All you can do is the best you can do.

Apr 16

Film Camera Batteries Master Post vol. 1

cameraspot:

One of the more confusing things we do in-store for people is help them find the correct battery for their vintage film cameras. It’s harder to do that online than in person, but we recently sat down with our catalog of batteries and did some sleuthing to figure out which batteries go with which cameras. 

The result of this research went up on Etsy: our most frequently-ordered batteries are up there now, listed with the cameras that go with them. But here’s a little peek into what’s what, our top five film camera batteries, plus the ever-useful AAs. 

#1: The S76. Also known as the LR44, SMC357, or SR44, this button-cell lithium battery is 1.5 volts and powers a number of common vintage cameras, including:

the Nikon F2, F3, Canon AE-1, Olympus OM-10, Pentax K100, K1000SE, KZ, KX, ME-super, the Yashica TL Super, and others. 

#2: The 2CR5. This one is more recent, and powers some of the common autofocus film SLRs, including:

The Canon Elan, Nikon N50, N90, the Yashica Dental Eye II, and others.

#3: The 28L, AKA XP544, PX28. This little guy, who looks kind of like a half-sized AAA battery but is usually lithium, not alkaline, powers a couple of really popular cameras, including: 

The Canon A-1 and AE-1P. 

#4: The 625A, AKA the PX625a, RX625a, KX625, and V625u. This one’s another lithium button cell. It’s common in the old manual cameras as well, including some medium-format ones. Among them: 

The Olympus OM-1, Yashica Mat 124, Zeiss Ikon Contaflex 125, SL706, Canonet GIII, Nikkormat FT.

#5: The CRP-2, also known as the DL223, 223A. This one’s a 6-volt battery, somewhat larger. It powers some more recent autofocus systems as well, including

The Nikon 6006, 6606. 

And finally, AAs. These are sometimes still used in digital cameras, and are especially common in speedlights, flashes, battery grips, and similar accessories. Now, while any AA battery will fit, a higher-capacity battery will last a great deal longer and give much better performance. The measurement to look for is mAh, or milliamp-hours. A higher number means the battery can discharge more at once, meaning it will retain the ability to power up your device for a longer period of time. 

Rechargeables save a lot of money and hassle, provided you remember to charge them up. Nickel-metal Hydride (NimH) batteries are the best for photographic applications. They can provide a high mAh output, and don’t retain a memory, so they can be recharged without first being fully discharged. 

AA batteries are used in a number of vintage film cameras, most notably including the Nikon F4, F5, Canon SureShot, Nikon 8008, 5005, and pretty much every motor drive ever. 

All these batteries are for sale, listed in that order, on this listing on our Etsy page, should you find that you need any of them. We also carry them in our stores, of course. Call ahead to ensure stock; they can be ordered from our warehouse in less than a week, normally. 

I know this kind of comes across as spammy but I get questions about this almost constantly, and half the time we wind up just putting batteries into the camera in question at sort of random until it works. So here’s an actual list of what those batteries are. And a link to where to order them. Because sometimes that’s what you need. 


(via One last time, WWII veterans take flight in restored B-17 bomber - Stripes)

aw Stripes’s Share This link made that post lame. This story is so neat— they assembled a full crew’s worth of veterans for one last flight in a B-17. All different crews, they’d originally served on, but one man for each position— a pilot, copilot, navigator, tail gunner, etc. Such a neat story!

(via One last time, WWII veterans take flight in restored B-17 bomber - Stripes)

aw Stripes’s Share This link made that post lame. This story is so neat— they assembled a full crew’s worth of veterans for one last flight in a B-17. All different crews, they’d originally served on, but one man for each position— a pilot, copilot, navigator, tail gunner, etc. Such a neat story!


