dbigtex56

I too have (had) a friend who lives there, and they are - well, were - really wonderful apartments. Spacious, hardwood floors, and these great little Moderne touches. Built in pre-airconditioning days, the casement windows on the corners catch every breeze. Also there's an exhaust fan in the attic which pulls air through the windows and does a remarkably good job of cooling the apartments. What a shame that they've been allowed to deteriorate to the point that restoration is not economically viable. How disgusting that the beautiful oak trees which grace this property will be cut down. I see no way that a 16 story building can co-exist with them. A more responsible developer would construct several mid-rises on the footprints of the existing buildings; but no. It's going to stick out like a sore thumb in that neighborhood. What a blot on Montrose! I'm pissed...

You're probably right. The link you provided shows an early postcard view, and the automobiles and peoples attire seem consistant with the c. 1912 construction date. That weird top floor treatment is there in all its glory. With professional restoration - assuming that some of the original decorative elements are restored - it will be an asset to Main Street. However, I still think it's no great shakes architecturally. And yes, that anodized alumiinum screen was quite a sight. What were they thinking?

Local news showed helicoper shots of the wreck, near the McGowen Station. Another SUV ran into the train. Of course.

As a knee-jerk preservationist, I usually defend old buildings. Even the plainest can contribute to the fabric of an urban space. But after taking a long, hard look at the West Building (located at the northeast corner of Walker and Main), I really don't see much to like. With the exception of a couple of brackets at the original roofline, there is little to indicate that the builder had any architectural vision in mind. The top story appears to be a poorly conceived addition. What's up with those silly-ass Corinthian columns, anyway? This building, coupled with the cruddy grocery store across the street, are the most persistant vestages of the blight that infested Main Street until just a few years ago. Replace it with something better, fix it if you must, or just implode the sucker - but please, it's time for a change!

Frankly, I think the website is awkward, ugly and lacking content. Houston deserves better.

The issue of the cost-efficiency of various means of transportation is a tangled web, indeed. Seemingly reasonable arguments often break down under closer examination. I read a review of a new book called The High Cost of Free Parking by Donald Shoup in City newspaper (Rochester, NY). A quote from the review: "At more than 700 pages, it's an exhaustive look at the economics, sociology, and planning of an activity most of us take for granted. Shoup mixes copious footnotes and analytical graphs and charts with pithy quotes and quirky allegories to make a single point: Free parking carries a steep price tag." I'm not a world traveller, but I have the impression that the assumption of 'free' parking shared by most Americans is not the norm in other countries. We unconsciously subsidize the automobile in many ways, yet zealously count every expense of public transportation. I usually don't post links, but I think the above review is well worth reading. Whether Mr Shoup's accounting methods are accurate (he equates the cost of 'free' parking with Medicare and the defense budget) is moot. The point he makes seems worthy of examination. Thoughts? *moved post to its own topic* dbigtex56

Just bought a Beseler MCRX enlarger off eBay, which will handle 4x5 negatives. I have a couple of Graflex Speed Graphics (Pacemakers), and currently am using a 545 Polaroid back. Also have a Yashika 124G for medium format. I'm still struggling with the logistics of creating a combination boudoir/darkroom in my small apartment I figure the safelights will give it atmosphere btw, any recommendations for local labs which will accept small jobs for C-41 processing? I still haven't addressed the issue of developing 4x5 negatives. It's always something...

I don't know if this will be helpful, but here goes. There's a show on HGTV called "Back to the Blueprint" (I think) and a recent episode showed the restoration of a mid-50s diner with terrazzo floors. A buffing machine was used to restore the original polish, and the restorer said "you can keep buffing until it's shiny enough, or until your arms fall off." The impression I have is that since terrazzo is of uniform composition and quite thick, there aren't the same concerns as sanding hardwood floors. Barring major gouging, it seems to me that the terrazzo is there for anyone with the determination (and biceps) to uncover it.

Good point, kjb434. It seems reasonable to me that humans - all living things - have adapted over eons to conditions here on Earth, and that our immune systems are especially sensitive and responsive in our earliest years. This artifical sterility to which children are subjected is relatively recent (within the past 100 years). A universal trait among children is to put things - however filthy or disgusting - in their mouths. Perhaps this early exposure 'kick-starts' the immune system into functioning correctly. Another consideration: in our zeal for a germ-free home environment, people use products which may be more toxic than we realize. Strangely, there seems to be concern about exposure to chemicals in the world at large, yet we merrily spray all sorts of weird chemicals inside our houses to feel 'clean'. Scoff if you will, I'm a great fan of the columnist Heloise, because she is such a strong advocate of cheap, non-toxic household cleansers. To a great degree, we choose our own environmental exposures. It's only when the exposure is imposed on us that I become concerned.

There was a small grocery store in the Rice Lofts (Main St side) which closed - can't swear to its name.

d'oh! Of course cropping would justify the additional resolution! I should have thought of that. (An awkward excuse; I'm a fan of printing negatives full-frame, and usually get all snotty about cropping. Digital doesn't carry that pretense.) Thanks, jpcampbell. Gary, thanks for your insights. As you noted, good glass is expensive, and to the casual buyer isn't as 'sexy' as more megapixels. The info about Nikon came from this article by David Pogue in The New York Times online edition. You'll have to register to access it, but it's fast and free. I recommend his weekly "Circuits" email. I'm not looking to buy quite yet (just invested in some large format 'wet' photography equipment, and need to justify what I already have before branching out further). However, I figure it's better to start researching too early than too late. Thanks again.

