Question:
Hi All Just back from Kilimanjaro (Rongai Route) and Tarangire Conservation Area. Had a brilliant time, and can recommend the Treetops lodge in Tarangire for those who like a bit of peace and quiet! If anyone’s interested, I’ve put up a load of photos at www.tomalin.org/charles/tanzania Enjoy Charles — www.wildviews.com Natural History Photography
Response:
>Hi All >Just back from Kilimanjaro (Rongai Route) and Tarangire Conservation Area. >Had a brilliant time, and can recommend the Treetops lodge in Tarangire for >those who like a bit of peace and quiet! >If anyone’s interested, I’ve put up a load of photos at >www.tomalin.org/charles/tanzania >Enjoy >Charles
Charles, What wonderful photos! You`ve done it again! I`m not going up Kili but seeing it is certainly an experience not to be forgotten. I like the look of the Treetops Lodge. I always loved baobabs. I shall put your photos in my favourites again. Well done and thanks for sharing them with us. Pat — Pat Anderson
Response:
>If anyone’s interested, I’ve put up a load of photos at >www.tomalin.org/charles/tanzania
Charles, thanks, very good photographs! Hans-Georg — No mail, please.
Response:
Thanks for your comments Pat and Hans-Georg. I try! As I’ve just ‘gone digital’ this year (these are my first serious efforts) I confess to taking an awful lot of shots on the basis that it costs nothing extra. The ones on the tomalin.org pages have been filtered down from around 600 pictures… If anyone wants info on my experience with digital, drop me a line. I don’t want to take up space here as its a bit off-topic. Rgds Charles www.wildviews.com Natural History Photography —
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->If anyone’s interested, I’ve put up a load of photos at >www.tomalin.org/charles/tanzania > Charles, > thanks, very good photographs! > Hans-Georg > — > No mail, please.
Response:
> If anyone wants info on my experience with digital, drop me a line. > I don’t want to take up space here as its a bit off-topic.
According to the charter: "Rec.travel.africa shall be open for discussion about all facets of travel on the continent. Primarily topics like how-to-get there, how-to-get-around, accomodation, wildlife, and other travel related issues are the aim of this group. Even though the main topic and dominant subject feature is travel, discussion may also include topics such as culture, archaeology, architecture, ethnology, photography, history, geology, politics, diving, mountain climbing, arts, music, cuisine, ecology, ornithology, etc." So, since I also loved your pix, post away…
Liz — Virtual Liz at http://www.v-liz.co.uk Kenya; Tanzania; India; Seychelles New Aug ‘03: Namibia "I speak of Africa and golden joys"
Response:
>Thanks for your comments Pat and Hans-Georg. >I try! >As I’ve just ‘gone digital’ this year (these are my first serious efforts)
Charles, me too. >I confess to taking an awful lot of shots on the basis that it costs nothing >extra. The ones on the tomalin.org pages have been filtered down from around >600 pictures…
It does cost something extra. It costs you your audience. Got to be selective, otherwise nobody will want to keep looking at your many photos. I think you did that very well. Exactly because photography is now so cheap and easy, we get a flood of poor photos. If you want yours to be seen, you have to make photos that stick out. Which isn’t actually that difficult, because most people are not ambitious and merely take photos because it’s fun to take them and because they want to catch and remember the moment. Once you decide to take photos for a general audience, there’s your ambition. Hans-Georg (http://www.michna.com/kenya2003/) — No mail, please.
