Lost in a Process ? — or Tampered ?

A man was walking on a trail in the middle of nowhere and met

Lord Buddha.   He asked, is this the right way to go ?

Lord Buddha answered,  Yes I came from there. You just GO.

Anyhow it was only a single trail, nothing else. —– Does it mean

Lord Buddha “Taught him the right way ?” or taught nothing new ?

—–

The man was born to go this way anyway.   So that there may

not be any needs to ask. —– still having the words, it gave him

a confidence and a peace of mind.

He just kept walk, thence reached to the destination.

(But, if the man didn’t actually walk all the way up, or stray-away,

he got nowhere and remained in the middle of nowhere,

still wandering in a barren desert.)

—– Everybody was born to have Dharma.   Therefore, unless

stray-away from the trail, but kept walking, everybody can

reach the destination —– where it was called Nirvana.

So, Lord Buddha told a man ” Just Go” — since it was a  way to

gain Selflessness and to reach Nirvana.

(Remember ?  Kisa Gotami’s story ?)

[]

Though, in reality very few did, since even fewer ever met

Lord Buddha, so that most of the people got the direction from

others who said walked it before.    And the another trouble was that

so many had took wrong turn, hence wrong trail had been

marked on the ground which was misleading the people to stray-away.

[]

Lord Buddha’s aim was to save the people from

“A delusion of Samsara” = The idea of Samsara  WAS  the very delusion”

though, later, the Teachings were mistaken to “Save from Samsara” on

the assumption of “endless cycle of rebirth = Samsara exists” because

the Hindu idea of Samsara was almost a common-sense THEN.

(During 400 years of oral tradition, gradually

the original contents of the Teachings has been changed to

“Buddhism IS based on a belief of Reincarnation”—– because of

this, the later attempt to revive the origin such as “Selflessness” 

became a contradiction = “If Selfless / Anatman was true, who is going

to be reincarnated ?  = and it was misinterpreted as a self-sacrifice.

—– There was absolutely no concept of “After life” in the

Lord Buddha’s teachings. = He didn’t even bother to give an answer to it.

(Able to answer mean, such idea was exists in the mind.  But because

there was absolutely no such notion, even no word exist in his mind.)

Or the Words to clarify “No after Life” was intentionally removed from

the oral recitation, because it contradicts a popular Hindu belief =

People must have thought “Such Enlightened wise-man wouldn’t have

had said such silly things against  a common knowledge of Reincarnation” ! 

[]

But if Lord Buddha’s teachings were the same to Hinduism, why people

specially come and seek a liberation in his teachings ?  = Because,

Lord Buddha denied the reincarnation, it’s mean no previous life which

would impose a Cast to next life exists.  Hence there was no Cast system in

the Original Buddhism.  

Cast is a part of Hindu Samsara idea ! —– Denial to such idea was the

Lord Buddha’s very distinctive and revolutionary new teachings.  

(The idea of “Re-born while carrying the Karma of previous life IS the CAST”.  

Denial of Perpetual Soul (Self) = No Self to be Re-born, hence NO CAST.)

—– You have to see the truth in the historical fact.

Think yourself.  Don’t believe the scripture blindly. —– Remember,

Lord Buddha reached to his Enlightenment without reading any scripture !

___/\___

[]

What Buddha found

(According to the Scripture which Yoshizen found in the Dragon’s den in South London.

—– the Authenticity is more or less the same to any other Buddhist  Scripture )  ;-D

After 6 years of ascetic hard practice which was based on the Vedic concept, “With a

concentration of one’s mind = Atman can reach to the level of super natural power”

which is, of cause, on the belief of that the Atman exists. —– but to realize, it was not

suit for him, and left the ascetic practice, and having nursing his weakened body,

Gautama Buddha suddenly noticed that, while eating a milk-porridge offered by a

village girl Sujata, his mind was completely empty. = no mind or conscious was there.

It must had shocked him and made him realized that we’ve been doing a lots of things

without having any thought or conscious. We all are walking without thinking how to walk.

Facing this undeniable fact, he realized that the belief of Atman was utterly false.

What makes us to live, and walk was not the Atman but invisible Dharma.

Atman is not exists, and if we remove the mind or thinking and make it empty, the Dharma

which has been masked by the mind will prevail.

—– So, he tested this, sitting under the Pipal tree.   And after 49 days when he run-out of all

the thoughts, the mind became empty, hence, without any pre-conception and with the

clearest eyes, he saw the world as it is which is the sign of the Dharma.

It was the moment of his Enlightenment.

[]

Then he gave a thought, why the same man who had been believing the existence of Atman

now seeing it is not exists.   If really Atman exists, same Gautama must see the same Atman

still here, but the fact showed, it is not.    It changes moment to moment.

