×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

For any serious amateur photographers...

For any serious amateur photographers...

For any serious amateur photographers...

(OP)
I started with a simple rangefinder 35mm camera (Agfa Silette) when I was in high school, shooting mostly slides. I 'graduated' to an SLR (Minolta SR-1 and then an SRT-101) in college where I did some freelancing and working for the university (I ran the ME-EM department's darkroom among other things). I also did some larger format work with an old 6 X 9 Zeiss Ikonta 52 1/2 folder that I picked-up at a garage sale for $25. I took mostly Ektachrome transparencies with it as seen in one of the images below. After I graduated it became strictly an off-again/on-again hobby. However, over time I continued to upgrade my equipment (I stuck with Minolta until the were acquired by Sony) and continued to work mostly in 35mm Ektachome until I started to go digital in 2000 when I bought a Canon PowerShot S10, although I continued to shoot film with my latest Minolta SLR until 2003 when I bought my first really good digital camera, a Minolta DiMAGE 7Hi.

Here's a few images that I've taken from over the years:



From my first trip to New York City, the Empire State building taken in May 1964 (Agfa Silette).



Sturgeon River near Alberta, MI taken July, 1968 (Minolta SR-1).



Scott Falls near Munising, MI taken July, 1969 (Minolta SRT-101).



On the shore of Lake Superior taken in February, 1971 (Zeiss Ikonta 52 1/2).



Red Square in Moscow, Russia taken in April, 1994 (Minolta XG-M).



Sunset near Adrian, MI taken in December, 2000 (Canon PowerShot S10).



Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia taken from the 63rd floor of the Petronas Towers in August, 2001 (Canon IXUS V).



Upper Tahquamenon Falls near Paradise, MI taken in September, 2002 (Minolta X-700).



Barge Cruise through the Vosges Mountain near Lutzelbourg, France taken in September, 2004 (Minolta DiMAGE 7Hi).



The Taj Mahal in Agra, India taken October, 2006 (Sony DSC-H2).



The Space Shuttle Endeavour being delivered to Los Angeles, CA taken September, 2012 (Sony A100).



Hoover Dam, near Bolder City, NV taken in September, 2013 (Sony A65).



Log Cabin where my wife was born near Lewiston, MI taken June 2014 (Apple iPhone 4S).



Quincy Copper Smelter and Mount Ripley Ski Hill in Houghton, MI taken in April, 2015 (Apple iPhone 6).



Sunset over the Tiete River in Sao Paulo, Brazil, taken July 2015 (Sony NEX-3N).

As you can see I've gone through a lot of cameras over the years and I'm now using mostly a mirror-less Sony NEX-3N which I find really convenient. Not exactly a pocket camera but it's much better that using my iPhone, which I will use in a pinch. I like the E-Mount lens as they are very compact and full featured. The problem is that for my DSLR I've got lots of accessories, including four lens, from a 10mm super-wide-angle to a 600mm telephoto plus a real nice external flash, remote controls, both wired and wireless, etc. But I am seriously considering upgrading one more time to a Sony A6000 which has the same resolution as my A65 DSLR but is mirror-less and takes the more compact E-Mount lens. And you can attach an external flash where as the NEX-3N only has the built-in. Granted, I'll need an adaptor because the A65, and my older A100 and Minolta SLR's, have a different flash-shoe mount but I can get an adapter so that would help. My old lens wouldn't be usable so I'd have to replace a few of them, at least get a good wide-angle as I can't really live without one of them.

BTW, while I'm only a serious amateur and haven't really done this for money since I was in school, where it certainly helped put food on the table, I do send what I consider my better stuff to a stock photo supplier in the UK and have sold a few images over the last couple of years so I guess I can claim that I'm a 'published photographer'. I've never seen where the images were ultimately used as they only tell you what size image was sold (that's what determines the fee collected), and the amount of money that I earned (which is generally 50% of the licensing fee).

