View Larger Map

To commemorate this week's Taste of Chicago celebration, here's a Google Maps satellite image of the world's United States' most famous fountain: Buckingham Fountain. We've all seen images and video of ol' Bucky countless times, but seeing an aerial view is quite unique.

---------------------

From an IM converstation a few nights ago with my brother:

yikesmoose: did you know that buckingham fountain has its own mailing address?
spudart: yes
yikesmoose: !
spudart: it also generates about $200 in change a year
BOO YAH!
yikesmoose: that's it?
200 bucks?
spudart: where did i read that?
i just read that recently
i think it was in time out chicago
yikesmoose: so I can go over to buckingham fountain with 200 pennies, dump 'em in there, and then say that I contributed 1% of their annual income?
that's seems sad for one of the world's most popular fountains. Lemme correct that. that seems sad for the world's most popular fountain. Tell me of a fountain that's more famous that Buckingham Fountain.
spudart: that's what the article was about
how it's sad that we don't compare to the world
yikesmoose: i think there's some city worker who is pocketing like 90% of what goes into Buckingham Fountain
spudart: yup
yikesmoose: I can picture it now. Time Out Chicago goes to interview the Buckingham Fountain people. They ask how much money comes out of the fountain annually. The response is "$200" only because the guy that collects it doesn't want people to know he's pocketing thousands of dollars.
That's totally Chicago.

It's common knowledge (at least to anyone from Chicago) that New York City, Los Angeles, and Chicago are the three largest cities in the United States. I was curious to see how the largest U.S. cities fared against the largest cities in the world.

mongabay.com's estimations puts New York City at #3, Los Angeles at #13 and Chicago at #25 (estimations from 2008). The United States isn't represented again until #49 and 50 with Philadelphia and San Francisco.

Below shows the most populous cities in the world with the U.S. cities in bold. All stats courtesy of mongabay.com.

1 TOKYO, Japan 34,400,000
2 JAKARTA, Indonesia 21,800,000
3 New York (NY), United States 20,090,000
4 SEOUL, South Korea 20,010,000
5 MANILA, Philippines 19,550,000
6 Mumbai (Bombay), India 19,530,000
7 Sao Paulo, Brazil 19,140,000
8 MEXICO CITY, Mexico 18,430,000
9 Delhi, India 18,000,000
10 Osaka, Japan 17,270,000
11 CAIRO, Egypt 16,750,000
12 Kolkata (Calcutta), India 15,010,000
13 Los Angeles (CA), United States 14,730,000
14 Shanghai, China 14,460,000
15 MOSCOW, Russia 13,260,000
16 BEIJING (PEKING), China 12,770,000
17 BUENOS AIRES, Argentina 12,390,000
18 Guangzhou, China 11,810,000
19 Shenzhen, China 11,710,000
20 Istanbul, Turkey 11,220,000
21 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil 11,160,000
22 PARIS, France 10,430,000
23 Karachi, Pakistan 9,380,000
24 Nagoya, Japan 9,250,000
25 Chicago (IL), United States 9,030,000
26 Lagos, Nigeria 8,860,000
27 LONDON, United Kingdom 8,320,000
28 BANGKOK, Thailand 8,290,000
29 KINSHASA, Dem Rep of Congo 8,190,000
30 TEHRAN, Iran 8,000,000
31 LIMA, Peru 7,750,000
32 Dongguan, China 7,650,000
33 BOGOTA, Colombia 7,440,000
34 Chennai (Madras), India 7,320,000
35 DHAKA, Bangladesh 7,310,000
36 Essen, Germany 7,250,000
37 Tianjin (Tientsin), China 7,200,000
38 HONG KONG, China - Hong Kong 6,950,000
39 Taipei, China 6,820,000
40 Lahore, Pakistan 6,810,000
41 Ho Chi Minh City (Saigon), Viet Nam 6,710,000
42 Bangalore, India 6,660,000
43 Hyderabad, India 6,610,000
44 Johannesburg, South Africa 6,470,000
45 BAGHDAD, Iraq 6,000,000
46 Toronto, Canada 5,790,000
47 SANTIAGO, Chile 5,630,000
48 KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia 5,470,000
49 San Francisco (CA), United States 5,450,000
50 Philadelphia (PA), United States 5,270,000

Note: The image accompanying this blog post shows the metro Chicago area which reflects the metro area stats from mongabay.

One of the nice things about having a blog is that I am often challenged with the spelling of words. It's nice to know the proper spelling of words from our language. To further this experience I started keeping a list of such words. Each time I get ten words added to my list, it will become a blog post.

So here's my first ten. The spelling on the left was my initial guess. Misspelled words have the correct spelling to the right.

1. peninsula
2. deranged
3. temporaile - temporal
4. convoluted
5. algorithms
6. goatee
7. seperate - separate
8. perpetuate
9. committment - commitment
10. dynacism - dynamism

40% for my first ten. Not bad. I always misspell "separate". Hopefully this new list will help me remember the correct spelling. Now I can now continue the list with "misspell". I wasn't sure if that second "s" should be there.