When things changes, others change as well with direct, indirect connection and this makes

the Dharma dynamic.   Hence, nothing stays permanent.

But it is the paradox, to be the Dharma it should be permanent. —– what only persistent in

the Dharma is, its nature of change, not the appearance.   Appearance is just a transitional

illusion on our eyes.   And our eyes were also attached to this transitional existence, us,

which we can not even define it is existing or not, because the one who try to define it,

is not a consistent existence either.

So the situation, which can only be describable is, the changing nature of the Dharma which

got a mechanism of Karma, which drives everything change, moment to moment,

that nature IS the Truth.

[]

It’s means, “No rigid existence of Atman, let alone its perpetuity, hence No Self, the Self what

we imagined”, everything is Void.  And the Dharma and its mechanism of Karma are all

invisible and unknowable because they may also be Void.

—– Yet still, we are here, there is no choice but has to accept this Truth.

When you can not beat, better join them, be flexible.   This is the Enlightenment.

It is not a kind of jump and dance discovery, but neither need to be depressed, because, this

is what we are and our situation is.   It’s mean, we neither need to worry because, our worry

itself may be yet another illusion, and anyhow we are here only in this moment in only one life.

And we are here because the Karma caused us to be here, there must be a reason which

we can not know.    We have to accept and respect the Dharma.

[]

And an essential wisdom to deal with this situation, —– to deal with almost invisible Dharma

and the Karma, we have to see them as it is, with transparent perception, never with

coloured glass, in other words, in Selfless clear eyes.   In Selflessness, in definition, there is no

Ego or Greed either. Since, the owner of Ego and Greed is not exist.

Therefore we have no possibility to loose anything = We will be in total freedom = We can have

totally liberated life, free from any delusion.

So, Lord Buddha started to teach the way to obtain this Selflessness.

[]

(Note : It is crucial to see the formation of Buddhism in an aspect of historical situation.  

It was a time when the Vedic belief was gradually taken-over by the new Hinduism.  

A religion of mostly just worship and make rituals toward the Vedic Deities (hence, ordinary

people were just by-standers) to a religion which is taking a personal account in each Karma

and perpetual cycles of Reincarnation (Samsara) = Hinduism, which horrified the people with

a fear to be trapped in a cycle and even born again as a beast.  

Lord Buddha urgently needed to to give an answer to those people and liberate them from

such deluded idea by teaching them that the reincarnating soul = Atman itself is not exists

hence the one’s death will be the total end which IS the Nirvana.

No-Self / Selflessness / Anatta / Anatman was the centre of his teachings.  That was why when

Lord Buddha was asked a question (again) “What happens after a death ?” or  “After a death

where the soul goes ?” He was so annoyed and didn’t give an answer.  —— On the scripture,

his personal attendance Ananda asked him “Why didn’t give an answer” “Because, it would

confuse them” = If this scripture was true, even a closest disciple haven’t understood the

teachings, or most likely  the writer of the scripture didn’t know what the Buddhism was.

(on that time the original teachings had already lost !) 

[]

—– It’s sound strange still, it is quite common tendency of the Karma, people who afraid to

get injured get injury.   (May be because, the person who had no fear was more agile and

able to see and avoid a danger = the same tendency appeared everywhere in the life.)

There are endless list of the paradox in the Life. = They are definitely making the life FUN.

And this is the secret to live happier peaceful Life.

So, this is the Enlightenment.

___/\___

[]

Selfless = Anatman = Sunyata = Voidness

As I wrote in the previous post “No Teaching ??? ”, what

Lord Buddha was teaching was no other than the state of the brain “Selflessness”

such as when a person was completely absorbed into an action or practice.

(Though his approach to put emphasis on meditation may not be the best way.

==> So that many different methods was invented later).

But unfortunately, this neurological phenomenon and his Teachings has not been

correctly understood and kept by his followers.    The reason was, as I wrote, it was

not clearly explained even to the immediate disciples and not all the disciples

necessary understood, let alone actually reached to a state of Selflessness. 

[]

This history has been reflected to some tradition, such as that the Theravada sect

who is keeping rather ancient form of Buddhism define the “Voidness” = Sunnata is

pertaining to the Selflessness / Non-Self = Annatta, and this Annatta is in fact, no other

than the Sanskrit, Anatman.

Lord Buddha’s teachings had the fundamental stance against the Vadic Atman.

Therefore, it was NO-Atoman = Anatman. —– It showed, in the original teachings, there

was no separate notion of Voidness, because the feeling of Voidness = Detached view to

the world was a part of the Selflessness or Selflessness itself.

(The one who really possess the Selfless-eyes knows this.)

Because, when the Emotion was disconnected, and feel everything were detached, the

stimuli to any 5 senses doesn’t have significance —– it exists though makes no difference

as if it was not existed.   Hence, didn’t need to specially talk about so-called Voidness.

(People who naturally acquired to speak English, as born in England, doesn’t excite or

talk about it.  But foreigner who newly became bilingual tend to show-off that he can

speak English. = A person acquired Selflessness through long practice, doesn’t feel of

the Voidness anything special, since they gradually came together and feel nothing

that they are the separate phenomenon —– in fact the person doesn’t even noticed

such a phenomenon, either Selflessness or Voidness ever existed in the mind.) 

[]

The history of Buddhism was the masquerade of sham Guru who pretended to know the

Lord Buddha’s teachings = Selflessness. —– As, there was a hear-say, the attribution of

the Enlightenment (Selflessness) is such as “Middle way” or a “Detached view = Perception

of Void” —– Those Guru pretended that they know the subject, and deployed the argument

while writing yet another script about “Middle-way” or “Voidness” simply they saw the

opportunities to become famous and rich.     But in fact, some of them were Tantra, or

mixture of Hindu and as they were using their more familiar knowledge to describe

Selflessness and Buddhism, = Buddhism deviated so much.   In fact some of them became

beyond the recognition from the original teachings and end-up almost like the Hinduism.

[]

Fundamentally, there couldn’t be any argument or needs to discuss the matter of

Middle way or Voidness, even the Panya Paramita as a separate phenomenon, since

they are naturally attributed to the same state of Mushin or Selflessness

= Psychological Phenomenon is Just one.

(A man in ill for caught cold shows the symptoms such as “High temperature”

“Headache” “Coughing” etc. so that to deal with “High temperature” alone and

dip him into a cold water wouldn’t help him. :-D)

People who doesn’t know the whole, in its totality, picking-up a superficial distinctive

feature, and talking in loud voice, pretending that he is The expert. Is exactly like a Theory

of Economics = use one monetary index, and try to describe whole economical trend.

Or mimicking the fashion of a star, and buy the same handbag, use the same buzz-word.

All those are the sign of “This person doesn’t know what he is talking about”.

Still, the trouble was that to the eyes and the ears of people standing by, who knows

even less, think those sham Guru looks, sound, great. —– The sensational new fashion

trend with buzzword of Voidness and the thousand of new-Buddha etc.etc. those new

concepts in Mahayana scriptures were made-up in this way.   (But don’t get me wrong

I’m not against everything of Mahayana, as it opened the more flexibility and the

way of free thinking which is the essential to the Zen mind.)  

[]

The worst was Nagarjuna who boasted that he brought back the scriptures from the

Dragon’s cave in the sea bottom. = What a shameless braggart. —– If you see it in

cool head, you may realize that he was a kind of sham doctor, a salesman selling dubious

beauty portion.   And selling new buzzword of Voidness, exploiting the ignorance of the

Buddhists who doesn’t know what was the

Lord Buddha’s original teachings.    (What Nagarjuna said, such as in the Panya Paramita

Sutra was not necessary wrong, and the funny paradoxical phrase was the attempt to

express the complexity of the human mind (co-existent Conscious and Unconscious mind)

though, to put such emphasis to Voidness alone was an indication of that he didn’t have an

own experience of the Selflessness (cut-off  Emotional Region / Hypothalamus in the Brain,

hence the things and the matters were seen remote from Self-interest) = he didn’t know

that the Selflessness and the voidness was not separate phenomenon.

[]

To describe what’s going on inside of our body is not easy,

not mention inside of the mind, even to

Lord Buddha, especially, subconscious is invisible. —– Hence he was very reluctant

on the beginning (so, the scriptures says). That was why

Lord Buddha invented the way to teach direct, without resorting the verbal explanation.

—- though, some were worked, but not everything. So that, many different understanding,

interpretations were bore out, not mention convenient use of the term or notion even the

Divine figures from other religion.

When the person was in Selflessness, there is no need to have a Divine figure to worship.

Selfless hence with Dharma IS its state.  Dharma is there together with

its mechanism of Karma. = It is not for worship but to live with.

[]

—– Of cause, the situation is more or less the same to me, I never seen how a

visual signal running from my eyes to the brain, = only guessing it must be like a

PET Scanner’s screen showed us.    Still, as we know now, how the brain works on the

process of thinking, feeling etc. and we are able to shed the light

to the matter “What is the Selflessness” of which

Lord Buddha pointed out as the way to deal with Life’s problematic situation.

Now is the time to elucidate and Re-construct the teachings of

Lord Buddha to its original form. —– using today’s term = talking in a style and the

words, matched to the occasion and to the audience was the tradition started by

Lord Buddha.    😉

___/\___

[]

No Word, No Teaching ???

