So I was mucking around in my photo archives searching for Chicago pics, and had a tough time trying to find some decent prints to scan.
Lots of problems: poor composition, crappy exposure, grainier than a Saskatchewan silo. That’s what happens when you use a point-and-shoot — no control over anything. Seems like a big waste of money developing the film, come to think of it. I didn’t own a computer until the middle of 2000, so I was scanning these — from a trip at the end of ’99 — at internet caf�s. An even bigger waste of money. (Digital cameras, despite their many shortcomings compared to film, at least let one practice technique without dropping a small fortune in developing costs.)
David and I both love Chicago, and were discussing back in the spring how much it would cost to get there. Our options:
- Tri-Pacer
- renting a faster plane
- commercial airline
- train
- driving
The Tri-Pacer only goes around 100mph/160kph and renting a faster plane would cost us a pretty penny (especially with rising fuel costs), so we were tossing around the idea of commercial airlines or Amtrak. At the time, David wanted to save up days off to visit me in Vancouver, so we eventually abandoned the idea. But, we’ve since revived it for a potential honeymoon plan when David is healthy enough to make the trip (also because I can’t leave the U.S. while my spouse visa is pending), so maybe a visit to Chicago will be sooner rather than later. We’ll see.