Response:
Hi Nice pictures
I also came back recently from my trip but it seems like you had a bit better weather than me. On your page you say "An amazing experience (and a bit of hard work)". Just "a bit of hard work"? I found it to be harder than expected but I did reach the top. Well, I have posted my pictures on www.gardkarlsen.com Regards Gard
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Hi All > Just back from Kilimanjaro (Rongai Route) and Tarangire Conservation Area. > Had a brilliant time, and can recommend the Treetops lodge in Tarangire for > those who like a bit of peace and quiet! > If anyone’s interested, I’ve put up a load of photos at > www.tomalin.org/charles/tanzania > Enjoy > Charles > — > www.wildviews.com > Natural History Photography
Response:
Ah well I confess I was in training for 6 months before going! (At my age I wasn’t leaving anything to chance). Yes the weather was very good. On the morning after we got back to Marangu, it rained for the first time. I suspect this would have made our route somewhat harder as it was *very* dusty, and so would have been turned to mud. I was very impressed with the detail and layout of your report. I don’t have the time unfortunately (or sufficient access to the PC -wife and 2 children to support
) to do that amount of work. I would recommend your site to anyone else headnig for ‘the big hill’ as a very useful source of info. Also, I had to laugh at your wife’s comment "just do it.just leave me out of it" – almost exactly what my wife said…. Rgds Charles — www.wildviews.com Natural History Photography —
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Hi > Nice pictures
I also came back recently from my trip but it seems like > you had a bit better weather than me. On your page you say "An amazing > experience (and a bit of hard work)". Just "a bit of hard work"? I found it > to be harder than expected but I did reach the top. Well, I have posted my > pictures on www.gardkarlsen.com > Regards > Gard > Hi All > Just back from Kilimanjaro (Rongai Route) and Tarangire Conservation Area. > Had a brilliant time, and can recommend the Treetops lodge in Tarangire > for > those who like a bit of peace and quiet! > If anyone’s interested, I’ve put up a load of photos at > www.tomalin.org/charles/tanzania > Enjoy > Charles > — > www.wildviews.com > Natural History Photography
Response:
Ah my point was that I don’t have to worry about the film costs. The problem with the audience has always been there, and I’ve always taken a lot more shots than I would use – it just used to cost more. I used to reckon on around 6 good shots per roll. Easy rule, if you take two shots each time (different composition, focus etc), half of the time the second shot will be better, so you immediately improve half your images – think about it… Take three shots, and two thirds of your images will be better.. My last trip out there was for a week on safari and a week in Zanzibar. I took 40 rolls (1400 shots), which cost me UKP150 to process (special deal) plus the film cost, and I had to keep rewinding films and reloading while shooting. What I love with digital is not only the cost reduction bit, but also I can dump them onto the PC and filter down to the useful 15% within a day or so. I’ve also found I can get prints done (and only of the ones I want…) for 20p for 7×5s, online; so I don’t even have to go down to the processing lab any more!! Fantastic. The prints I get are as good as my old negative based ones, and of course I can crop, recolour etc before submitting if I want to. No contest – digital it is for me. Incidentally I used two cameras – a Nikon D100 SLR, mostly for Safari; and a Canon Sureshot S50 (compact) mainly for Kili. I was amazed that the quality of the compact shots was as good as the SLR (5Mps versus 6Mps). The SLR now sits on a shelf, unless I need the big lens, or the macro. (oh yes, and my 300mm is now effectively a 420mm on the digital as well). Ah – happy man. Charles — www.wildviews.com Natural History Photography
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Thanks for your comments Pat and Hans-Georg. >I try! >As I’ve just ‘gone digital’ this year (these are my first serious efforts) > Charles, > me too. >I confess to taking an awful lot of shots on the basis that it costs nothing >extra. The ones on the tomalin.org pages have been filtered down from around >600 pictures… > It does cost something extra. It costs you your audience. Got to > be selective, otherwise nobody will want to keep looking at your > many photos. I think you did that very well. > Exactly because photography is now so cheap and easy, we get a > flood of poor photos. If you want yours to be seen, you have to > make photos that stick out. Which isn’t actually that difficult, > because most people are not ambitious and merely take photos > because it’s fun to take them and because they want to catch and > remember the moment. Once you decide to take photos for a > general audience, there’s your ambition. > Hans-Georg (http://www.michna.com/kenya2003/) > — > No mail, please.
Response:
>Ah my point was that I don’t have to worry about the film costs. >The problem with the audience has always been there, and I’ve always taken a >lot more shots than I would use – it just used to cost more. I used to >reckon on around 6 good shots per roll. >Easy rule, if you take two shots each time (different composition, focus >etc), half of the time the second shot will be better, so you immediately >improve half your images – think about it… Take three shots, and two >thirds of your images will be better..
Charles, that’s certainly true for the blind photographer. But it isn’t so for me. I can see the photo already in the viewfinder, so I usually take a first shot quickly, then wait for a better one. Surprisingly often, in the vast majority of all photos, the first remains the best, and quite often the second photo doesn’t get taken at all, because the situation deteriorates. There are exceptions, of course. When there is a lot of movement, I sometimes shoot away to later find the exceptional one, but such cases aren’t all that frequent. Very occasionally I activate the rapid-fire function on my camera. Then there’s the movie shot that’s never been there with film. I agree though that it is now cheaper to take some extra photos. But I still don’t find that I take more than I took with film. In fact I didn’t take all that many. I have become selective before I went digital. Hans-Georg http://www.michna.com/kenya2003/ — No mail, please.
