Nature

[Goshawk]

^ cool...it's a tarantula.

[sunshine51]

Big black beastie...on Doi Angkang .... when I tried to shoo it off the road with a stick it reared up...and if too close it snappped those front legs together...sure its poisonous..

Ahhhhh yes...the Asian Tarantula...and it appears to be quite disturbed by your

presence in it's domain...which happens to be anywhere it is at when you disturb

it! They are venomous (not poisonous as many folks say) but the venom has about

the strength of wasp/hornet venom and usually not harmful to humans...unless you

have that reaction to bee stings some people have. They used to be quite common

all over SEA...kids had em as pets even. The spiders posture is it's warning...lemme

be and we'll both be fine. Tarantula bites/stings are quite painful...not just because

they inject a fair amount of venom but their fangs can be a half inch long...if it's a

huge tarantula! Nice photos...

Forgot to add...if you ever encounter these again the best way to shoo em away

is to use a straw or small twig and very gently nudge their back legs. They'll usually

move away from the nudge...ie...towards the front. Nudging these critters from the

front prompts their defensive posturing...good for pix but not arachnid movement!

One can also use their index finger to do the nudging...gently that is!

NB...Edit to add the final bit.

[fabianfred]

It looks like it has lost a leg...

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[jack2964]

What on earth is this awesome looking critter?

Look at the pincers and that 'tail'

6-legged so must be some kind of insect perhaps a kind of beetle with a soft abdomen instead of a hard shell?

[samuijimmy]

^ looks like some kind of Scorpion... Jack! ?

Barnacles or mussels (?) on an old coconut log!

[Robby nz]

Goose-necked Barnacles Jimmy

Grow on floating things in the open ocean.

Seems they will also grow on the shore in North America although I think they are a different species.

I have only ever seen them on floating things.

Its said that you can eat them but I think I'll give them a miss.

[FracturedRabbit]

SC111205 by pattayadays.com, on Flickr

[sunshine51]

What on earth is this awesome looking critter?

Look at the pincers and that 'tail'

6-legged so must be some kind of insect perhaps a kind of beetle with a soft abdomen instead of a hard shell?

I'm in RSA at the moment but when I rtn to LOS I'll have a look in my Big Book of Bugs.

If it ain't in there....we're all doomed!

Off hand I'd say it's a maturing beetle larvae....which beetle though I haven't a clue.

[villagefarang]

A dozen or so of these guys in the garden today.

[Goompa]

I have a shot here for an an ant with a green tail

I also have a shot where I think one wants a kiss , am I strange ?

Sorry folks I am strange , don't worry , false alarm!

Still thinks it wants a kiss!.......

.

[Robby nz]

Caught in a fish trap in the klong, what is it, intense interest ?

A Reticulated Python

Non poisonous but none of the locals including the dogs were taking any chances.

[MJP]

[samuijimmy]

what ya looking at?

[angiud]

A dozen or so of these guys in the garden today.

This is the larva of:

The Atlas Moth

Should be also easy to breed

[samuijimmy]

Bee at work!

[samuijimmy]

Monitor Lizard,

Lamai Samui, today.... usually they run off ... but this one obviously want his picture taken! .... about 6 feet long!

[sunshine51]

Monitor Lizard,

Lamai Samui, today.... usually they run off ... but this one obviously want his picture taken! .... about 6 feet long!

SJ....many times these monitors don't run off! I've been told it's a stand my ground mentality

they have at times...perhaps if the spot is all nice & comfy-cozy. We have a big monitor that

likes to get up on our roof and I named it Walter...eats eggs outta my hand and I still have the

hand. David Attenborough once told me that monitors are easily tamed from his time spent

on Sri Lanka where some village kids had them as pets. Anyway...Walter has now been

renamed to Wallette since she's laid eggs under a log behind our house...11 eggs to be

exact. Gonna be a great future photo-op when they hatch!

[FracturedRabbit]

S1222759 by pattayadays.com, on Flickr

[MJP]

S1222759 by pattayadays.com, on Flickr

The standard of your photography has really slipped of late.

[FracturedRabbit]

S1222759 by pattayadays.com, on Flickr

The standard of your photography has really slipped of late.

You're right. Like all the truly inept, I blame the camera.

