Photos

Chat and items of interest about Crete and Greece.
filippos
Posts: 5706
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 7:38 pm
Location: Kalyves
Contact:

Photos

Postby filippos » Mon Jun 20, 2016 10:46 am

A few new photos here.

Kilkis
Posts: 10624
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 3:58 pm
Location: Near Chania

Re: Photos

Postby Kilkis » Mon Jun 20, 2016 5:33 pm

Another example of fraud? I'm pretty sure the white and blue one on the right hand end of the line in 15/30 is a Lambretta? I think all the Vespas had a single sided front suspension on the right while the Lambretta had a dual front suspension. Also the Vespas all had very bulbous side panels while the Lambretta ones were flatter. It looks just like the Lambretta I rode in the mid 60s.

Warwick

filippos
Posts: 5706
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 7:38 pm
Location: Kalyves
Contact:

Re: Photos

Postby filippos » Mon Jun 20, 2016 11:32 pm

Well spotted, Warwick. There was indeed a lone Lambretta, I think a TV 175? The owner's girlfriend was riding his Vespa.

Eleni13
Posts: 486
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:13 am
Location: UK

Re: Photos

Postby Eleni13 » Tue Jun 21, 2016 6:43 am

I love the storm clouds over Drapanos and the frappé.

Mixos
Posts: 467
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 8:26 am
Location: North East Crete or S.W.England

Re: Photos

Postby Mixos » Tue Jun 21, 2016 10:11 am

Yes, I thought I was the only nerd who suspected it was a Lambretta, Warwick, but it was such a nerdish thought that I was too embarrassed to post! Thank you for making me feel a bit better for that. I was looking in vain for one of the old Vespa 90s that I rode in the late 1960s. It was a funny little machine that wobbled alarmingly in the slipstream of overtaking lorries, but it -- and I -- survived several scrapes and bumps and it still worked perfectly after being ridden through a garden fence by a friend of mine who thought he could perform wheelies on it. (He couldn't.) Nice pics filippos.

Kilkis
Posts: 10624
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 3:58 pm
Location: Near Chania

Re: Photos

Postby Kilkis » Tue Jun 21, 2016 11:27 am

Mine was the 125 cc version. I also survived a few scrapes but one came a bit too close. I came off on black ice on Woodhead pass around 6 am doing about 50 mph. One second you are riding along the next you are sliding along. No warning. Absolutely nothing you can do. Fortunately little damage to me or the bike apart from some scrapes. The road had a camber so I slid into the side rather than straight along. As I sat wondering what had happened a 30 ton arctic came past, also doing about 50 mph, with all wheels locked. The driver was completely rigid and sheet white. The possible consequences hit me much harder than the crash itself. When I got back on the bike I found I could no longer bank it into corners. My mind just wouldn't let me take the bike away from vertical. Every corner I had to slow down almost to walking pace and try to go round upright. I sold it immediately and didn't ride a bike again for 20 years.

Strangely it was coming to Crete on holiday that got me back on a bike again. We wanted to explore but wanted to be out in the fresh air, not cooped up in a car, and hiring a 250 cc Honda seemed to be the ideal solution. At first I thought my fear had not left me. I really struggled to get it round corners. Every corner was a fight. Fortunately I happened to glance in the mirror half way round a corner and discovered that my wife, who had also not been on a bike for 20 years was trying to stay upright. When I leaned the bike into the corner she was leaning the opposite way. Once I had convinced her that she had to stay upright relative to the bike not relative to gravity, i.e. if the bike leans then lean with it, everything got back to normal. For our 25th wedding anniversary we rode on a 600 cc Yamaha to Greece, i.e. Corfu, Cephalonia and the Peloponnese. Apart from the channel crossing and motorail to Nice we didn't book a thing in advance. Brilliant holiday.

Warwick

PS No shame in being a nerd.

peebee
Posts: 814
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2011 5:07 am
Location: Kalyves

Re: Photos

Postby peebee » Tue Jun 21, 2016 12:25 pm

In the UK, I owned a series of `superbikes' ranging from 600cc up to 1200cc, and leaning over in corners was normal.
Here however, I am still somewhat cautious, due to loose gravel, dusty or very shiny road surfaces, with the added unknown of whether or not Yannis is coming in the opposite direction, with his mobile in one hand and a frappe in the other.

Kookla
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 4:24 pm

Re: Photos

Postby Kookla » Tue Jun 21, 2016 12:32 pm

What a lovely story, Warwick... The bit about your wife, not your accident! I grew up with Norton's, BSAs, Triumphs etc. My father was not best pleased at me riding pillion. As I explained to him, my boyfriend was more concerned about the safety of his lovingly restored bike and therefore, unlikely I would come to harm. There was a tree in the middle of the road, which had Tarmac each side of it. The unwritten law was to see how close to the tree you could get. He forgot I was on the back and clipped my foot peg on the tree. I somersaulted in to the brambles, he got up and ran over to check the bike! True love, between him and the bike that is! There was also a time I fell asleep on the back... :roll:

Kilkis
Posts: 10624
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 3:58 pm
Location: Near Chania

Re: Photos

Postby Kilkis » Tue Jun 21, 2016 12:58 pm

Apologies to Filippos. I seem to have hijacked his thread. As always nice photos. Perhaps we should concentrate on that.