The image for this blog post is inspired by the über-famous photo featured on desipio.com

I went "walking" around London a few days ago via Google Maps Street View and I came across an interesting storefront about 1 mile west of St. Paul's Cathedral. Funny thing is that I tried to revisit the location again just now and Street View doesn't go down that street any more.

What first intrigued me about Chesire Cheese was its name and how it is situated under what appears to be an overpass in a very old building tucked away. A little Google action unlocked the door to a historic pub (not a cheese shop) dating back to 1538.

Charles Dickens was a frequent customer of this charmingly dark pub which served as inspiration for his novels. It's said to be surprisingly large with various bars and rooms. Other literary figures associated with the pub are Oliver Goldsmith, Mark Twain, Alfred Tennyson and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.

Chesire Cheese was rebuilt after the Great Fire of 1666. Some of the interior is believed to date back that far and at least to the 1800s. The vaulted ceilings are thought to date back to a 13th century Carmelite Monastery which previously occupied the space.

Thanks to wikipedia for all this info.

I think I found myself a pub to visit if I ever get back to London. All thanks to a leisurely walk through Google Maps Street View.

The New York Times' positive review includes the following: "The beer is considered about the best value of any London pub."

Frommer's says, "The Cheshire is the best venue to introduce your children to an English pub." So I'm sure it sounds a bit touristy, but that's fine by me.

image courtesy of mya! on Flickr via Creative Commons license.

The other day I was complaining about Nikon's digital SLR lineup. I've been so disillusioned that I've even considered going to the Four Thirds format. Though I'm not sure how incredibly fantastic a semi-compact SLR would be for me. Sure it'd be idea on vacations, but big vacation plans aren't really in my future. Besides, pushing around a stroller for the foreseeable future allows me to simply go full hog SLR. Just throw the SLR bag on top of everything else in the stroller.

Now, I'm starting to go in a completely different direction. Enter the Nikon Coolpix P90. $360. 12 megapixels. 24x optical zoom. Yea, that's right. 24x. optical. 35mm equivalent is 26 - 624 mm. What a beautiful number. 624. mmmmmmmm. candy.

I bought the Nikon Coolpix 8800 back in 2005. 10 megapixels 10x zoom (300 mm). It was perfect for our trips to London and San Diege before our daughter came along. I could sneak it into a small bag and no one knew I was a tourist. In fact, I had two people ask me for directions in London because they thought I was a local. I like that.

However, I dropped my 8800 reaching for a batting practice ball at Petco Park (in San Diego) and it hasn't been the same since. A few months ago I received the dreaded "Lens Error" which is the kiss of death for the 8800. So I kinda miss that camera now. It was fun bringing it to Wrigley Field and Brookfield Zoo. Taking photos at those two locations with a "300 mm" lens was one of my favorite pastimes. And now I could continue that hobby with a "624 mm" lens? bahama mamma.

Yet, the P90's 1/2.33" image sensor is super tiny when compared to Nikon's DX sensor and even the Four Thirds sensor. Heck, it's even smaller than the 1/1.8" sensors found on most point-and-shoot cameras. Forget the P90. Right? Though I keep hearing a soft voice saying "624! 624!" This will require an investigation at my local camera store. Maybe I'll just get the AF Zoom-NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4-5.6G lens ($600 retail).

It's been tough watching the Cubs lose the last two close games against the Detroit Tigers. Despite the outcome of the games, I really have enjoyed this series thus far for one simple reason. The Detroit Tigers have the best uniforms in all sports. Simply the very definition of classic.

Their home uniforms feature pure white tops and pants with the old english style dark blue "D" logo on the left chest and dark blue piping along the sides of the pants and around the collar running parallel down the center fronts matched by dark blue caps with the same old english "D" logo in white. That's it. Pure and simple. No other uniform past or present looks better.

Oh, and single digits work best on this pure uniform. It's too bad that three single digit numbers are already retired by the Tigers organization.

For the past 3+ months I've been closely and extremely patiently following the developments of Nikon's world of SLR cameras. And I have to say I'm now rather disenchanted.

I have some decent coins in my budget from my Etsy store profit and I'm ready to replace my 8 year old D100 (6 megapixel DX sensor).

married to Nikon
I'm somewhat entrenched in the Nikon family. I have three Nikon lenses, but two of which aren't anything special and should be traded in. The third is a beautiful 60mm macro lens. I much prefer the interface of Nikon over Canon in addition to overall quality of build. Plus, there's a bit of a Nikon heritage in my family of which I would feel a level of guilt for betraying.

