RR: Second ride of the season (short/pics link)

Well, i pretty much rode in the same place as last time, though i went an additional 1.48 miles
(hey, i'm still way out of shape).

This time i was graced with that sweat-spot once again. you know, the one just after the initial
lactic acid burns off and you feel like you can ride for miles and miles. Well, i used this "extra"
energy to ride some more technical sections of trail. Other than that, same old, same old. I managed
to forget my water bottle, again (you'd think i would have learned the first time).

I took a few pictures this time. nothing real spectacular, just a few trail pics.
http://www.megalink.net/~farmers/photography/mtb/2003-04-25/

~Travis
--
To reply by email, remove clothes.

travis5765.homelinux.net, Primary Administrator TF Custom Electronic, Owner/Founder/Developer
(current project: Automotive exhaust flame-thrower)

 

On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 16:35:59 -0400, Technician <[email protected]> wrote:

> Well, i pretty much rode in the same place as last time, though i went an additional 1.48 miles
> (hey, i'm still way out of shape).
>
> This time i was graced with that sweat-spot once again. you know, the one just after the initial
> lactic acid burns off and you feel like you can ride for miles and miles. Well, i used this
> "extra" energy to ride some more technical sections of trail. Other than that, same old, same old.
> I managed to forget my water bottle, again (you'd think i would have learned the first time).
>
> I took a few pictures this time. nothing real spectacular, just a few trail pics.
> http://www.megalink.net/~farmers/photography/mtb/2003-04-25/
>
> ~Travis

Travis, are there any turns at all on that trail? In every single one of those photos the trail loks
dead straight. COme on, give us some photos that pack a little more interest in!

Miles (by the way, welcome back)

--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

 

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 16:35:59 -0400, Technician <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Well, i pretty much rode in the same place as last time, though i went an additional 1.48 miles
> > (hey, i'm still way out of shape).
> >
> > This time i was graced with that sweat-spot once again. you know, the one just after the initial
> > lactic acid burns off and you feel like you can ride for miles and miles. Well, i used this
> > "extra" energy to ride some more technical sections of trail. Other than that, same old, same
> > old. I managed to forget my water bottle, again (you'd think i would have learned the first
> > time).
> >
> > I took a few pictures this time. nothing real spectacular, just a few trail pics.
> > http://www.megalink.net/~farmers/photography/mtb/2003-04-25/
> >
> > ~Travis
>
>
>
> Travis, are there any turns at all on that trail? In every single one of those photos the trail
> loks dead straight. COme on, give us some photos that pack a little more interest in!
>
> Miles (by the way, welcome back)
>
>
>
>
Well, turns are hard to follow in a photograph so i rarely capture them. i will keep it in mind on
the next ride though.

~Travis
--
To reply by email, remove clothes.

travis5765.homelinux.net, Primary Administrator TF Custom Electronic, Owner/Founder/Developer
(current project: Automotive exhaust flame-thrower)

 

Technician wrote:
> Well, turns are hard to follow in a photograph so i rarely capture them. i will keep it in mind on
> the next ride though.
>
> ~Travis

that's silliness. I just took these yesterday,

http://www.cet.com/~pennys/images/esmerelda2.jpg http://www.cet.com/~pennys/images/esmerelda1.jpg

 

On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 14:02:33 -0700, Penny S. wrote:

> http://www.cet.com/~pennys/images/esmerelda2.jpg http://www.cet.com/~pennys/images/esmerelda1.jpg

Let me guess: "its steeper than it looks".

--
-BB- To reply to me, drop the attitude (from my e-mail address, at least)

 

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> Technician wrote:
> > Well, turns are hard to follow in a photograph so i rarely capture them. i will keep it in mind
> > on the next ride though.
> >
> > ~Travis
>
> that's silliness. I just took these yesterday,
>
> http://www.cet.com/~pennys/images/esmerelda2.jpg http://www.cet.com/~pennys/images/esmerelda1.jpg
>
>
>
>

Most of the turns on the trails i ride are obstructed by trees. Though looking at your photos,
perhaps i was viewing them at the wrong angle. i'll experiment a bit on the next ride (should be
able to get a bit more mileage in too).

~Travis
--
To reply by email, remove clothes.

travis5765.homelinux.net, Primary Administrator TF Custom Electronic, Owner/Founder/Developer
(current project: Automotive exhaust flame-thrower)

 

BB wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 14:02:33 -0700, Penny S. wrote:
>
>> http://www.cet.com/~pennys/images/esmerelda2.jpg http://www.cet.com/~pennys/images/esmerelda1.jpg
>
> Let me guess: "its steeper than it looks".

actually these look about right. I don't profess to be a great or even good photographer...
snapshots R US... but If I can get a few turns in the frame, surely Travis can?

Penny

 

On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 14:02:33 -0700, "Penny S." <[email protected]> wrote:

>http://www.cet.com/~pennys/images/esmerelda1.jpg

Ooooooooh, i like the one with the flowers.....

MTBguy.ca

 

On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 14:33:55 -0700, Penny S. wrote:
> BB wrote:
>> On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 14:02:33 -0700, Penny S. wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.cet.com/~pennys/images/esmerelda2.jpg
>>> http://www.cet.com/~pennys/images/esmerelda1.jpg
>>
>> Let me guess: "its steeper than it looks".
>
> actually these look about right. I don't profess to be a great or even good photographer...
> snapshots R US... but If I can get a few turns in the frame, surely Travis can?

I was referring to the "photo flattening effect". Certainly not a comment about your photography.
I've yet to hear that anyone has figured out how to get a picture (or video) to show how steep a
hill really is.

BTW, Travis - are those fireroads just gentle romps through level woodlands or grinds up a hill?

--
-BB- To reply to me, drop the attitude (from my e-mail address, at least)

 

BB wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 14:33:55 -0700, Penny S. wrote:
>> BB wrote:
>>> On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 14:02:33 -0700, Penny S. wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://www.cet.com/~pennys/images/esmerelda2.jpg
>>>> http://www.cet.com/~pennys/images/esmerelda1.jpg
>>>
>>> Let me guess: "its steeper than it looks".
>>
>> actually these look about right. I don't profess to be a great or even good photographer...
>> snapshots R US... but If I can get a few turns in the frame, surely Travis can?
>
> I was referring to the "photo flattening effect". Certainly not a comment about your photography.
> I've yet to hear that anyone has figured out how to get a picture (or video) to show how steep a
> hill really is.

I"ve always just gotten down real low ( like on my knees) and looked up the trail... works for
me.www.specialtyoutdoors.com/images/shoreline2.jpg

 

> BTW, Travis - are those fireroads just gentle romps through level woodlands or grinds up a hill?
>

Well, none of them are fire roads.

#0146, there is an exposed ledge there just in view. the view shows the
backside that is smooth, the front is a little sharper as it is the edge of the ledge.

#0147 is a shallow climb. the picture does not show the detail of the
terrain. it is full of low "bulges" (not sure of the real term) typical of northeastern woods.

#0148 is a nice smooth downhill (very low grade). at the end can be seen
the main walking trail covered with the previously spoke of (in another thread) energy sapping bark.

#0149 is actually part of the north end of the Sandy River Narrow Gauge
railroad bed. fairly flat, but has a washout (#0150).

#0150, this is the drop out some may remember from a while back that i
was having trouble with. i now ride it with ease. you can see my tire mark in the soft soil to the
left and then crosses over to the right side of the trail at the bottom (best way i found to ride it
out. left side on the near end has some exposed roots).

#0152, i am actually standing at the intersection of the new trail (that
the ATVs obviously do not use). this is actually quite steep, i will see if i can get a grade shot
on my next ride. above me is a rocky downhill (that i had to ride back up).

On my next ride i will take much more pictures in an attempt to show what the terrain looks like
(anybody want to load me a helmet cam, wink, wink). after reviewing the pictures, i can see where
everybodies perspective comes from. they really don't show the technicality of the terrain i like to
ride. photos really do flatten the terrain (if only i had a 3D holographic imager). I will try my
best with photos, but to really know the terrain, you would have to experience it for yourself. i'm
sure i could plot out a good 30 - 40 miles of good terrain should anybody be in the area. i rode it
all in a day once and it just about killed me, though that's not saying much really. though now i
have a car so i don't have to ride the extra miles to get from one trail to another (some are quite
literally across town from the others).

So it looks like i have a mission for my next ride. capture a very 3D terrain, in 2D while still
maintaining a fair perspective. i will most likely put my bike in a few shots for perspective.
like for instance, the washout in #0150, if i stood at the bottom, the tops would be about
shoulder height, and the peaks are spaced about, well, we'll say between 6' and 8' (grade is about
95% to 110%±5 on each side). those are guesses though, so don't go calculating them out and
contradicting me ;-)

~Travis
--
To reply by email, remove clothes.

travis5765.homelinux.net, Primary Administrator TF Custom Electronic, Owner/Founder/Developer
(current project: Automotive exhaust flame-thrower)

 

On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 17:28:14 -0700, Penny S. wrote:

> I"ve always just gotten down real low ( like on my knees) and looked up the trail... works for me.
> www.specialtyoutdoors.com/images/shoreline2.jpg

Nice pic. Looks like a VERY interesting climb!

--
-BB- To reply to me, drop the attitude (from my e-mail address, at least)

 

On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 21:07:02 -0400, Technician wrote:

> likely put my bike in a few shots for perspective. like for instance, the washout in #0150, if i
> stood at the bottom, the tops would be about shoulder height, and the peaks are spaced about,
> well, we'll say between 6' and 8' (grade is about 95% to 110%±5 on each side). those are guesses
> though, so don't go calculating them out and contradicting me ;-)

How are YOU calculating the grade?

--
-BB- To reply to me, drop the attitude (from my e-mail address, at least)

 

"Penny S." <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...

> I"ve always just gotten down real low ( like on my knees)

Baker let THAT go to comment on BANDWIDTH?!?

Bill "Steve, you ain't no Shaun" S.

 

BB wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 21:07:02 -0400, Technician wrote:
>
>> likely put my bike in a few shots for perspective. like for instance, the washout in #0150, if i
>> stood at the bottom, the tops would be about shoulder height, and the peaks are spaced about,
>> well, we'll say between 6' and 8' (grade is about 95% to 110%±5 on each side). those are guesses
>> though, so don't go calculating them out and contradicting me ;-)
>
> How are YOU calculating the grade?

how much you wanna bet he's NOT using a clinometer.

Penny

 

BB wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 17:28:14 -0700, Penny S. wrote:
>
>> I"ve always just gotten down real low ( like on my knees) and looked up the trail... works for
>> me. www.specialtyoutdoors.com/images/shoreline2.jpg
>
> Nice pic. Looks like a VERY interesting climb!

I always go down it. ;-)

 

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 21:07:02 -0400, Technician wrote:
>
> > likely put my bike in a few shots for perspective. like for instance, the washout in #0150, if i
> > stood at the bottom, the tops would be about shoulder height, and the peaks are spaced about,
> > well, we'll say between 6' and 8' (grade is about 95% to 110%±5 on each side). those are guesses
> > though, so don't go calculating them out and contradicting me ;-)
>
> How are YOU calculating the grade?
>
>

guessing (as it says). 45° = 100% grade. i just estimate it based on 45° and come up with it that
way. i could be, and most likely am, way off though. I'll measure it someday (up from bottom, over
to peak) and see what it really is.

~Travis
--
To reply by email, remove clothes.

travis5765.homelinux.net, Primary Administrator TF Custom Electronic, Owner/Founder/Developer
(current project: Automotive exhaust flame-thrower)