We’re in the deep freeze here, several days of temps below freezing already and with probably a foot of snow on the ground from Sunday and Monday (the most we have gotten in one storm in our seven winters here), and it isn’t going anywhere anytime soon, since only the last day of the ten-day forecast is showing anything above freezing (finally 35 next Friday)–of course a lot can change in those ten days, but for now we are predicted to continue having highs in the 20s. I plan to go check out waterfalls over the next few days, but not all of the roads are plowed well, so I’m staying home as much as I can, just getting out for walks within half a mile of home. My preferred footing in weather like this is the inch-deep snow just to the side of a cleared walk, not the walk itself. Cleared walks have so much potential for slick spots that I don’t walk on them unless I have to. 🙂
Last night my photography club met, all of us via Zoom because the roads near our usual meeting place weren’t cleared well enough to meet safely in person, according to the man making the decision. The highlight of the meeting was that each of us who had submitted photos to a recent juried show, and had all our photos rejected, could send one of those photos to the committee, and two of the three jurors were present to say why it got rejected.
Problem is, the conversation before last night’s meeting was all about how they had more than 200 photos to choose from, and were limited to choosing just 80 for the show, but that the photos this year were astoundingly good and it was a really hard choice . . . but last night’s meeting totally belied that, in that they critiqued about eight photos, and about not one of those photos did they say, “This is actually a really good photo, but we had lots of really good shots of a similar subject, and this didn’t end up being one of the ones we chose for the show because of this one little weakness.” They just spent about 20 minutes on each photo showing why it just didn’t work at all.
And even though I had sent one photo, as requested, somehow they started the meeting with two of my photos, back to back. Had I experienced 40 minutes of nonstop criticism of my photos from two so-called “experts” (neither is a nature photographer) 20 years ago, it likely would have reduced me to tears. As it was, I endured it, and ended up hoping that newer photographers weren’t scared off by the experience.
The first photo of mine they critiqued wasn’t the one I had submitted to be critiqued by them. (I did submit it for the show as one of the five, none of which got accepted. Last year, with different photos and different jurors, I submitted five photos to that show and had three accepted, and submitted five photos to a different show and had four accepted.) It was a photo of a frozen waterfall.
Now, if you haven’t happened to photograph frozen waterfalls, you need to know it takes this kind of weather–multiple days below freezing–to get such shots. You are going out in very cold weather, on terrain that might be a little iffy, and with temperatures that aren’t ideal for your equipment. I took dozens of shots, some zoomed in close and some wider views. One shot included some frozen icicles off the cliff near where I was standing as foreground, and that is the photo I sent to the show. (I had a different photo I liked better, zoomed in a little more, but that is the one my husband liked best. I showed both photos to a critique group and asked which they liked better, and they chose the one I submitted except they cropped it differently, and neither my husband nor I liked the way they suggested it be cropped.)
Also, at this particular location, it’s possible to see the waterfall from three different spots. At the top is a viewing platform, and then there is a set of stairs that go down, and you can see the waterfall from the middle of the stairs, or go down to the bottom and see it from creek level. In fact, if you want to walk from one rock to another or wade the creek, you can even do that. The problem is this: water seeps onto the stone steps, and when it is cold enough for the waterfall to be iced over, the steps are encased in a solid layer of ice several inches thick. You need to keep that in mind for the discussion that follows. I would like to take photos from creek level, but I can only get them safely from the observation deck.
For years we have enjoyed the photos you’ve shared with us. Many were stunning in their detail and clarity. While some “expert” may take issue, we enjoy them and think they’re more than worthy of recognition. Chin up Ma’am.
So, the jurors (a man and a woman) started off with this particular photo, and seemed in no hurry to move on to any other photos. I think they spent half an hour on this one photo, and if they said anything at all positive about it, I missed it. They said the lighting was bad, the focal point unclear, that the icicles in front and the waterfall at the bottom competed for attention (a fair critique). They pointed out that there was no horizon in my photo (because it was looking down), but I’m not sure that it’s fair to say a photo has to have a horizon.
But they weren’t content to say the photo might have been cropped differently, or that they would have liked to see a different photo zoomed in more. (I had lots of those photos, since I was using a really long zoom lens, but they had no way of knowing that.)
The man ended up saying (several times) that his biggest problem with the photo was that it took “no effort.” That wasn’t true, and it was insulting. (It took a lot of effort to drive to that spot and walk to that spot in sub-freezing weather, I took photos from several places within the park, and I took dozens of photos at that spot itself, from several angles and with several zoom levels. Then I chose two favorite photos, and my husband edited the one I asked him to edit.) Finally he said that for a photo like this, you need to be willing to get your feet wet, to go down to the creek itself and take the photo from there.
I figured most of the people in the club knew the spot, and so saying something about the scene wasn’t admitting I took the photo (they were being critiqued anonymously, though they said we could tell them we took it if we wanted to). So I said that in that spot in winter, when the waterfall is that frozen, the steps to get to the creek are iced over and impassible.
And that’s when the critique took a weird turn. The man said that to get good photos, you have to be willing to take risks. (I doubt he has seen those steps in winter; he is fairly new to the community.) He said that you take the risk and go down and get the photo from the right spot. And then the woman juror chimed in and said if you don’t go down and get the photo from the “right” spot, then you just don’t take the photo at all.
Now, in warmer weather I have taken photos from the bottom and from the top, and don’t have a definite preference between them. And to go so far as to say that I shouldn’t have taken the photo at all is to suggest it’s a really, really bad photo–but it’s also downright weird to downplay a photographer’s objection that it isn’t worth descending ice-covered steps to get a different photography angle.
The second photo of mine they critiqued, of a juvenile hawk in a tree screaming because he wanted a parent to bring him food, they didn’t treat as brutally. But neither did they say it’s actually an interesting and good photo, just imperfect. They had nothing but negative things to say about it, and the man kept calling it an “eagle,” even though two of us corrected him and told him it was a hawk. (He thought the photo should include whatever the “eagle” was looking at that was making him scream, so I explained I took this photo, and it is a juvenile hawk yelling for his parents to bring him lunch, and no, he isn’t looking at his parents while he’s screaming–he’s just yelling his fool head off.)
A different photo that these jurors didn’t accept for the show got included in a calendar this year. My inclination is to submit most of the same photos next year and see how many get accepted with different jurors. In the meantime, last night was a surreal experience. If I’m not willing to go down icy stone steps–and then go back up them later–then I need to desist from taking photos at all, and leave such shots to photographers who are willing to put in “effort” to get photos.
Thanks, AJ. I posted a photo of the icy steps to my photography group on Facebook, and it has gotten dozens of comments–and not one person has said, “Yes, you could have gotten down these safely, but you’re just too lazy.” They all agree that they are really dangerous and nowhere near the risk just for a different photography angle.
~ At least two people are dead and many more injured as several fires broke out across Southern California amid historically dry and windy conditions.
Tens of thousands were evacuated as more than 5,000 acres burned in the Palisades Fire in the Pacific Palisades neighborhood in Los Angeles. The Eaton Fire — which broke out miles away from the Palisades Fire, in Altadena, California — had grown to 2,227 acres with 0% containment. The Hurst Fire, meanwhile, erupted and spread northeast of San Fernando, California, burning at least 500 acres. ~
It’s been an inferno burning to the north of us, close enough that my house and front porch — where we also had the ‘devil’ winds blowing wildly for hours late into the night — smelled like smoke.
My friends to the north in LA weren’t directly threatened, but their power was off for most of the evening. Two daughters were closer to the fire zones but seemed to be OK as of last night.
Lifeguard stations were burning on the beach in Malibu. And so many homes lost, folks racing to get out with what was on their backs or what they could grab and carry; saw an impromptu TV interview with a man on his bicycle, carrying large framed paintings under his arm, his house going up in flames just behind him — he handed the paintings to the reporter who asked how he could help, he’ll get them later he said, and off he rode into the night. 😦
Cousin in Missouri called, they’re dealing with 14 feet of snow and freezing temperatures as noted by Cheryl.
The sky is yellow-gray this morning.
And the winds, still in play through the next 24 hours or more, are spreading embers so fires pop up randomly, stretching fire-fighter resources throughout LA County and beyond as help arrives.
We had some staffers covering the fires into the night (we have outlets throughout LA, Inland, Orange counties, and we get virtual fire coverage “training” every year along with equipment provided to carry in our cars, but I and some others aren’t seriously a part of those tentative plans, it’s left to our crime and breaking news team of young go-getters who can run fast).
One of my former colleagues told the story of covering a wildfire in our foothills some years ago when the fire abruptly turned and headed their way (they all had parked heading “out” as advised by firefighters). He had to take off running to get to his car, the bottoms of his shoes had partially melted.
At noon, it’s 31° here, nothing for most of you on the blog, but too cold for me to desire an afternoon walk, partly because of the wind.
Glad you are wise, Cheryl, and hope others who heard that critique don’t do something foolish based on what they ‘learned’ from that man.
I’ve been listening to a program on wisdom this morning, specifically on Proverbs 8. Lady Wisdom calls out to people. That foolish ‘expert’ man was telling people to risk their lives.
In verse 8:22 the text speaks about wisdom being, “acquired at the beginning of his creation . . . formed before ancient times, from the beginning, before the earth began.” The point was made in the talk that God used wisdom as a starting point in His creative efforts. We, lesser beings, need to do likewise.
After my dad started wondering about his glasses and I had put his feet down, I went out and swept the deck of an inch of snow. My dad was happy to get out for his morning walk. He sat on his glasses yesterday so they went in for repairs in Lewiston. He did not know and may not know now though I told him thirty minutes ago.
Cheryl, how discouraging. And no, stepping on ice-slicked stones could be life-and-limb threatening.
Michelle, yeah, many of us are realizing our already climbing homeowners insurance will leap to new heights. And looking at your checklist from before on your blog, I keep coming back also to 2 large trees next to my house. I’d hate to lose them but realize they “should” come down (I had them trimmed several months ago but removal would be wise I know, were it not for the monumental costs … ).
And I do have wood shingles on my 2 small roof overhangs over the front porch and front of the garage. Might be my justification to get tile which I wish I’d done before when the roof was done.
Not sure how safe the rolled flat roof is that’s on the overall house and garage, but it’s probably/maybe? better than shingles. Fellow reporter today was saying his house is all wood shingle roofing. …
And in LA we’ve been on a crusade to plant more shade trees everywhere, so now what?
mumsee (or someone from somewhere above), I started thinking about that later (“14 feet”) and realized earlier I meant (or maybe he meant) 14 inches! lol
Whatever. I don’t live in snow country. (But have visited enough through the years to know from experience that ice is evil.)
Speaking of GED: son and daughter are doing well. Daughter has now successfully completed three of the four units, expecting to take and pass science on Monday. Son is halfway through. His impulse control, or lack thereof, gets the better of him but he did history and math successfully and is ready for science on Monday. They said he knows the stuff but he plows through so quickly he does not give himself time to read the questions. The staff also reports the two are the nicest and most polite students they have ever had.
In the Palisades Fire, LA DWP’s 3 huge water tanks all ran out of water: LADWP chief Janisse Quiñones says the water system has been pushed to the extreme
~ Quiñones urged DWP customers to conserve water not only in the Palisades but in the entire system “because the fire department needs the water to fight fires and we’re fighting a wildfire with urban water systems, and that is really challenging.”
She explained that the first water tank in Pacific Palisades that was tapped by firefighters held about 1 million gallons of water but it ran out of water at 4:45 p.m. Tuesday, and the second tank of 1 million gallons of water ran out of water at about 8:30 p.m., followed by the third tank early Wednesday. ~
Steel roofs are getting more and more popular here. I have wondered how difficult it would be for fire fighters to hack through them when they need to get into an attic.
Fourteen feet of snow in Missouri would make all the news reports for sure. Probably 14 inches does as well, I suppose.
Cheryl, your reports remind me of when my daughter and husband used to compete in music contests. Like photography much of that is simply subjective. Yes, there are parameters, but there is so much that is personal preference. You see the same thing on the food channel. One judge complains about this or that and the next loves it. It becomes a matter of liking your own creation and/or what you do. Innovation in art etc. would never happen either under some of these judges. The saddest thing is that judges like that can totally frustrate the new people, as you noted.
I’m so sorry, Michelle — saw that on FB. Devastating.
Planes have been grounded for firefighting due to the winds, that was as of this morning (and since Tuesday) — they may be cleared now.
So sad, also, to see that the Will Rogers Ranch Home was burned to the ground. 😦 I’d wanted to go back there again recently, had mentioned it to my cousin.
Palisades Fire Destroys Historic Homes and Buildings at Will Rogers State Historic Park and Topanga State Park
~ PACIFIC PALISADES —The devastating Palisades Fire destroyed historic buildings and multiple structures at two California State Parks last night, including Will Rogers’ historic ranch house and buildings at Will rogers State Historic Park (SHP). The fire fueled by wind gusts up to 80 mph also destroyed parts of Topanga State Park (SP), including the historic Topanga Ranch Motel once owned by William Randolph Hearst.
“California State Parks mourns the loss of these treasured natural and cultural resources, and our hearts go out to everyone impacted by the devastating fires in the Los Angeles area,” said State Parks Director Armando Quintero. “Since yesterday afternoon, we are directing all available resources into the emergency response effort and working to secure and protect as much as we can at affected nearby state parks. We are deeply grateful to our parks staff and all partner agencies for their swift actions. Our top priority remains the safety of the public, our employees and the responders bravely battling the fires.”
Shortly after the Palisades Fire began around 10:30 a.m. on Jan. 7, State Parks closed Topanga SP and Will Rogers SHP as a precaution. The fire quickly moved onto State Parks property at Topanga SP and that evening, into Will Rogers SHP. While a full assessment of the damages and losses isn’t immediately available, here are the significant impacts known:
Will Rogers’ historic ranch house and other historic buildings at Will Rogers SHP destroyed;
Topanga Ranch Motel and all concessions destroyed;
State Park employee residences destroyed;
More than 30 structural losses at Topanga SP and Will Rogers SHP.
State Parks was able to evacuate the horses and some of the cultural and historical artifacts, including artwork, at Will Rogers SHP ahead of the fire. ~
Winds last night were especially erratic (according to information presented a news conference this afternoon), up to 70 mph and at one point, at 2 a.m., suddenly just changed directions, so planes weren’t useful. Winds are still a factor and there is “0” containment so they do expect more spread — but they’re hoping for less of a spread than what we’ve seen leading up to this point.
I wonder if any of you have any good novels to suggest, which features siblings? Little Women and such have already been suggested. I know a book club that is looking for a good book that features siblings.
Kathaleena – Two older books that come to mind are “East of Eden” and “Rich Man, Poor Man.” Jane Austen’s works included siblings.
I have been re-reading a series of Christian historical novels that I think may be for young adults, but I have enjoyed the stories myself. The author is Jack Cavanaugh. The titles are “The Puritans,” “The Colonists,” “The Patriots,” “The Adversaries,” and “The Pioneers”.
The first one does not involve siblings, but the others do.
Sorry, Michelle–I have prayed for them a couple of times. Those fires sound horrendous, and I’m sorry again that the attempt to recall Newsom wasn’t successful.
Good morning! I will be watching the service for President Carter at 10 a.m. So much coverage lately on the news here. Does anyone else plan to watch it?
Thanks, Peter. It’s possible I’ve already sent the frozen-waterfall photo to AJ, I’m not sure–the particular photo was taken two or three years ago. I’m pretty sure I haven’t sent in the baby hawk one, though.
Honestly, it would have devastated me to have such an extended critique on really good photos a few years ago, but this time I was more aware that it was poor form, that some of what they said was actually rude (saying the photo took “no effort”) and some of it bad advice (don’t take the photo at all, go ahead and go down those icy steps), and I mostly disregarded what they said (except a little bit that seemed potentially helpful). My bigger concern was that newer photographers could have been really discouraged by it, even discouraged by what they said about my photos. (For example, that photo of a hawk was a fairly good photo. Someone new to wildlife photography, and who saw the photo treated so disdainfully, could be discouraged from even trying to get photos.) I also think that some of the photos they did accept into the exhibit weren’t very good, so I already had been questioning how valuable their opinion was, even before it was given so negatively.
I’m on the board, though, and at the next board meeting I plan to recommend two changes if they have such “juror feedback” in the future: that they instruct the jurors to find positive things about the photos they critique, and that they dismiss the jurors before the end of the meeting so that the club members can talk without them overhearing, so that we can reassure anyone who felt particularly attacked. Personally I’m inclined not to have jurors provide such feedback again, but if we instruct them how to do so kindly, it might help a little. I actually wish I had spoken up a little bit toward the end of the meeting, once the critique portion was over, and say that I really liked several of the photos that had been critiqued, and that such judging is highly subjective and people should consider resubmitting next year, as I plan to do myself. Not to defend my own place in the critique, but that of other people.
After the show opening, several of us in the club gathered informally, and we commented that someone who was new to photography was really excited he’d had a photo or two accepted into the exhibit. He found that really encouraging. Well, what about if, instead, he had had his photos critiqued mercilessly, with no comments about what was good about them. Would he be inclined to try again next year, or even to stay in the club at all?
Wandering Views 
Good morning.
We’re in the deep freeze here, several days of temps below freezing already and with probably a foot of snow on the ground from Sunday and Monday (the most we have gotten in one storm in our seven winters here), and it isn’t going anywhere anytime soon, since only the last day of the ten-day forecast is showing anything above freezing (finally 35 next Friday)–of course a lot can change in those ten days, but for now we are predicted to continue having highs in the 20s. I plan to go check out waterfalls over the next few days, but not all of the roads are plowed well, so I’m staying home as much as I can, just getting out for walks within half a mile of home. My preferred footing in weather like this is the inch-deep snow just to the side of a cleared walk, not the walk itself. Cleared walks have so much potential for slick spots that I don’t walk on them unless I have to. 🙂
LikeLiked by 3 people
Good morning, again.
mumsee
LikeLiked by 2 people
1/2
Last night my photography club met, all of us via Zoom because the roads near our usual meeting place weren’t cleared well enough to meet safely in person, according to the man making the decision. The highlight of the meeting was that each of us who had submitted photos to a recent juried show, and had all our photos rejected, could send one of those photos to the committee, and two of the three jurors were present to say why it got rejected.
Problem is, the conversation before last night’s meeting was all about how they had more than 200 photos to choose from, and were limited to choosing just 80 for the show, but that the photos this year were astoundingly good and it was a really hard choice . . . but last night’s meeting totally belied that, in that they critiqued about eight photos, and about not one of those photos did they say, “This is actually a really good photo, but we had lots of really good shots of a similar subject, and this didn’t end up being one of the ones we chose for the show because of this one little weakness.” They just spent about 20 minutes on each photo showing why it just didn’t work at all.
And even though I had sent one photo, as requested, somehow they started the meeting with two of my photos, back to back. Had I experienced 40 minutes of nonstop criticism of my photos from two so-called “experts” (neither is a nature photographer) 20 years ago, it likely would have reduced me to tears. As it was, I endured it, and ended up hoping that newer photographers weren’t scared off by the experience.
The first photo of mine they critiqued wasn’t the one I had submitted to be critiqued by them. (I did submit it for the show as one of the five, none of which got accepted. Last year, with different photos and different jurors, I submitted five photos to that show and had three accepted, and submitted five photos to a different show and had four accepted.) It was a photo of a frozen waterfall.
Now, if you haven’t happened to photograph frozen waterfalls, you need to know it takes this kind of weather–multiple days below freezing–to get such shots. You are going out in very cold weather, on terrain that might be a little iffy, and with temperatures that aren’t ideal for your equipment. I took dozens of shots, some zoomed in close and some wider views. One shot included some frozen icicles off the cliff near where I was standing as foreground, and that is the photo I sent to the show. (I had a different photo I liked better, zoomed in a little more, but that is the one my husband liked best. I showed both photos to a critique group and asked which they liked better, and they chose the one I submitted except they cropped it differently, and neither my husband nor I liked the way they suggested it be cropped.)
Also, at this particular location, it’s possible to see the waterfall from three different spots. At the top is a viewing platform, and then there is a set of stairs that go down, and you can see the waterfall from the middle of the stairs, or go down to the bottom and see it from creek level. In fact, if you want to walk from one rock to another or wade the creek, you can even do that. The problem is this: water seeps onto the stone steps, and when it is cold enough for the waterfall to be iced over, the steps are encased in a solid layer of ice several inches thick. You need to keep that in mind for the discussion that follows. I would like to take photos from creek level, but I can only get them safely from the observation deck.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yikes Cheryl.
Be careful.
For years we have enjoyed the photos you’ve shared with us. Many were stunning in their detail and clarity. While some “expert” may take issue, we enjoy them and think they’re more than worthy of recognition. Chin up Ma’am.
Allen
LikeLiked by 5 people
2/2
So, the jurors (a man and a woman) started off with this particular photo, and seemed in no hurry to move on to any other photos. I think they spent half an hour on this one photo, and if they said anything at all positive about it, I missed it. They said the lighting was bad, the focal point unclear, that the icicles in front and the waterfall at the bottom competed for attention (a fair critique). They pointed out that there was no horizon in my photo (because it was looking down), but I’m not sure that it’s fair to say a photo has to have a horizon.
But they weren’t content to say the photo might have been cropped differently, or that they would have liked to see a different photo zoomed in more. (I had lots of those photos, since I was using a really long zoom lens, but they had no way of knowing that.)
The man ended up saying (several times) that his biggest problem with the photo was that it took “no effort.” That wasn’t true, and it was insulting. (It took a lot of effort to drive to that spot and walk to that spot in sub-freezing weather, I took photos from several places within the park, and I took dozens of photos at that spot itself, from several angles and with several zoom levels. Then I chose two favorite photos, and my husband edited the one I asked him to edit.) Finally he said that for a photo like this, you need to be willing to get your feet wet, to go down to the creek itself and take the photo from there.
I figured most of the people in the club knew the spot, and so saying something about the scene wasn’t admitting I took the photo (they were being critiqued anonymously, though they said we could tell them we took it if we wanted to). So I said that in that spot in winter, when the waterfall is that frozen, the steps to get to the creek are iced over and impassible.
And that’s when the critique took a weird turn. The man said that to get good photos, you have to be willing to take risks. (I doubt he has seen those steps in winter; he is fairly new to the community.) He said that you take the risk and go down and get the photo from the right spot. And then the woman juror chimed in and said if you don’t go down and get the photo from the “right” spot, then you just don’t take the photo at all.
Now, in warmer weather I have taken photos from the bottom and from the top, and don’t have a definite preference between them. And to go so far as to say that I shouldn’t have taken the photo at all is to suggest it’s a really, really bad photo–but it’s also downright weird to downplay a photographer’s objection that it isn’t worth descending ice-covered steps to get a different photography angle.
The second photo of mine they critiqued, of a juvenile hawk in a tree screaming because he wanted a parent to bring him food, they didn’t treat as brutally. But neither did they say it’s actually an interesting and good photo, just imperfect. They had nothing but negative things to say about it, and the man kept calling it an “eagle,” even though two of us corrected him and told him it was a hawk. (He thought the photo should include whatever the “eagle” was looking at that was making him scream, so I explained I took this photo, and it is a juvenile hawk yelling for his parents to bring him lunch, and no, he isn’t looking at his parents while he’s screaming–he’s just yelling his fool head off.)