“What’s most fascinating about pad Thai, however, is that it probably isn’t even Thai. Noodles, stir-fry, and, especially, noodle stir-fries are quintessentially Chinese. In fact, just about every ingredient found in pad Thai isn’t native to the people after whom the dish is named. “The only really Thai ingredient is the pounded dried chillies,” the Bankok Post even admitted in February. Even the dish’s full name, kway teow pad Thai nods to its Chinese origins (kway teow is Chinese for rice noodles). “Its name literally means ‘Thai-style stir-fried noodles,’ and for a dish to be so named in its own country clearly suggests an origin that isn’t Thai,” local chef Kasma Loha-unchit notes in her own recipe. Indeed, the Thai seem to agree—in Thailand, it’s explicitly referred to as a Chinese noodle dish.” The strange and potentially stolen origins of pad Thai - Quartz (via kevinpurdy)

(via kevinpurdy)


“Too, I know the great secret of retail, which is that unless you are naked and painted green, or otherwise REALLY distinctive—I mean, “cross-dressing Ben Franklin with a walker*” kind of distinctive, mere dyed hair and body piercings do not register—the clerks do not see you. They may talk to you, they may smile, they will ring up your purchase, but they do not retain an iota of memory of you as soon as you turn away. They do not care. The only things that are real when you are working retail are your coworkers and the clock. So I do not much worry about wandering around looking like I’ve weathered an explosion in an art supply store. Possibly some day I will pass another threshold that requires I have a certain gravitas in my dealings with the Rest of the World, but god willing, it’s a long way off.”

This Mortal Clay…

(via fuckyeahursulavernon)

I let this pass without comment at first but I just hunted it down to have a crack at it. 

This isn’t necessarily true. I work retail, have for years, in a smallish shop with a lot of regular customers. I know many of them by name; an alarming number of them know me by name. 

But the above is still sort of true, only I think much more reassuring: it’s not that we retail clerks don’t see you. We totally do, and we may even fleetingly snicker. But the thing is, we don’t *just* see *you*. We see hundreds of people. 

And this is the really reassuring bit, I think— we see so many people that your weirdness, while it may register, isn’t particularly astonishing. This is the big secret that those who deal with the public constantly already know: 

Everyone is weird.

This is the absolute truth. Every single person you  meet is a big fucking weirdo. There is no normal. If they appear normal, they are secretly weird. If they are obviously weird, many times, it turns out they’re still not all *that* weird. 

Everyone is weird. So we don’t really care about your perceivedly-beyond-the-pale weirdness. Because, in the grand scheme of things, your uncombed, yoga-pants-wearing ass is honestly pretty typical, no matter *what* is going on with your hair or how many rings you have in your nose.

We’re a lot more likely to remember and complain about the creepy guy who used our have-to-put-up-with-him-because-we’re-on-the-clock status to hit on us in the most upsettingly disturbingly technically-legal fashion possible. Because that is also really fucking typical, and actually soul-sucking (and sometimes genuinely terrifying because what if he’s waiting in the parking lot? what if he finds us on Facebook? this is a small town), unlike your unfashionable pants that literally everyone is wearing this season because nobody dresses up to run mundane errands.

(via vulgarweed)


vulgarweed:

vaticanmeos:

history meme - one war (1/1)

The Cold War (1947-1981) was a sustained period of conflict, primarily between the USSR and the USA. Spurred on by continuing tensions from the end of WWII, The Cold War was a clash of ideologies - communism (Soviet Russia) vs. capitalism (America), with each side vying for dominance in a bitter power struggle. The term ‘Cold War’ comes not from Russia’s climate, but instead refers to the lack of actual army-to-army warfare taking place. Instead, both counties fought for their beliefs through technological advances such as the space and arms races, while their client states fought in proxy wars - e.g. Vietnam and Korea.