I have been reading comments on camera forums, made by people who read something written by someone else who had a friend who knew these things, declaring that Micro Four Thirds cameras "lacked depth of field control" and were therefore "unable to isolate the subject"; because as we all know, you can only isolate a subject by turning the background into an unidentifiable mush, and not by the use of light, contrast or texture. They are also apparently rubbish at high ISO (25,600 and up, which I use daily) and are not so good for the majority of us who like to print wall size images on a weekly basis.

I realise I have made a mistake and need to upgrade immediately, but every other camera I investigate is also castigated into awfulness by the same forums. Contrary to my previously held belief that almost any modern camera can pump out a decent image, it appears that the entire camera market is populated by poo and I might as well take up an alternative hobby.

But, contrary old bugger that I am, I bloody love my E-M1 so will continue to fight a losing battle against its many failings, with the tragic results you see before you.I can only apologise.

[Rob8891]

S1222759 by pattayadays.com, on Flickr

The standard of your photography has really slipped of late.

You're right. Like all the truly inept, I blame the camera.

I have been reading comments on camera forums, made by people who read something written by someone else who had a friend who knew these things, declaring that Micro Four Thirds cameras "lacked depth of field control" and were therefore "unable to isolate the subject"; because as we all know, you can only isolate a subject by turning the background into an unidentifiable mush, and not by the use of light, contrast or texture. They are also apparently rubbish at high ISO (25,600 and up, which I use daily) and are not so good for the majority of us who like to print wall size images on a weekly basis.

I realise I have made a mistake and need to upgrade immediately, but every other camera I investigate is also castigated into awfulness by the same forums. Contrary to my previously held belief that almost any modern camera can pump out a decent image, it appears that the entire camera market is populated by poo and I might as well take up an alternative hobby.

But, contrary old bugger that I am, I bloody love my E-M1 so will continue to fight a losing battle against its many failings, with the tragic results you see before you.I can only apologise.

Still plodding on with my home-made shoebox pinhole camera, (but am devastated at the low quality of shoeboxes in Thailand). Ah, michty me! What to do, what to do?

[Fiddlesticks]

S1222759 by pattayadays.com, on Flickr

The standard of your photography has really slipped of late.

You're right. Like all the truly inept, I blame the camera.

I have been reading comments on camera forums, made by people who read something written by someone else who had a friend who knew these things, declaring that Micro Four Thirds cameras "lacked depth of field control" and were therefore "unable to isolate the subject"; because as we all know, you can only isolate a subject by turning the background into an unidentifiable mush, and not by the use of light, contrast or texture. They are also apparently rubbish at high ISO (25,600 and up, which I use daily) and are not so good for the majority of us who like to print wall size images on a weekly basis.

I realise I have made a mistake and need to upgrade immediately, but every other camera I investigate is also castigated into awfulness by the same forums. Contrary to my previously held belief that almost any modern camera can pump out a decent image, it appears that the entire camera market is populated by poo and I might as well take up an alternative hobby.

But, contrary old bugger that I am, I bloody love my E-M1 so will continue to fight a losing battle against its many failings, with the tragic results you see before you.I can only apologise.

Still plodding on with my home-made shoebox pinhole camera, (but am devastated at the low quality of shoeboxes in Thailand). Ah, michty me! What to do, what to do?

It is painfully obvious that the best camera is always the one you DON'T have ! ! ! !

[MJP]

S1222759 by pattayadays.com, on Flickr

The standard of your photography has really slipped of late.

You're right. Like all the truly inept, I blame the camera.

I have been reading comments on camera forums, made by people who read something written by someone else who had a friend who knew these things, declaring that Micro Four Thirds cameras "lacked depth of field control" and were therefore "unable to isolate the subject"; because as we all know, you can only isolate a subject by turning the background into an unidentifiable mush, and not by the use of light, contrast or texture. They are also apparently rubbish at high ISO (25,600 and up, which I use daily) and are not so good for the majority of us who like to print wall size images on a weekly basis.

I realise I have made a mistake and need to upgrade immediately, but every other camera I investigate is also castigated into awfulness by the same forums. Contrary to my previously held belief that almost any modern camera can pump out a decent image, it appears that the entire camera market is populated by poo and I might as well take up an alternative hobby.