There is a well known quotation in Buddhism   “In his 45 years of teaching,

Lord Buddha didn’t give even a single word”. —– Even as a metaphor,

this words could explain the most crucial truth in the teachings of

Lord Buddha.

(After 4 years I blogged here = this practice has been my equivalent of facing a rock wall

to sort out the conflicting notions and the words in the scripture, and on the end, I came

to the conclusion.)

[]

A trouble of Buddhism is that there is no authentic written “one teaching”.    

Even the earliest scripture, Agama Sutra was created 200 or more years later, thence

virtually all the 3,000 Buddhism scriptures were compiled on hear-say and guess-work.

(still the author may say “My understanding of the True Buddhism”)  

And on top of this,  it was a well known fact that

Lord Buddha,s words seemed to be different ocasion to ocasion and it was depend on

to whom he was speaking. —– So that, what I’ve been doing was, picking-up the pieces

among the mountain of disassembled parts and to re-configure the most likely the

original picture. (You may say, I also doing a guess-work) 😀

[]

Considering this Quotation “No teaching” together with other stories such as Kisa Gotami’s

mustard seeds’ story and a story of Churi Pantac (Shuri Bantoku) sweeping the garden, and

on top of those, “Going out on rainy night” (Test of Selflessness) story.

There was no explanation of why or what could be achieved by doing so, was given by

Lord Buddha. = It must be the teaching of “Think it yourself” though, is anywhere the

explanation why need to think yourself, was ever explained ?    By thinking it, (but thinking

in the subconscious level ! ) the one can reach own understanding which would lead to the

own Enlightenment, as the Enlightenment couldn’t be given or taught by any other person,

the one has to find it. (external communication hardly touch one’s subconscious.)

(It is completely different from “Believing the Gospel”= Belief is to firmly memorise the

Pattern, but not necessary know what to do with it, since implanted memory is a

foreign substance) = Because the very process of finding out, is a part of the Enlightenment

(This process is to Re-program the Brain and cut-off Emotional Region to handle a situation

= hence, without an involvement of the Self.)    Thus, to teach it in the words would spoil the

purpose of ths teaching itself. = Teaching in Words would only create a memory, but Buddhism

need to change the personality from the subconscious. —– While fully aware of this paradox,

Lord Buddha wouldn’t have explained the effect of the practice or what is the aim of it,

instead, only gave an instruction what to do.   He didn’t give-away the trick and the goal.  

In this extent, he didn’t teach but just gave a Task.   And while doing it, the person can reach

and gain a state of the “Mushin” and  “Selflessness”. —– Observing the person’s progress,

Lord Buddha must have given further instruction what to do next,

and where is the point to watch, but not what to think or why / the theory.

( Practice  can be done purely subconsciously  (in Mushin)  but the Word  ( = Categorized 

notion)  couldn’t be operated away from the highly conscious brain activities.)

[]

A crucial point in Buddhism IS there is no promise of salvation BUT “Save yourself by

reaching the Enlightenment by yourself” —– otherwise, Life is suffering, getting ill,

get old and die. = very blunt message. = (Very Un-Religion like message in deed, since

Buddhism is a teaching of Truth, not a false hope or pinky illusions.)   And all the

8 right path etc are what you do.   Not what to believe. In fact, all those “Do what” are

obviously in the common sense.   Nobody would suggests otherwise.   So, there are no

fancy ritual but simple practice = matter is not what or why, but Do.

Lord Buddha might actually told those words to his followers, but no words of why to

Do it = because, no matter of what, but actually Do it unconditionally then

what would happen = Was the teaching.

[]

So that when you do, just DO without thinking,

without questioning, it’s mean in Mushin, was what

Lord Buddha taught, NOT a complicated reasoning or mythical story which only exists in

abstract notion = Delusion.    “What we can DO (include the thinking) without our lexical

conscious = in another word “DO it subconsciously” is the Core of the teaching.

Lord Buddha must have taught how the Karma (cause and result) works in each moment,

such as behind our eyes how the nature is interacting, and all sorts of the physical

phenomena, almost like a science teacher, and taught this is what the Dharma is.

But strictly remained within the rationality and on the facts.

(even though it was in the 2,500 years old standard).

[]

Since we can do, we can live, without conscious (in deed as we are walking without

thinking how to walk or we are thinking without us noticing it.)

“In the truth, SELF is not a real existence but only an imaginary existence = The Self or

Atman in Vedic teachings is a false”.   Therefore the teaching couldn’t be based on the

lexical thinking which is a product of the conscious Self. —– The paradox was that the

teaching was “to become and to live Selfless”. = How to teach and learn the Selflessness

without relying on the product of the Self / Word and the notion. —– Only a way to

learn “To do without thinking” is just watch the way to DO, then Do the same.

[]

To teach or to tell in the words, “Do it without thinking” is the same as to tell

“Tell me that you are sitting in silence” 😀 —– So that,

Lord Buddha just asked the followers to follow him and do the same.

The followers studied by just watching and learned by just Doing.

By just keep Doing, the followers get used with it, and reached the mind-set to Do

and Live without conscious of the Self.   (Without conscious mean, it is not only in

Mushin but be with the Karma of its Moment, in another word Ichijo / Oneness with

the subject or ultimately with the Dharma.)

[]

So that, the teachings were not in the words, hence, it sound as if nothing was taught.

But that was what Buddhism was in the original form. —– And this was the very reason

why the tradition of “Teaching by Heart to Heart, without relying on the words”

(教外別伝，不立文字，依心伝心)  has been kept in the Zen teaching.

(= Just DO the work. Soon or later you will learn to do it automatic/Selfless.)

Yes, Lord Buddha has taught.  In a way NOT taught anything at all.

So, the quotation was correct.

___/\___

[]

 

Home-made flower :-D

It’s a middle of September, not many flower left.  

—– Don’t tell me to go to a florist.  I don’t buy flower or plant.  

They should be where they grow.  Unless I found a pot abandoned on the street.

—– (provided it’s not a meter-tall tree.)  —— Then Kinetorori murmured me  

“If no flower, why not make one yourself” —– It’s a his bad habit.

It’s the most un-Zen like practice though, —– I did.  😀 

 (Out of used envelope.)

[]

So, a flower is blooming in my room. (keep blooming for foreseeable future.  😀 )

Buddhists telling us “Live on the moment”

—– though, I took a way against it.  

A photograph is imprisoned to the moment.  

So, to have a Jailbreak of this “Moment”

I made a photo to have rather prolonged span

of time (unlike ordinary photographic norm).  

The photo above consists multiple exposure

while having its focus shifted.  = Yet another

attempt to create fuzzy image —– went

beyond a soft-focus lens,  yet keeping a sharp core of

image, unlike a pinhole photo.  

[]

Camera Stability Test

In the previous post, I talked about the Image Stabilizer a bit though I’m not a fan of it.   Since, I haven’t seen any photo which was benefited from it so far.  May be because, even without it I’m quite capable to shoot good enough picture hand-held. (even 500 mm lens !)

People may get a benefit of its Placebo effects = Peace of mind stabilizes the hand.  😀 

Still,  it was only “Impression from my experience”  —– not from the objective comparison.

—– So, in this occasion I purposely tested it.  

(but I wouldn’t say it was scientifically rigid —– Just clicked the camera as usual.) The test object was a “Pinhole-light” as you can see the photo left. = If the camera shakes, photo will clearly shows its movement at once.

I gave only one click for each speed, 1/125, 1/60, 1/30 but for Image Stabilizer (IS),  further 1/15, 1/8 and 1/4  were tested —– It was free-standing hand-held though, I was using my Chest-pod.  😉 

( Check the image of pinhole on the enlarged photo please)

Canon EF 200~70, F2.8 L IS lens on 5D Mk3  with IS On.  From left  1/125, 1/60, 1/30.   Lens zoom was set to  200 mm.

and further  1/15, 1/8, 1/4 —– even IS couldn’t save a shake on 1/4 .

The same as above but IS Off —– though, it didn’t make much difference.

Further slower speed = 1/15, 1/8, 1/4 —– 1/8 started to show a shake.

(Its horizontal movement showed,  Chest-pod stops vertical shake more !)  = It’s mean, IS made only one stop difference.

Tamron 500 mm F8 lens was tested on Canon 5D Mk3  on 1/125, 1/60, 1/30.

The same Tamron 500 mm was tested on Nikon D810 body,  1/125, 1/60, 1/30.  

Results shows almost no difference on the different camera body.

Canon EF 70~24mm F2.8 big heavy lens was set to 50mm and tested  1/125, 1/60, 1/30.

And small Micro Nikkor 55mm F3.5 lens was tested on Canon 5D Mk3 body.

—– Different size and weight of the lens showed not much difference.  

My conclusion was, as I thought before, the Image Stabilizer makes little difference, it was mare one stop.  (Anyhow for 200 mm lens, hand-held 1/4  (if not 1/8) is a hopeless situation.)  

So the lesson was, that if you are a good shooter, a sharp photo you made was = because you are a good shooter, not because of Image Stabilizer.  And if you are a bad shooter, no Image Stabilizer will rescue you.

 Those lenses are the lenses I tested with.  

Some are the latest current model but 55 mm Micro Nikkor and Tamron mirror lens are more than 40 years old. —— still working perfect (optically  😉 )  

And the kitchen was where I did those test shots.  The shooting distance was about 2m, so, I shot them while standing here (half step forward).  All from the same distance.

[] 

Stabilize the Camera — Chest-Pod

 There are many way to stabilize the camera.  Starting from the way to grip the camera.

 Ultimately a use of Tripod or Mono-pod, even a use of a Bean-bag.   

Still, it’s all down to a mind-set of the photographer = Whether to pay an attention

against a possible camera-shake and become aware of own doing?  

If it is a case “Doesn’t matter that the Stabilizer built into the lens should take care of

that problem”.   —– This is the most funny situation.   It is only a psychological trick.  

The stabilizer may save a photo while cancelling a camera shake for further 3 stops = such

as in a situation of 200 mm lens, it would be safer to use a shutter speed 1/250 or faster  

and with the aid of stabilizer it “may” drop to 1/125 or 1/60 —– still “may not” works.  

In such case, I would set 2 stop higher ISO setting to get 2 stop higher shutter speed.  

—— In the same time a  “Maestro” may say “other than ISO 100 color is not in its best”

—– Oh, really ? !  The BEST mean it is still in a relative matter = NOT the absolute.  

Our right-eye and the left-eye are not necessary even seeing the same color.

(Test it your self if you are not aware yet.  😉 —– If not aware this discrepancy,

how the one could boast about “the critical Color”  😀  )  

[]

I used be working close together with the publishers, their printers, plate-making engineers,

and one of my closest climbing mate of mountain has studied Printing Technology and

became an expert of the photo-scanner (such as Crosfield’s machne) —— I heard many

wired stories of “Special Sorcery” in their trade —– still, when it makes the print on the paper,

such as slight difference of the paper which is different a roll to roll, or even a humidity in

the air changes absorbency of the paper hence changes the color of print,  etc. etc.  = there

can not be any reliable absolute or perfection.  It is just someone’s preference.  

Anyhow, computer to computer, this CRT to that LCD screen, the color is always different

= what fuss about such minute difference.  😀  

[]

As I grown-up in the time when the color film was ISO 64 or 100, B/W was 400 and even with

push-development,  ISO 1600 or so (Kodak Royal Record Pan = ISO 12500 was existed though)

I had to stabilize the camera other than ISO speed.  So that, I tried many kind of  chest-pod.

(though there are too many — even I don’t remember how many I bought and made myself.)  

So, I show you two of my handmade.

This is a chest-pod of current use on my DSLR.   The simplest, hence the most neat one !

It was made by aluminium pipe and a short piece of  C-channel (which was cut and bent).

(A trouble was, the Airport Security suspects that this is a part of a disguised weapon.  😀 )

—– Unlike western people,  I hold a camera right side down  (it’s a Japanese tradition)  

 therefore when I shoot vertical-way, this chest-pod come against my left shoulder

just under the collar bone. 

And this is the other one I made for EOS Film Camera which doubles as an external

battery chamber.  ( AA x 5 rechargeable  batteries instead of 2CR5 Lithium battery)

And it functions as a chest-pod exactly the same way as the other one.  But this one can

fold down under the camera bottom. ( I don’t make a rubbish for a sake of Youtube.  😀 )

The advantage of this shooting style is, the hand which triggers the shutter, its elbow was

firmly lodged onto the body, hence it is far more stable than the style having right arm in

the air and move a finger to trigger.  

—– May be because of the fundamental flaw of the camera holding style in the west, the

camera shake is unavoidable, hence, it gave an opportunity to the manufacturer to produce

“Stabilizer” and sell it for £500 more price !    (I don’t think it costed such amount for them. )

—– In a video image, shaky picture is annoying but on a still, “two stops slower” seems not

much use —– better use same £500 to another shopping, and set 2 stop higher ISO, —– above

all, have a practice to gain a stable holding of the camera would be far more advantageous.  

Since, to gain calm, stable mind to stabilize the hand would be far more beneficial to the 

one’s whole life in general.     Anyhow, not all the lenses you got, has a stabilizer, and

living with unstable mind wouldn’t bring any happiness.    

Better think it in different angle and better change the mind-set and the way you shoot.

(If you doubt, have look a photo here and the photos by 500 mm lens in the previous post. )

(Here, the Zen practice comes in.  😀 ) 

[]

Body Parts

Those photos are just a casual snap of the people playing with computer.  

But using 500 mm lens hand-held. = naturally, there was not much room to use

such long telephoto lens in a small room, picture became a kind of close-up.  

Yet still, it was 2 m away, people didn’t mind to be photographed much. —– and

I found a quite unusual usefulness of this lens, despite it is rather dark F 8.

(ISO was set to 1600,  shutter speed was  1/15 ~ 1/30, AV mode — just to mention) 

I hope you enjoy the photos.  😉 

Next time I hope to upload more appetising body-parts.  😀  😀

[]

Ring Flash / Flash Story

——– (This Ring Flash was made to use with the Fish-eye lens on the

——– Yoshi-handy handmade camera, 36 years ago !  😀 ) 

In some posts ago,  I’ve shown Studio Flash and ring Flash tube.  

May be I should talk a bit more about Electronic Flash-light. — Why It’s called “Electronic

Flash” was, before, Flash-light meant Bulb Flash = the people over 60 might remember,

even if it was not a typical bulb shape, how about Flash-cube / Magicube at the time of

Kodak Instamatic camera, they are still flash bulb, but only small.  🙂

Flash bulb was an “Explosive device” = thin aluminium foil was packed into a glass bulb

with Oxygen and ignited by an electric spark, with a “Bong” noise !  

( I only know from Antic collection though, yet before  Flash bulb, it was an explosive 

magnesium powder = it’s literally explode ! —– hence, all the assistant of a photographer

used to have a lots of spot on their face, burnt by the exploding magnesium powder.  😀)

  []  

Unlike such hot staffs, electronic flash is using a discharge of high voltage electric energy

through a Xenon gas filled tube.  To make this, a capacitor inside of a Flash was slowly

charged-up to high voltage, then discharge it in an instant to produce very intense bright light.  

Like an electric spark, it needs to be high voltage, and the larger the capacitor,  

the light produced from it would be the brighter.  

This is the reason why a camera’s built-in flash, which got only small capacitor inside, was

not bright-enough to reach distance.             In contrast, a studio type big Flash having a bank of

capacitors connected parallel to store huge energy, 

and the big flash tube was made by a quartz to

withstand the heat shock created by a

discharge of huge energy.  

And to charge-up those capacitors, studio type is

using the main electricity and a

portable type, clip-on type are using electronic

voltage converter to rise the battery voltage

to 315 ~ 350 V.  

[]

As I said, the electric energy is first charged into

the capacitor.  

The capacitor is an electric device, which was

made by insulated two metal plates or foils

to store electric charge.  In order to store as much

as energy, very thin two aluminium foils were

tightly wound together.    And to separate two

metal foils, paper or plastic film ect. which called 

dielectric material was sandwiched between.  

But most of the capacitor used in a flash equipment is a

type called Electrolytic capacitor which is not using common insulator, hence smaller in size.

   []

It is not well known to the people that those Electrolytic Capacitor has a limited life.  

Especially if the equipment was not used long time (more than a year) they might be dead

and a moment when it was switched on again after long rasp of the time, the capacitor

would be internally short-circuited and gone for ever. —– ?   Why the insulation breaks ?

[]

If you tested the conductivity of Aluminium, you may know, despite the Aluminium is a

very good conductor,  Anodised surface shows no conductivity.   With the Anodisation,

the surface  of Aluminium was covered with the aluminium oxide which is an insulator.

Instead to use a separate insulator between two Aluminium foil,  Electrolytic Capacitor

is using this oxide coating developed own surface as a dielectric / insulator.  

So that, as long as the capacitor was kept receiving electric current, they maintain

the oxidized coating on the surface of aluminium foil.   But if the equipment was left

unused long time, the insulative coating deteriorate.

—– And a moment when it was switched on again, and the voltage rose high,  the

insulation breaks down and makes two foils short-circuited and start to generates heat,

or the power transistor pumping the high voltage into the capacitor burns-out.  

If the capacitor over heat  it would explode.   (In fact, the situation is always the same

where ever electrolytic capacitor was used — such as even an audio power amp.)

  []

The remedy to this situation is, the same as to initialise a capacitor in a factory.  

= slowly charge up the capacitor while waiting the insulating coat grows on the

surface of the aluminium foil (in its anode-side, hence it called Anodisation.)

—– To do this, professional people use variable transformer (Rheostat) and sloooowly 

rise the voltage while giving hours of time.  

(If you try, — You need to constantly measure the voltage of the capacitor —– first

second or two of switch-on, when you see the voltage rise to 5~10 V, then switch-off — if

the voltage shows “slowly” dropping, switch on again to see it reach to 15 V —- then

switch-off and wait till it’s drop to 10 V and switch on to 20 V again (like two step

forward, one step back) —— in this way until it reached to more than 300 V then to

the full —– all the process will takes hours !   🙂  or 😦  

 —– But if you see the voltage drops rather quick, and  never rise above

the certain voltage, don’t push it further, and you have to

accept that the capacitor is already dead !  —– Sorry about  😦  

(still better than to see it exploded in messy manner.)

  []

In another approach, if the capacitor could be disconnected from the charging circuit.  

(But this is only for the experienced person.) —– Use the main AC power.  

Connect a Rectifier to live, and 100 K (may be reduced to 50 K, 10 K on the later stage)

register to neutral.   And use this rectified direct current to charge up the capacitor.  

In the first few seconds, when the capacitor’s voltage  rose to 10 V, then disconnect.  

When voltage was dropped to 5 V then charge it to 15 V (Keep a distance of up and

down proportional  —– repeat this again and again, while time to time having a break

(to have a cup of tea  🙂 and make a capacitor to regain a potential to charge-up to

higher voltage) and slowly bring the voltage to the full.  

From the main voltage in Europe, rectified voltage would be 310 ~ 330 V, about the

same voltage of the working flash.  But in the US  110 V, it’s needs  to use voltage

doubler circuit.   And a fully charged capacitor of 1000 microF, 2000 microF has an

energy to evaporate a tip of screw-driver, if it was short circuited — and hell like Bang!  

= Before you do any  work, always DO NOT FORGET to discharge the capacitor

through 5W 1K register.

(If you couldn’t understand  what I’m talking here straight, DO NOT attempt to try this !

—– to touch AC main, 200, 300 V DC is killingly dangerous for amateur !  

(Accident happens in a completely unexpected moment, in an unexpected situation.)

  []  

Assuming the capacitor is working perfect, the rest of the flash circuit is rather simple.

The thick two cables from capacitor were connected to the both end of a flash tube.  

And an additional cable was attached outside of flash tube = this is the trigger which

receives 3000 V or higher voltage pulse. —– To trigger this very high voltage pulse, a switch

inside of camera shutter-mechanism used to short circuit a small capacitor in the primary

side of trigger coil, then in the  secondary side 3000 ~4000 V pulse will be produced.    

But now-a-day, sophisticated electronic camera can not take such high voltage, —– instead,

a trigger to flash was done by low-voltage signal.  

= (In another word, to connect very old flash to a modern DSLR is highly risky.  

(If you got Test Meter, you can measure how high the trigger voltage of the flash, on the

connector of  Flash extension cable.  If it shows more than 15 V, (it could be as high as 100 V),  

never use it direct to the camera = Use a Slave trigger.)

  []

Once you understood the structure of flash-light, to modify it, is not very difficult.  

My Ring flash on the photo was made to take the power from Brown F900 power pack

but before it was connected to Kako hummer-head flash.   As long as it receives 300 ~ 350 V,

it will flash and the light-intensity is depend on the size of the capacitor.  

(By the way, Flash-tube’s life is also limited !  = Don’t expect it works for ever.  😀 )

(That Ring Flash Tube can take, up to  200 WS = C x V-square x 1/2 = Wat-Second

such as—–1000 microFarad x 315V x 315V x  1/2 = 50 WS = GN may be about 25~28  though

it’s all depends on the efficiency, size of the reflector, how old the tube is, etc. etc.)

[] 

500 mm Macro lens ?

The other day I tested an 800mm Mirror lens of which my friend just obtained.

In fact it was a gift from his Daughter.  Lens was for Canon DSLR though, funnily enough

he got no Canon SLR.  —— that’s why I was asked to test, whether for a sake of that lens,

is it worthwhile to buy a camera body.  🙂     These days, people seeing even a small compact

camera started to have extremely high zoom ratio, such as Panasonic’s  x60 zoom

(equiv’ 20 ~ 1200 mm)  they no longer “fear” long telephoto lens.

—– That lens was (amazingly !) good.     So, he is going to become a bird photographer.  🙂

I hope him to become an expert of  “800 mm” lens and capture a lots of bird photos.

As a matter of fact, I got a Mirror lens too, but not  800 mm, my one is  500 mm.

“Naturally”, not very often used though, it was a Tamron F8 Mirror lens = once dabbed

as the second best mirror lens among the 500 mm mirror lens after the Zeiss.  (mind you,

Zeiss Mirrotar 500 mm carries a price of  5 million yen —– but Tamron was 50,000 yen

—– I got it in second hand for 20,000 yen.  😉 )

Not just sharp, Tamron 500 mm was designed to produce good close-up image as well, 

hence its closest distance comes down to  1.7 m and able to take  x 1/3 close-up !

This is a clopped part of the photo. Depth of the field is so shallow still, not too bad isn’t it,  

considering it was nearly  2 m away.    (Can you imagine to look into the reflecting pattern

of batterfly’s eye from  2 m distance ! ) —– (Only when if we could manage extremely

critical focus under F8  darkness of view-finder ! ) 

( Fish-eye photo was an extra —– just for fun.  😉 )

Another trouble is, because of the angle of view is less than  5 degree = quite difficult

to know  “Where AM I watching ?”  especially, when the image was out of focus.  😀

As out of focus Bokhe become funny ring pattern —– you may hate, or some time

they looks more decorative. —– it’s a character.    It could be a good fun to play with !

[]