tomdav

Sure, I'm man enough to apologize. I thought I did that (see my edited post at NWH) but let me know if you need anything else. BTW, to the extent people can look beyond labels of "hiker" or "climber" or the forum they hang out at, here is an example of the labeling feature I referred to. I think it's a good example of something positive that can result when people focus less on differences and put that energy into collaborative efforts. 360 Degree Panorama From Morningstar

Since you quoted me out of context originally I'll include the full context (what's in parentheses added for clarification): Myabe you should get (her) consent. You do realize this thread is hotlinked over at CC? Most of them (edited to emphasize "them" meaning those inclined to come over and create trouble) aren't very bright, but eventually they'll figure out the labeling feature. As I said, it doesn't excuse my initial poor choice of words but I think someone reading it objectively can see it wasn't intended to insult everyone here. If you're unwilling to give me the benefit of the doubt, well, I suppose it doesn't make sense for me to say much more about it.

Off White, I can see how you could misinterpret. Bad choice of words on my part and I will add that it was taken out of context. My intent was to refer to those inclined to come over to stir things up for the sake of a juvenile attention grab. Didn't intend to offend most of the folks here.

tvashtarkatena, I don't recall any GW thread you've posted in having been locked. There's about 15 GW threads over there. I recall 2 of them are locked (diabtribes re. Al Gore). We usually only lock threads that get way off topic, devolve into politics, or in which people are just taking shots at each other instead of contributing to the discussion. BTW, enjoyed your trip reports over there. Isn't this thread about trip reports? Sorry to intrude again. Out of here.

To clarify, Tazz is not a moderator at NWH. She decided she didn't need the hassle of moderating or the constant second guessing by wannabe refs. Not that it needs much moderation apart from those who seem to be a problem no matter what forum they post in. Sorry for the intrusion.

The easiest route is via the Maloney Ridge Road starting at 3750' and involves no brush. Park at the end of the road just past Evans lake, walk back 100' or so toward Evans Lake to find a steep fisherman's trail heading straight up the ridge (slightly overgrown for the first 100 yards, but opens up quickly). Follow it all the way to the top of the ridge, then down to the pass at 5100' where it drops 600' to Rock Lake. Traverse the talus 100' or so above the west shores of Rock Lake (not the east ridge Beckey suggests) up to the tarn at 5278', then SE to the pass above Panorama Lake. From here it's all talus to the pass above Purvis Lake. Drop from the pass and shoot for the snowfield, taking advantage of it as much as possible to avoid the choss (which you'll have to hit sooner or later to get up to the shelf leading to a short class 3-4 scramble to the summit). http://www.nwhikers.net/forums/download.php?id=2816

Hey, Tom take your sniviling punk ass back over to nw.wankers and quit acting like a bitch. Will do Gina, but let me leave you with something that might help with words like sniviling.

Hey trask, good to hear from you again. Good luck with the manzere search.

File, Export Map to Disk, Save as JPEG

Nah, closer to Alfred E.

More proof

Very interesting. I took the test and initially got a 142. Out of curiousity, I hit my back button and changed the answers to the few questions I wasn't 100% sure about, then hit enter to see my revised score, doing so one at a time. In every case but one my score dropped (meaning the original answer was correct). I missed the grape vs. coconut in case anyone thinks I'm attempting to highlight my intelligence. Correcting this changed my score to 144, which I believe is the maximum possible score. If you look at the normal distribution of IQ scores, you'll see that the tails flatten at 144. In order to statistically capture the tails they would need to ask more than 40 questions so I call bullshit on Dru. It's not difficult to demonstrate. I'll supply the answers that score 144 and if Dru can indicate which ones are incorrect (not necessarily give the answers) leading to a score of 167 I'll change my avatar to a dunce cap for a month. Otherwise I suggest Dru do the same for attempting to inflate his score here, among other things.

167 up three points from last time i took test. Hey Dru, let me get this straight. Are you saying you got 167 on this test?