But, contrary old bugger that I am, I bloody love my E-M1 so will continue to fight a losing battle against its many failings, with the tragic results you see before you.I can only apologise.

You used your 1D MK IV for that. Stop posting pics taken with a multiple thousands of dollars full frame claiming you used a M/43's . . . I'm not fooled!

By the way, how did you do that again?

[sunshine51]

S1222759 by pattayadays.com, on Flickr

The standard of your photography has really slipped of late.

You're right. Like all the truly inept, I blame the camera.

I have been reading comments on camera forums, made by people who read something written by someone else who had a friend who knew these things, declaring that Micro Four Thirds cameras "lacked depth of field control" and were therefore "unable to isolate the subject"; because as we all know, you can only isolate a subject by turning the background into an unidentifiable mush, and not by the use of light, contrast or texture. They are also apparently rubbish at high ISO (25,600 and up, which I use daily) and are not so good for the majority of us who like to print wall size images on a weekly basis.

I realise I have made a mistake and need to upgrade immediately, but every other camera I investigate is also castigated into awfulness by the same forums. Contrary to my previously held belief that almost any modern camera can pump out a decent image, it appears that the entire camera market is populated by poo and I might as well take up an alternative hobby.

But, contrary old bugger that I am, I bloody love my E-M1 so will continue to fight a losing battle against its many failings, with the tragic results you see before you.I can only apologise.

You used your 1D MK IV for that. Stop posting pics taken with a multiple thousands of dollars full frame claiming you used a M/43's . . . I'm not fooled!

By the way, how did you do that again?

Well....FWIW....I'm outta likes to give for the original pic.

I reckon it's a great photo y'all....no matter what camera

was used...so there.

[MJP]

^^ Yup. It's shockingly good.

Rabbit really can pull it out of the hat.

He's an easy wind up too.

[FracturedRabbit]

^^ Yup. It's shockingly good.

Rabbit really can pull it out of the hat.

He's an easy wind up too.

I shall rise to the bait again by pointing out that the 1D4 is a 1.3 crop camera and not full frame as you so foolishly suggest. I shall not bother telling you that my personal 1D4 went to a very nice man in Ireland in July of last year, and the rather phallic 300mm F2.8 went to a not so nice man in California who initially decided he wasn't going to accept it after I had spent 5,000 baht Fedexing it to him because he didn't want to pay the import duty. Dick.

Anyway, my abode is now free of flappy mirrors, apart from a very old Exacta which, as anyone with nothing better to do will tell you, was the world's first production SLR camera. It's shit, but it's historical shit.

Last, and probably least, the cheeky monkey had an Olympus 75mm F1.8 lens pointed at it. Well, you did ask.

[Mousehound]

Astral, very nice pic, but those are not orchids, I don't recall the name now.

Look like a member of the pea family.

[Goompa]

No word on those Fujian lenses at the moment ?

Still waiting for updates .

[MJP]

^^ Yup. It's shockingly good.

Rabbit really can pull it out of the hat.

He's an easy wind up too.

I shall rise to the bait again by pointing out that the 1D4 is a 1.3 crop camera and not full frame as you so foolishly suggest. I shall not bother telling you that my personal 1D4 went to a very nice man in Ireland in July of last year, and the rather phallic 300mm F2.8 went to a not so nice man in California who initially decided he wasn't going to accept it after I had spent 5,000 baht Fedexing it to him because he didn't want to pay the import duty. Dick.

Anyway, my abode is now free of flappy mirrors, apart from a very old Exacta which, as anyone with nothing better to do will tell you, was the world's first production SLR camera. It's shit, but it's historical shit.

Last, and probably least, the cheeky monkey had an Olympus 75mm F1.8 lens pointed at it. Well, you did ask.

I never knew that. Mind you I'd avoid Canon.

I shall be free of flappy mirrors too by Tuesday. I'm free!!! It's the end of my tour of duty in Issan and SIL has taken over!

[sunshine51]

From FR: "It's shit, but it's historical shit."......

And well worth noting that the Exakta was built in Dresden Germany.

Jimmy Stewart played a photog in an Alfred Hitchcock movie named

Rear Window...the main character in fact...

But I digress....so back OT to some real historical shit....

Dino poop.