What may have eventually ensured that The Cold War didn’t become ‘hot’ was the impending threat of nuclear warfare. Both the USSR and the USA had frantically stockpiled as many nuclear weapons as possible in the struggle to be the superior military force, but the threat atom bombs posed was not so well known until 1952, when America exploded the H-Bomb; 2500 times more powerful than that dropped in Hiroshima. Russia followed suit, possessing their own H-Bomb by the following year. Suddenly, the world was a much more dangerous place. Both nations knew that if they were to fire their missiles, the enemy would respond immediately; resulting in wide-spread mass destruction for them both. As Soviet leader Nikita Chrushev said: “The survivors of a nuclear war would envy the dead.” [+more]

whoa, that shit didn’t end in 1981. I remember that nuclear terror far too well for that.

No, that shit ended in 1989 when the Berlin Wall fell. I know this because I wasn’t born until 1979 but I remember. And later it came out about the Man Who Saved The World— I looked it up, and because of my childhood home’s proximity to a then-active arsenal, none of my family would have survived the initial wave of radiation (and a good portion of us would have died in the initial shockwave). That incident was 1983. I was four. 

That shit was not over in 1981.


Apr 15
“My ideal porn would be two fully clothed people telling me I didn’t have to work a day job anymore”

@weismanjake

(via giddygirlie)

(via shaebay)


xekstrin:


A new religious statue in the town of Davidson, N.C., is unlike anything you might see in church.
The statue depicts Jesus as a vagrant sleeping on a park bench. St. Alban’s Episcopal Church installed the homeless Jesus statue on its property in the middle of an upscale neighborhood filled with well-kept townhomes.
Jesus is huddled under a blanket with his face and hands obscured; only the crucifixion wounds on his uncovered feet give him away.
The reaction was immediate. Some loved it; some didn’t.
"One woman from the neighborhood actually called police the first time she drove by," says David Boraks, editor of DavidsonNews.net. "She thought it was an actual homeless person."
That’s right. Somebody called the cops on Jesus.

And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Since you have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, you have done it unto me.

This actually brought tears to my eyes. 

xekstrin:

A new religious statue in the town of Davidson, N.C., is unlike anything you might see in church.

The statue depicts Jesus as a vagrant sleeping on a park bench. St. Alban’s Episcopal Church installed the homeless Jesus statue on its property in the middle of an upscale neighborhood filled with well-kept townhomes.

Jesus is huddled under a blanket with his face and hands obscured; only the crucifixion wounds on his uncovered feet give him away.

The reaction was immediate. Some loved it; some didn’t.

"One woman from the neighborhood actually called police the first time she drove by," says David Boraks, editor of DavidsonNews.net. "She thought it was an actual homeless person."

That’s right. Somebody called the cops on Jesus.

And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Since you have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, you have done it unto me.

This actually brought tears to my eyes. 

(via kat-rampant)


acquaintedwithrask:

naamahdarling:

jtotheizzoe:

skunkbear:

Can you control your metabolism with your mind?

Turns out … yes.

Watch the science desk’s new video: a super fun collaboration between Alix Spiegel and Bianca Giaever.

Food as placebo! Does labeling something “low fat” or “healthy” trick our brains in the wrong direction? Feed your mind with this great vid from NPR Science.

Previously: Learn more about the weirdness of placebos, from medicine color to pill size, with this video.

The fact that this works for one feeding with a single milkshake means nothing.  It’s basically a trick to fool your body into feeling fuller, temporarily, but it says nothing about how your body treats hunger over the long term.

See, there are three kinds of hunger.

There’s mechanical hunger, which is your stomach being empty and growling.  It says “PUT FOOD IN YOUR STOMACH.”

There’s mouth hunger or aesthetic hunger, which is your need to eat food that satisfies you psychologically.  Comfort food, the native foods of your culture, foods whose tastes and textures satisfy you innately.  It says “PUT YUMMY THINGS IN YOUR MOUTH!”