What do I want in my ideal SLR?
- 16+ megapixel
- FX (full frame) sensor
- articulating LCD
- built-in focusing motor
- movie capabilities
- And I want it all for under 2 grand

I apologize if I made milk come out of your nose. Nothing comes close to these dreamy specs.

my kingdom for a D400
What's been driving me nuts is that the successor to the D300 has been rumored for quite a few months. There were some solid hopes the D400 would have an FX sensor and 16 megapixels. Movie functionality was to be included as well. There was no talk about an articulating LCD. (Many pros and semi-pros hate it. I love it.) An FX sensor with 16 megapixels for 2 grand sounded perfect to me even if it didn't have an articulating LCD.

In the past month the rumor mill changed from FX to DX which saddened me greatly. Then in the past couple weeks it's been pretty much confirmed there will be NO D400, at least not for another year. Instead Nikon will release the D300s which will have dual card support and movie capabilities. whoop de freakin' do.

Canon kicking Nikon's butt
Nikon really needs a true competitor to the Canon EOS 5D Mark II (21 megapixel "full frame"). Yes, the Nikon D700 is incredible at higher ISOs, but I’ve seen reviews where the high ISO image quality of the EOS 5D Mark II is comparable to the D700 when 5D Mark II’s 5616×3744 images are sized down to the D700’s 4256×2832. And the Mark II’s images at low ISO are superior to the D700. The result? I want full-frame D400 16+ megapixels. The 5D Mark II goes for about $2600.

I'm avoiding Canon for the reasons noted above. Plus Canon's full frame sensor really isn't full frame as noted in one of my previous blog posts. It's only half way to being full frame. Canon is being really sneaky about that and I wish the photography industry would expose Canon's false marketing.

Here's Nikon's current line of cameras:

D700
12 megapixels
FX sensor
static LCD
built-in focusing motor
no movie function
$2600
commentary: $2600 for 12 megapixels? rip-off. I absolutely love the full frame FX sensor. It's the creme de le creme, pure noise-free butter. But 12 megapixels does that sensor no justice.

D300
12 megapixels
DX sensor
static LCD
built-in focusing motor
no movie function
$1600
commentary: No way, Jack. Not much point for me to get the D300 when I can get the D90. Nikon desperately needs to update this camera.

D90
12 megapixels
DX sensor
static LCD
built-in focusing motor
movie function
$1000
commentary: I'd buy the D90 if I had buy an SLR right now. DX sensors really shouldn't get much larger than 12 megapixels. If they get over 12, then higher ISOs will suffer big time. And I need quality imaging at high ISOs with all the family photos I take indoors. But $1000 for a 12 megapixel camera just seems like a lot of money, especially when I think there really should be a full frame camera with 16 megapixels for $2000.

D5000
12 megapixels
DX sensor
articulating LCD
no built-in focusing motor
movie function
$750
commentary: No built-in focusing motor kills this option. If I want auto-focusing, then I'd be stuck with only DX lenses. No thanks. If Nikon snuck in a focusing motor, then I'd be all over this camera. It'd be a great deal and the money saved could go to buy some nice glass. Though I'd have to investigate the functions on this camera a bit more. There's only one dial mode instead of two.

Anything above the D700 is way too much money and anything below the D5000 is out of the picture because of the lack of an internal focusing motor.

I've driven down 103rd Street in Chicago hundreds, maybe thousands of times. On Sunday I was driving west between Western Avenue and Pulaski Road and noticed the large amount of homes that have wrought iron railings and porch supports on their front porch. Unfortunately traveling by car allows for only a certain level of study of the variety from home to home. All were rather simple designs, but the subtle variety of shapes and forms were (was?) interesting. Analysis of such detailing has previously escaped me.

Here's what's currently shown as the number one search result for "Chicago painting" on Google Images.

"The Bean...Chicago Painting"
Karen Margulis
7 in X 5 in (17.8 cm X 12.7 cm), dry pastel
$95 USD

Firstly, I have to say that calling a dry pastel drawing a "painting" is quite a stretch. Though I've fallen victim to using the term "painting" for my oil pastel drawings. I have to say that oil pastels do have more paint-like qualities when compared to dry pastel. But I really shouldn't talk. While in high school, I tried convincing my art teacher that I should be able to submit a marker drawing for a painting class assignment. I still argue that I used the markers in a very painterly fashion. So I'll give Karen a pass on this one.

My whole point is that it's kinda cool that you can buy the #1 Google Image for "chicago painting" for $95. I only wish it was larger to really give a sense of scale for Cloudgate (aka The Chicago Bean). 5x7 is quite small. But speaking in terms of the industry, $95 for a quality drawing/painting is a great deal. Then again, interpreting the Bean in a 5x7 surface gives the Bean a more natural comparison to being a bean (lower-case "b") while at the same time distinguishing the scale of human form to Bean (upper case "B").

I've never been a big fan of dry pastel drawings. Artists of this medium generally tend to obsess over being detail-nazis or color freaks. Karen avoids falling victim to this plague here. The color palette is crisp and simple. The soft textures on the Bean are enough to give definition while also providing a somewhat organic feel to this great icon.

