Photography! Well, okay, reviewing photos....

I put up an image - original and photoshopped version - at Buzznet. They're from 2003 - but I came across them while going through my photos looking for the Japanese Gardens (which these are definitely not). I want my photography out there and admired. I don't want to be a professional photographer or get paid for it. Too hard, too dicey, and I'm not that good - I think I'm pretty good for an amateur hobbyist, very good for the amount of time I put into the hobby, but I'm not a professional and I don't really want to put the work in.

But gee, I would like some of my better images out there. So, my current solution? I'm finding the good photos of the Gardens - goodness knows I have taken enough over the years! - and donating them to them, to use or not as they will, just with credit. If they don't use any, I am out the price of a CD and mailing it, which is not much. If they use them, hey, I got what I wanted...for the price of a CD and mailing it. (I've already been emailing them to make sure they can use them and don't need extra paperwork, and would welcome them. The response was quite positive, so I'm feeling pretty good about this.)

Scott says they'll probably be surprised by how many images they get, for an amateur donation, especially since I'm ejecting any that aren't at least "good" in appearance, and technically good or better (preference strongly to better). I have to agree with him, honestly - I have three years worth of back photos and I love the Gardens a lot, as anyone who reads this journal for any length of time sooner or later learns (and gets sick of, if they're not interested in the Gardens, probably).

Wheeeeee! Back. Gardens. Heat, but not bad.

I went to the Gardens this afternoon. Going through all those photos of them, made me want to be there. So now I have more photos of them.... (Did anyone not see that coming, from the first sentence?)

It's warm out. I did okay, though, as the Gardens are well-shaded and always a bit cooler - and that made them bearable, though not great. Wandered for a bit, took photos, and then beat a retreat with the AC on. I'd considered, when I left the house, going into Portland for Saturday Market and some photography downtown also. That got nixed while I was walking the Gardens as, if downtown Portland is comfortable, the Gardens will be chilly. The Gardens were barely tolerable. Saturday Market is crowded and has food stalls, so it's warmer than "downtown" by a small but noticeable margin (or maybe it just feels that way; doesn't matter which, does it?). So if the Gardens are barely tolerable, downtown Portland will be bad and Saturday Market will be worse.

Coming home with the AC on was really nice. Now I'm sitting at home with the AC on. Got the mail when I arrived and, along with the bills, I have gotten the roleplaying games I ordered. So, if you'll pardon me, I have a box to open now. :)

Grrrrrrrrr. Design issues....

I really, really, really get annoyed when a user interface has a screwup, especially if it's an obvious, bad screwup, that the user can't dodge. This is not to say that the UI work I do is perfect - I've had some of it bite me, yes. We all screw up. But I don't think I've ever committed what I'd label a UI "atrocity".

Here's one that is stupid but is not an atrocity: In Windows XP, if you use the XP-style start menu, you can "pin" items to the start menu, putting them in a list at the upper left - above your most frequently used programs. If you uninstall one of those items, or upgrade it in such a way as to break the link (which happens way too often), the icon goes to blank, just like any other dead shortcut. So far, fair enough. So, you right-click and select "Unpin from Start Menu" since it's useless, right? Well, have fun if you do. It tells you the link is bad and does nothing. Grrr. However, this is not quite an atrocity because, if you simply run it, it gives you the same error but then follows up by asking if you want to remove it from the list.

Here's one that is an atrocity (and which I'm heartily sick of). On my IBM Thinkpad, I have a "Fn" (function) key. It sites next to the left control key, under the shift key. Fine by me. But, Fn-F4 puts the computer in "standby" mode - and there's no "do you want to do this?" dialog given. Meanwhile, ctrl-F4 is used to close a child window (alt-F4 closes a parent window). Um. Folks? "Standby" and "close one of the subwindows of this program" are WILDLY different functions in effect and scope, and putting them side-by-side is NOT NICE. I hate standby. I hate it with a passion. I have no use for it. Nonetheless, I put my computer on standby once or twice a month, trying to close out sub-windows (usually either mailboxes/messages in Eudora, or mush signons in SimpleMU).

The system is set never to go to standby on its own, but that doesn't stop it from doing so when I hit that key combo, of course. Does anyone know any way to set it so Windows will never, ever, EVER do that again?

...SNORT. I am such a DORK.

I just freaked because only a few of my last shots came out, and I remembered that the camera locked up once and I had to turn it off and back on - but I swore that was down in the natural garden, and a lot of the shots after that were missing....

Then I looked down at the card reader, and the card. Which is yellow, not brown. That would be because I filled one card, and had to use another. Perhaps I would have the rest of my photos if I, say, tried getting them off the card they were actually on....