Photographing the Moon through a telescope on a shoestring budget requires some post. My choice is GIMP. After a month-long chase, I didn’t care how polished the framing or results of any Moon pictures through a telescope came out, I just wanted to see the damn thing! What starts out flat can be processed quite simply to reveal a ‘world’ of silvers and grays from just a fat sliver on the histogram.

What makes a good photograph? What’s a good picture? That’s a valid, if vague, question. Aesthetics aside, there is a real answer. As a photography teacher I get the question a lot. Posting this may seem simple but it’s a revelation to the newer shooter.

I took my sweet time and finally got back the 120mm roll of Kodak film I used in the Diana F+ The plastic Lomography camera has a viewer window that lets you advance the film to shoot either 12 or 16 shots. Above all else, I was reminded just how “brilliant” analog film is over digital results despite the lack of instant gratification.

A Nikon Coolpix S6000 at $150 bucks shooting at 8 Megapixels delivers normally to standard expectations. What happens though when we pass those same images through a post-process called Tone Mapping and multiple exposures of the same scene through HDR software? When does which prevail? What situations benefit most from which form of post-processing?

I’m a happy and passive member of a Washington D.C. foodie community and get to meet a lot of great people when I go out places. I bring with me tech knowledge and an interest in how these bloggers work and what tools they use to chirp and tweet and blog and post about food and other things edible.

It doesn’t happen often, but sometimes, I meet someone to whom my rants and tech rabble are meaningless. I love it.