Here are two shots, one taken yesterday and one taken today, just to get them up before Theme Thursday. I like them enough that I don't want them rattling around on my hard drive doing nothing. The first shot is of a Question Mark butterfly taken yesterday in Ballard Park. I had taken a lot of shots of the fall colors around Gooseneck Cove, but didn't like any of them enough to publish. But this butterfly settled down right in front of me on one of the trails in Ballard Park and seemed to say: "You want a photo shoot? Well, here I am!"
The second shot was taken today on my way home from the grocery store. I had an idea about tomorrow's "Traffic" theme that required a to visit the Common Burying Ground (all will be explained tomorrow) and while looking for a spot from which to take the shot for tomorrow's post, my eye was caught by these two gorgeous examples of colonial-era stone carving. Naturally, I had to get this shot.
Oh yeah, and for all of you who have requested, despite my warnings, that I provide a video clip of me playing my dulcimer... I tried. My still camera will take videos, and so I set up and played to it. Unfortunately, it won't transfer to my computer. I've tried everything, but the video file won't move from the camera to the computer, even using the software Canon provides specifically for that purpose. So for the time being you're just going to have to live with not listening to me noodle meditatively on the dulcimer.
© 2009 by A. Roy Hilbinger
© 2009 by A. Roy Hilbinger
hmm; I can move videos to my computer from the camera.
ReplyDeleteTraffic + Common burial ground?
Too bad we can't do grave rubbings anymore. They are amazing works of art. I think, anyway.
Jeeze. Okay. I'll live.
ReplyDeleteI think I see why it is called a Question Mark butterfly. The carving on the gravestones is magnificent.
ReplyDeletethe butterfly is really gorgeous.
ReplyDeleteI agree, the butterfly shot is gorgeous -- it has a somehow-surreal quality to it -- but I love the gravestones! They're in fairly good shape for their age. Lots of that style behind the church I attended as a child and later, as a teen.
ReplyDelete...these are beautiful shots! You've captured that fuzzy body of the butterfly--makes me think of a mouse (a daytime Fledermaus). The stones are gorgeous... I can see why you "don't want them rattling around on my hard drive doing nothing." (Perfect description...)
ReplyDeleteThe photographs are truly EXCELLENT.
ReplyDeleteI do not think I have seen this type of butterfly before...it is soooo beautiful and quite frankly ASKED YOU to photograph it yes??
wow those gravestones are in amazing shape.
ReplyDeleteregarding the vid, we await with bated breath!
really wonderful shots...love the colors in the butterflies and the detail in the tombstones is great!
ReplyDeleteYou know what amazes me is that, if I'm reading the stones right, one stone includes Charles and his wife Elizabeth (including but one day of death, however) while the other is the stone for a baby girl who didn't quite make it to her first birthday. Either that, or Charles is the son of Jonathon (deceased) and Jonathon's wife Elizabeth.
ReplyDeleteIf the latter, it makes me wonder if these weren't both just children who died young (as was quite common) since there's no distinction noted except their parents.
Steph - ...or Charles is the son of Jonathon (deceased) and Jonathon's wife Elizabeth. Yup, it's that, because the stone reads: "Here lieth Charles son of Jonathan Lawton desesed [sic] & Elizabeth his wife, who died Sept. the 26 day 1720."
ReplyDeleteIf a gravestone names the parents it usually means whoever's buried under it was a child. I don't understand what you mean by "distinction."