Windbreak in North East Florida



Windbreak North East Florida ⓒBearspawprint2014

Windbreak North East Florida ⓒBearspawprint2014


15 comments on “Windbreak in North East Florida

  1. SalvaVenia says:

    A very emotional shot, and well-balanced. 🙂


    • Thanks, but “emotional”?

      Liked by 1 person

      • SalvaVenia says:

        Should I have better termed it: full of action …? 🙂


        • I remain perplexed. “full of action” and “emotional” do not mean the same.

          There is some action, high altitude winds, weather changing, two kinds of clouds at different altitudes two moving vehicles, the truck traveling at 60mph, as is the unobserved photographer, though there is no way to judge traveling speed from the picture. … But the only “emotional” content are emotions generated by the viewer.

          Where you trying to make a joke?

          Or did you intend “emotional” to have a meaning more closely resembling the opinion expressed in the content of your essay of the subject of music and emotions? “The dualistic prowess of music. – Or: Beware of hypocrisy, my beloved soul!”

          Liked by 1 person

          • SalvaVenia says:

            Respected Mitakuye Oyasin,

            we could be discussing two aspects, here. One is the technicality of a photograph, the other one the emotions, reasons and possible further reverberations of human being taking that very photograph.

            In the first sense, agreed, no any emotions to be talked about; a machine is a machine and remains a machine (or technical device, for that matter).

            In the second sense, we could talk about emotions nevertheless, because before the technical device mentioned above could start performing, somewhere within the person handling that device an emotion must have been stirred up to want to operate that device.

            Another angle to defend the position of “emotional” might be the argument of art. Does man not even speak about “the art of nature”? Thus, whatever triggered that person to photograph the scenery above, he “created” a manifest “piece of art” (never mind good art or bad art, because that again is something prone to the eye of the beholder). And then that (or another) person posted this piece of art within the World Wide Net, thus transferring it from the private into the public domain, giving other people a chance for evaluation and reaction.In short, the photographer watched something being reflected upon his eyes which then was processed through and by his brain, and for the one or other reason ended up within the emotional structure of him, causing an emotion which ended in the want to exactly photograph whatever had been mirrored upon his eyes. How then, could we not speak about emotion? Without emotion that very picture would have never been taken at all, right?

            Thus, in my humble opinion, when I wrote “emotional”, that was just an answer to the initial emotion of the photographer. And not towards the technicality of digital processing of a respective device.

            Lateron, after you “challenged” that very term “emotional”, I just inquired whether you preferred the technical viewpoint as in opposition to the other possibility. And because my intention, hopefully, never is to demean or to be unpolite etc., I added a smiley, thus signalling my good intention.

            I very much hope this clarifies the matter a little bit and in an acceptable manner.

            BTW, I really enjoy our mutual encounters very much and am thankful for pointing matters out. 🙂

            Wishing you a successful week, full of joy and enlightenment.

            Greetings from the other side of the pond,


          • Mitakuye Oyasin – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

            Liked by 1 person

          • SalvaVenia says:

            Yes, dimwit me … 😦

            Thanks for telling, anyhow.

            Kind regards,


          • I should have placed a link, rather than using the Lakota words.


          • SalvaVenia says:

            Thank you for the info.


          • SalvaVenia says:

            Ah, I see. Thank you.


          • See? See what? What do you think you see?

            We have a saying: ONE CANNOT SEE THE FOREST FOR THE TREES.

            Mitakuye Oyasin is a premise that is in common with many indigenous peoples. The words themselves represent a concept that is more than mere words or ideas about words

            Reading a definition, or translation, is insufficient to absorb the vastness of communion that these beautiful words help to make available.


            MAY IT BE SO ——— DA DA DA

            Liked by 1 person

          • SalvaVenia says:

            Seems, I have trespassed somewhere without realising it.

            That was not my intention.

            Kindest regards,


          • “I have trespassed somewhere without reali(z)ing it.”

            That is the crux of the communication problem. You seem to willfully NOT allow yourself to realize that YES IT IS your intent to trespass. If trespass were not your intent, you would not so do. It is very simple. It is INTENT that generates words and actions.


          • You used a lot of words to say say not much. You use circular reasoning and only rhetorical questions. Unless you change your professed opinions of emotion, as described in your own essays, than descriptions using “emotional” are insulting. Circular reasoning goes nowhere, and induces only fatigue … which is NOT an emotion.

            And NO it was NOT emotion that inspired this photo. Opportunity, alone, inspired the photo. The only emotion was relief that no logging trucks, bicyclists, farm machinery, post delivery vehicles, bad weather, or demanding passengers where in the way… and finally I had my camera handy with batteries.

            A “smilie” does not deny true intent. It might disguise intent superficially, you might even allow your intent to be disguised from yourself with a wall of opaque words.

            You did NOT “answer any initial emotion in the photographer”. Again you are projecting your own opaque verbiage in front of only yourself.
            And yes it is all only your opinion, but it is only your opinion of your own perception, and definitely NOT humble.


          • In this mini-essay you use circular reasoning. All references to emotion, by you, will continue to be viewed in light of your own public publications on the subject.

            NOWHERE did you “answer … the initial emotion of the photographer”. Yes, you are projecting your own opinion as a wall of words, in front of your own sight. No, your opinion is NOT humble.

            NO not “right“. That is your circular reasoning, again. This wall of words clarifies only that you do not see beyond whatever you project in front of your own vision.

            You are mistaken. This particular photo was an opportunity for technical practice.

            BTW, The British idiom “across the Pond” has been used since the 17th century by British and Americans referencing Atlantic travel between the UK and USA or Canada.

            Greetings from the constitutional republic USA.



Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s