My favorite part of this painting is the interaction of the Bean with the background. The soft haze in the skyline doesn't exactly contrast the Bean. It uses the same color palette and both are relatively soft even if the background is much softer. It's an analogous relationship resulting in a inquisitive dynamism.

Two years ago I blogged about the Boston Institute of Contemporary Arts building. It seems nowadays cantilevered buildings are all the rage. Now take a look at the Tamayo Museum by Rojkind Arquitectos and BIG. It has not one, not two, but THREE cantilevers. Goodness.

The viewing platform looks nice, but it'd so much more incredibly impressive if the museum was right next to a body of water like the Boston Institute of Contemporary Arts. Imagine the crazy experience standing atop the Tamayo Museum and looking down and seeing nothing but water. Instead, people will look down and just see a hill. Big whoop.

Ok, so it's not so much a case. Think of it as the world's smallest "camera bag". I suppose it's the anti-camera bag. The Spider Holster is a clever way to carry around your SLR camera or any device that has a standard tripod mount. Prices aren't available yet.

I'm not crazy about how you advertise to the world that you're carrying around an SLR by having it exposed on your hip. But it makes things quite convenient if you don't want to hassle with carrying a carry bag around. Just be careful if you knee down. I could see a camera coming off the spider holster quite easily that way.

Yesterday's blog post gave some insight into what makes Micro Four Thirds cameras so great. The only problem is that there hasn't been any true Micro Four Thirds cameras... until yesterday. The Olympus EP-1 was announced amidst months of rumors. Among those rumors where those stating the EP-1 would be inspired by the famous Olympus Pen series from the 1950s and 1960s. Well, Olympus kinda fell flat on their face on this one (in terms of the design).

If Olympus is going to go retro with this camera, then they should have done it 100%.

The top white section tries to blend too many current design aesthetics with its beveled tier and sloping arc to the left of the Olympus logo.

The radius of all the corners are much too large. The corners should be much less round and much more angular.

The brown leather-like grip is an interesting venture and a great idea. Yet it appears that this grip is simply a rounded rectangle on the front of the camera resulting in a patch-like appearance. For stronger aesthetic appeal, the grip should wrap around the edge of the camera. The beveled frame around the grip is an awkward framing element which only emphasizes the look of it being a patch.

Essentially, the Olympus EP-1 should be more box-like in its overall appearance and within the details. Simplicity is king in retro design. Over-designed elements such as those featured in the white top diminish the retro look. Unfortunately the concept camera, shown below, has a truer retro feel and better over all design than the final model.

As a side note, the view finder shown in the EP-1 above is add-on to the mount. It looks incredibly stupid on the camera.

Today, Olympus is expected to announced the very first Micro Four Thirds digital SLR camera that's in the body of a point-and-shoot. This is historic news in the photography world.

Check out yesterday's post featuring the world's best image sensor chart and compare the size of the Four Thirds image sensor to that of any other SLR sensor. Then compare the Fourth Thirds image sensor to the 1/1.8" sensor which is found in just about all point-and-shoot cameras. The Four Thirds sensor is relatively close in size to other SLR cameras and it's much larger than the 1/1.8" sensor.

What does this matter? Well, the Micro Four Thirds format lets you have the power of an SLR image sensor in the body of a point-and-shoot. THAT'S HUGE! Carrying around a digital SLR requires a consistently conscious commitment. Four Thirds allows for more mobility. Now, I won't go so far as to say it's a pocket camera, but it certainly doesn't have the clunk and mass of other SLRs.

A clarification
More specifically, what saves space in the Micro Four Thirds cameras is that it doesn't have a mirror and a pentaprism which is found in all other SLR cameras. Technically speaking, when the mirror and pentaprism are missing from a camera with a Four Thirds sensor, it is called "Micro Four Thirds". When the mirror and pentaprism are used with a camera with a Four Thirds sensor, it is called "Four Thirds". Don't think that Micro Four Thirds uses a smaller size Four Thirds sensor. It's the same sensor. The camera just doesn't have the mirror and pentaprism. I think it's terrible marketing on Olympus and Pansonic's part. Micro Four Thirds cameras also have a smaller lens mount than Four Thirds cameras. A lens adapter is required to use Four Thirds lenses on Micro Four Thirds cameras. Micro Four Thirds was announced in August 2008, but the Four Thirds sensor has been around since 2002.

There's been a lot of buzz surrounding the Micro Four Thirds movement since its announcement last year. Since then, Olympus and Panasonic have released Micro Four Thirds SLR cameras, but those camera bodies are in the traditional SLR form factor. They don't truly take advantage of the technology which allows for much smaller cameras. That all changes today. The Olympus EP-1 puts the Four Thirds sensor in the body of a point-and-shoot. This should be interesting.

Quality of digital photographs are determined by four major factors:
1. image sensor size and quality
2. lens optics
3. megapixels
4. processing core

These are placed in order of importance. Yea, image sensors and lens optics are that important.

I have never seen a good illustration comparing the basic image sensors so I put one together. There's also a 300 dpi illustration on my flickr page.

Some observations:
I was shocked to see how much smaller Canon's "full frame" (C) is than Nikon's full frame (B). Hooray for Nikon. Canon's "full frame" can be considered to be simply a half way point between Nikon's standard SLR sensor (D) and Nikon's full frame sensor (B).

And of course the medium format sensor just destroys all the other sensors out there. Got about 20 grand? That's what it'll cost to buy a medium format digital camera (as of this posting).

Four Thirds SLR is an intriguing option. It's not too much smaller than the standard SLR sensors. The advantage of the Four Thirds system is that it allows for much, much smaller SLR bodies. (There's no bulky mirror system necessary.)

1/1.8" (I) is what most consumer cameras have. Notice how much smaller it is compared to the SLR sensors. That's why you get superior image quality from an SLR image sensor.

cartophilia mentions the conflict between Russia and Canada over claims to the North Pole. Accompanying the post is a great map illustrating the conflicted region.

Back in 1997, Russia sent a mini-submarine 14,000 ft to the Arctic Ocean seabed to plant a rust-proof titanium metal flag at the North Pole.

I love Canada's response: "This isn't the 15th century. You can't go around the world and just plant flags" to claim territory, Canada's minister of foreign affairs, Peter MacKay, told reporters.

I wonder what Santa Claus thinks of all this.

Musical notation seems to have worked for the business of making music for hundreds of years now. But I'd like to scrap that system and use descriptive words instead. Here's the first piece in the Maldre Descriptive Words Music System:

Oomp Oomp, dum, dum, whack, dum, dum, dum, oomp, omp, smash

I was looking at a map of the outlying suburbs of Chicago. I noticed a town far southwest of Chicago called Paw Paw. Of course I had to zoom in closer and "visit" the town of Paw Paw and see what's happening. Sadly the folks at Google Maps decided to photograph Paw Paw on a cloudy day. Much of the town is masked in a white cloak. I am disappointed.

interactive map below

View Larger Map

HE GONE
Four years ago I opened my ebay store. On Friday, June 5, 2009 I closed my ebay store.

WHAT HAPPENED?!
What was the cause for this decision? Back around February of 2008 ebay made a major change. They changed the default search results to be sorted by "best match" rather than "ending soonest". This way ebay has massive control over which items are listed first in all basic searches. ebay didn't show much favor for my store and my items were poorly ranked in their system. You would think "best match" would mean they would have algorithms that would analyze your search terms and find the items that best match your search. No, ebay's "best match" only favors large shops that sell large volumes of items on a regular basis.

Plus, I sold off most of my baseball drawings around the end of 2006, at least the ones of players that people commonly know. What was left in my store was mostly conceptual art and drawings of old baseball players that very few people know. People don't shop ebay for conceptual art. They shop ebay for collectible art... and unicorns, lots of unicorns.

NO MONEY
With this "best match" change I went from being in the black with very modest profit each month to being in the red. There were consecutive months were I didn't sell a single item.

EBAY WANTS YOU TO SELL VIA AUCTIONS, NOT STORES
Plus, ebay never showed any love for their store business model. Throughout my entire 4 year experience the ebay store search tool (searching ebay stores, not the default ebay search tool) has been confusing, difficult to find and very convoluted in its essence. Because of this, ebay clearly demands that sellers use their auction-style format in order to have any success.

MASS EXODUS
It was a bit of a marvel that my store lasted as long as it did. When I opened my shop I bookmarked a ton of fellow ebay stores that sold art. I'd guess that maybe 10% of those shops still exist.

ETSY STILL LIKES ME
So I'll continue to focus my energy on my successful Etsy shop. And I'll think about what I can do with my 1000markets shop and bigcartel shop, both of which don't cost me a single dime in operating costs. I was plunking down about $18 a month for the ebay shop.

EBAY STILL HAS USES FOR SELLERS
I won't let ebay completely fall off my radar. Beginning June 16, ebay is changing their policy to allow users to sell 5 items a month auction-style with no posting fees. I think that's great. Though I'm sure they are going to raise their commission fee. During my four years of selling on ebay I observed that ebay is CONSTANTLY changing their policies so they may strip more and more money from their sellers. It's no wonder ebay's business outlook isn't bright.

Yesterday, specific benefits of shipping USPS Priority Mail were given. Now, here's something you can do to spice up your Priority Mail box. Use a $4.95 stamp instead of the ugly, plain-jane barcodes that the Post Office prints off. I'm not sure how much using a stamp instead of a barcode sticker will slow down the delivery of your package. Hopefully there's no difference.

Currently the Post Office sells the Redwood Forest stamp shown above. It's a real beaut.

