Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Antartica The Global Warming  (Read 32317 times)
Bobtrips
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 679


« Reply #80 on: September 03, 2007, 10:31:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Let's get back to the main point.  At least the point that the author was addressing.

Global warming.

(I'm dropping out of the 'how much does wind/nuclear cost.  I'm not an expert and so far can't identify a data source that I trust.)

Our planet is most certainly warming.  Is it human caused and or is it caused by some so far unidentified 'natural' event that will prove to be temporary?  We don't know for sure.  Sure at the 100% level.

But we've got an awful lot of data that suggests that it's us and the vast, vast majority of people who study these sorts of things think that it's likely us.

The very conservative bet is that it's likely us and if we don't do something then there are going to be millions and millions and millions more people who fit this description.

Quote
When you are starving, degraded and living in a state of hoplessness, arguments about global warming have little meaning.

And let me add - when you've got thousands of starving people dying outside your walled community (or starving conveniently out of your sight) then the arguments will also have little meaning.  

It will be too late.

Now, some of us are selfish enough that we won't give a damn.  We'll continue to drive our monster SUVs, buy huge side by side refrigerators and do all the other things that increase CO2.  

And some countries will not (at least in the short term) step up to the plate and work on the problems inside their borders.  Those problems that spread to the entire globe.

But does it make sense to take the stance that "I'm not doing anything unless everyone else does it too?"

Seems like that would be shooting ourselves in the foot.
Logged
Bobtrips
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 679


« Reply #81 on: September 03, 2007, 10:56:41 AM »
ReplyReply

And I'd like to get back to the original reason for this thread - Michael's review of the book.

Last winter I traveled in Laos for a couple of weeks with a friend who has no background in photography.   She likes to look at pictures, but her use of a camera has been to snap pics of friends and family with little regard for the image quality, only the content.

I'd be snapping away and she'd (sometimes) make a comment about how 'ugly' that particular place was.  

Later she looked at my pictures and said something to the effect of "Oh, I see what photographers do.  They take ugly looking places and make them look good."

That left me wondering about how motivation drives our shots.  I enjoy visiting 'trash heaps' and looking for interesting shots.  I go to 'dirty' parts of the world and look for beauty to photograph.

Perhaps Michael and others like him do the same.  "Light's no good today.  Let's play cards.  Let's wait until we can get some stunning shots...."  

It's no secret that good photographers pay a lot of attention to when conditions are going to be best for shooting that 'stunner'.

Perhaps the author's pictures were driven by his desire to see what bad is/might be happening to our world.

Perhaps he didn't set out to create 'bad impressions', to mislead us.

Perhaps he just shot what he felt.

Perhaps he didn't bother shooting on days during which the light was extraordinary and made the place seem 'better than it is'.  

Just thinkin'....
Logged
Bruce MacNeil
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 61


« Reply #82 on: September 03, 2007, 05:11:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The problem is the cost of that new clean energy. Our prosperity is dependent upon the cost of energy and the efficiency with which we use that energy. Are we able to increase the efficiency of all our appliances (on average), and make sufficient savings by reducing wastage, to offset that unavoidable increase in the cost of energy from windmill farms.


How much does power from wind turbines cost? What is the credible back of the envelope cost per megawatt of installed wind turbine power?
Logged

Bruce MacNeil PhD; M. Div.; M.Fol.
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8947


« Reply #83 on: September 03, 2007, 06:18:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
How much does power from wind turbines cost? What is the credible back of the envelope cost per megawatt of installed wind turbine power?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

If you can believe the U.K. based Royal Academy of Engineering, it's at least twice the cost of coal, gas and nuclear fission.

[a href=\"http://www.engineerlive.com/european-process-engineer/environmental-solutions/2113/debating-the-true-cost-of-wind-power-electricity.thtml]http://www.engineerlive.com/european-proce...ectricity.thtml[/url]
« Last Edit: September 03, 2007, 06:19:06 PM by Ray » Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5543


WWW
« Reply #84 on: September 03, 2007, 06:46:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Perhaps Michael and others like him do the same.  "Light's no good today.  Let's play cards.  Let's wait until we can get some stunning shots...." 
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137062\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Uh no...I've NEVER seen Michael play cards...

I've seen him make his best efforts to get to a good place to shoot and then shoot regardless of the conditions. You may walk into a place with the expectations of one thing but leave with entirely different (and equally valid) results–if you shoot. The one sure fired way of making sure you DON'T get the shot is not take the shot...

Naw, I'm still leaning towards the fact the original shooter didn't get the images "right" in post.
Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8947


« Reply #85 on: September 03, 2007, 08:00:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Let's get back to the main point.  At least the point that the author was addressing.

Global warming.

Our planet is most certainly warming.  Is it human caused and or is it caused by some so far unidentified 'natural' event that will prove to be temporary?  We don't know for sure.  Sure at the 100% level.

But we've got an awful lot of data that suggests that it's us and the vast, vast majority of people who study these sorts of things think that it's likely us.

Let's get back to the IPCC report. There's a strong degree of certainty that most of the warming is attributable to us. If we assume that is correct, it follows that global warming will continue whatever we do. The only influence we could have is in slowing down the rate of warming.

Even if we imagine the impossible, that we could completely cease all further emissions of greenhouse gasses, our contribution to those gasses already in the atmosphere, which are causing most of the warming, is still going to hang around for a long time.

Quote
Now, some of us are selfish enough that we won't give a damn.  We'll continue to drive our monster SUVs, buy huge side by side refrigerators and do all the other things that increase CO2. 

In Australia, the drivers of these SUVs and other huge, gas-guzzling Totota 4x4s, are often small ladies taking their kids to school. They drive them because they feel safer in the event of an accident. The vehicles are high off the ground, built like a tank and have a huge front bumper bar to sweep away kangaroos that might get in the way.

However, let's suppose that you could persuade this insecure lady to pack her brood into a 1.5 litre Hyundai Getz bubble car, for the sake of the environment. She would then free up some wealth. She'd have more money to spend elsewhere.

How can we (or she) be sure that the freed up funds are not spent in a manner equally injurious (and perhaps even more injurious) to the environment. Perhaps she decides to build an extension to the house to accommodate an expected increase in family size. Perhaps the excavators that dig the clay to make the bricks are even greater polluters than the SUV. Perhaps the furnace that fires the clay to make the bricks is also a greater polluter than the SUV. Perhaps the builder who travels a hour each day for 3 months and carries his gear in a small truck also causes more harm to the environment than the SUV.

So this lady, who feels she has made a great sacrifice for the sake of the environment can now hold her head up high? Perhaps we are deluding ourselves.

Quote
But does it make sense to take the stance that "I'm not doing anything unless everyone else does it too?"

It may not be a recommended stance if we want to seriously tackle the global warming problem, but it certainly makes sense. No individual and no government wants to put itself at an economic disadvantage in relation to its neighbours by increasing the cost of its own energy, a cost which is fundamental to economic prosperity.

Governments can steer people in a particular direction with a range of inducements and penalties; tax breaks and subsidies for clean energy resources; implementation of carbon credit schemes etc, and that is already being done.

Is it enough? Probably not. Can we do more without taking the economy into a recession? Who knows!
« Last Edit: September 03, 2007, 08:07:06 PM by Ray » Logged
Antarctic Mat
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 56


« Reply #86 on: September 04, 2007, 04:54:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Hello.

I'd quite like to comment on what the original poster started. He made a statement about the review that was given for the book.
I obviously haven't read the book but I have read the review and also have seen the image of the front cover.
My comments are based solely on reading the review and seeing the image.
I have been here in the Antarctic for 2 years now, I have another 6 months to go before I leave. I have lived on the Peninsular through a summer and a winter and have lived much further South for a summer and I'm just coming out of a long winter and into a summer again.
I always struggle with self proclaimed experts on any subject and often I live by the rule that if I don't actually know what I'm talking about then I should probably shut up. The image on the front cover is of a view that I have hundreds of pictures of, deep blue/black sea with brash ice and heavy skies, it's like that on the peninsular for a large proportion of the time. Of course in the height of summer when people sail down for there couple of weeks of expedition it is usually glorious sun, blue skies and amazing ice-burgs and wildlife. Even if you have been here a few times on your little trips you can't possibly have an idea of what it's like here and it would seem slightly arrogant to think that you would have!
After 2 years here I have come up with the following; the Antarctic is incredibly harsh, it's cold, dark and can be very dangerous, it's also incredibly beautiful. In the last 9 months I have had 115 days with no sun at all, -47 temperatures and winds that it's almost impossible to stand up in. Of course I'm coming into summer now and we will soon have 24hr daylight and white as far as you can see but like I said, it's not the whole story.
The guy who made the book may well have manipulated his images to give a darker more edgy feel to Antarctica but for what it's worth, the image in the front cover is far more realistic to me than pictures of brightly lit floating ice-burgs and blue skies, regardless of how much merit they have as photographic images.
Thanks.
Mat.
Logged
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4924



« Reply #87 on: September 04, 2007, 06:47:24 AM »
ReplyReply

mat,

The photograph on the cover is lovely. The photograph on the cover is very evocative of what Antarctica can look like. But a book with several hundred photographs all of which have the same tonalities and colour does not in my opinion provide a balanced view of Antarctica.

Look at the book. Either intentionally or through incompetence (I can't be sure which) every tonal value below mid-gray is compressed dramatically. Imagine a histogram with almost nothing below 100. That's the book. That's not reality. That's not Antaarctica. Not for hundreds of images in a row, clearly taken at different times of year in different types of weather and at different locations.

Michael
Logged
jeremyrh
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 291


« Reply #88 on: September 13, 2007, 04:10:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
That's the book. That's not reality.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137192\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Seems to me that Mat says that that IS reality, at least for most of the time - and I'm inclined to take the word of someone who's lived in a place over the word of someone who's just visited.
Logged
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4924



« Reply #89 on: September 13, 2007, 06:38:26 AM »
ReplyReply

I have no doubt about Matt's experience with Antarctica. And true, I've never been there in winter.

But, that doesn't change anything to do with the book, which he admits to not having seen. So while you're willing to give him credence because he has more experience with the place, why not do the same with me and the book. I have it. I've seen it. He hasn't.

The issue is simple really. The book is a polemic. It tells a story with a single focus. It does not provide a balanced view, and therefore while it likely will accomplish it's intended task it should not be looked at by anyone as being a realistic representation of Antarctica with all of its faces.

That's all I've been trying to say. Look elsewhere for the full story.

Michael
Logged
jeremyrh
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 291


« Reply #90 on: September 13, 2007, 06:45:47 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
It does not provide a balanced view, and therefore while it likely will accomplish it's intended task it should not be looked at by anyone as being a realistic representation of Antarctica with all of its faces.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=139109\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I've yet to see a photo book that represents anywhere realistically, showing all the faces of the subject. If I saw one I probably wouldn't want to buy it.
Logged
CatOne
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 390


WWW
« Reply #91 on: September 13, 2007, 11:25:15 AM »
ReplyReply

By the way, there are articles which say that the ice mass on the eastern half of Antarctica, which comprises 85% of the total ice mass, is increasing.

And this is in Nature, which is a highly-regarded scientific publication:

http://www.nature.com/news/2005/050516/full/050516-10.html

So while the western half (where most of us western hemisphere folks go -- to the peninsula) go is calving big chunks... it's getting it back on the eastern side (if only because of increased precipitation from the warmer temperatures).

Still... worth a read.

And are we going to start this "carbon credits" thing again complaining about the people taking the flights to Antarctica?  Again it's one freaking flight out of 10,000 flights per day.
Logged

benInMA
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 186


« Reply #92 on: September 18, 2007, 04:22:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Copeland's photos (at least on the website) look fantastic to me.   The use of normal & wide angle perspectives are refreshing and give a more interesting insight into the geography.  The tones look varied... there are some sunny day shots.  

The Vignetting is sometimes a bit much though.

He is apparently the recipient of the International Photography Awards prize for "Photographer of the Year - Books Category" and has also been invited to speak at the UN in October.

If his work is a more correct representation perhaps a retraction would be wise.

Here is the website:

Antarctica - A Global Warning
Logged
thewanderer
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 106


« Reply #93 on: September 18, 2007, 05:37:19 PM »
ReplyReply

i just looked at the site,, i remeber the sun shining every now and then,, that whole thing is just dark and dreary,, it just wasnt that way when we were there,,,, so i will side with MR on this one,,
Logged
alainbriot
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 684



WWW
« Reply #94 on: September 18, 2007, 05:47:44 PM »
ReplyReply

I've never been to Antartica but my experience as a landscape photographer is that the many landscapes I have seen and photographed all had different moods, aspects and appearances.  In other words, the same landscape looks different depending on the time of day or year,  on the weather pattern, or on the photographer's emotional response.

I have only seen the images from the book on the website, but from that basis it would appear that Antartica is different from all the landscapes I have seen in that it has only 1 aspect: dreary...
« Last Edit: September 18, 2007, 05:49:37 PM by alainbriot » Logged

Alain Briot
Author of Mastering Landscape Photography, Mastering Composition, Creativity and Personal Style., Marketing Fine Art Photography and How Photographs are Sold.
http://www.beautiful-landscape.com
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #95 on: September 18, 2007, 09:56:27 PM »
ReplyReply

I love the look of these photos.  I don't think they are dreary.  Stark, sure, but not dreary.
Logged
NikosR
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 622


WWW
« Reply #96 on: September 19, 2007, 05:33:23 AM »
ReplyReply

Since it seems we are right on track again as far as the original message in this thread is concerned and since I'm the OP and my original PS. was partly addressed by an 'eye witness' full-time Antartica resident, may again rephrase my question?

Since when an artistic book needs to be realistic (to whose eyes?), or present nature in ALL its many facets and aspects, or appear not to suffer from ANY amount of post manipulation?. Furthermore, would all the images, photo galleries and collections we've seen by Michael and Co of their photo trips to Antartica fit in the above description? Are they more realistic, more representative and less manipulated?

PS. I'm quoting from the postscript to the MR article:

'If you would like to see and photograph for yourself what Antarctica is really like, you may wish to join my third Antarctic photographic expedition, now scheduled for mid-January, 2009'.

Really?
« Last Edit: September 19, 2007, 09:51:52 AM by NikosR » Logged

Nikos
Antarctic Mat
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 56


« Reply #97 on: September 19, 2007, 08:00:10 AM »
ReplyReply

Hello.

I'd just like to clarify the points I made, I think I was pretty open about the fact that I had only seen the cover, I will have a look at the web site though.

My comments were not directed at the technical criticisms of the photographs themselves, I am a not a professional photographer, I was more bothered by the fact that someone who has sailed down the peninsular a couple of times in the height of summer feels qualified to say what Antarctica is really like. I obviously fully accept any criticism leveled at the image made by a professional, if they are all altered in order to put across a point of view then the artistic merits should be on a very personal level surely, technical aspects can obviously be commented upon by experts.
I have a couple of thousand Antarctic photographs, a large majority show heavy skies, stark contrasts, none have been manipulated because I don't know what I'm doing!
The Antarctic is a very stark place, I think everyone is aware of that, we have hundreds of Antarctic books here in our library, hardly any show a true representation of what it is like to live here, if photographers fill a book with beautiful blue skies, stunning ice burgs, fluffy baby seals they are entering into a form of manipulation no different from the guy who only chooses dark and sombre images, some may say that the guy with the dark images has created a book intended to start conversations, prompt action maybe, it could also be said that the book filled with the fluffy images is designed to raise more money than awareness.
Just my thoughts obviously.
Mat.
Halley Research Station.
Brunt Ice Shelf.
Logged
mtomalty
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 536


WWW
« Reply #98 on: September 19, 2007, 04:12:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Youtube has a few videos archived that feature photographer Sebastian Copelands
images and commentary regarding his Antarctica experience.
It's clear he's an activist but I don't think that diminishes his photographic vision regardless
of whether we agree or disagree with his politics and accompanying video content
certainly doesn't suggest poor post processing skills.The low cloud ceiling is evident in
much of the video.

Search with the keywords: Antarctica and Copeland.   Specifically look for a clip
called Antarctica:a global warning

I have still only seen the cover image in reference to his book but would be curious to know
if the imagery featured in this video reflect the content of the book.

Seems like a pretty well balanced cross section of images to me and,personally,I'm more
responsive to the darker,more somber content

Also for a longer winded address check out:
http://definitivespace.zaadz.com/blog/2007...astian_copeland

Mark
Logged
josayeruk
Guest
« Reply #99 on: September 19, 2007, 07:36:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
PS. I'm quoting from the postscript to the MR article:

'If you would like to see and photograph for yourself what Antarctica is really like, you may wish to join my third Antarctic photographic expedition, now scheduled for mid-January, 2009'.

Really?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140376\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Subtle us a brick to the head, eh.  
Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad