The Online Photographer

Of the last 200,000 visits to this site, 94,276 came from the United States; Canada was next with 19,479 visitors, closely followed by the U.K. with 18,471. Our friends in Australia round out the top four with 7,642.

What's the relative population of Canada vs. the U.S.? We might get more visits per capita from Canada.

We had zero visits from about a dozen countries in central Africa. The only countries outside of Africa from which no one visited us were Turkmenistan and Papua New Guinea. Those countries were blank on the map. (The Caspian Sea was blank too, and I clicked on it about ten times trying to see what country it was. D'oh! What can I say? I'm not from around there.)  We're not stunningly popular in Paraguay (2 visits), Greenland (1 visit), Angola (1), Myanmar (1), or Cuba (1). We're much better read in Costa Rica (100 visits) than in neighboring Nicaragua (2).

Places where we're surprisingly popular: Finland (2,395 visits), The Philippines (1,184), Romania (1,021), Brazil (1,014), and Thailand (531). And I'm going to count Mongolia on this list, with 8 visits, because I wouldn't have thought we'd have any readers from Mongolia. Whoever you are in Ulaanbaatar, greetings and good wishes! 

We're read all over Europe, but garnered only 94 visits from Ukraine. I think we need some talking up in Ukraine—my sister-in-law Tetiana is Ukrainian!

According to Google Analytics, from whence all this tasty information cometh, TOP is read in 170 different countries. Here's to you, wherever you are in this beautiful round world.

Mike

Send this post to a friend

Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. More...
Original contents copyright 2010 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved.

I will be off until Monday morning in order to put in some work on a photo-related project. (But one that will interest you once it's done, promise.)

—Mike, TOP's Head Homunculus and Sometime Slacker

UPDATE: And we have a winner! Thanks to everyone who gave it a try—we got some nice ones. I'll post the relevant details when the new banner goes up.

The "contest" is now over, so no need to send any more. Thanks! 

Mike

-

I don't know about you, but I'm getting pretty tired of our header—the box at the top of this page that says "The Online Photographer."

I keep puttering with new ones, but I gotta face it, I'm not a designer. I don't seem to have any decent fonts, either.

So...any amateur (or slumming pro) designers out there? Want to try your hand at designing a new header for TOP? (I got a few offers of help last year, when I mentioned this the first time, but I can't find the emails any more.)

Doesn't have to be anything terribly fancy. Just something dignified and not too stylish. Here are the specs:

Needs to be 870 pixels wide. The current one is 140 pixels high, but that's not set in stone.

Has to go with our current color scheme, which I can't change. (Actually I can change the sidebar color, just not the main column color.)

I'd like it if it featured the letters "TOP" somehow, in addition to the words "The Online Photographer." But that's not required. It should also say "Edited by Mike Johnston" somewhere on it, but small.

It can contain images if you want to, but beware, the specific implications of any images would have to be very appropriate, and I just don't know what they would be. Images of current cameras will not make it. Images would be more likely to hurt your chances than help them, I'm guessing. But it's up to you.

Eschew cliché: Please, no stylized apertures replacing the "O" in "TOP"!

First Prize: a $250 Amazon Gift Certificate, sent to you by email. You won't get a permanent credit on the page, but I'll write a post saying who designed the winning entry and linking to your website.

Contest lasts until: we get one I like and want to use.

Send to: my email address, linked in the right-hand column. No jokes, please: I have enough to sort through as it is.

Whaddaya say—give it a shot?

Mike

It seems to me that appropriation is part and parcel of blogging. We're all the time saying, in effect, "Hey, look at this interesting thing! [That I'm now reproducing on my site without owning it and without necessarily having permission.]" I'm always conscious of this and I always try to be sensitive to the "fair" part of Fair Use. In particular, if someone is clear about what they want to have happen with their material, I try to respect that. Mainly, bloggers and website editors do this by being conscientious about linking—many people really do want publicity and "viral" connections, so linking back to whomever owns something is often enough consideration for them. Especially from a site like TOP, which can send thousands of visitors at a time to a linked site. So, for instance, on Wednesday I used a photograph of Umida Akhmedova I got from the Radio Free Europe site. But I credited them and linked back to them. Is that enough? Hope so.

Anyway, not long ago, as you'll probably remember if you're a regular reader, I published, here on TOP, a video I found on YouTube of the famous mystery, horror, and "speculative" (not "science") fiction writer Harlan Ellison ranting about not being paid for his work by people who expect (ahem) that he'll be happy to do it for the publicity. He makes it crystal clear in the video that he's not. 

A few people joked that I had better have my homeowner's insurance in order (he threatens in passing in the video to burn down the building of a would-be appropriator).

But I got to thinking. Really, by publishing that video, I've done exactly what he's saying in the video he doesn't want people to do. How is that fair?

So I poked around on the internet. He's not online, and I couldn't find an email address, but I came up with the best mailing address for him I could find and mailed him a check for $25, along with a brief handwritten note explaining what it was for.

Well, to my surprise, yesterday I got a delightful little note back, typed on a tiny square of paper (reproduced here more or less actual size), no doubt with the ancient manual Olympia typewriter Harlan is famous for continuing to be faithful to. Pronouncing himself "pleased and stunned," he says "YOU are the first—the VERY FIRST—mensch & Good Guy to ever send me a payment for the work YouTube, et al, have mis-appropriated."

Well worth twenty-five bucks, if you ask me, quite apart from the video.

Mike

Send this post to a friend

Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. More...

More eyes: I've added an interesting "Featured Comment" to the "Ralph Gibson on Time" post below that you might want to see. Some interesting comparison photographs.

Ctein weekly: I'm pleased to announce that Ctein's columns will now appear regularly once a week. Starting this coming Thursday, his column will appear every Thursday morning.

Mike

A post called "Clarification" from yesterday was removed because it contained errors. My apologies.

Mike

Publisher's Statement: In plain view of God, Man, and the FTC, I would like to state that I, Michael C. Johnston, of Waukesha, Wisconsin, U.S. of A., am the publisher, editor, and author of this website, known as "The Online Photographer," and I take responsibility for its contents. I attempt to hew to standard journalistic practices to the limits of my ability and of my understanding of said practices, and I make every reasonable attempt to require authors who write for the site to do the same.

I "monetize" (i.e., glean earnings from) the site in several different ways. One way is by affiliating with "e-tailers" (i.e., online or mail-order retailers or discounters, in our case principally, but not exclusively, Amazon and B&H Photo). These vendors share a small percentage of their profits with us from sales referred from our site. I remind readers of this as often as I dare without being totally annoying about it, although it would have to be up to individual readers to judge if success is achieved on that last count.

I very much like the arrangement. It seems like a win-win-win: our affiliate e-tailers get a sale which might otherwise have gone to someone else; readers get to contribute materially to the health of TOP without paying anything extra for what they're buying; and I am dosed with small dollops of cash I manifestly don't deserve. Which I couldn't be happier about.

I make every effort to make these arrangements transparent. Not only do we not try to hide anything, the opposite principle is in force: to the extent that I can do so without being ridiculous about it, I try to remind readers of our affiliations as often as I can, because, each time I do, people use the links more, apparently because many people like the website and want to support it.

In general, every link to any B&H Photo page or any Amazon page found on this site should be considered an affiliate link. If it isn't, I messed up. Maybe I was tired.

However, to more consistently discharge our fiduciary duty to all readers and to disclose to them the connection between hot links and financial emoluments, as well as to more heartily endorse and conform to FTC guidelines for bloggers, the following statement will be added discreetly to all our postings from now on: "Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site."

Signed virtually,

Michael C. Johnston

Send this post to a friend

Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

I'm sorry to trouble you with self-serving administrative concerns so soon after the Birthday post, but I wanted to pass this along. I've just learned, definitively, that TOP does not get credit for any items you buy from Amazon that were previously placed in your cart, whether you linked from here when you placed them there or not. We only get credit for items you both select and buy after linking to Amazon from here.

I should have known this two years ago. I've been telling people the opposite, all this time. How discouraging.

Never did have much of a head for business.

Mike

Rather incredibly (and by incredible, I mean difficult to believe), TOP turns four years old on Saturday. I think I've mentioned before that when I started doing this in 2005, my ambition was to keep it going for a year, and, frankly, at the start, I wouldn't have given a farthing for the chances of that. And yet here we are, still chasing the great white squirrel.

To date, there have been a few dozen shy of 3,000 posts, well over 21 million visits to the main page, and very close to 50,000 comments.

