That's not erotic -- that's intimate.

#Film "Paris, Texas" (1984). Director: Wim Wenders, written by L.M. Kit Carson, Sam Shepard, Walter Donohue. With actors Harry Dean Stanton, Nasstassja Kinski, Dean Stockwell et al.
#Music Ry Cooder, Paris Texas
youtu.be/X6ymVaq3Fqk?...

#Words Hiraeth (Welsh) #Language

Oh, and three and four:
3. The Bluesky filter is stupid, and
4. The Bluesky filter has no idea what I perceive as erotic.
I could explain that, but I suspect you don't need an explanation.

Two observations:
1. I can see the Picasso no problem.
2. Eroticism does not equal nudity.

Photos don't pass. They are moments frozen in time.

That is a very erotic photo.

For a micro-account with less than 80 followers, these numbers are... somewhat overwhelming.

I'm not going to thank all of you individually, but...
I'm gobsmacked. Thanks!

Not all cries for help are loud.

There’s a silent signal everyone should know.

Thumb tucked. Fingers folded.

It means “I need help”

Share this please!

You could be the one who sees her when she can’t say a word!

#SheShed

A crescent moon and Venus, surrounded by thin wisps of high cloud, vaguely reddened by an already set sun

The clouds, the moon, and Venus in the evening sky

First photo: a branch with fresh leaves

Second photo: a branch with erupting blossom

Third photo: Peak Blossom.

Images 7, 8 and 9 of the increasingly inaccurately named tryptich

This one's called "patience... any moment now... PEAK BLOSSOM".

Yeah, you know what?
Each time you feel you improve, you get gratification.

And it may just be that you'll never stop improving.

Yeah, she's really cute.
Until she lies on top of you, that is.
She's an adorable monster.

Cat pic for @sheena-mck.bsky.social

This should be Venus

Just for fun, I dialed in maximum zoom (560mm), and photographed Venus at 1/125, f8.
Here's a 100% crop.

The western evening sky at 21:30 today. Top left: Venus. Bottom right, a crescent moon

Venus and the moon

It's not "an optical illusion".
In fact, you can probably imagine what is happening yourself.
If I use a longer lens, and I step away from the plant to make it take up the same amount of space in the viewfinder, the background objects are going to be drawn in.

Yes, it is, isn't it?
If you have a tree, with a building in the distance, you can make two completely different photos of it.

And all this merely by changing to a different lens.

Note: the plant is the focal point. But the object "looming over it" doesn't have to be sharp. As long as you can see what it is, that's fine.

On the right photo, the trailer tent is just an insignificant object in the background. You could almost overlook it. On the left photo, the trailer tent dominates the image. If it had teeth, you'd urge the plant to make a run for it. The relationship between the two is changed completely.
3/4

The answer is: neither the plant nor the trailer tent was moved one inch. The only thing that moved was the photographer.

The first picture was taken at 300mm; the second one at 70mm. I positioned myself to get the plant at the same size in my viewfinder for both photos.

2/?

A flowering plant, with part of a trailer tent in the background at a short distance

A flowering plant, with a trailer tent in the background at a considerable distance

(For @kafkaesque2024.bsky.social and @paulaflucas.bsky.social)

Here's two boring photos of a flowering plant with a trailer tent in the background.

My question for you is: in which photo was the distance between the object (the plant) and the background (the trailer tent) smallest?

The answer to that requires a lot of thought, and is probably within DM territory.
But yes, mum and I were two peas in a podcast.

I suppose that's not unlike what my mum taught me too.

Damn, girl. I'm sorry to hear that.
I *promise* that I'll have that compositional tip with example shots for you tomorrow.

This is precisely why I shouldn't be married for as long as I've been now, but I still am.
I expect people to be upfront about what they think and feel. As soon as they start playing mind games, I'm out.
This means I'm incompatible with lots of people.

How did you know? 😉

Whenever I feel like I failed, I throw myself onto something I know I'm good at, and that will consume sufficient brainpower so as to not overthink anything else. 😁

> But that’s just me.
No, it's not.

I do.
But I found a remedy to that decades ago.
It's still working. 😎

I am occasionally here, mainly to nudge @kafkaesque2024.bsky.social forward in her discovery of her new toy and how it all works. I also owe @paulaflucas.bsky.social some information along the same lines. But fighting 3 virtual private servers is very therapeutic.