Want to ship an item at the most affordable price? If the package is under 1 pound and is a reasonable size*, then USPS (United States Post Office) Priority Mail is the way to go. Their prices for packages under 1 pound ($4.95 anywhere in the United States as of this blog post) are much better than the prices from FedEx, UPS, or DHL.

*The maximum size is 108 inches or less in combined length and distance around the thickest part.

FREE BOXES FROM THE POST OFFICE
They also have FREE 11.5" x 13.125" x 2.375" boxes. The only catch is that you have to use those boxes for Priority Mail. You can order the boxes online and have the Post Office delivery them to you for free. Or simply pick them up at your local Post Office. But don't make the mistake of using Priority Mail Flat Rate boxes. More on that later.

I have shipped almost 200 packages via Priority Mail using their free boxes. It saves me money because I don't have to hassle with buying boxes. The Priority Mail boxes are also self-sealing, so there's some cost savings on tape as well. Plus, their boxes lend a nice, professional feel rather than using some box that I have lying around. Now, I learned very quickly that it's important for me to keep my packages under 1 pound. Keep on reading.

YOU COULD BE PAYING A LOT MORE FOR PRIORITY MAIL IF YOUR PACKAGE IS OVER 15 OUNCES
Pricing gets a little more complicated when your package gets over 15 ounces and you may want to consider other shipping options as a result. For certain situations, Priority Mail is still a good option, for others it's not. There's two factors that determine the USPS Priority Mail price for 1+ pound packages: weight and shipping distance. Let's cover weight first.

weight:
USPS Priority Mail prices change based a system of pounds. The best way to explain this with examples. A package that is 1 pound 1 ounce is the same price as a package that is 1 pound 15 ounces. A package that is 2 pounds will cost more than a 1 pound 15 ounce package. The changing point for cost is at the X pound 0 ounce mark.

shipping distance:
The further away the recipient is from you, the higher the cost. Remember, if your package is under one pound, then it doesn't matter where in the U.S. you are shipping to. It's the same cost. It's only when packages get to be 1 pound and heavier does distance-based price point kick in.

So let's say I'm shipping a 1 lb 0 oz package from Chicago to Los Angeles. It would cost $8.10 (as of this blog post). Whoa, that's a huge spike from $4.95. If my package was one little ounce less (15 oz), then it would be only $4.95. Now, if I'm shipping that same 1 lb 0 oz package from Chicago to somewhere in Illinois it would be $5.50. Compare that to the $8.10 cost to Los Angeles. Distance plays a HUGE role in Priority Mail costs when the package is 1+ pounds.

The Post Office has a formula of "zones" to determine the distance fees. It's very unclear exactly how they define zones. Your best bet is to either look at their pricing chart to see what the highest cost a certain weight package would be or use their price calculator which is quite handy.

I pulled the following zone defintion from prestashop.com. I couldn't find such definition on usps.com, so I can't account for how accurate this info is, but it gives a general idea of how the zone system works.

Zone Distance
1 Non-local zones within a 50 mile radius of the point of origination
2 50 to 150 mile radius
3 150 to 300 mile radius
4 300 to 600 mile radius
5 600 to 1000 mile radius
6 1000 to 1400 mile radius
7 1400 to 1800 mile radius
8 1800 miles and over

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FLAT RATE PRIORITY MAIL AND PRIORITY MAIL
the boxes
You'll also need to know the difference between Flat Rate Priority Mail and Priority Mail or at the very least that you can't use Flat Rate boxes to ship Priority Mail. Items can be sent via Flat Rate only if you use the assigned Flat Rate boxes. And THAT'S where it gets tricky for Priority Mail. When I first tried using Priority Mail I made the mistake of trying to use a Flat Rate Priority Mail box. Rookie mistake. Flat Rate boxes can only be used with the Flat Rate service.

prices
Flat Rate allows packages to be sent for one price only if you use Flat Rate boxes. It can be up to 70 pounds (not sure) and must be shipped with the U.S. (not sure).

Plus, it doesn't help that the Post Office is going through a big marketing campaign trying to get people to use Flat Rate Priority Mail. And why wouldn't they? If Grandma Jones is shipping some slippers to her grandson downstate, the Post Office doesn't want her to know that she could pay just $4.95 for Priority Mail. They plaster the Post Office lobby with big signs for Flat Rate Priority Mail. And Grandma Jones ends up paying $13.95 instead of $4.95.

Now there are instances where Flat Rate Priority Mail is a better option than Priority Mail. When a package gets to a certain combo of weight/shipping distance, then Flat Rate wins. For example, if I'm shipping a 5lb package to Los Angeles it would cost $15.20 via Priority Mail and Flat Rate is $13.95 (as of this blog post). There's different size boxes for Flat Rate which changes the price, but the "Large Flat Rate Box Domestic" is about the same size as the Priority Mail box.

When you start spending over $10 to ship something via USPS, then you're better off looking into using UPS, FedEx, or DHL. I have never used USPS Flat Rate Priority Mail. I find UPS to offer better prices.

