Ex Girl Friends Ex Boy Friends

1741930906697.jpeg

You can’t see it here but she’s standing on a tightrope. She’s about to start juggling three, then four, then five of those burning torches. @zuiko85 said his wife chose him because he was boring. This woman moved on from me because I was boring. She was exciting like most things that are too dangerous to keep, but too feeble to let go.

Nikon FA 85/1.4 AiS, yellow filter, Tri-X at ei 1600, TMax RS. I am pretty sure I took this before I had a Leica.
 
Last edited:
Freakscene said:
View attachment 4858454

You can’t see it here but she’s standing on a tightrope. She’s about to start juggling three, then four, then five of those burning torches. @zuiko85 said his wife chose him because he was boring. This woman moved on from me because I was boring. She was exciting like most things that are too dangerous to keep, but too feeble to let go.

Nikon FA 85/1.4 AiS, yellow filter, Tri-X at ei 1600, TMax RS. I am pretty sure I took this before I had a Leica.
Click to expand...
She moved on from you because you were boring? Consider that a gain well made. Exciting partners burn brightly but swiftly. But I'm sure it was fun while it lasted.
 
Archiver said:
She moved on from you because you were boring? Consider that a gain well made. Exciting partners burn brightly but swiftly. But I'm sure it was fun while it lasted.
Click to expand...
There is no need for the sad face. I was very glad to hear from her that she was leaving. I was fatigued of being woken at all hours to her bouncing off the walls. She was extremely beautiful and just as crazy. I had important and interesting things to do, and needed sleep to work . . .
 
Last edited:
p.giannakis said:
A very caring and thoughtful person - very well educated too.
Taken more than 20 years ago, one Saturday morning in her garden - unaware, while she was making breakfast.
Shot on Ektachrome Elite 100

View attachment 4860808
Click to expand...
Jiminy crickets, what a beautiful photo. This is what cameras were made for. Do you recall which lens you had for this?
 
Me and another of an ex, around 1990, I believe, or slightly before. Here, we are both dressed appropriately for "swanning" about in parts tropical (Madang New Guinea in this case, unless I am mistaken). We always got on well and had high regard for each other but some relationships are like "old soldiers"....................they seem destined to "just fade away" as General MacArthur said. I run into her now and then and we are still on amiable terms. I have always thought this to be a much better policy than the alternative - that of dredging up old hurts and real or imagined betrayals. I like to think that it's a sign of being civilized perhaps (something I occasionally aspire to 😛 ) - but in relationships and especially those of the "ex" kind, it's sometimes difficult to pull off, I must admit.


461800100_10235754445621360_2079477248960239968_n.jpg
 
Last edited:
Archiver said:
Gosh, she looks so sweet! And 1979, where did the time go...
Click to expand...
All those past (lost) years went down the plug hole. As Susan Rossiter Peacock Sangster Renouf (look her up on Google, it's all there) once said of one of her husbands.

I for one miss my past life, some of it. But not for quids would I want to relive many of the less than good times.

For some of us the past is better than the present. For me, the present won in 1997. And goes on winning every day I have with my SO.

As the Buddhists believe, yesterday is history, tomorrow will be today in the morning. Today is all we have.

Gosh, how ever did we get on to this topic?
peterm1 said:
Sorry, I did not mean to try to "teach you to suck eggs" I was just laying out my thought processes on the subject. Yes I agree that physics reveal some weird outcomes and Quantum Physics especially so. More especially when you compare it to everyday observations of time in the macro world we exist in. Just the other day there were reports of an experiment in which a quantum particle was observed travelling back in time. But we already know that must occur - Roger Penrose (Nobel Prize winner in physics) has argued strongly that quantum entanglement of particles necessarily must involve something of that kind because these entanglements / interactions are "non-local" - they take place instantly, in theory even if the distance between the particles were halfway across the universe. We see the same kind of thing with "delayed choice / quantum eraser experiments where waves become particles even if an observation is made of them AFTER the event. It's all weird sh#t but incredibly interesting (and difficult to make sense of). But what I was arguing was that it's still a long stretch of the bow for some physicists to argue that time "does not exist." But it clearly does seem to exist though it behaves differently from how we think it does.

As some jokester said "Time is an illusion - in my job, lunch time, doubly so." 🤪

Sorry, this stuff interests me and I read about it. I still do not pretend to understand it. But I do not think physicists really do either - they can only conduct experiments, observe the outcomes, devise theories and try to write mathematical equations based on that which might be helpful in establishing what the hell is going on.
Click to expand...

Supremely well written, but way way way above my head.

Now if we were to talk about old Coonawarra or Limestone Coast reds, or Rolleiflexes...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom