maybe recovery.  Can I climb out of this hole?

2014:    430 hits, 25 posts, 49 photos uploaded, 33 on busiest day.  Do I exist?
2013: 6,700 hits, 66 posts, 777 photos uploaded, 1,031 on busiest day.
2012: 2,100 hits, 72 posts, 476 photos uploaded, 149 on busiest day.

 

 

———————————————

Previous report details:

I received my annual report from WordPress early this morning. Because it seems I’m in a deep, deep slump, I wasn’t too excited about checking my numbers.  For anyone who wants to leave now because of the lack of photos, here’s the “bottom line up front”:

This year: 6,700 hits, 66 posts, 777 photos uploaded, 1,031 on busiest day.
Last year: 2,100 hits, 72 posts, 476 photos uploaded, 149 on busiest day.
My Flickr photo stream now has 26,630 visits. I wish there was a way to annualize the data on Flickr!

I’ll sit on this change for now.  What does it mean?  Have I traded quality for quantity?  Can I reproduce this “trend” next year?

From WordPress (thank you, WordPress, for the creative feedback!):

Previous year (2013):

Crunchy numbers

A New York City subway train holds 1,200 people. This blog was viewed about 6,700 times in 2013. If it were a NYC subway train, it would take about 6 trips to carry that many people.

In 2013, there were 66 new posts, growing the total archive of this blog to 138 posts. There were 777 pictures uploaded, taking up a total of 1 GB. That’s about 2 pictures per day.

The busiest day of the year was January 31st with 1,013 views.

Interesting. But how does that compare to last year?

Last year (2012):

Crunchy numbers

600 people reached the top of Mt. Everest in 2012. This blog got about 2,100 views in 2012. If every person who reached the top of Mt. Everest viewed this blog, it would have taken 4 years to get that many views.

In 2012, there were 72 new posts, growing the total archive of this blog to 74 posts. There were 476 pictures uploaded, taking up a total of 621 MB. That’s about a picture per day.

The busiest day of the year was December 8th with 149 views.

Advertisements

Puzzled by Smartphone Cameras Supremacy within Astrophotography


My D300 cannot produce a photo this sharp when hooked up to my Bausch & Lomb 1200mm reflector.  Through the eyepiece, the moon is crystal clear.  Sharp as a razor.  But I struggle to get the same clarity when the Nikon’s hooked up to the telescope.

One night I tried placing my Samsung Galaxy S4’s camera to the eyepiece to see whether I could get a WYSIWYG photo.  BAM!  Success.  But while it works fine on the Moon, I could not get the Samsung Galaxy to focus or capture the bands of Jupiter (that I could make out with my eye).  So as long as the image is big and bright, the Sammy captures it spectacularly!  The best thing about this setup is that once I stabilize the image in the eyepiece, I can capture exactly what I see with the 13MP camera.  The worst thing about it is I need to carefully center the phone’s camera in the eyepiece and pay careful attention to the optimal distance to the eyepiece.

Nevertheless, it’s the best way I’ve found to produce NASA-quality images of the Moon (if this is, indeed).

Edited in GiMP for levels and color.

20140111_210422c