Finally, as I've mentioned, I've been taking pictures since high school and all of the photos that I've ever taken have been scanned and are saved as digital images. Years ago I purchased a very nice (and expensive) high-resolution (4000 dpi) 35mm film scanner that I still use from time-to-time, as well as a flatbed capable of scanning larger format negatives/transparencies. All told, I've currently got close to 39,000 images stored on both an external hard-drive as well as on DVD-ROM's for catastrophe recovery (although I'm now going to have to find a place for my second set of disks as I was keeping them in my file cabinet at work). I use 'FileMaker Pro' on my Mac Pro desk-side computer and each record includes relevant information such as when (month and year) and where each photo was taken and what the subject matter was including the names of the known and identifiable people in the shot. Also what camera was used and of course the type of media; Slides, Negatives, APS or DIgital. There's also a field for keywords to help when searching. Also each record includes a thumbnail image and of course a unique image record number and on which DVD-ROM the image has been archived.

While this may sounds like a lot of work, if you're diligent and don't let things get behind, it doesn't really take all that much extra time. And since I had been keeping complete records since college, first in a ledge and then on index cards, when I did start to scan the images and load-up the database, it was fairly easy to catch-up since I had always had good records.

Anyway, I hope this was of interest to both any other photographers out there as well as those who may only use a smartphone to take snapshots.

John R. Baker, P.E.
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

RE: For any serious amateur photographers...

Nice.

'Location. Location. Location.' doesn't apply just to real estate. Standing in front of an interesting or pretty subject is a perfect Step 1.

For waterfalls, a nice effect is to use a neutral filter and thus allow a much slower shutter. This one I took at Lake Placid, NY.


RE: For any serious amateur photographers...

This is stuff I posted on my website.

I took this on a canoe trip to Killarney Provincial Park, Ontario, probably on Davis Lake, on Labour Day weekend in 2001. The time was around 5:00pm. I used my Yashica TL Electro 35mm SLR. Probably, I used my 50mm f1.9 lens. The exposure was 1/15 seconds. The film was Fujichrome Sensia ISO 100. I did not have a tripod with me, but the knob of my hiking pole is held on by a camera thread. The monopod saved this shot. I use this photo for the background on all my computers.


This is a P-15D Mustang made up to look like one of John C. Meyer's aircraft from WW II. This was at an airshow at London, Ontario, on 1988Jun03, according to my notes. Actually, I was getting ready to photograph a DeHavilland Mosquito that was about to taxi by. I took this picture for practise, and I was pleasantly surprised. It was late in the day, around 5:00pm. I used my Yashica TL Electro 35mm SLR. I used my Tamron 28-70mm zoom lens set to 70mm. My exposure was 1/15 seconds. The film was Kodachrome ISO 25. I had my 35mm camera on the tripod, and I panned it a little. Note the blurry person next to the tail of the aircraft.


Yes, I got a photo of the Mosquito, but it was not as cool as this one.



--
JHG

RE: For any serious amateur photographers...



My dog catching a tennis ball from a foot away.
Using an Olympus TG-2

Keith Cress
kcress - http://www.flaminsystems.com

RE: For any serious amateur photographers...

That didn't happen by chance: Say more...

RE: For any serious amateur photographers...

Hi John,
You and I have exchanged photos here, before, and thanks again for sharing some more. Especially like the dizzying view over the Hoover dam.

I see you've been using mirrorless cam's for a while. I'm starting to think that's the wave of the future. A series of articles I read recently has shown how the CMOS sensor technology is reaching a plateau of maturity, but there is still lots of room for improvement in the way the image data is processed and stored (speed, fidelity, noise suppression). The elimination of the mirror may also become a point of competition if Canon or Nikon decide to catch up to Sony in that department.

My toy is now a Canon 6D, highly recommended for astrophotography. I find that it's rather heavy for vacation travel, and still pick up the old Nikon when on the go.


Comet PanStarrs, 2013, taken with a Nikon D800 10MP camera, 200mm telephoto lens.


My first!


Having fun with a wide angle (14mm) and learning to do HDR as post-processing (rather than in-camera, which sucks). This is a '68 Firebird, for those who don't already know.

STF

RE: For any serious amateur photographers...

zeusfaber; Jake (dumb name for a dog) will catch a ball until he overheats. He's always fascinated
me with his speed. You literally can not kick a soccer ball past him. If you watch him closely you
see he stares at your belt buckle to read your motion. If he's sitting in front of you and throw a
tennis ball underhand forty feet away he will get up turn around and chase the ball. He will reach
the ball before it hits the ground and chomp it out of the air. A truly fascinating spectacle of speed,
timing, physics at it rawest form.

