Photojojo puts together a page of my most interesting photos from a year ago and sends me an email twice a month.  I share it here with my readers.

With all apologies to Dave’s masculinity, I’ve gone with a flower again.  I just felt it was perfect for April.

Click on the following and save it if you have a square monitor:

Click on the following and save it if you have a wide screen monitor:

My late March Photojojo.  (They select the most interesting photos I took a year ago)

Once again, I got my photojojo photo time capsule email.  This time, one year ago I was in Miami for my cousin’s wedding.  And here are the photos they chose:

Here’s your March computer desktop background!

Click on this one and then, once it loads, right-click and set as desktop if you have a square monitor:

Click on this one and then, once it loads, right-click and set as desktop if you have a widescreen monitor:

The beach was covered with snow, but that didn’t seem to bother the seagulls. As I approached, they let me get really close and if I got closer they preferred to run rather than fly.

The Brooklyn Bridge. It was completed in 1883 and it links Brooklyn to Manhattan. It’s also possible to take the Manhattan Bridge from Brooklyn, but it’s far less picturesque. I’ve been to the Brooklyn Bridge a few times to take pictures with the first time being when I bought my Fujifilm Finepix S7000. This was the first time I took photos from Brooklyn Bridge Park; every other time had been from on the bridge itself.

What can I say about visiting the Lomography store that hasn’t already been said? It provides a very interesting contrast with B&H Photo Video. B&H is a photographer’s sex dream. There are cameras and lenses of all kinds everywhere (on the second floor, nowadays). A conveyor belt system brings your order to the guy taking your order and then over to where you pay. It is massive (taking up a good chunk of 9th and 34th) and it feels chaotic on a Sunday afternoon. You instantly feel as though you need to win the lotto so you can posses it all. It feels like a microcosm of NY with people trying to get every which way and pushing around.

If you read anywhere on the web, you’ll see people talking about how Photoshop (and digital photo manipulation) is ruining the purity of photography.  People argue endlessly about this as if they could get everyone on their side.  Guess what?  This controversy is older than radio.  Recently I’ve been reading the great photography history, How To Read a Photograph.  It turns out that as early as 1898,  people were purposely publishing their photographs straight as they happened to develop.  In the 1920s there emerged a division between photographers over whether it was more proper for photographers to alter their negatives (and therefore become an interpretive art form like painting) or if they had to be developed as is.  People had already been experimenting throughout the 1900s with the usage of different chemicals to affect their prints in different ways.  Photographers even used different films from different manufacturers because they were known to give darker greens or more saturated colors or better grain.  Digital photography is no different - it’s just that dark rooms took years to master while anyone can get the basics of the Canon RAW (or Lightroom RAW) editor.  But, having seen that this division has existed within photography for the past 100 years, I don’t think it will be going away any time soon.

Dan over some cupcakes that Danielle made for him.