Warwick

johnincrete
Posts: 839
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 4:04 pm
Location: Chania

Re: Photos

Postby johnincrete » Wed Jun 22, 2016 7:19 am

To me, the brilliance of Phil's photos is that he saw what many of us do not see and he is quick enough to take the photo. It's like the artist who paints a landscape, not like a photo but with some part or with colours that seem impossible to the ordinary eye but correct in the whole.

I would like to know if Phil uses a camera with a film or a digital. I remember the young man who worked for a camera shop and who took photos in our church. He said that digital would never be as good as film but, eventually, he turned up with a new very expensive digital camera and was "converted".

Eleni13
Posts: 486
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:13 am
Location: UK

Re: Photos

Postby Eleni13 » Wed Jun 22, 2016 9:06 am

I went for an interview once where one of the panel asked me if I thought that digital would ever take over from film. I said I thought it was only a matter of time until the technology was good enough. All three were horrified.
I only miss the beautiful, unmatchable Kodachrome. Not the hours sent in darkrooms smelling of acid.

filippos
Posts: 5706
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 7:38 pm
Location: Kalyves
Contact:

Re: Photos

Postby filippos » Wed Jun 22, 2016 9:26 am

johnincrete wrote:I would like to know if Phil uses a camera with a film or a digital.
I've been using digital exclusively for 10-12 years, currently a Canon 5D MkIII. For most people digital has matched film in terms of quality for several years and it's still improving very rapidly.

Bonuses are, once you've bought the kit, the only cost is recharging the battery; you know immediately if you have an acceptable result rather than wait a week to get film back from a photo lab (or Boots); pictures can be viewed in any size up to a maximum of the monitor screen; no need to get extra prints to mail to family/friends - it's now possible to e-mail shots direct from the camera via smart phone. Very few amateurs print photos now and, in any case, cheap home printers will churn out OK prints up to A4 size; digital performance in low-light is now vastly better than film: I haven't used flash for at least two years for day to day photography, only off-camera flash for special effects on particular projects. My two flash units are virtually redundant (and my camera doesn't even have built-in flash).

Quality and detail are now exceptional. Canon has two cameras with over 50 megapixels - 53million light sensors - on a chip measuring approx. 36mm x 24mm. The level of detail is stunning. Sony have a compact camera with 40+ megapx. Those are for professionals and dedicated amateurs with a bit of spare cash. The Sony, for example costs about £2,500 ................. body only without a lens. (Christmas is only 6 months away if anyone's feeling generous).

Kilkis
Posts: 10624
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 3:58 pm
Location: Near Chania

Re: Photos

Postby Kilkis » Wed Jun 22, 2016 10:07 am

I'm no photographer but I do seem to end up reading quite a lot about digital cameras in computer magazines. Based on the reviews I have read, Cannon and Nikon seem to totally dominate the DSLR market. Sony are very strong in the CSC format. Panasonic and Fujifilm are very good for compact cameras with Panasonic being especially strong in ultra-zoom with pretty good anti-shake technology.

As an occasional and rather poor snap taker I use a Panasonic ultra-zoom. I previously had a Nikon compact but switched to Panasonic when the battery door fell off the Nikon. The Nikon was smaller and more convenient but the ultra-zoom on the somewhat larger Panasonic makes it more versatile.

The general impression I get when out and about is that most people now settle for the camera built into their smart phones. I wonder what your interview panel would make of that, Eleni?

Warwick

Eleni13
Posts: 486
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:13 am
Location: UK

Re: Photos

Postby Eleni13 » Wed Jun 22, 2016 2:13 pm

The interview panel would need smelling salts.
I am frequently happy with my i-phone pictures, but the Panasonic G3 is my favourite for ease of carrying the kit. My Nikon still produces the best quality, but I hate carrying loads.

filippos
Posts: 5706
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 7:38 pm
Location: Kalyves
Contact:

Re: Photos

Postby filippos » Wed Jun 22, 2016 10:15 pm

With many smart phones now having cameras of 6mpx and upwards that's plenty for the vast majority of users who, primarily, upload the pictures to social media or e-mail them to friends. If prints are wanted 6mpx would give a pretty good result in sizes up to about 10'' x 8'' It would also be good enough to provide a picture almost 3ft square if you have a screen big enough to show it.

Camera manufacturers have convinced buyers that more megapixels is good and that's true for professionals for whom ultra fine detail or the capability to produce huge prints is necessary but for the typical camera use that's irrelevant. less than 0.5mpx will produce an acceptable result at 10'' x 8'' on screen (but would look poor printed at that size).

You also need sheds full of computer storage space with 50mpx photos - think maybe 60MB or more per photo.


Return to “Chatter”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests