At the risk of being corrected by O Docker, and really knowing nothing about photography, let me guess that the camera settings for the (very bright) full moon would not capture an image of (much fainter) stars or planets. So those dots are probably some terrestrial lights, perhaps some street lights?
Actually this photo gives me an idea. Several of us have pioneered the path of minimalist blogging this week by posting pictures with hardly any words. Perhaps we could all take it to new extremes next week by posting pictures with hardly anything in them? But it will be hard to surpass this one!
Following Tillerman's logic - if nothing else, his logic is usually sound - the only lights in the sky bright enough to show up at the exposure you were using for the moon are probably airplane landing lights.
Many decades ago, when I lived in Maidenhead (about 45 miles upstream of London for the geographically challenged) I shared a house with a guy who decided one weekend it would be fun to kayak alone down the Thames. So he left Maidenhead on Saturday morning and kayaked through London at night, ending up somewhere in the Essex marshes on Sunday morning where he pulled his kayak ashore and thumbed a lift home.
I'm not sure if he bothered to carry a light. He wasn't really an experienced kayaker. Just a crazy long-haired Canadian kid. He did tell us he got stopped by the River Police in the middle of London but apparently they let him continue.
At least that's the story he told us afterwards... Is it feasible?
Yes, very feasible, sounds a bit like the DW (Devizes to Westminster) kayak race which some do all in one go.
I've even seen the River Police stop leisure craft for safety reasons but they did let them continue too.
I think visibility of kaykers might have been an issue as there was a notice from PLA about this over the summer: http://www.pla.co.uk/notice2mariners/pdf/U17_of_2010_-_Making_Vessels_Under_Oars__Kayaks_and__Canoes_more_Visible1.pdf
I think Shakespeare beat you to that pun by a few centuries O Docker.
Actually according to some sources the place name Maidenhead does have a boat-related origin. It means 'a landing-place for maidens', i.e. a place where landing from a boat was very easily accomplished.
And I'm sorry the good American citizens of Maidenhead NJ were so sensitive about the name. Apparently they petitioned the NJ legislature to change the town's name because "... it must be the wish of every good citizen... to be relieved of the necessity of using a term which may offend the delicacy of modesty, or disturb the feelings of seriousness, or excite the sneers of the willing."
I never knew anyone in Maidenhead in the UK who was so delicate that it bothered them in the slightest.
22 comments:
At the risk of being corrected by O Docker, and really knowing nothing about photography, let me guess that the camera settings for the (very bright) full moon would not capture an image of (much fainter) stars or planets. So those dots are probably some terrestrial lights, perhaps some street lights?
Actually this photo gives me an idea. Several of us have pioneered the path of minimalist blogging this week by posting pictures with hardly any words. Perhaps we could all take it to new extremes next week by posting pictures with hardly anything in them? But it will be hard to surpass this one!
First comment closer, think lights
Masthead lights?
Following Tillerman's logic - if nothing else, his logic is usually sound - the only lights in the sky bright enough to show up at the exposure you were using for the moon are probably airplane landing lights.
Approach queue at Heathrow?
penguins? :-) they have such beady little eyes.
Not there yet.
I have left a clue out there somewhere and there is actually a serious point to this pic.
Awww! One of the penguins is winking!
But that's probably not the kind of help you were hoping I would give. Sorry, just as stumped as everyone else!
BTW, if I were to make a serious guess I probably would've said masthead lights in an anchorage field, too. I took a picture like that once.
BTW I am considering resuming words next week. :D
Oh no, Bonnie, I was hoping you'd get it.
It seems that there is a downside to doing sailing rather than...
They are not lights on kayaks are they?
Bravo Tillerman!
Yes, this is a party of kayakers out on the Thames (brave souls).
What is important to note is you can't see anything about them apart from their lights.
So if you were out kayaking at night without lights you'd be invisible.
Its another of those "lets be careful out there" reminders.
Here endeth the safety lesson for the day.
Thanks for the final clue JP!
Many decades ago, when I lived in Maidenhead (about 45 miles upstream of London for the geographically challenged) I shared a house with a guy who decided one weekend it would be fun to kayak alone down the Thames. So he left Maidenhead on Saturday morning and kayaked through London at night, ending up somewhere in the Essex marshes on Sunday morning where he pulled his kayak ashore and thumbed a lift home.
I'm not sure if he bothered to carry a light. He wasn't really an experienced kayaker. Just a crazy long-haired Canadian kid. He did tell us he got stopped by the River Police in the middle of London but apparently they let him continue.
At least that's the story he told us afterwards... Is it feasible?
Yes, very feasible, sounds a bit like the DW (Devizes to Westminster) kayak race which some do all in one go.
I've even seen the River Police stop leisure craft for safety reasons but they did let them continue too.
I think visibility of kaykers might have been an issue as there was a notice from PLA about this over the summer:
http://www.pla.co.uk/notice2mariners/pdf/U17_of_2010_-_Making_Vessels_Under_Oars__Kayaks_and__Canoes_more_Visible1.pdf
Doh! PLA notice got cut off so I'll do it properly.
You can read the notice on "Making Vessels under Oars, Kayaks and Canoes more visible" by clicking here.
Tillerman, are you certain your housemate was a bloke?
I could understand a young lady being anxious to leave Maidenhead behind her by whatever means possible.
I think Shakespeare beat you to that pun by a few centuries O Docker.
Actually according to some sources the place name Maidenhead does have a boat-related origin. It means 'a landing-place for maidens', i.e. a place where landing from a boat was very easily accomplished.
I had no idea Shakespeare was so well acquainted with Maidenhead.
Lawrenceville, N.J., where I live, was originally named Maidenhead in 1697, after the town on the Thames north of London.
West of London actually.
And I'm sorry the good American citizens of Maidenhead NJ were so sensitive about the name. Apparently they petitioned the NJ legislature to change the town's name because "... it must be the wish of every good citizen... to be relieved of the necessity of using a term which may offend the delicacy of modesty, or disturb the feelings of seriousness, or excite the sneers of the willing."
I never knew anyone in Maidenhead in the UK who was so delicate that it bothered them in the slightest.
It appears that New Jersey lost its Maidenhead at the hands of the legislature in 1816.
The legislature has been providing similar services to its citizenry ever since.
Anyone notice a strange coincidence?
A few days, JP posted a picture of a SWAN.
This comments thread has led to discussions about MAIDENHEAD and SHAKESPEARE.
Shakespeare, Swan and Maidenhead!
How weird is that possum?
Tillerman: it is all part of the great "flow" of the universe
I rather like the name "Maidenhead" and can't see why anyone would want to change it.
Post a Comment