Response:
> Ah well I confess I was in training for 6 months before going! > (At my age I wasn’t leaving anything to chance).
Charles, I’d be interested to hear about your training regime: reasons why follow. I’ve visited Tanzania many times on business since 1996 but apart from a long weekend in the Selous (highly recommended!), most of my experience of the country has involved the inside of offices in Dar and Arusha, with the odd brief trip to Mwanza and a couple of other places. I’ve flown over Kilimanjaro on many occasions (including one flight with Swissair where the pilot flew around most of the mountain and we had some fantastic views) but have never set foot on it. As I’m planning to go in two years time to celebrate my half century. Many thanks for the excellent photos! Andrew
Response:
I can see the photo already in the viewfinder, so I > usually take a first shot quickly, then wait for a better one. > Surprisingly often, in the vast majority of all photos, the > first remains the best, and quite often the second photo doesn’t > get taken at all, because the situation deteriorates.
Good for you! I’m not selective enough, so I to tend to fire off a shot fairly quickly, especially if it’s a species which is new to me, then wait to see if I can get closer or something better happens, and often I do/it does. I do waste a lot of film, though, so your way is no doubt best. The thing is, I do different things with my slides. If I’m doing talks to birding/wildlife groups, I show a mostly different set of slides than if I’m talking to camera clubs. Bird groups just like to see nice birds, and can forgive less than perfect compositions if the bird is nice or interesting and you can talk a lot about it…..(I can usually talk for Scotland…) Liz — Virtual Liz at http://www.v-liz.co.uk Kenya; Tanzania; India; Seychelles New Aug ‘03: Namibia "I speak of Africa and golden joys"
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > I can see the photo already in the viewfinder, so I > usually take a first shot quickly, then wait for a better one. > Surprisingly often, in the vast majority of all photos, the > first remains the best, and quite often the second photo doesn’t > get taken at all, because the situation deteriorates. >Good for you! >I’m not selective enough, so I to tend to fire off a shot fairly quickly, >especially if it’s a species which is new to me, then wait to see if I can >get closer or something better happens, and often I do/it does. I do waste a >lot of film, though, so your way is no doubt best. >The thing is, I do different things with my slides. >If I’m doing talks to birding/wildlife groups, I show a mostly different set >of slides than if I’m talking to camera clubs. >Bird groups just like to see nice birds, and can forgive less than perfect >compositions if the bird is nice or interesting and you can talk a lot about >it…..(I can usually talk for Scotland…)
Liz, if you need a documentary photo of a rare bird, then it’s even more important to take one shot immediately, before even thinking. The reason is, of course, that the next second the bird may be gone. And a bad photo is sometimes better than no photo at all (although bad photographs always tire the audience, so you have to be careful here). On the other hand, it is one of the abilities of the professional photographer to take one shot, and that one is just correct in all aspects. It is perhaps a good idea for us amateurs to strive for this as well, as it sharpens our photographic abilities and draws our attention to the factors that tend to be forgotten by laymen. The amateur who learns to take each picture technically correctly and with the right framing will make better photos. I’ll ramble on a bit, because this may give some newcomers some ideas about how to improve their photos. To give one example, one of the most prevalent amateur errors is to have the main motive in the center of the photo, rather than the correct frame selected. In other words, when he takes a photo of a cat, the head or nose will be in the middle, one half of the photo will show empty background, and part of the cat may be cut off (which is not always bad, by the way), while the more learned photographer will have the frame around the cat. Another typical amateur mistake is the desire to have everything on the picture, while a well-chosen detail may yield a much better photo. I sometimes ponder this strange first shot phenomenon. (Why is the first shot so often the best?) One possible explanation is that you drive around or wait for a photo opportunity, and when you spot one, it is exactly because the situation is already better than the many others before where you didn’t pull the camera. So there’s a lot of ways for this situation to deteriorate, but it is rare for such a situation to improve on its own. I also often spot a photo while driving. Then I stop and find that I have to actually reverse and go back to the point where I spotted it, because it looks best from there. This is why you need to have to develop a photo culture with your driver when you don’t drive yourself. A good driver geared to supporting his clients’ photography should move the car even by a few feet if desired. When I drive and have photographing passengers, I often tell them to shout "stop" when they spot a photo opportunity. This reduces the problem that somebody in the car does spot one, but doesn’t dare to ask to halt the car or even go back. But I find, that, often enough when this is done, the other passengers also pull out their cameras and thus prove that it was worth the effort. Hans-Georg — No mail, please.
Response:
Hi I still tend to go for the second (or third) shot of a scene . One reason is to change the composition: as Hans-Georg says – it is often better put the key focal point off centre, and when pressed for time (e.g. mammal on the move, bird fidgeting etc) pausing to get it ‘right first tmie’ may result in a good photo of the animal just leaving the frame. Having got one or two shots ‘in the can’ I also make sure I get a selection of vertical and horizontal compositions. With a good view / subject /composition I will happily take 5 or 6 shots over a couple of minutes (don’t forget the light changes as well). This is not a blunderbus approach – rather I try for 6 excellent pictures. Inevitably one or two will be better in some detail. One of the most common points I edit for is catchlights in the eye. If a bird flicks its head round just right, you can get that magical point of light which brings the whole thing to life. Similarly, active large mammals have a tendency to move their heads around at the critical moment. With digital I don’t have to worry about the costs anymore, or the time to switch films/cameras every 36 shots. Cheers Charles www.wildviews.com Natural History Photography
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I can see the photo already in the viewfinder, so I >> usually take a first shot quickly, then wait for a better one. >> Surprisingly often, in the vast majority of all photos, the >> first remains the best, and quite often the second photo doesn’t >> get taken at all, because the situation deteriorates. >Good for you! >I’m not selective enough, so I to tend to fire off a shot fairly quickly, >especially if it’s a species which is new to me, then wait to see if I can >get closer or something better happens, and often I do/it does. I do waste a >lot of film, though, so your way is no doubt best. >The thing is, I do different things with my slides. >If I’m doing talks to birding/wildlife groups, I show a mostly different set >of slides than if I’m talking to camera clubs. >Bird groups just like to see nice birds, and can forgive less than perfect >compositions if the bird is nice or interesting and you can talk a lot about >it…..(I can usually talk for Scotland…) > Liz, > if you need a documentary photo of a rare bird, then it’s even > more important to take one shot immediately, before even > thinking. The reason is, of course, that the next second the > bird may be gone. And a bad photo is sometimes better than no > photo at all (although bad photographs always tire the audience, > so you have to be careful here). > On the other hand, it is one of the abilities of the > professional photographer to take one shot, and that one is just > correct in all aspects. It is perhaps a good idea for us > amateurs to strive for this as well, as it sharpens our > photographic abilities and draws our attention to the factors > that tend to be forgotten by laymen. The amateur who learns to > take each picture technically correctly and with the right > framing will make better photos. I’ll ramble on a bit, because > this may give some newcomers some ideas about how to improve > their photos. > To give one example, one of the most prevalent amateur errors is > to have the main motive in the center of the photo, rather than > the correct frame selected. In other words, when he takes a > photo of a cat, the head or nose will be in the middle, one half > of the photo will show empty background, and part of the cat may > be cut off (which is not always bad, by the way), while the more > learned photographer will have the frame around the cat. Another > typical amateur mistake is the desire to have everything on the > picture, while a well-chosen detail may yield a much better > photo. > I sometimes ponder this strange first shot phenomenon. (Why is > the first shot so often the best?) One possible explanation is > that you drive around or wait for a photo opportunity, and when > you spot one, it is exactly because the situation is already > better than the many others before where you didn’t pull the > camera. So there’s a lot of ways for this situation to > deteriorate, but it is rare for such a situation to improve on > its own. > I also often spot a photo while driving. Then I stop and find > that I have to actually reverse and go back to the point where I > spotted it, because it looks best from there. This is why you > need to have to develop a photo culture with your driver when > you don’t drive yourself. A good driver geared to supporting his > clients’ photography should move the car even by a few feet if > desired. > When I drive and have photographing passengers, I often tell > them to shout "stop" when they spot a photo opportunity. This > reduces the problem that somebody in the car does spot one, but > doesn’t dare to ask to halt the car or even go back. But I find, > that, often enough when this is done, the other passengers also > pull out their cameras and thus prove that it was worth the > effort. > Hans-Georg > — > No mail, please.
Response:
Hi Andrew I guess there are a few things I did – See the doctor a year before you go for a check-up, e.g. blood pressure and anything else he hasn’t told you
Think about your weight. I decided I needed to lose 15lbs to get to my ‘ideal weight’, and I didn’t want to carry the extra weight up the hill…. From there I set a target weight for each month for the six months leading up to the climb. Don’t overdo the weightloss, as you need a bit of spare stored energy (maybe 3-4 lbs worth) before you start. Its surprising how much you burn off despite being well fed on the trek. Also don’t try to be losing weight up until the last minute. Aim for your target weight at least 4 weeks before you go to let your body settle into it. For actual training I went for hard graft circuit training (an hour) once a week for 5 months, and twice a week for the last 4 weeks. This was really tought o start with, but did get eaasier after 3-4 weeks. I also started off taking a walk every Sunday morning, with a trip to the Peak District once a month ( I live in Bedford which is real flat…). I increased the walks gradually from 8-10 miles to around 15 miles each week; then switched to running 5 miles every Sunday for the last 6 weeks. I also took the last week off completely (to allow a little recovery and avoid late injuries). I actually broke my toe 2-3 months in, which meant I had to skip 4-6 weeks completely, but it didn’t affect me in the end. The last tip (I got from someone else) was to bulk up on Carbohydrates during the last week. Athletes do this before a big race, as it provides easily accessed energy for the body. Plenty of pasta and rice etc. I probably overdid it really, but I felt great when I got to the top (not even a headache – thanks to Diamox?), whereas some of the others (somewhat younger) were far more tired. I confess I’ve put half a stone back on since getting back four weeks ago, but who cares now!! If anyone wants more info (I am not an expert here, but willing to share my experience) – drop me a line…. Just lose the "nospamspam" bit from the email. Charles www.wildviews.com Natural History Photography
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Ah well I confess I was in training for 6 months before going! > (At my age I wasn’t leaving anything to chance). > Charles, > I’d be interested to hear about your training regime: reasons why follow. > I’ve visited Tanzania many times on business since 1996 but apart from a > long weekend in the Selous (highly recommended!), most of my experience of > the country has involved the inside of offices in Dar and Arusha, with the > odd brief trip to Mwanza and a couple of other places. I’ve flown over > Kilimanjaro on many occasions (including one flight with Swissair where the > pilot flew around most of the mountain and we had some fantastic views) but > have never set foot on it. As I’m planning to go in two years time to > celebrate my half century. > Many thanks for the excellent photos! > Andrew
Response:
>One of the most common points I edit for is catchlights in the eye. If a >bird flicks its head round just right, you can get that magical point of >light which brings the whole thing to life.
Charles, ever thought of photoshopping them in?
Hans-Georg — No mail, please.
Response:
> >One of the most common points I edit for is catchlights in the eye. If a >bird flicks its head round just right, you can get that magical point of >light which brings the whole thing to life. > Charles, > ever thought of photoshopping them in?
<hollow laugh> One of my slides which is doing quite well in comps has a bird feeding its chick and both have highlights. At one comp, one of the other entrants said, "Och, Liz attacked her slide with a pin". Such a thought had *never* occurred to me, but apparently it’s an old trick. Liz — Virtual Liz at http://www.v-liz.co.uk "Okay, who put a ’stop payment’ on my reliaty check"
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> >One of the most common points I edit for is catchlights in the eye. If a > >bird flicks its head round just right, you can get that magical point of > >light which brings the whole thing to life. > ever thought of photoshopping them in?
><hollow laugh> >One of my slides which is doing quite well in comps has a bird feeding its >chick and both have highlights. >At one comp, one of the other entrants said, "Och, Liz attacked her slide >with a pin". >Such a thought had *never* occurred to me, but apparently it’s an old trick.
Liz, I once took a slide of a vulture on a tree from the side. The picture looked good, but the vulture’s face was rather dark, and the eyes were invisible. So I did just that, poked into the vulture’s eye with a needle. The result was a tad more than I wanted. The vulture now has a cyan-colored glowing eye that keeps surprising the audience no end.
I also have photos of dik-diks and several other animals with glowing eyes, but those were caused by the flash that I used in some situations, occasionally even in bright sunlight. These pictures look eerie. Hans-Georg — No mail, please.
Response: