On Tue, 13 May 2003 11:47:00 +0100
"Jon Mitchell" <jon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hey ! Don't judge us all by the type of person on a security
> check-point !!
>
> It is a sad fact of the state of this country, that often (not
> always - I know it's a generalisation !) the people employed as
> "security" for anything are there for the ego boost or power-trip.
> They certainly aren't there for the money, as "security"-type jobs
> I believe aren't all that well paid. Hence they often don't attract
> the type of people to the jobs that we would like to be looking
> after the security of this country. Sometimes I wonder if they are
> just night-club bouncers in a different uniform !!
>
> Anyway, I for one am sorry that the first and last people you talk
> to on arriving or leaving this country leave such a bad memory.
> Consider that this guy was probably very bored, and giving you a
> hard time made him feel powerful in his rather insignificant life !
> It's sad, I know, but he's
> probably not got any OM's at home to love .... !! ;-)
Well, I asked for the security supervisor, who informed me that the
rules put out by your TSA (transport safety authority - I assume) did
not permit them to hand-check anything whatsoever. Now, I assume that
the TSA is a government body, which then should be controlled by your
elected representatives....which, by transition, the brittish people
should be in control of. Ohh, wait, you have non-elected
representatives, right? What are they called "house of lords", or
something? Ok, if they are in charge of the TSA, then you are in the
clear :)
>
> So - please come back. It's actually quite nice here once you get
> in !! And next time, to avoid the problems associated with the
> half-wits you encountered on the X-Ray machine, I'm sure there
> would be several "local" OM'ers who would take your film, get it
> processed, and post the resultant prints / negs / slides on to you.
Would be possible, although this time time did not permit any such
detours. All I had time for "for fun" was a tour at the London
Aquarium....see further down, where there will be OM-content :)
> If nothing else, it's an excuse to meet
> up with OM'ers !
See, that would be fun. I thought about it last time, but time and
all that did not allow it. Still, there may be a next time...
> And if this is not the case, don't throw away
> those ruined prints. Bring the whole lot along in hand-luggage to
> demonstrate to the monkey on the machine what happened last time -
> if he can lift his knuckles off the ground for long enough to look
> at them !!
Well, let's just say that the BAA have a recorded letter comming
their way :)
I was surprised, actually, when I previously went to the US from
Paris Charles de Gaulle. Normally, you'd expect the security staff
there to be really annoying, and since I had no specific needs for
photography, I just carried an OM1 and some random films (Kodak
TechPan, Pan F and some Velvia). I sent it through the x-ray since I
did not feel like struggeling with anything. Upon geting it out, the
security person asked if she could open my bag just to take a look (I
carry various electronic gadgets, so of course that is expected). She
saw my bag of films, and noticed that the TechPan read "Professional
film". She then apologised deeply, and said "you know, when you carry
professional film let us know, and we will hand-check, even if they
are slow speed". I said that it was OK - nothing much faster than 50
ISO so it should not be too much of a problem. Her response was
"Still, it's a shame to pay good money for good films and then take
the risk - and we are happy to inspect such manually next time".
>
> Above all, don't judge us all, or avoid us, based on your lasting
> memory of one a**hole !!
>
Well, I am probably not going to stop going to London. I have both
family there and business relations there, so I know that not all
Londonians (Londoners? Londers? what do you call yourself?) are like
the security-guys at Gatwick. And now for the OM content. I
went to the London Aquarium (just next to Westminster) on an
afternoon off. I am into fishes (both diving among them and in tanks
scattered around at home), so I thought this would be fun and paid up
for an annual pass (another good reason to come back). I had a
<name-erased-to-avoid-blasphemy> camera as well as a trusty OM2 with
the 50/3.5 mounted, and when entering the security guy said "You're
OK to take pictures and use flash, but please turn off the flash with
those tanks where there are signs saying 'no flash'".
In general, flash through a public aquarium glass is not a good idea
(this is where the - unfortunately ruined - prova 400 pushed to 1600
came in), but I thought it very very friendly. Not only to allow
photography, but to allow flash-photography except where it would
cause unreasonable stress to the fishes. And to have the security guy
say so when entering. (Brittish Museum has a similar policy, if I
recall correctly, allowing photography - something which most museums
unfortunately don't...). Definitely nice.
Anyways, the aquarium was surprisingly nice. They had nice fishes in
what seemed to be good conditions, so it was a pleasure to visit. In
particular the shark-tank was nice, made such that the illumination -
when seeing it from the lower windows - looked exactly as when diving
underwater with nice effects of "flare" (in lack of better words).
Photographically, the only complaint was that there occationally were
self-illuminated information panels which reflected off of some of
their tanks (especially the one with their giant gouramis, which was
otherwise facinating).
The OM2 held up pretty well to the task - there were a few frames
from the aquarium on the non-damaged film - as did the 50/3.5. I
could have wished for a slightly larger apeture for focusing and a
slightly longer focal length would have been usefull in some
situations. However alltogether, it was a winning combo. The
<name-erased-to-avoid-blasphemy> camera was a high-end af thing,
which seemed to have a hard time deciding how to focus and often get
it wrong. The OM2, however, came out as a winner.
Next time I go there, I should bring bring an extension tube, though,
to be able to get closer. The fish got pretty close to the glass, and
I found myself having to back away to be able to focus. I think the
7mm auto tube should be good. I might also look in to a 2-series or
beattie screen, since it would make focusing easier. I am going to
hold off on my desire to ask about the 90/2 to fight the desire to
acquire one :)
Which brings me to.....which is to prefer: a beattie or a 2-series
screen? It would go in an OM2s/p, so I assume that no recalibration
would be needed to meeter correctly.
Anyways, the London Aquarium is an experience I'd reccomend - with or
without OMs.
--thomas
>
> Jon
>
>
>
>
> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
>
--
-------------------------------------------
Thomas Heide Clausen
Civilingeniør i Datateknik (cand.polyt)
M.Sc in Computer Engineering
E-Mail: T.Clausen@xxxxxxxxxxxx
WWW: http://www.cs.auc.dk/~voop
-------------------------------------------
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|