The United Arab Emirates has recently become the home to some incredibly glitzy architecture. I appreciate how they are challenging the status quo. But so much seems to exist just for shock value. Take Capital Gate by RMJM for example. Here's the info from archdaily:

Capital Gate, the iconic leaning building in Abu Dhabi, reached halfway point. The building, designed by international architects RMJM, will lean 18 degrees westward, 14 degrees more than the Leaning Tower of Pisa.

To make this possible, the central core of the building slants in the opposite direction to the lean of the structure, and it straightening as it grows. It sits on top of a 7-foot-deep concrete base with a dense mesh of reinforced steel. The steel exoskeleton known as the diagrid sits above an extensive distribution of 490 piles that have been drilled 100 feet underground to accommodate the gravitational, wind and seismic pressures caused by the lean of the building.

It's good to see today's technology advancing so greatly which allows for such structures to be built. But part of me is just waiting for physics to truly have the final say and put man in his place. Then again people were probably saying the exact same thing when the world's first skyscraper, The Home Insurance Building in Chicago, was built in 1885.

Stone Towers
architect: Zaha Hadid
location: Cairo, Egypt

Zaha Hadid's proposed Stone Towers in Cairo looks like they came straight out of Star Trek and that's meant as a compliment. It has a certain utopian feel. There's a bit of spirited discussion in the comments of archdaily's post.

The very first comment nails the Star Trek analogy which mirrors my first impression. Some slander Hadid's use of repetitive forms as laziness. I beg to differ. The repeated shapes hold their own in value of visual interest.

Terry Glenn Phipps writes a lengthy comment exploring how Hadid is maturing as a creative architect while another gets into the evolvement of modern architecture.

Another person calls it "discomfortable" for its "stone jungle" appearance. A stone jungle sounds more intriguing that awkward. I'm not sure what the intent is there. Other negative feedback include terms such as "overpowering","overwhelming", "depressing". I think a great deal of such criticism is based on a preference against large volumes of concrete.

This heavy and massive use of concrete reminds me of how concrete dominated London architecture of the 60s and 70s. (I was surprised the effects of WWII when I visited London a few years ago). Yet, Hadid evolves the aesthetic to a more dynamic sensation through its controlled patterns of curvatures.

More interesting (and much larger) photos of Stone Towers at archdaily

1950 Bowman #82 Carroll Lockman. I got this pup for $3 on ebay. I found out that vintage baseball cards can be purchased on ebay for a reasonable price if they all beat up. In fact, I prefer the aged, more than gently used cards of yesteryear. It adds more history to the card. Paying literally 25 times as much money for a pristine card doesn't interest me.

There's a few nicknames for St. Louis Cardinals slugger, Albert Pujols, including Prince Albert, Phat Albert, The Machine, El Hombre, and Darth Pujols (The last one is mine). I'd like everyone to stop calling Albert these names and begin referring to Al as "Big Poopie". It's a spinoff of David Ortiz's nickname "Big Papi" and Al's ubiquitous last name.

I've always been curious about seeing a list of cities that have Major League Baseball teams and which cities don't in terms of population. Wikipedia gives a list of the 263 most populated cities in the United States.

However, I find this statistic to be very misleading. Yes, Chicago's population is 2,836,658, but that doesn't include all the surrounding suburbs and nearby cities that constitute a concentrated base of fans. A more accurate stat is the population of metropolitan statistical areas and wiki has a table for that as well.

Now we can easily see which largest metro areas don't have MLB teams and how they rank against the smallest MLB markets. I don't know why Google lists Riverside as its own city. It's really part of the Los Angeles metro area in my opinion. Riverside residents can easily make the trip to see a Dodgers or even an Angels game.

The largest metropolitan area without a baseball team is Portland. Poor Portland. They're not even close to traveling to San Fran, Oakland, or Seattle for a game. The whole mix of metro areas from 22-30 is interesting. I'll list them again here in a more concise list:
22. Pittsburgh - YES
23. Portland - NO
24. Cincinnati - YES
25. Sacramento - NO
26. Cleveland - YES
27. Orlando - NO
28. San Antonio - NO
29. Kansas City - YES
30. Las Vegas - NO

In theory, Portland, Sacramento, Orlando, San Antonio, or Las Vegas can have a Major League Baseball franchise because there's other markets of similar size that do have a MLB team.

And then all the way down at 39 is Milwaukee. There are 13, count 'em 13 metro areas that are larger than the metro-Milwaukee area that don't have MLB teams. How does Milwaukee do it?

Yesterday's post I talked about how red hats with the Cubs' home uniforms looks dumb. I'll continue that thought and say that the solid blue tops worn frequently as the Cubs' home uniforms is really bothersome. Officially they are called "alternate jerseys".

1. As mentioned yesterday, the Cubs home uniforms are classic. There's a few storied franchises in baseball that should never mess with their home unis and the Cubs are one of them. The blue pinstripes with the circle blue and red "Cubs" within is timeless. Why mess with perfection? Anything else will automatically be lacking.

2. It just looks stupid. These guys are wearing pinstriped pants and a solid blue shirt. Surely I'm not the only one that thinks this pairing is misplaced. Look at it this way. You're starting a new MLB franchise or you're completely rebranding an existing MLB franchise with no worthy history. Are you going to design the home uniforms so that the top is a solid, vibrant color and the pants are pinstripes? The answer certainly is "no" because it just looks stupid. The two elements clash with other visually. They also clash historically. Pinstriped uniforms lend a sense of history. Solid, richly colored tops are more modern. Why mix the two? It's just plain awkward.

Somehow it became a rule a few years ago that the starting pitcher decides what uniforms to wear. It was cute... for about a month. Then we all found out that Zambrano LOVES the solid blue tops. Ugh. And what if we get 3 starters that prefer the alternate? The alternate would become the standard. I'm throwing up on my keyboard now. And what if all 5 starters prefer the alternate? We wouldn't see the pinstripe tops any more. I'm really getting sick now.

Cubs management really needs to put their foot down and get rid of these stupid alternate home jerseys. There is absolutely no need to have them when you have a classic, timeless, loved home jersey. Oh wait, they want to sell these alternate jerseys to fans. I guess we're stuck with them. Personally, I think it tarnishes the great Cubs brand. It hurts the Cubs in the long run.

And don't get me started on how the blue in the alternate jerseys is slightly different than the blue in the Cubs hats.

Yesterday's (Memorial Day) Cubs game was a bit crazy.

The Cubs lost their 8th game in a row.

Freddy Sanchez went 6 for 6. Sanchez also made two awesome plays in the field.

Mr. T sang the 7th inning stretch. I normally can't stand the 7th inning interview (It's baseball, not the Tonight Show), but Mr. T was fun. He even went back to his seat after the stretch. How many celebs do that? Uh, none.

Carlos Zambrano struck out as a pinch hitter in the bottom of the 8th with two outs and two runners on base when the Cubs were down 10-8. I don't understand that one. Yes, it's fun seeing Big Z come to bat. But there seriously isn't anyone better on the bench? He's not the best situational hitter. But he did bat .337 last year. However, he's a lifetime .239 hitter.

And then there's those red hats. The Cubs home uniforms are classic. There's a few storied franchises in baseball that should never mess with their home unis and the Cubs are one of them. I wasn't happy to see them put red outlines around the numbers and players names on the back. That happened around 1998. In the past couple years they fortunately took the chunky, cartoon red off the back of the uniforms. And yes, I know names on the backs of the Cubs uniforms were introduced in the 1990s, but I don't have a problem with that, which bends my "dont mess with the home uniforms" theory.

But those red hats just look stupid. You'd think they wouldn't look so bad. After all the Cubs' colors are blue and red. It just goes to show the value of primary and secondary colors. The Cubs' primary color is blue. Red is a secondary color. Don't make the hats red. It messes with the primary and secondary color roles.

It's no sweat really, because these red hats were won by all MLB teams as a Memorial Day tribute and I'm cool with that. It's just a one-time thing. There'd be some serious problems if these red hats appeared in the home unis more than once a year. It works as an oddity, but not a regularity. ("Regularity" can be used as a noun. I just looked it up.) Mixing up uniform options adds another layer of history to a history-based sport. MLB and individual teams just need to be conscious of how frequently they do such things.

Some would say they shouldn't do it because it's just another way to get fans to buy more stuff. I don't see anything wrong with that. Fans aren't being forced to buy these hats. If you want to look goofy wearing an all-red Cubs hat with stars and stripes crammed into the "C", then that's your right. I prefer the classic all blue cap with a white outlined red "C". Thank you.

There has been some debate whether or not a Mies van der Rohe designed structure should be destroyed and replaced with a new Metra station. Chicago architecture crit, Blair Kamin, thinks it should come down. It's a dumpy "mediocre" building that has no significance other than having van der Rohe's name attached to it.

Chicago architecture writer, Lynn Becker, feels differently: "The view down Federal Street is the only one that puts the industrial aesthetic of Mies's IIT buildings, not in a park-like landscape to help the medicine go down, but directly within the industrial context of a gritty city street running parallel to a set of railroad tracks".

I see both sides of the argument and I have side with Kamin. Tear down the Mies building. Ugh. I can't believe I just wrote that. I've always been a big fan of infrastructure investments in roads, highways and public transportation. The lack of civic planning in the Chicago suburbs is a pet peeve of mine. So building up Chicago's public transit has my full support.

However, I can sympathize with Becker. The new Metra station looks a bit trivial. I commented on his blog post that it looks a lot like the original Donkey Kong game. $11.7 million for Donkey Kong? Am I missing something here?

This is just a beautiful poster by johnmichaelgray on flickr.