Actually, the lens on the Sony S85, S75, and S70 is really a Canon Lens. It's identical to the lens used on the Canon G2, G1, and several other high end cameras (most of which label it as a Canon Lens). Phil Askey alludes to this in his review of the S75. I'm guessing Sony gets away with labeling it a "Carl Zeiss" lens by having Zeiss throw a coating on it.

Yep, northeast dragontail, and a 360 from above.

Unless you live in Oregon, there's a huge advantage of ordering online - you avoid sales tax. On the Nikon (pre-rebate) that's $70+. Not to mention I haven't found any local shops that will actually match internet prices. At best, Ritz (aka Camera World, Cameras West, etc.) will match "qualified Internet retailers. Qualified internet retailers must be listed on the manufacturer's website". Since camera manufacturers won't allow their "authorized" merchants to advertise below a certain price, this really doesn't save you much. I've purchased 3 cameras online and never had a problem. I always read the fine print to make sure I can return the camera without "restocking fee" if there is something wrong with it. As philfort noted, you should also make sure the merchant is legit (what, you want the lens cap, battery, ac adapter, software, manuals, and us warranty? that runs extra $200). And never, never, ever buy accessories, extended warranty, or anything other the camera from the place you buy online. Jon, forget about ISO 800 (it's a marketing gimmick like digital zoom). Anything above ISO 200 will be unacceptably noisy (unless you buy a $2000+ digital SLR with a large sensor). I always shoot at ISO 50 on my G2 to eliminate noise. If you want to shoot action, you'll need a digital SLR.

Both are nice cameras. I've been using a G2 for over a year now and it has served me well. Street price for the Nikon CP 5000 (after $100 rebate) is $664. The G2 has dropped to $550 now that the G3 has been announced. Prices are per buydig.com (after $25 shipping). I don't necessarily recommend these guys, but they generally honor their advertised prices even if you don't bite on the overpriced accessories (meaning you can assume the advertised prices are legit). Things I prefer about the G2: - battery life (battery lasts 40% longer than the CP 5000 per dpreview, not to mention you can buy a higher capacity "VidPro" spare for your G2 from batterybarn.com for $44 which lasts 30% longer than the stock G2 battery. Yeah, the Nikon battery might seem good... until you've experienced the real thing, i.e. higher end Canon or Sony rechargeable). - faster lens (particularly at telephoto) - RAW file format (gives you a digital negative) - IS0 50 (less noise vs. ISO 100 on the CP 5000) - infrared wireless remote - hardly any chromatic abberations / purple fringing (can be a problem on the CP 5000) Things I like about the CP 5000: - 2cm macro focus (vs 6cm on the G2) - 28mm wide angle (vs 35mm on the G2) Things that aren't important: - 5MP vs 4MP (5MP sensors currently have a lot of problems with "noise" - this is reportedly one of the reasons Canon kept the G3 at 4MP) I don't think you can go wrong with either camera. If shooting macros is important to you, I'd lean toward the CP 5000. Otherwise I'd go for the G2 (or the G3). [ 10-29-2002, 02:48 PM: Message edited by: tomdav ]

The 'easy way' is a pretty simple. At the Baring Lake trailhead follow the abandoned road a short distance until you hit a creek and a faint trail going straight up. If in doubt follow the creek (as opposed to bearing left into the second growth forest). Upon reaching the ridge line there is a well beaten path to the saddle (looking back to the saddle from the gully). From there is an obvious route to the gully, notch, and summit. The notch was the only tricky part (due to a steep snow wall when we did it) but I'm guessing it's something most here would not consider technical. I don't think finding water will be a problem. It took us 4.5 hours up and 3.5 hours down - we were carrying day packs. => 360º Panorama (6/15/02) [ 08-06-2002, 04:08 PM: Message edited by: tomdav ]

Too funny - is this the best spray you can come up with? Lambone, I'm sure Trask will be the first one in line waiting to pucker up. He considers us gay so I'm assuming he also goes by the alias 'jad' when frequenting gay bars. In any case, thanks for the exposure. We've only been around a little over 7 months and the feedback from most of our users has been to focus on a different format than what you have here. For the record, I personally don't have any problems with cc.com and judging by the amount of activity here it seems to work for a lot of people - kudos to those who made it what it is. Tom - nwhikers.net

OK, they're not technically climbing pics, but outdoor pics nonetheless... tomdav.com [ 03-04-2002: Message edited by: tomdav ]

Thanks, some really good points there TTT. I hadn't even considered the fall ramifications.

According to the link above it says the Crag Hat is "CE certified and UIAA approved". I saw it at Marmot Mountain Works in Bellevue and it didn't seem any less sturdy than the rest, but it sure was easier on the pocket. What do you like about the Erin Roc? Seems heavy (100 grams more), but a lot of folks seem to like it.

OK, forgive me folks. I'm not necessarily a climber but I do occasionally scramble and I'm thinking of getting some lightweight head protection. I was dorking around the net and saw this reasonably priced helmet called the "crag hat" for $36 at http://www.bittersweetgear.com/helmets.html. Would any of you recommend this helmet or have another suggestion? I was also thinking about the Petzl Meteor (strictly from the minimal grams standpoint) but was a little concerned re. the "one time use" disclaimer, not to mention cost. Thanks for your feedback!

IMO, Digital cameras are the best thing since sliced bread... As far as how many MP to get, it depends. If all you want to do is post on the web and print 5x7's, a 2MP camera will do fine, but I would strongly recommend spending the extra money and getting a 3-4MP camera, particularly if you want to print 8x10's or need to crop. You're gonna be pretty pissed when you take that awesome shot with your 2MP toy and can't frame it as a film quality 8x10 (like you can with 4MP). As far as brand, I'd pass on Nikon. They had their day with the Nikon 9xx series and sat on their butt for the last two years only to be left in the dust by Canon and Sony. The holdout Nikon purists themselves are even panning the new CP 5000 which should tell you something. Sony is a good brand, but is known for oversaturating colors, particularly reds. I'd like Oly a lot more if they didn't use smartmedia. You really can't go wrong with Canon. Most accurate colors, uses compact flash (not dumbmedia or betamax memory$tick), microdrive capable, flip out LCD, hotshoe, minimal chromatic abberations (still a problem with the Oly's), RAW format, great rechargeable battery, remote control, and I could go on and on. As far as getting a good price, you only need to know a bargain sleuth like myself. There were some fantastic internet deals at Christmas being able to quadruple scoop with the $100 MSN Passport Holiday reward, $100 off your next purchase gift certificates at some stores, Amex Blue pricematching, cash back via ebates.com, etc. All said, I got my Canon 4MP G2 for less than $350 at Christmas (and it still can be had for < $525 tax free, email me if you want details). In my opinion, the Canon G2 is hands down the best digital camera out there right now for under $1000. If you want something more pocketable, try the Canon S30 or S40. Don't take my word for it, read the reviews on the web. The best place to get digicam info is at the reviews, forums, and links over at http://www.dpreview.com. As far as weatherproofness, I've used my Canon G2 in the rain, sleet, snow, heck, it even fell into an icy cold creek with me and was immersed! Stuck it on the food dehydrator for week and far as I can tell it still takes as good shots as the day I took it out of the bag. Check out that picture below (taken after all this abuse) if you need some convincing. Now, that's not to say you shouldn't stick it in a waterproof plastic baggie. I do now! Finally, ignore anything consumer reports or computer magazines have to say. They might be capable of reviewing dishwashers and computers but not cameras. It breaks my heart when I see a couple shopping for a camera at BestBuy or CirciutCity with at an outdated, uninformed printout from cnet.com or consumer reports. Listen to the folks who know cameras and that is NOT necessarily the folks at your local camera shop either - your mileage may vary. Canon G2, F/8, 1 second shutter, no filters, straight out of the camera. [ 02-16-2002: Message edited by: tomdav ]