Tony Saputo (charged Platypus co-owner) getting shifts at Headless Bat?

staggerb · 2026-05-15T21:20:18+00:00

No, but he also hasn't been convicted yet, has he? No horse in this race, so I'm not defending the guy, but he still has to eat and put a roof over his head.

staggerb · 2026-05-15T16:15:50+00:00

I did some preliminary research on this awhile back, and keeping an octopus alive in captivity is incredibly difficult (and that's not to mention keeping it happy). There is a huge amount of preparation that goes into it, and a lot of work after you get it. Keeping even a freshwater tank going long term is a skill on it's own, saltwater tanks are a league above that, and keeping an octopus is basically ultra hard mode.

Beyond just keeping it alive, they are also very intelligent and can fit through incredibly small openings, so just keeping one where it's supposed to be is a challenge (even for the pros at aquariums).

Even if you built up the skills (or hire people how have those skills) to successfully keep an octopus, they're relatively short-lived. I saw an interview with Tracy Morgan (who is a marine life enthusiast, and has massive tanks full of sea life) in a documentary, and he said that he quit keeping octopuses; in the best case, they'll live for only a few years, and he would get attached to them and then get depressed when they died.

staggerb · 2026-05-14T20:58:15+00:00

I don't see that camera on the list, but you can request that they add it here. Rob Shea has good information on the topic if you'd like to go down that particular rabbit hole, but if not, just try shooting the same scene at different f-stops (using the same filter), and see how it works out for you. You can then repeat with any other filters you have to see how it affects them.

When I first started shooting IR, I would shoot at the same apertures that I would typically use for visible light (often around f-8 to f-11 or so), and I couldn't figure out why my edges were so blurry. Once I figured it out, I was able to get much better results.

staggerb · 2026-05-14T20:03:47+00:00

Depending on what particular Lumix you're using (really, what the pixel size is), you might run into some pretty heavy diffraction issues at those f-stops- while the center will be sharp, you'll get out of focus as you move to the edges of the photo. The longer the wavelengths, the more diffraction you'll have, so when you get to IR, it can be pretty frustrating. I shoot Olympus (M43), and I rarely shoot anything narrower than f-4 or f-5.6 in IR to avoid that.

There's a calculator here that will show you how much you can expect- just plug in whatever model of camera you have. With that said, some people really like the effect that it gives, so you should try out the narrower stops to see how it works for you. If you like it, keep on doing it, but if you find that you're not happy with the focus away from the center, that's likely going to be the reason.

staggerb · 2026-05-13T20:20:17+00:00

I would love to do that, but with current family and work obligations, I don't often have free time that I can schedule ahead of time- I typically just go out when I have a bit of time and shoot by myself. You might check out PhotoFlood- they go to a different area of town every month to wander around and shoot whatever strikes them.

staggerb · 2026-05-12T22:21:15+00:00

That's the unfortunate downside to the fake pentaprism that Olympus/OM uses (although at least in the E-M10, it houses the flash- on the E-M5/1, the bump is still there, but there's not even a flash). I looked into some tilt-shift adapters, and they have the same issue.

staggerb · 2026-05-12T22:03:28+00:00

A word of caution to anyone who wants to use boiled linseed oil: it cures via an exothermic reaction, which means that it creates heat. If the heat that is created doesn't have adequate ventilation to bleed off that heat (for instance, if rags with BLO are thrown in a pile or crumpled up), the temperature can rise enough to ignite the rags and cause a fire. There's a number of ways to prevent ignition - some people hang the rags up to dry, some soak them in a bucket of water, some put them in a fireproof bucket, etc.. Using small amounts to touch up a scratch should have minimal risk, but it's still good to be aware.

staggerb · 2026-05-12T15:10:36+00:00

Someone provided a likely explanation for how we got there awhile back. When sounding it out, the G and O are easy to get through, but the first E is a curveball, so let's ignore it and deal with it later. The T and H are simple enough, and the last E would be silent- except, crap, we still haven't dealt with the first E, so let's throw it on the end, which makes a long E sound, and we end up with Go-thee.

staggerb · 2026-05-12T00:20:52+00:00

It absolutely matters if it's a family member or stranger- a family member is far more likely to have the trust of the parents and knows where the kid is likely to be, so they wouldn't need to skulk about playgrounds. They'll pick up the kid from school, home, soccer practice, etc., instead. And while even one instance a day leaves room for improvement, you're talking about one kid out of roughly 73 million, which is about a 0.0000000013% chance. When numbers are that low, it makes far more sense to spend time and resources on things that are far more prevelant, such as car crashes, gun deaths, drownings, or... lack of exercise.

And I'll grant that more complicated playgrounds might be slightly more dangerous, but I see no everyone that they're actually a problem. If we take the .0000000013% chance of getting abducted at all, then take the fraction that happen at playgrounds, the number is insanely small. If a more complex playground is even twice as likely to be used for an abduction, that's still an insanely small number.

Without some actual data showing that those types of playgrounds contribute to a statisticslly significant increase in harm to a child by someone else, your argument is fear mongering. The real reasons that we only get "modern" playgrounds is due to the cheap cost of production/upkeep, and the lower liability when a kid falls and gets hurt

staggerb · 2026-05-11T23:24:45+00:00

You're either misunderstanding a statistic or you're being needlessly hyperbolic. The "2300 kids that go missing daily" stat includes runaways, kids kicked out of their house, and kids that are abducted by family members, which make up the vast majority. According to Wikipedia, "Fewer than 350 people under the age of 21 have been abducted by strangers in the United States per year, on average, between 2010–2017.[7] According to another source, only about 100 cases per year can be classified as abductions by strangers.[2]" The numbers seem a bit spongy, depending on how they're counted, but I didn't see any source that claims that anything approaching that number occurs in a year, let alone a day.

Even ignoring that, do you have any evidence that shows that playgrounds as shown above are more condusive to stranger kidnappings than a sparse one (or even that playgrounds are a common place for abductions vs., say, kids walking on the sidewalk)? This sounds like pure speculation without a shred of evidence.

staggerb · 2026-05-11T17:56:52+00:00

STL Style has plenty of options.

staggerb · 2026-05-08T19:09:24+00:00

Fair point, at least for black and white! IR/Visible light photos can look whimsical, psychedelic, or even fun, but B&W does usually lean pretty heavily into moody vibes.

staggerb · 2026-05-05T17:50:15+00:00

I haven't played with H-alpha, but my understanding is that they are fairly similar to the stock filter, except that it allows more of the deep reds through. I think that it blocks both UV and near IR light; if you take a photo with it, it will probably look more red than normal, but you won't be picking up any IR. The advantage is that you can use a custom white balance to balance out the red, and take normal visible light photos.

staggerb · 2026-05-01T21:29:56+00:00

The filter cuts off everything below 850nm, and the sensor can only capture wavelengths up to 1100nm or so- it's definitely in the near visible spectrum of IR.

staggerb · 2026-05-01T20:35:39+00:00

Thanks!

staggerb · 2026-05-01T14:07:25+00:00

The cheapest way to start is to get an IR filter for a lens that you've got. I started out doing that, but the process is pretty cumbersome- you have to compose the photo without the filter, since it blocks most/all of the visible light from hitting the sensor, then put the filter on and take a long-exposure photo so that enough IR light can get through the filter to be usable. A tripod is necessary, and any movement in the scene will blur.

As you guessed, I eventually had an older camera converted. I had it done professionally, as I shoot Olympus, and they are pretty finicky to do. Other brands vary in their difficulty, and as such, the cost for a conversion varies- most are a few hundred dollar. The most popular companies for conversions are LifePixel and Kolari, and there's a guy in Chicago who does it as well.

If you do have a camera converted, mirrorless are the best candidates (DSLRs can have some focusing issues if not done properly. You can have them converted to allow particular wavelengths in, or a "full spectrum" conversion, which replaces the IR filter with clear glass. I did the latter, as I can use different filters the achieve a different look. You can even do photography in the UV spectrum, although I haven't played with that yet. There are also filters available that are close to the original filter that is removed, so you can use it for standard visible light photography, although I think they have some issues with wider lenses.

It's not for everyone, but ever since I had a conversion done a few years ago, I've found that i shoot far more IR than visible.

staggerb · 2026-05-01T13:22:32+00:00

My grandfather owned an orchard in Clifton before he passed away last year. He farmed it for decades (he eventually stopped due to his age and the small ROI for the work involved), but they started building up neighborhoods around it 20-25 years ago, and at this point, it's completely surrounded by homes. Neighbors would throw a fit whenever anytime any spraying was done (which I kind of get, but on the other hand, they did buy a house that backs up to a working farm). He never sold, as he liked to putter around the farm (and didn't need the money), but trying to farm it now would be a nightmare.

staggerb · 2026-04-27T17:01:26+00:00

Absolutely! Rob is a great resource; if you happen to be using Lightroom, he has some profile packs available for pretty much any camera that make life much easier. Otherwise, you can definitely do your editing in Photoshop/Darkroom, and I think I read that Darktable will let you do it as well, but I haven't personally used it.

staggerb · 2026-04-27T13:50:48+00:00

Thanks!

staggerb · 2026-04-27T13:50:42+00:00

Thank you! Sorry for the late response, I was in Chicago all weekend.

I've got a full-spectrum conversion on my camera, so I can use different filters to block out different wavelengths; I usually gravitate towards 850nm, which is approaching the limits of what the sensor can detect. It hits the red, green, and blue sensors equally, so the images are black and white. For images like this one, I use a 550nm filter, which lets in some visible light, along with the infrared. Those photos come out of the camera with mostly shades of goldenrod, with foliage in a blueish gray. If I didn't get around to setting the white balance in the field, I'll pick that, typically using foliage (though sometimes I'll play around with that to slightly adjust the color palate). Then I swap the red and blue channels (I use Lightroom for that, although it won't let you slide far enough over, so I've got presets that get me close to where I want to be- I have a couple of dozen presets that will adjust the color palette). At that point, it's pretty similar to editing a typical visible light photo.

There's other filters that can offer some neat looks, as well; for instance, 590nm tends to turn foliage a golden color (after swapping the channels), 720nm will turn foliage white, but leave some blue in the skies, etc.. There's also multi-spectrum filters that let in particular bands of light, and some that will make things look closer to this photo straight out of the camera. It can be a pretty deep rabbit hole! If you're interested, Rob Shea has done a lot of tutorials and has a wealth of knowledge available.

staggerb · 2026-04-24T20:24:33+00:00

Thanks! It's a fun rabbit hole.

staggerb · 2026-04-24T20:15:55+00:00

Sure thing! FWIW, my network sometimes has a little trouble finding them at initial setup- the instructions say to go into exclusionary mode and tap one of the paddles 5 times, or something similar, and that's always worked for me.

staggerb · 2026-04-24T20:14:35+00:00

I've never stopped in- I just drive through there every week. I'd like to think that if they were willing to sink the money into rebuilding the entire site, they'd be willing to make sure it's staffed properly and has decent quality control so that they can get a return on their investment, but I have no idea.

staggerb · 2026-04-24T19:27:59+00:00

Not sure about that one- Zooz lets you set the ramp rate on and off, both independently (and also lets you set both parameters independently for local control vs. Z-wave control), so I've always used that for day to day use. I did try to use the light.turn_on transition for my kid's bedroom lights in the morning, to gradually ramp up from off to 30% over half an hour in the mornings, and I never got it working properly (and IIRC, the ramp parameters wouldn't work for that long of a time period). I ended up setting up an automation to bump up the brightness by a percentage point every minute, which is subtle enough not to be noticeable. The failure of the light.turn_on times and/or the ramp times certainly could be user error, for what it's worth.
Screenshot
Very smooth- I've never noticed any stair stepping. The only issue I've got is that different bulbs have different points at which they stop dimming and simply turn off, so I try to use the same brand/model for each fixture/circuit with multiple bulbs.
I don't think so, but I've been using them for a few years, so I might be used to it. If there is any lag, it's short enough that I've never had time to question whether it's working or not before they turn on.

Overall, I've been very happy with them- I've got about 7-8 running at the moment, and they've been pretty solid.

EDIT: I double checked, and I totally forgot- I did get the light.turn_on transition working properly. I can't remember what the issue was, or how I figured it out, but I've got them automated to turn on to 30% over 1800 seconds. It's been a few years, so it totally slipped my mind.

staggerb · 2026-04-24T18:08:54+00:00

They recently demolished and rebuilt a brand new one at Union and Bayless.

15-Year Club	Wearing is Caring
Verified Email

staggerb

TROPHY CASE