Anyway it all happens so fast you have a hard time seeing much of it, so enter a camera. One night in
the living room I got him playing catch and started to take shots. I took about 300 shots, dealing
with an event too fast to really see coupled with shutter lag to come up with that one. They had to
be flash and a thousandth of a second shutter time.

Keith Cress
kcress - http://www.flaminsystems.com

RE: For any serious amateur photographers...

(OP)

Quote (SparWeb)


Especially like the dizzying view over the Hoover dam.

Years ago you could only get a shot like that of the Hoover Dam from a helicopter. However, the government has now kindly provided us photographers with a very convenient (and free) platform from which we can take all the photos what we want.



The Mike O’Callaghan - Pat Tillman Memorial Bridge near Bolder City, NV taken in May 2011 (Sony A100)

Oh, and you can also use it as a bridge to pass between Nevada and Arizona without being stopped and having your car checked for explosives before being allowed to drive across the dam.

John R. Baker, P.E.
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

RE: For any serious amateur photographers...

(OP)
I've never managed to get any decent photos of a comet, but I have gotten a few eclipses over the years:



Lunar eclipse near Irvine, CA taken in July 1982 (Minolta XG-M)



Lunar eclipse near Irvine, CA taken in October 2004 (Minolta DiMAGE 7Hi)



Solar eclipse near Irvine, CA taken in May 2012 (Sony A100)



The camera and lens rig used for the solar eclipse photo, showing my Sony A100 mounted with a 400mm f8.0 lens (Minolta DiMAGE 7Hi)



Lunar eclipse showing the 'Blood Red Moon' near Irvine, CA taken April, 2014 (Sony A65)



In the 'Blood Red Moon' shot above, that was Mars off to the right and this is that portion of the image at full pixel limit. This was shot with the same rig shown earlier except that it used the Sony A65, 24.3MP versus 10.2MP for the A100.



Lunar eclipse near Broomfield, CO taken September, 2015 (Sony A65)

Note that on August 21, 2017 there will be a total eclipse of the sun that will be visible from coast-to-coast, as shown on the map below. I intend to be somewhere along that path of totality (I'm thinking somewhere near Grand Island, Nebraska) with all my gear ready to get some once-in-a-lifetime shots (lets hope it doesn't rain):

John R. Baker, P.E.
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

RE: For any serious amateur photographers...

I like the photos so far. I am definity not as dedicated as john with documenting my photos.
What does everyone else do with their photos to be able to show peole I have been using blurb to Print my photos as a book which i use as a photo album, the only issue is its far too easy to add text, so oftent here ends up beening a quite high word count ( which makes it far more usible to others but it sure makes it a lot more work).

I was using a a Cosina CT1 for 20 years (got it for my 11th birthday), before going digital with a Pentax K7 (which got stolen) followed by a Pentax K3.

Pentax K7, 450mm (35mm eqv), F14, 2012 Ardmore, New Zealand
De havililand DH98 Mosquito, I have a photo which the wheel smoke as well but it is just not as crisp.




Pentax K7, 82mm (35mm eqv), 2011, a beech on the Wairarapa coast, NZ.


Pentax K7, 27mm (35mm eqv), 2011, Florence, It.




RE: For any serious amateur photographers...

I think I see somebody out for a row, but where are the crowds that usually throng Florence? I bet it was a Sunday morning.

I only just recently started adding comments to my photos. For the last 15 years or so (in which I've had a digital camera, I've been carefully storing them in chronological folders, with descriptions in the folder names to identify the subject before opening the picture files. With the arrival of Lightroom, or things like iPhoto for Mac users, some of this is catalogued automatically. I haven't made the switch yet, because my system still works quite well.

I haven't printed many photos in a long time. What I do is put the "finished" copies on a memory card and stick it into an electronic picture frame, which scrolls through the hundreds and hundreds, over a period of several days.


Okay, I have a question to pose, too: Who thinks is OK to process photos, who thinks it's cheating? Or, how much is too much?

While I admire photos that are good right out of the camera, because they display the skill of the photographer, I had to get over my reluctance to learn photo processing when I started to pick up astrophotography, which is pretty much pointless unless you are prepared to enhance the photo. Now I cannot accept any photos I take without a few tweaks here or there. It's pretty obvious in my photo of the Firebird above, but does anyone think it detracts from the picture, rather than improves it?

John Baker,
I was hoping to combine the eclipse with a visit to the Yellowstone. The good hotels are already booked up. And the bad ones are going for 300$ a night!

STF

RE: For any serious amateur photographers...

(OP)
Yes, I also use an Apple, a Mac Pro deskside with lots of memory, disk space and a high-end graphics card with a decent monitor. I also invested in a good high-end, B-Size, 8-color Epson photo printer. I looked at Lightroom but my system works fine so I'm sticking with it. I use iPhoto as a 'gateway' as I download all my images from my cameras with it and keep them there as another sort of archive. I then export out the images that I intend to retain in my 'collection' and use PhotoShop to clean them up. Mostly just exposure, color and contrast correction and the occasional cropping to improve the overall impression of an image. I then save my final images as JPEG's using the least amount of compression.

As for the 2017 eclipse, I'm thinking that perhaps renting an RV might prove to be the best approach.

John R. Baker, P.E.
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

RE: For any serious amateur photographers...

Quote (SparWeb)


Okay, I have a question to pose, too: Who thinks is OK to process photos, who thinks it's cheating? Or, how much is too much?

I took a ski club photo a couple of weeks ago of a ski instructor and some students. In one photo, he had his head down and the students were looking at me. In the other photo, he was looking at me and the students were looking at him. Fixed! My first attempt at copying stuff from one photo to another and lining everything up worked fine. The snowy background helped. I am asking myself your question.

In my case, I got the photo I wanted. Everybody looks good, and looks they are having fun. The shot is not dishonest.

If I were taking photos for a news organization, I would classify copy and paste like this as unethical. In professional organizations, a lot of stuff is unethical not because it is evil, but because evil people need to do it, and good people do not need to do it. If a news organization is seen doctoring photos, all the photos it has published cease to be credible.

If I were taking pictures for an engineering organization, context matters. I may need a specific photo for a manual. I may need a photo that shows you something happened, in which case, Photoshopping is unacceptable, beyond the correction of exposures. If I doctor a photograph in a manual, I could add a note stating that I doctored it.

I have a Nikon D7100. In crappy light conditions, I use my 35mm F1.8 lens, and raw mode. My shots get horribly underexposed. It is amazing what I can recover on the computer, afterwards.

--
JHG

RE: For any serious amateur photographers...

SparWeb,

You can try some of the towns in Idaho that may be cheaper than the ones in the park itself or Jackson Hole. If you don't mind being away from crowds, at least for the eclipse itself, try Island Park or Ashton. Island Park may also offer enough open space to set your gear up to get some clear pictures.

I have had a Canon AE-1 since 1978 and used it for most of the time my children were growing up. Usually shoot Ektachrome for slides. In 2011, I moved up to a Canon 60D DSLR with a Sigma 35-125 lens. When I go to the racetrack, IndyCars, I rent a 400-600 lens for the weekend.

"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."

Ben Loosli

RE: For any serious amateur photographers...

The best advice relating to HDR I've seen was something like the following (paraphrased)...

If the viewer notices the HDR effect before they notice the subject of the photo, then perhaps it might be a bit too much HDR.

Of course, there are no hard and fast rules.

RE: For any serious amateur photographers...

On the subject of editing images, I think it depends on the intent.

At my cousin's wedding at Lake Placid, I took this quick 'snapshot' with lucky timing. But the original image was cluttered with some poles and such intruding into frame, from the dock and some other things just below the frame. So I spent about an hour painstakingly (manually, pixel by pixel) editing-out the distracting elements to leave a more pleasing composition.

It seemed to become almost the defining image for the event. With the original clutter, it was just a snapshot. Well worth the editing time. But a risk of misleading others trying to find the same spot, ...such a nice view, so free of visual clutter... Doesn't exist. Sorry.

RE: For any serious amateur photographers...

VE1BLL,
Who knew you were such a romantic?

STF

RE: For any serious amateur photographers...

(OP)
My display is set at 2048 x 1152 and if I maximize the Safari window, at least with the images I posted, which were all saved as 17 inches wide and 72dpi resolution, covers about half the width of the 'white space' with the text going across the entire page but properly wrapping as expected. If I narrow up the Safari window the text continues to wrap until I get small enough than the images start to shrink as well.

John R. Baker, P.E.
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

RE: For any serious amateur photographers...

