Photography really brings out one's flaws. Being shy tends to restrict one's photographs to inanimate objects. You're not going to find me doing street photography. And digital photography quickly highlights (I assume) the fact that I'm colour blind. I love deep, rich colours. It's just that the colours I see might not be the same ones people with normal colour vision see. Film used to hide that (I think). With Kodachrome I could just go out, photograph whatever caught my eye (and, funnily enough, that's almost always based on colour) and rely on Kodak to process the film. With Kodachrome 25 there was no question. Expose the film properly - that was my sole worry. But, now, with complete colour control being in my hands...uh-oh.

Speaking of things bringing out flaws - folks do realize that Christopher Hitchens is flat-out nuts, right? One too many G&Ts during the day? If not, you might read his latest "essay" in Slate, in which he, with his usual "missing the point" style, attacks a recent article in the "Lancet" regarding Iraqi deaths due to Bush's fabulous little war. He doesn't actually suggest that there might be a flaw in the methods (fairly standard epidemiology), but does slag the Lancet's editor by pointing out that he's "...a full-throated speaker at rallies of the Islamist-Leftist alliance that makes up the British Stop the War Coalition.", as if the gentleman in question might not actually regard the Iraq war as genuinely morally repugnant (not to mention pointless). Good on ya, Chris! That'll show that weasel. Damn the science! The man's a Commie sympathiser! (Oops, make that an Islamic-Leftist sympathiser.). Gees, what a dork Chris has become. Or, for all I know, always was. The profile of him in "The New Yorker" (Oct. 16th issue) certainly suggests the latter.

Oh, well. Sure is fun, huh?