Another way to look at it is that air quality has improved by select criteria. Are the pollutants being released in 2005 the same as those in 1970? And are the pollutants we measure the only ones which affect our environment? We are exposed to a bewildering array of substances on a daily basis. Sometimes it takes years to identify and confirm that some are harmful. In 1970, lead based paint and asbestos were commonly used in the construction of buildings. Since then, convincing evidence linking these substances to health issues has been discovered. The cost of eliminating or containing lead and asbestos has been considerable. While we should take pride in that we've reduced some of the more obvious pollutants, that doesn't mean that others are not lurking. Why has the incidence of asthema in children increased so dramatically in the past few years? On the other hand, there's a suspicion that some reports are unnecessarily alarmist. Some people value recognition over accuracy, and research funds tend to go to the squeakiest wheel. Researchers, like Caeser's wife, must be above suspicion. The appearance of conflict of interest should be noted, and the context of data collection and evaluation examined. We cannot afford to become smug.

While I hate to see you go, it's good to know that Houston will have an informed and able ambassador in Seattle. Spread the word!

We shouldn't judge too harshly the things people say while in a state of shock and grief. However, I feel just fine about judging the news media who exploit a family's loss to get some juicy sound bites, and who attempt to stir up a controversy where none exists. Yesterday, channel 13 reported the driver's death as happening "when his pickup got in the path of a Metro train". Got in the path....? Gee, did the train make a wrong turn? or was he swept onto the tracks by a tornado? Or, as eyewitnesses and video cameras seem to indicate, did the damn fool run a red light at high speed? Again, I feel very sorry for the family of the deceased. However, embarassment seems more in order than blame.

As I understand it, more megapixels roughly equals higher resolution (much the same way that large format films can show more detail in enlargements than 35mm). A couple of questions: At what point does more megapixels cease to matter when the maximum enlargement will be a 4x6 print? To some degree this is probably subjective, but in practical terms, greater detail eventually becomes indistinguishable to the unaided eye. If one does choose to print enlargements from a digital source, where do you go? Obviously, it's impractical for most people to have a home printer capable of producing poster-sized prints. Any advantages to finding a local source and taking your digital media there, vs. transferring it over the 'net (if that's an option)? And one more question: I read that Nikon is producing new cameras whose RAW data is not fully compatable with Adobe Photoshop. Is this likely to pose a problem? I haven't yet taken the digital plunge, and am grateful for any insights y'all could offer.

Respectfully, are you sure of those figures? Perhaps I was mistaken, but I thought the cost of the Katy Freeway expansion was many times that of the construction of the first segment of the light rail system. If I'm wrong, I apologize in advance. If someone has a reliable source handy (links preferred) for the total expenses of each of these projects, please post them. I know, I could probably spend a few hours researching it myself...

With all respect to Matress Mac, I'd probably exhibit some neuroses too, if he jumps around and yells like that all the time. It's considered courageous to share one's personal problems with the public these days. We should feel fortunate that the young lady does not suffer from hemorrhoids.

Question asked and answered. Time to move on. At a member's request, this thread is closed.

You would also be ticketed if your partner parked your car in a no-parking zone, or failed to pay a parking meter. I believe there also would be consequences if you allowed an unlicenced driver to use your car, and he was subsequently in an accident. What I propose is that both the driver and the owner of the car be held liable for running a red light. If the driver cannot be apprehended, the owner is still responsible for his car illegally being in an intersection. In other words, running a red light would be two seperate offenses; one for the car, one for the driver. In the case of a camera-issued ticket, only the owner of the car would be ticketed. If the infraction is witnessed by a policeman, the driver would be ticketed the same as our current system. I assume that people already loan their cars only to people they trust; this doesn't seem like much more of an imposition.

As an aside, I saw a Japanese movie on PBS which mentioned the high suicide rate in Tokyo. So many people were jumping in front of trains that it threatened the efficiency of their mass transit system. The government started charging the families of the deceased for the delays, and for cleaning up the resultant mess. The rate of train/pedestrian 'accidents' dropped sharply. Presumably, the suicidal have found some more socially acceptable, less intrusive means to end their lives.

Please give a source for your information, as tvtome.com states the following: "Laws of Chance" is based on the real-life exploits of Kelly Siegler and centers on a feisty female assistant district attorney in Houston who uses unconventional methods against the toughest old-boy Texas defense attorneys. No mention is made of Lou Diamond Phillips.

Rather than waste scarce transit funds on crossing gates, I'd rather spend the money on perfecting and installing traffic signal cameras. People don't seem to care that they may kill someone (or themselves) by running a red light, but getting hit in the wallet gets their attention. We can never 'child-proof' the world, so let's hold people accountable for actions which endanger themselves and others.

Anyone have any (reliable) updates on this property? First, we had reports of the Main Medical Centers. Then a real estate broker's sign went up, advertising that a full city block was available. A week or two ago, the Medical Center sign went back up. Is this another Shamrock Tower, or is someone going to actually move dirt this time?

I think you're thinking of Charlie's Hamburgers, a now defunct fast-food chain. They had a singing TV ad: "Charlie's Hamburgers....good ol' hamburgers...Charlie's Hamburgers...good ol' hamburgers..." , etc. This Charlie's was located on Westheimer @ Waugh. In the late 70's the building was occupied by a strip-joint called (and I'm not making this up) The Booby Rock. After the BR closed, it was converted into Charlie's, a 24-hour diner very popular with the after-hours/Montrose crowd. The building is now occupied by Chances, a predominately lesbian bar. While IMHO Charlie's food was so-so, the atmosphere made it worth it. I hope Montrose Diner can succeed on personality and location, since food and service seem to not be their strong suits.

tw2entyse7en notified the HAIF editor that he wished to close his membership, and to delete his posts. This was solely his decision, and it was respected.