A different photo that these jurors didn’t accept for the show got included in a calendar this year. My inclination is to submit most of the same photos next year and see how many get accepted with different jurors. In the meantime, last night was a surreal experience. If I’m not willing to go down icy stone steps–and then go back up them later–then I need to desist from taking photos at all, and leave such shots to photographers who are willing to put in “effort” to get photos.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Thanks, AJ. I posted a photo of the icy steps to my photography group on Facebook, and it has gotten dozens of comments–and not one person has said, “Yes, you could have gotten down these safely, but you’re just too lazy.” They all agree that they are really dangerous and nowhere near the risk just for a different photography angle.
LikeLiked by 2 people
No ice here. Just an inferno.
From this morning:
~ At least two people are dead and many more injured as several fires broke out across Southern California amid historically dry and windy conditions.
Tens of thousands were evacuated as more than 5,000 acres burned in the Palisades Fire in the Pacific Palisades neighborhood in Los Angeles. The Eaton Fire — which broke out miles away from the Palisades Fire, in Altadena, California — had grown to 2,227 acres with 0% containment. The Hurst Fire, meanwhile, erupted and spread northeast of San Fernando, California, burning at least 500 acres. ~
It’s been an inferno burning to the north of us, close enough that my house and front porch — where we also had the ‘devil’ winds blowing wildly for hours late into the night — smelled like smoke.
My friends to the north in LA weren’t directly threatened, but their power was off for most of the evening. Two daughters were closer to the fire zones but seemed to be OK as of last night.
Lifeguard stations were burning on the beach in Malibu. And so many homes lost, folks racing to get out with what was on their backs or what they could grab and carry; saw an impromptu TV interview with a man on his bicycle, carrying large framed paintings under his arm, his house going up in flames just behind him — he handed the paintings to the reporter who asked how he could help, he’ll get them later he said, and off he rode into the night. 😦
Cousin in Missouri called, they’re dealing with 14 feet of snow and freezing temperatures as noted by Cheryl.
The sky is yellow-gray this morning.
And the winds, still in play through the next 24 hours or more, are spreading embers so fires pop up randomly, stretching fire-fighter resources throughout LA County and beyond as help arrives.
LikeLiked by 2 people
We had some staffers covering the fires into the night (we have outlets throughout LA, Inland, Orange counties, and we get virtual fire coverage “training” every year along with equipment provided to carry in our cars, but I and some others aren’t seriously a part of those tentative plans, it’s left to our crime and breaking news team of young go-getters who can run fast).
One of my former colleagues told the story of covering a wildfire in our foothills some years ago when the fire abruptly turned and headed their way (they all had parked heading “out” as advised by firefighters). He had to take off running to get to his car, the bottoms of his shoes had partially melted.
It’s all very unsettling.
LikeLiked by 2 people
14 feet of snow in Missouri is a lot, which I will attribute to smoke inhalation on the front porch. Who knows what is burning in California.
but, levity aside, that is horrible and terrifying and God knows.
mumsee
LikeLiked by 3 people
At noon, it’s 31° here, nothing for most of you on the blog, but too cold for me to desire an afternoon walk, partly because of the wind.
Glad you are wise, Cheryl, and hope others who heard that critique don’t do something foolish based on what they ‘learned’ from that man.
I’ve been listening to a program on wisdom this morning, specifically on Proverbs 8. Lady Wisdom calls out to people. That foolish ‘expert’ man was telling people to risk their lives.
In verse 8:22 the text speaks about wisdom being, “acquired at the beginning of his creation . . . formed before ancient times, from the beginning, before the earth began.” The point was made in the talk that God used wisdom as a starting point in His creative efforts. We, lesser beings, need to do likewise.
LikeLiked by 1 person
After my dad started wondering about his glasses and I had put his feet down, I went out and swept the deck of an inch of snow. My dad was happy to get out for his morning walk. He sat on his glasses yesterday so they went in for repairs in Lewiston. He did not know and may not know now though I told him thirty minutes ago.
mumsee
LikeLiked by 3 people
Up here, we’re shuddering at the insurance nightmare so many are about to endure.
Natural disasters are happening everywhere these days as the earth groans and God . . . as always is calling us to him.
Take a look at this post: https://www.michelleule.com/2015/09/21/preparing-your-life-for-a-fire/
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am feeling sad watching all the LA news.
LikeLike
Cheryl, how discouraging. And no, stepping on ice-slicked stones could be life-and-limb threatening.
Michelle, yeah, many of us are realizing our already climbing homeowners insurance will leap to new heights. And looking at your checklist from before on your blog, I keep coming back also to 2 large trees next to my house. I’d hate to lose them but realize they “should” come down (I had them trimmed several months ago but removal would be wise I know, were it not for the monumental costs … ).
And I do have wood shingles on my 2 small roof overhangs over the front porch and front of the garage. Might be my justification to get tile which I wish I’d done before when the roof was done.
Not sure how safe the rolled flat roof is that’s on the overall house and garage, but it’s probably/maybe? better than shingles. Fellow reporter today was saying his house is all wood shingle roofing. …
And in LA we’ve been on a crusade to plant more shade trees everywhere, so now what?
LikeLiked by 2 people
mumsee (or someone from somewhere above), I started thinking about that later (“14 feet”) and realized earlier I meant (or maybe he meant) 14 inches! lol
Whatever. I don’t live in snow country. (But have visited enough through the years to know from experience that ice is evil.)
LikeLiked by 2 people
(Should also add, insurance policies could – and probably will be in some/many cases – simply canceled.)
LikeLike
DJ, I prefer my explanation.
mumsee
LikeLiked by 1 person
and don’t tell me you did not inhale.
mumsee
LikeLiked by 1 person
Speaking of GED: son and daughter are doing well. Daughter has now successfully completed three of the four units, expecting to take and pass science on Monday. Son is halfway through. His impulse control, or lack thereof, gets the better of him but he did history and math successfully and is ready for science on Monday. They said he knows the stuff but he plows through so quickly he does not give himself time to read the questions. The staff also reports the two are the nicest and most polite students they have ever had.
mumsee
LikeLiked by 3 people
tin roofs here in the land of prairie fires. Ugly but beautiful in effectiveness.
mumsee
LikeLiked by 1 person
In the Palisades Fire, LA DWP’s 3 huge water tanks all ran out of water: LADWP chief Janisse Quiñones says the water system has been pushed to the extreme
~ Quiñones urged DWP customers to conserve water not only in the Palisades but in the entire system “because the fire department needs the water to fight fires and we’re fighting a wildfire with urban water systems, and that is really challenging.”
She explained that the first water tank in Pacific Palisades that was tapped by firefighters held about 1 million gallons of water but it ran out of water at 4:45 p.m. Tuesday, and the second tank of 1 million gallons of water ran out of water at about 8:30 p.m., followed by the third tank early Wednesday. ~
LikeLike
Here is an interesting article for those who are curious and want to know details:
https://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/what-is-lying-state-lying-repose-lying-honor
LikeLiked by 2 people
Staggering:
~ at least 70,000 residents were under evacuation orders and nearly 30,000 structures were under threat. ~
No slowing down yet. Three major fires, winds continuing. Heavy layers of smoke over the port complex.
Mumsee, aren’t tin roofs now kind of popular (for their looks)? Kim would know.
LikeLike
oh yeah, that’s me! Stylin’ the retro tin roof, always in vogue.
mumsee
LikeLiked by 1 person
Actually, that is one of my concerns about living in Boise, the city of trees. Seems like a confraglation waiting to happen.
mumsee
LikeLike
Steel roofs are getting more and more popular here. I have wondered how difficult it would be for fire fighters to hack through them when they need to get into an attic.
Fourteen feet of snow in Missouri would make all the news reports for sure. Probably 14 inches does as well, I suppose.
Cheryl, your reports remind me of when my daughter and husband used to compete in music contests. Like photography much of that is simply subjective. Yes, there are parameters, but there is so much that is personal preference. You see the same thing on the food channel. One judge complains about this or that and the next loves it. It becomes a matter of liking your own creation and/or what you do. Innovation in art etc. would never happen either under some of these judges. The saddest thing is that judges like that can totally frustrate the new people, as you noted.
LikeLiked by 2 people
can’t they use ocean water?
mumsee
LikeLiked by 1 person
Weeping. My nephew and family lost their house:
https://www.instagram.com/stories/clairechristiana/3540833023232941830?utm_source=ig_story_item_share&igsh=NjZiM2M3MzIxNA==
LikeLiked by 4 people
Sorry, Michelle.
mumsee
LikeLiked by 1 person
M I am so sad for them. Praying as they face this new journey of devastating loss and thankful all the while that they are ok.❣️
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m so sorry, Michelle — saw that on FB. Devastating.
Planes have been grounded for firefighting due to the winds, that was as of this morning (and since Tuesday) — they may be cleared now.
So sad, also, to see that the Will Rogers Ranch Home was burned to the ground. 😦 I’d wanted to go back there again recently, had mentioned it to my cousin.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Palisades Fire Destroys Historic Homes and Buildings at Will Rogers State Historic Park and Topanga State Park
~ PACIFIC PALISADES —The devastating Palisades Fire destroyed historic buildings and multiple structures at two California State Parks last night, including Will Rogers’ historic ranch house and buildings at Will rogers State Historic Park (SHP). The fire fueled by wind gusts up to 80 mph also destroyed parts of Topanga State Park (SP), including the historic Topanga Ranch Motel once owned by William Randolph Hearst.
“California State Parks mourns the loss of these treasured natural and cultural resources, and our hearts go out to everyone impacted by the devastating fires in the Los Angeles area,” said State Parks Director Armando Quintero. “Since yesterday afternoon, we are directing all available resources into the emergency response effort and working to secure and protect as much as we can at affected nearby state parks. We are deeply grateful to our parks staff and all partner agencies for their swift actions. Our top priority remains the safety of the public, our employees and the responders bravely battling the fires.”
Shortly after the Palisades Fire began around 10:30 a.m. on Jan. 7, State Parks closed Topanga SP and Will Rogers SHP as a precaution. The fire quickly moved onto State Parks property at Topanga SP and that evening, into Will Rogers SHP. While a full assessment of the damages and losses isn’t immediately available, here are the significant impacts known:
State Parks was able to evacuate the horses and some of the cultural and historical artifacts, including artwork, at Will Rogers SHP ahead of the fire. ~
Photos
https://www.parks.ca.gov/NewsRelease/1346
LikeLiked by 2 people
Winds last night were especially erratic (according to information presented a news conference this afternoon), up to 70 mph and at one point, at 2 a.m., suddenly just changed directions, so planes weren’t useful. Winds are still a factor and there is “0” containment so they do expect more spread — but they’re hoping for less of a spread than what we’ve seen leading up to this point.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I wonder if any of you have any good novels to suggest, which features siblings? Little Women and such have already been suggested. I know a book club that is looking for a good book that features siblings.
LikeLike
Sorry to hear that awful news, Michelle. Prayers for them and so many others.
LikeLike
Kathaleena – Two older books that come to mind are “East of Eden” and “Rich Man, Poor Man.” Jane Austen’s works included siblings.
I have been re-reading a series of Christian historical novels that I think may be for young adults, but I have enjoyed the stories myself. The author is Jack Cavanaugh. The titles are “The Puritans,” “The Colonists,” “The Patriots,” “The Adversaries,” and “The Pioneers”.
The first one does not involve siblings, but the others do.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sorry, Michelle–I have prayed for them a couple of times. Those fires sound horrendous, and I’m sorry again that the attempt to recall Newsom wasn’t successful.
LikeLike
Good morning all, God is still working.
mumsee
LikeLiked by 2 people
Good morning! I will be watching the service for President Carter at 10 a.m. So much coverage lately on the news here. Does anyone else plan to watch it?
LikeLike
Cousin in Missouri called, they’re dealing with 14 feet of snow
You know, when the snowplows come through, 14 inches on the ground can become a 14 foot mountain. I’ve seen it in large parking lots.
We got around 8-10 inches here with some taller drifts. $40 to plow the long driveway (~100ft) is worth it, as I cannot shovel that much snow.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Cheryl – your photographs are works of art. Art is subjective so don’t fret if a couple of clueless jurors don’t like your work.
Could you send AJ the photos in question to post here?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thanks, Peter. It’s possible I’ve already sent the frozen-waterfall photo to AJ, I’m not sure–the particular photo was taken two or three years ago. I’m pretty sure I haven’t sent in the baby hawk one, though.
Honestly, it would have devastated me to have such an extended critique on really good photos a few years ago, but this time I was more aware that it was poor form, that some of what they said was actually rude (saying the photo took “no effort”) and some of it bad advice (don’t take the photo at all, go ahead and go down those icy steps), and I mostly disregarded what they said (except a little bit that seemed potentially helpful). My bigger concern was that newer photographers could have been really discouraged by it, even discouraged by what they said about my photos. (For example, that photo of a hawk was a fairly good photo. Someone new to wildlife photography, and who saw the photo treated so disdainfully, could be discouraged from even trying to get photos.) I also think that some of the photos they did accept into the exhibit weren’t very good, so I already had been questioning how valuable their opinion was, even before it was given so negatively.
I’m on the board, though, and at the next board meeting I plan to recommend two changes if they have such “juror feedback” in the future: that they instruct the jurors to find positive things about the photos they critique, and that they dismiss the jurors before the end of the meeting so that the club members can talk without them overhearing, so that we can reassure anyone who felt particularly attacked. Personally I’m inclined not to have jurors provide such feedback again, but if we instruct them how to do so kindly, it might help a little. I actually wish I had spoken up a little bit toward the end of the meeting, once the critique portion was over, and say that I really liked several of the photos that had been critiqued, and that such judging is highly subjective and people should consider resubmitting next year, as I plan to do myself. Not to defend my own place in the critique, but that of other people.
After the show opening, several of us in the club gathered informally, and we commented that someone who was new to photography was really excited he’d had a photo or two accepted into the exhibit. He found that really encouraging. Well, what about if, instead, he had had his photos critiqued mercilessly, with no comments about what was good about them. Would he be inclined to try again next year, or even to stay in the club at all?
LikeLiked by 1 person