JohnRBaker, I really like your capture of the falling water of the waterfalls.

Ted

RE: For any serious amateur photographers...

John,
Thanks for displaying the images.
What I'm interest in is what kind of 35mm film scanner you have?
-pmover

RE: For any serious amateur photographers...

(OP)
The scanner I've used for about 15 years is a Canoscan FS4000US (I've also used over the years and still have a flatbed with a light panel for large format work). The reason that I purchased this particular scanner was because in addition to scanning 35mm (slides and film) it also had an adapter for APS film cartridges. For about 10 years, starting in 1996, my wife was using an APS camera for her photos and I had even gotten one for when I traveled since they were very compact (this was pre-digital days) when I didn't want to haul along an SLR. They basically replaced whatever 35mm Point & Shoot cameras we were using at the time. Over that 10 year period we shot about 5,000 frames of APS.

When I started to go digital (bought my first digitial camera, a Canon PowerShot S10, in 2000) that was when I decided to look into what it would take to convert my film archives to digital (at the time I had approximately 12,000 frames of 35mm, slides and film, in 3-ring binders, and APS in folders, plus a bunch of slide boxes, it look up an entire closet shelf). Besides, I had just gotten a request from my alma mater that they were establishing a photo archive at the university and they were looking for anyone how had collections of photos taken while they were were attending school and this included any photos taken in the area, not just on campus (note that I freelanced while in school and sold a lot of shots to the schools paper and yearbook staff as well as covering sports events, concerts and other on and off campus events). And while they were willing to take prints, they would rather have the original slides and negatives. And they explained that if you DID provide them the original slides and negatives that you could then take their fair value as a charitable deduction against your income taxes (if you only provided copies or paper prints then you could NOT take the deduction as only originals were considered to be of any monetary value). Well I wasn't going to give away something like 800 original slides and negatives without at least a 'copy' and at the time, this was in 2001, high quality scanners were just starting to be introduced for serious photographers and that was when I did my research and chose the Canoscan device. Now it cost well over $900 (and this was in 2001 dollars) but I recouped much of that when I took the deduction on my taxes for the donated slides and negatives (I also sent them 18 CD-ROMS of images along with a spreadsheet/printout with all the image details). Since then several of my images have appeared in school publications and can be viewed in their online archive (you had to sign a full release for the use of the photos and the only restriction I put on them was that I get photographers credit if any images were published).

Here's a review from when the Canoscan unit was first introduced back in mid-2001:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/SCAN/FS4000/FS40A....

Note that one of the original features which attracted me was that it has a SCSI interface and at the time I was using an Apple G4 Mac Tower that had SCSI interfaces (this was before Firewire and any of the higher speed USB standards). It also came equipped with a USB port which is good since you can't hardly buy a computer today with a SCSI interface. I hadn't used it for the last couple of years but when I was cleaning out my office at work I came across some old slides which had been taken at a conference somewhere and I wanted to share the images with some of the other people that were in the shots. Now I could have used my Epson flatbed, but the Canoscan can do four slide at once automatically where as the flatbed you either to do them one frame at a time or make big image and crop them later. The problem was that while the scanner was working fine, the driver software had long since become obsolete with respect to the recent Apple OS updates and Canon stopped maintaing drivers for it years ago. However, do a little Googling I found something called 'VueScan' and after trying the free trail version I purchased the 'professional' version for $79. It works really well and it supports all of my various scanners, both the Canoscan and Epson flatbed but also an Epson 'All-in-one' office printer/fax/copier that we used for regular, non-photo printing. Now I can bulk scan multipage documents using the copy-feeder on the all-in-one and it will even automatically convert them into PDF documents or perform OCR, converting the text into readable text documents, so I felt it was a pretty good deal and I've already gotten at least one upgrade so they're keeping ti up-to-date.

Anyway, the bottom line, while I'm only using the Canoscan occasionally, I'm going to keep it around as it doesn't take up much space on my desk and while I have to now use the USB interface, which is a lot slower than when I could still hook it to a SCSI port, it's still works just fine doing only four slides or six negatives at a time. Granted, if I had to do any APS cartridges which would be 25 frames, that could be a bit more tedious, but I've scanned in all of OUR APS's and don't expect that I'll ever take anymore despite the fact I've still got one of the APS cameras around here somewhere.

BTW, I just checked Ebay and there are several units identical to mine being offered at well below $200, with one still in the original box for less than $130.

John R. Baker, P.E.
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

RE: For any serious amateur photographers...

(OP)
I'm going to work on a few 'theme posts' covering one subject at a time.

My first 'theme' will be Waterfalls, and those pictured here can all be found in Michigan's Upper Peninsula. In fact, all but ONE of Michigan's nearly 200 named waterfalls can be found in the UP (Upper Peninsula):



Douglas Houghton Falls near Eagle River, MI taken May, 1966 (Kodak Brownie Twin 20)



Silver River Falls near Copper Harbor, MI taken June, 1967 (Kodak Brownie Twin 20)



Hungarian Falls near Lake Linden, MI taken October, 1968 (Minolta SR-1)



Scott Falls near Munising, MI taken July, 1969 (Minolta SRT-101)



Manganese Falls near Copper Harbor, MI taken June, 1970 (Minolta SRT-101)



Copper Falls near Copper Harbor, MI taken June, 1970 (Minolta SRT-101)



Lower Tahquamenon Falls near Paradise, MI taken August, 1973 (Minolta SRT-101)



Munising Falls near Munising, MI taken August, 1978 (Minolta SRT-101)



Alger Falls near Munising, MI taken August, 1978 (Minolta SRT-101)



Upper Tahquamenon Falls near Paradise, MI taken September, 2002 (Minolta X-700)



Jacobs Falls near Eagle Harbor, MI taken August, 2008 (Sony A100)



Eagle Rivers Falls near Eagle River, MI taken October, 2010 (Sony DSC-H2)



Canyon Falls near Alberta, MI taken October, 2010 (Sony DSC-H2)



Scott Falls near Munising, MI taken April, 2014 (go back and look at the previous photo of Scott Falls taken 45 years earlier) (Sony A65)

Note that I have more photos of waterfalls taken in in other states but thought that these might be of interest to those out there who may not appreciate how many waterfalls that there are in Michigan. I may do another series on Michigan Lighthouses, another little appreciated feature of Michigan.

John R. Baker, P.E.
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

RE: For any serious amateur photographers...

(OP)
My next 'theme' post, as I previously mentioned, covers the lighthouses of Michigan.

Note that there are some 121 lighthouses in Michigan, more than any other state. I've included images of only those lighthouses that I've personally photographed, 12 in total (I need to make it a point to visit more the next time we're in Michigan):



Portage Lake Upper Entry Lighthouse near Houghton, MI taken in August 1969 (Minolta SRT-101)



St. Helena Island Lighthouse near St. Ignace, MI taken in August, 1970 (Minolta SRT-101)



Round Island Lighthouse near Mackinaw Island, MI taken in July, 1995 (Minolta XG-M)



Old Mackinaw Point Lighthouse near Mackinaw City, MI taken in April, 2006 (Canon IXUS V)



Point Iroquois Lighthouse near Bay Mills, MI taken in August, 2008 (Sony A100)



Whitefish Point Lighthouse near Whitefish Point, MI taken August, 2008 (Sony A100)



Mendota Lighthouse near Bete Grise, MI taken August, 2008 (Sony A100)



Eagle Harbor Lighthouse near Eagle Harbor, MI taken August, 2008 (Sony A100)



Copper Harbor Lighthouse near Copper Harbor, MI taken in October, 2010 (Sony DSC-H2)



Sand Hills Lighthouse near Five Mile Point, MI taken in October, 2010 (Sony DSC-H2)



Eagle River Lighthouse near Eagle River, MI taken in October, 2010 (Sony DSC-H2)



Portage Lake Lower Entry Lighthouse near Jacobsville, MI taken in August, 2011 (Sony A100)

John R. Baker, P.E.
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

RE: For any serious amateur photographers...

My favourite lighthouse photographs:


(Beirut, March 2012, IPhone 4).

A.

RE: For any serious amateur photographers...

Amazing photoghraphs

RE: For any serious amateur photographers...

Nice tour of the Michigan Lighthouses... did a road trip up into that area and many of the lighthouses in 2014...

Memorial at Whitefish Pt. is touching to see..

Happened to be there when one of the divers that went down to the Fitzgerald was there.. Interesting conversation.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources