Monday, March 28, 2022

Why Are People So Afraid? / ᎦᏙᏃ ᏴᏫ ᎤᎪᏗ ᎠᏍᎦᎢᎲ

Sunday, March 27, 2022

My Return to Film Photography - XVI

Since the last instalment in this series (about four weeks ago), I've shot four rolls of film: two rolls of Rollei Infrared 400 (one 35mm and one 120) and two rolls of Ilford FP4 Plus (one 35mm and one 120). The subject of this instalment will be the infrared experience.

In the photo above you see my Mamiya C33, set up for infrared photography. The filter over the taking lens is a Hoya 25A, which is one of those recommended by Rollei, the film manufacturer. The filter factor is 8, so I divided the film's ISO 400 rating by 8 and reset it to 50. IR film focuses differently from normal panchromatic film because IR light has a longer wavelength. For this reason, most camera lenses have a small, red index mark on the distance scale for focusing with IR film (all of my 35mm lenses have such a mark). The first problem I encountered was the absence of such a mark on the distance scale of the Mamiya. My solution was to study those other lenses, particularly the 80mm setting of the zoom lens (which is also the focal length of the normal lens of the Mamiya), to see where the normal index mark would be for each distance setting according to the IR index mark. I made a table of these correspondences, which I then graphed for interpolations. This solution worked great. I did my test shooting at measured distances (mostly a single distance), which I set according to my graph. Such careful measuring of distances under controlled test conditions resulted in my 6x6cm shots being better focused than my 35mm shots, although there was no red index mark on the camera.

While we are talking about potential pitfalls in using IR film, I should mention that part of my 35mm roll was a bit fogged by light at the edges, due to my somewhat careless handling of the film cassette before developing. Apparently the Rollei cassette was not 100% light-tight. I was also sorry to see that the unexposed film was in a plastic can, not a metal one such as Kodak used to provide for IR film.

Here are a few images from my tests, first the 35mm, and then the 120:

In the shot above, you can see the typical IR "black sky and glowing foliage" effect.

Conclusions: I like IR film a lot, and I had forgotten how much I like it. Everyone know that it can give great special effects in landscape shots, but I find that it can also be useful for portraits. Due to its inherently higher contrast, it makes good use of low, indoor artificial lighting. It seems to be more sensitive than ordinary panchromatic film to modern light sources such as quartz halogen. For nudes, the heightened contrast brings out musculature.

I tried to test the "IR x-ray effect," by which certain types of clothing are rendered transparent, but determined that the filter I was using was not very suitable for that. I have ordered the most suitable type of filter for that purpose, but won't have it for about a month. It is interesting to note that Rollei did not include any of the "good" ones for the purpose among their ten-or-so recommendations. When I get the new filter, I'll test it on myself and share the results with you all. Until next time, shoot film if you can!

(to be continued)

In This Life / ᎯᎠ ᎥᎴᏂᏙᎲ ᎭᏫᎾ

Thursday, March 24, 2022

Our Job on Earth / ᎠᏆᏤᎵ ᏧᎸᏫᏍᏓᏁᏗ ᎡᏆ-ᎡᎶᎯ ᎾᎿ

Tuesday, March 22, 2022

Synoptica XXXII - The Call of Matthew/Levi

The two images above are partial page-copies from GOSPEL PARALLELS A Synopsis of the First Three Gospels, Ed. by Burton H. Throckmorton, Jr., a publication in which I own no rights.

An examination of the three columns on these pages will show immediately that we have a lot to talk about. To give us even more to talk about, here is another partial page-copy:

This is from The Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, by George Howard, another publication in which I own no rights.

And, just to make things even more interesting, here is the Masoretic Hebrew text of the quotation from Hosea 6:6, with pointing left out to make it easier to see that it agrees perfectly with Shem-Tob's text in the Howard book (but differs in the tense of the verb from all texts that were in use by the Christians of Europe:

כי חסד חפצתי ולא־זבח

We should consider, first of all, similarities and discrepancies among the three synoptic gospels in their canonical texts. Here is a list to get us started:

The subject of the story is named "Matthew" in the Gospel of Matthew, but is called "Levi" in the other two Synoptics.
He is, in the Greek tradition, said to be a tax collector, but in the Hebrew tradition he is apparently a money changer.
Only Mk. calls him "the son of Alphaeus."
Only Lk. adds, at the end, "to repentance."

Only Mt. includes the quotation from Hosea 6:6.

Further considerations:

The version in Mt. is less detailed than the other two.

The name "Levi" does not appear in the lists of Apostles.

The quotation from Hosea is given in its correct Hebrew form in the Hebrew tradition represented by Shem Tob, which it never was in the Greek and Latin NT translations used by Christians.

First of all, let's consider the name change. It is evident that the person in the story underwent a name change from "Levi" to "Matthew" (and not the other way around) since his name has come down to us, including in the lists of Apostles, as "Matthew." In Shem-Tob's Hebrew Matthew, the form of the name is given as "Matatiah," which means "gift of God." Shem-Tob also glosses it, in Spanish, as "Mateo."

We don't know the reason for this name change, and perhaps never will, but we can be pretty sure that the direction of the change was from "Levi" to "Matthew," and not the other way around. One might, therefore, be tempted to think that either Mark or Luke was the source, and Matthew came later, But it is a guiding principle in textual criticism that the briefer of two texts is usually the earlier one and closer to the source, Matthew is, here, the briefer, sparser text.

This seeming conflict may not really be one at all. For several years now I've believed that my Layered Matthew Hypothesis is the correct solution to the so-called Synoptic Problem. According to this hypothesis, the Gospel of Matthew was the first to be written (such was the predominant belief in the Church for 1800 years, supported by early writers such as Papias), and it was published in several (at least three) "editions" or "layers." The first layer, which I have called Matthew I, was mainly Sayings material, and Luke borrowed from it extensively, but Mark did not. Much of Luke reflects the earliest layer of Matthew, as can be seen especially in the Beatitudes, This is confirmed by the existence of Shem-Tob's Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, which is a little more primitive than canonical, Greek Matthew, and I believe goes back in its roots to the level of Matthew II. Matthew III is, by definition, canonical, Greek Matthew, a translation from Matthew's original Hebrew.

The quote from Hosea 6:6 belongs to the level of Matthew II, and was not yet present when Luke and Mark did their borrowings. Interestingly, in Shem-Tob the quotation is given in its correct, Hebrew form ("I desired," or "I have desired," which it never is in the Greek tradition, which instead has "I desire."

(to be continued)

Sunday, March 20, 2022

Image from James Webb Space Telescope

The image above has just been shared with us by NASA. It is the first in-focus image from the new James Webb Space Telescope. It was taken in the near-infrared, using a red filter to increase contrast. The bright star in the center, which has been named 2MASS J17554042+6551277, is two thousand light-years from Earth, so we are looking at light that left the star when Jesus and Julius Caesar walked our planet.

The telescope is made up of eighteen hexagonal mirrors, adjusted to nanometers (billionths of a meter) to form a single, large mirror. Further adjustments will be done, providing images that are even sharper.

These public images furnished by NASA never show the maximum information that can be extracted from them. Knowing this, I got what more I could from the image by further editing:

Stars and galaxies are strewn across the background like crumbs from God's abundant table.

Original image: NASA. Further editing by Donald C. Traxler aka Donald Jacobson Traxler.

Saturday, March 19, 2022

New Quatrains of Our Lady - I

The Despot of the Agushas will headlong fall,

and in his place another will rule.

A woman of the eighteenth will heed the call,

and bring a new peace to the lotus pool.

La condition humaine

Friday, March 18, 2022

It Is Not the Ability to Read and Write / Ꮭ ᎨᏒᎠᏎ ᎾᏏᎾᏒ ᎪᎵᏱ ᎠᎴ ᎪᏪᎶᏗ

Re-posting this, as it is timely right now.

Tuesday, March 15, 2022

144,000 Visits and Many Rolls of Film

A couple of days ago we passed the milestone of 144,000 visits to (page views in) this poetry, writing, and photography blog. My sister Patricia, who is a well known poet and the recipient of many awards, says that my internet numbers put hers to shame. It is no doubt true, but I certainly can't explain it. Perhaps people just like nudity. I like it too, and have chosen to live naked as much of the time as possible (which in these days of pandemic is almost all the time). On a typical day I am clothed from a half hour to two hours out of twenty-four. In other words, I am unclothed from 92% to 98% of the time. This is an important statistic if one wishes to understand my view of the world.

But my activity is not limited to writing poetry and nude modeling. I write on many subjects, including language, religion, the so-called Synoptic Problem, and Bible translation.

Lately I have begun to write about photography, especially film photography. My series, "My Return to Film Photography," now includes fifteen parts (fourteen, actually--there is no part thirteen). In the next few days, after I do tests of Ilford FP4 Plus and Rollei Infrared 400, in both 35mm and medium format, I'll write an instalment on the different films that I'm using. Don't miss it!

As usual, I would like to thank you all for your loyal and enthusiastic readership. Thanks. Wadó, ꮹꮩ'.

Monday, March 14, 2022

A Naked Person / ᎤᏰᎸᎭ ᏏᏴᏫ

Sunday, March 13, 2022

The Word of the Day / ᎧᏁᎢᏍᏗ ᎢᎦ ᎥᎿᎢ

Thursday, March 10, 2022

We Live in a World / ᎢᏧᎳ ᎠᎴᏂᏙᎭᏎ ᎡᏆ-ᎡᎶᎯ ᎭᏫᎾ

Wednesday, March 9, 2022

Each of Us Is the Center / ᏏᏴᏫ ᎢᏧᎸ ᎥᎿᎢ ᎨᏒᎠᏎ ᎠᏰᎵ

Monday, March 7, 2022

I Am Not the Warm Breeze

Each of Us Is the Center / ᏏᏴᏫ ᎢᏧᎸ ᎥᎿᎢ ᎨᏒᎠᏎ ᎠᏰᎵ

Sunday, March 6, 2022

Through the Small Details / ᎤᏍᏗ ᏄᏍᏗᏓᏅᎢᏗ ᏗᎬᏩᎶᏒ

Saturday, March 5, 2022

If There Is to Be a New World / ᎢᏳᏃ ᎨᏒᎣᏎ ᎢᏤ ᎡᏆ-ᎡᎶᎯ

Friday, March 4, 2022

The Spirit Does Not Depend on the Body / ᎠᏓᏅᏙ Ꮭ ᎠᎵᏍᎦᏍᏙᏓᏎ ᎠᏰᎸ ᎾᎿ

The Body Is a Gift / ᎠᏰᎸ ᎨᏒᎠᏎ ᎠᏓᏁᏙ

Tuesday, March 1, 2022

My Return to Film Photography - XV

The photo above, the subject of which is my Mamiya C33, was shot with the Canon EOS Rebel 2000, which I have hardly used until now. I decided to tear myself away from the AE-1, which I really love, long enough to shoot a roll with the EOS. I was pleasantly surprised.

The film version of the EOS, introduced in 1999, is auto-exposure (aperture priority, shutter priority, of program) and autofocus. The auto-exposure is great, and I got beautiful, consistent negatives.

I'm afraid that I can't be as sanguine about the autofocus, at least for my purposes. It is easily fooled into focusing on something other than the main subject. This is why the manufacturer made it possible to override the auto focus and just focus manually. I prefer to set the auto-exposure to either Av (aperture priority) or Tv (shutter priority), as the case warrants, and do the focusing myself.

The pleasant surprise of which I spoke was the quality of the lens that came with the camera: the Canon Zoom Lens EF 28-80mm 1:3.5-5.6 II. I normally don't expect as much from a zoom lens as I do from a prime lens, but the sharpness and contrast of this lens were both excellent.

Here are a few sample shots:

All of these images were shot on Ilford HP5+, rated at ISO 400 and developed normally in D-76 (stk). I used Kodak Photo-Flo 200 at the end of the washing process.

In the next instalment of this series, I hope to say something about some of the films I'm using. In the meantime, shoot film, if you can!

(to be continued)