And there’s chemical hunger.  Chemical hunger is craving … something.  That feeling you get when you don’t eat enough fruit for a while, and suddenly you crave citrus.  The feeling you get when you are bleeding from your vagina for the tenth day in a row, and would literally murder old ladies for a steak and/or a bucket of bone marrow.  The feeling you get when, for no reason you can name, you crave something like almonds or anchovies or really dark chocolate.  At its most immediate, it’s the low-blood-sugar shakes and dizziness.  At its most insidious, it’s the thing that leads you to eat and eat until you are satisfied.  It says “MEET YOUR NUTRITIONAL REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE YOUR CELLS ARE STARVING, YOU NUMBSKULL.”

Reduced ghrelin may not have much effect on mouth hunger, and it absolutely isn’t going to affect chemical hunger.  It will affect mechanical hunger, but only for a short time.

As someone who, out of a hateful illness, starved herself for years like nobody else could do it right, I probably know more about actual hunger than most people ever, ever will.  I can tell you all kinds of things about it.  Things you probably don’t want to know, honestly.

I can tell you right now that I tried all the tricks.

I tried using smaller plates.

I tried drinking loads of water before each meal.

I tried chewing slowly.  (SOOOO SLOWLY.)

I tried filling up on really bulky, low-calorie foods.

I tried really small, frequent meals.

I mean, if there was a trick, I tried it.  If I’d known about this, I’d have tried this too.

And none of the tricks worked.  I was still hungry pretty much every few hours, and the less I ate, the less time it took for me to get hungry.  Eventually, I was hungry all the time.  Like, I was so hungry I stopped being able to feel mechanical hunger. 

No, stop, think about it.  My body had become so used to my stomach being empty that it stopped sending me those signals completely.  And yet … I was hungry.  All the time.  Even when I satisfied my mouth hunger, I was hungry.  I needed to eat.  I can’t even describe what that felt like, except to say that it was overpowering.

When I finally started recovering, I ate whatever I wanted.  And for two years, two years, all I wanted to eat was salt, fat, sugar.  For several months, I still never felt hungry, but I couldn’t stop eating. I would eat until I felt physically sick, and I still WANTED to eat more.  Because I had been starving myself, and that is what starving yourself does.

Because my body knew, it knew, that 700 calories a day was not 2,000 calories a day.  It knew it was starving.  It thought it was dying.

You cannot fool that.  You cannot permanently change your body’s metabolism with tricks.  Just because it works once doesn’t mean it will work the nine hundredth time you try it.

So, unless it can trick your body into literally thinking that 100 calories is 300 calories forever and ever, your weight loss tricks are not going to work forever, you will rebound, you will gain back the weight you lose.

Research like this is useful, because knowing how the human body and mind interact is useful.

Research like this in the hands of people who aren’t qualified to draw conclusions from it is not useful.  This will no doubt somehow enter the vocabulary of weight-loss “tricks” intended to help desperate and misguided people fool themselves into thinking they are smarter than the literal cells in their body, when they are not.  And that is a sad thing.

So for the people saying “If you think of your kale/wheatgrass/quinoa/goat placenta smoothie as really indulgent, you won’t feel hungry afterward!”, you’re wrong.  Do it often enough, and you’ll feel hungry constantly.

There’s not a shortcut. I don’t recommend weight-loss dieting to anyone, but if you’re going to pursue it — again, just don’t do this if you still believe all the crap about being thin being a somehow magical state that will insulate you from all kinds of physical and psychological and social ills — you should know that you are working against literally every cell of your body.  There’s not a work-around for that.  It is a bone-scraping, desperate hunger you will feel every minute of every day, worse and worse the longer you go.

Clever “tricks” like this are sops thrown to you to say “Look, look, it’s easy, look how easy it is!  Look how stupid the human body is!  Look how much more powerful your brain is!  You can totally fool yourself out of being a meat-popsicle that craves fat and starch and salt if you just work at being satisfied with less.”

Lies.

All they do is make it easier to start, and easier to keep limping along pretending nothing is wrong, when you can feel with every fiber of your being that there is.

Whenever new “science” shows something that implies, from research based on a single event, one single meal or item of food, that there is a faster way to lose weight, or an easier way to not feel hungry, give it the stinkiest of all stink-eyes.  Because one meal?  One meal more or less is not hunger.  Not really.  The measure of hunger is what happens once you have depleted your body’s reserves enough for it to start eating itself away … and then you keep going.  And going.  And going.  What you feel then is hunger.

You know what else probably kills your appetite?  Videos of surgery.  Nobody’s suggesting that we take up watching those before our meals so we don’t feel like eating as much.  And if we did?  We’d get used to it pretty fast, as the large number of surgeons nurses and veterinarians and techs who can still eat will attest.

They get over it because our bodies need food.  We need to eat, both physically and psychologically, to be healthy.  And that is stronger than pretty much any other urge we have except maybe thirst — I don’t know, I never tried to dehydrate myself to death.  Hunger takes longer to kill you.  (And yeah, you feel every minute of it.)  It is stronger than the urge to lick Ben Barnes.  Stronger than the urge to pet kittens.  I could stop thinking about those things for hours at a time.  I never forgot that I was hungry.

Also, as one final note, there’s a huge error in this research.  Food is not neutral, okay?  We have such a guilt complex around food these days that if I give a random person a 600-calorie treat, it’s 99% certain that they will feel some guilt.  And they will feel less guilt over a 100-calorie treat.  And guilt?  A surprisingly good motivator for feeling sated sooner.  Which is why the diet industry is so huge on guilt and shame.  So unless you could find someone who had literally no associations with food/calories/guilt — and these days, even finding tiny children who do not have that is going to be a job of work — your study might be measuring something other than what you think it is.

(And guilt doesn’t work long-term, either.  I was still hungry enough after four years of 700 calories a day to eat a whole goddamn box of Pop-Tarts.  I felt pretty fucking guilty after the first one.  I still ate them all, and every piece of fruit in the house.)

(Also, anyone who expects you to endure that sort of hunger just to access a higher tier of respect in the pecking order is a fucking douchebag and you can safely disregard anything they say as toxic bullshit.)

Ugh.  Rant over.  I’m going to go eat something bad for me, because I fucking can.  The best way not to feel hungry — eat when you want to eat.

this is probably the most well-spoken and intelligent thing I’ve read today, and if you scroll past it well you’re missing out

I didn’t even watch the video, I’m just so incredibly impressed with the penultimate poster’s rant. It’s… yes. 

The things we do to ourselves about food are so literally insane, yet omnipresent and inescapable. 

(via fancybidet)


“Fan fiction is a way of the culture repairing the damage done in a system where contemporary myths are owned by corporations instead of by the folk.” Henry Jenkins (Director of media studies at MIT)

(via vulgarweed)


“A study, to appear in the Fall 2014 issue of the academic journal Perspectives on Politics, finds that the U.S. is no democracy, but instead an oligarchy, meaning profoundly corrupt, so that the answer to the study’s opening question, “Who governs? Who really rules?” in this country, is:
 
“Despite the seemingly strong empirical support in previous studies for theories of majoritarian democracy, our analyses suggest that majorities of the American public actually have little influence over the policies our government adopts. Americans do enjoy many features central to democratic governance, such as regular elections, freedom of speech and association, and a widespread (if still contested) franchise. But, …” and then they go on to say, it’s not true, and that, “America’s claims to being a democratic society are seriously threatened” by the findings in this, the first-ever comprehensive scientific study of the subject, which shows that there is instead “the nearly total failure of ‘median voter’ and other Majoritarian Electoral Democracy theories [of America]. When the preferences of economic elites and the stands of organized interest groups are controlled for, the preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.”
 
To put it short: The United States is no democracy, but actually an oligarchy.”

US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study | Common Dreams

If we had a truly independent and adversarial press in my country, this would be a big news story, but they still haven’t found that plane, so … whaddayagonnado right?

(via wilwheaton)

(via shaebay)


Page 1 of 225