Now, I hate to do this to you, I really do, but you know what's coming: as I always say, it's time to buy yourself our birthday present. If there's something you want from either Amazon or B&H Photo, you must* buy it for yourself. Look, you have to do something to support TOP and help pay for all the good free stuff you enjoy, right? So if there's a book you want, or a lens, or a CD, anything, I'm sorry, but it's your duty; you really have no choice—your hands are tied—your obligation as clear as...optical glass. And if your spouse or partner, child or parent complains about you spending money, well, you can tell him or her in good conscience that you didn't want to buy yourself a present, but you had to, Mike forced you to.

Meanwhile, I'm going to take a couple of days off. I won't be slacking, however: I plan to use the time to finish up this year's "TOP Ten Cameras" list. This time, though, I'm trying something different. I know we all just love the cute way that the "top" in "top ten" matches the site's acronym, but let's face it, the concept of the "best" cameras is incredible (and by incredible, I mean lacking in credibility. Kinda silly, in other words). I'm planning to try a new format for it, too. Hope you'll be entertained, and possibly even enlightened.

Okay, mostly entertained.

And Happy Thanksgiving to all of you who celebrate it—what the heck, even if you don't.

Cheers,

Mike, TOP's Chief Artificial Coffee Creamer Officer**

*(I kid, of course. As I also always say, you're always welcome here whether you buy anything through our links or not. Especially if you are un- or under-employed, my thoughts are with you this Thanksgiving, and please keep your money for more important things. You can catch us when prosperity smiles on you again, as surely it will.

I'm very grateful for all the support we get from so many people. TOP has felt the economic downturn but is still surviving. More than 270 people "subscribe," i.e., give a recurring donation of at least 25 cents a month; a number of people have sent cash "tips"; somewhere between 1% and 4% of our readers have bought things though our links at least once; and various "Friends of the Site" have made donations in kind of everything from professional advice to equipment loans. Plus, we have some great advertisers. And let's not forget the many individuals who have written the guest posts or the great comments that add so much to the conversation. I have a lot to be thankful for this Thanksgiving.)

**

ADDENDA:

 

Out-of-camera JPEG version

 

Send this post to a friend

(P.S. There are sometimes some hidden jokes on the site that I put in just to amuse myself. People hardly ever notice. Hit the permalink for this post and check out the URL....)

Since the first of the month just went past again, I'd like to say thanks to all of you who ordered something from Amazon or B&H Photo (our major affiliates) through our links.

It's a painless way to support the site because those companies then share a little bit of their profits with us. You don't have to pay anything more, but a small portion of your purchase price goes to us.

Here's our links page. It includes links to Amazon in Canada, Germany, and the U.K.

I get this question a lot, so I'll answer it in advance—anything you order from B&H or through Amazon (doesn't matter what it is, and third-party vendors count) gets credited to TOP as long as you go directly there from here when you actually make the purchase. You can save the Amazon link URLs but not the B&H one.

If you've ordered anything through our links, it's just really kind of you. Merci beaucoup!

Now back to work on Part II of the GF1 / E-P1 post....

—Mike, TOP CFO, Balayeur de plancher, and Generalissimo of Dunning

Illustration by Cheryl Jacobs Nicolai from this post

I wonder if I've angered the gods lately? I seem to be suffering from a spate of technical problems, unrelated but arising in succession.

I was preparing my epic GF1 vs. E-P1 post for publication this morning when...certain keys on my keyboard stopped working. It made it hard to type certain special characters and cut and paste. After forty-five minutes of prying off the keys and cleaning out the schmutz that has somehow collected beneath them (when is somebody going to invent an un-dirtiable keyboard?), I gave up and ordered a new keyboard for express delivery. This has been an on-again, off-again problem for about the past four days. I'm really hoping it's the keyboard and not something in the e-brain of the blog compositor.

Last weekend our freshly serviced lawnmower failed to start. The service guy showed up in his pickup truck last night to cart it away again. He tells me that although I bought a lawnmower that has "Honda" emblazened on it, it's not a Honda lawnmower—it's a Sears Craftsman lawnmower, with an engine built by Honda to Sears' specs—meaning, of much lower quality than "real" Honda engines.

Oh.

Wish I'd known that before I overpaid for it.

I will probably sort out my ongoing bad lawnmower luck someday. Probably just as soon as my son moves away and I move back into an apartment.

There have been other incidents. Most notably: I came across a cache of brand new, still shrinkwrapped jazz records recently, at a local used bookstore. Bought 'em all. Thought I had made a real score. So guess what? About half of them are faulty. One is perfect but for a neatly scribed scratch that runs most of the way across one song. Another is intolerably noisy, with pops and ticks throughout the whole record. Mind you, these were unopened. They're all manufacturing defects. 

I suppose there had to be some reason why they were bargain priced and stuck in a bin in an out-of-the-way used book store.

Of course, with the 9,000 or so music files I have on the hard drive, I don't have that problem. I have a different problem. Every time iTunes updates, which is frequently, it can't find any music that wasn't purchased from iTunes. I have to go search manually for the files before I can play them.

It's always something. Maybe if I bought an iTunes how-to book to not read, it would help.

Zeus? Buddy? What have I ever done to you, man?

Regular programming will return when the new keyboard gets here. With any luck, that is: I ain't killing no goat.

Mike

UPDATE: I got the new keyboard on Thursday (a nice Microsoft Natural Ergo 4000) after learning that the problem was indeed in the TypePad interface and not in the old keyboard at all. But I put a lot of miles on my keyboard, and the old one was in pretty grubby condition. Fortunately, I really do learn something every week here on TOP, and this week I learned about washing dirty keyboards in the dishwasher (the amusing link is from a reader named charlie—thanks, charlie), so the old one is in the dishwasher right now.

Meanwhile, I'd forgotten how nice these keyboards feel when they're new—they're not mechanical, but the type with the plastic membranes under the keys—but they're still very nice.

Featured Comment by Riley: "I believe the proper sacrifice for a keyboard is a hamster."

Featured Comment by Stan B.: "To this day, don't know why keyboards don't come equipped with a crumb tray...."

Featured Comment by Hugh Look: "I think you've been a victim of a unique and very secret collaboration between Apple and Microsoft, the little-known Critical Task Detector (CDT), now built in to all small computers. CDT monitors the speed at which you strike the keys, the force with which you strike them, the number of times you use the backspace key and the sweat on your fingertips. Clever software then computes the probability of an impending deadline by adding these up, and when it gets a suitably large number it decides that indeed a deadline is looming and you need to be punished for leaving it so late, so that You Will Never Do It Again. You know what happens next.

"I'm taking Microsoft and Apple to the European Court of Human Rights on the grounds that CDT is discriminatory against a) freelance newsletter editors (as I used to be until CDT forced me out of the business) and b) people with ADD (as I still am)."

Featured Comment by Fred: "If you have a goat—put it to work on your lawn!"

Featured Comment by fmertz: "Pullleeeeze! The proper sacrifice for a keyboard is, wait for it...a mouse!"

When TOP posted the pictures of the Prius/Tesla/Toureg wreck the other day, I failed to give credit to the photographer (I found the pictures at a third-party website which also didn't attribute them). Turns out the photographer is John Nuttall, a.k.a. skagman, who has alternative views on his flickr page. He says the pictures have been extremely popular and that he's gotten more than 13,000 hits on his flicker photostream since putting them up. Thanks to John for setting us straight.

Mike

Featured Comment by Bill Mitchell: "OT: since I got my Prius, when I drive in the local State Park the wild animals seem to pay no attention to me. Last weekend I came on several flocks of wild turkey, and they let me drive right up in the midst of them as though I weren't there (they were on both sides of the main road, running back and forth between them). Turkeys are the most skitterish wild life, but deer act the same way towards the Prius. I haven't run across our resident Florida panther lately, so I don't know how it would react."

Mike replies: On the contrary, this might not be off topic at all! I imagine this might be something that certain wildlife photographers might very much want to know about....

I've been experiencing some technical problems with the website lately. This may result in a higher than usual number of errors surviving in posts for longer than they should. Also, some readers have been having trouble leaving comments. We are working on the problems. I'm sorry for any inconvenience and I hope you will bear with us.

Mike

Featured Comment by Roger Bradbury: "There's a bear with you? I'd be very careful, then. Remember, when photographing bears it is not necessary to run faster than the bear, just faster than your assistant."

The New York Times published an obituary of Marty Forscher yesterday, written by Margalit Fox. I was pleasantly surprised to see that TOP was cited, and TOP reader Marshall Arbitman's Featured Comment was quoted.

Mike
(Thanks to Will)

Send this post to a friend