The Tamron 150-600mm - Why I'm Not Buying it, But You Might

 Intro

I'm not going to be buying the Tamron 150-600mm superzoom.  Since my reasons are my own alone, I'm going to give you the pluses and minuses, and let you decide for yourself.  And I'm actually hopeful that my condemnation of the lens might actually cause you to buy it, since we're all looking for different things.

I read reviews of camera gear just like any other photographer, and some of them can be quite helpful.  Others not so much.  Sometimes I want to see specs, sometimes not, sometimes a user experience, sometimes I don't care, you get the idea.  My interests are varied, depending on the gear and why I'm looking at it.

A quick note for ALL reviewers of ALL camera bodies and lenses, though:  Stop including tiny sample images in your posts and reviews!  They're absolutely worthless.  It does no one any good to see a 35 Meg image shrunk to 1000 pixels wide, thinking that it tells us something about the camera or lens.  If you're going to include images, then either crop them to 100% view, or include the full-resolution images behind a click.  And even then, you MUST include a comparison image of something else in order for the image to mean anything at all.

Why Do This?

Since I don't really do gear reviews, one might wonder why I'm "reviewing" this lens in the first place.  I've mentioned previously, and in almost every conversation I have with fellow photographers, that your gear doesn't really matter, so why bother caring now?  The answer is that I will attempt to prove my assertion by looking at a piece of gear much more expensive than what I currently use.  I approached the Tamron with an open mind; I was fully prepared to buy it to replace an aging lens I depend on every day.

The Baseline Lens

Nikon 100-300mm f/5.6 (Image courtesy Leicashop.com)

For landscapes, macro work, and even some automotive shoots, I currently use the Nikkor 100-300mm f/5.6 lens.  It's completely manual in every way.  It has no autofocus, no auto aperture, no image stabilization, no nothing.  It's a piece of glass with two adjustment rings on it, one of which has two functions.  Since you can't use the camera to help you control the way the lens works (and because it's an f/5.6 - very slow), it's practically impossible to use it for wildlife photography, and almost as difficult for motorsports.  There is no lens profile in LightRoom or Adobe RAW, and Adobe will never make one.  I bought it for $65 off of EBay about six years ago, and it had minor pitting internally, though it wasn't noticeable in the final image.  Fast forward to today, and the pitting has gotten worse.  Anything shot with an aperture smaller than f/8 (meaning higher numbers, up to f/32), has hundreds of dark blotches everywhere in the shot, making the lens useless except for f/8 and f/5.6.  That makes the lens, in today's market, worth exactly nothing.  And sometime in the near future, the pitting will increase to the point that I'll have to just throw it away.

But the shots it does take look extremely nice.  The focus is good, the vignetting is controllable, and the distortion is smooth enough that I almost never even correct for it because it doesn't bother me, particularly when I combine 300 shots to make a panoramic image.

The Contender 

Tamron 150-600mm f/5-6.3 (Image courtesy Tamron)

This is Tamron's SuperZoom, the 150-600mm.  Its f-stop capability varies between f/5 and f/6.3, depending on the zoom level.  It has everything the Nikkor above doesn't have:  camera-adjustable focus and aperture, a really good image stabilization system, and a tripod ring, so that it can sit on the tripod head with a heavy camera on the back and still be balanced.  You can read plenty of other details about it everywhere else on the web if you want to, but that should really be enough talk about specs.

Lens-to-Lens Shot Comparison

Both of these shots were taken at 300mm, using the same f/8, 1/800, ISO 100 settings.

 

Nikkor 100-300mm, 100% crop from center of frame.  f/8, 1/800, ISO100

Tamron 150-600mm, 100% crop from center of frame.  f/8, 1/800, ISO100

For me, this is the most crucial test.  Sometimes it's important to look for chromatic aberration, pincushioning, or any of  a couple of dozen other behaviors, but these two lenses are fairly comparable in all those areas - not amazing, but actually quite good.  So let's not waste time with that.

The Tamron took in a little more light (and thus, color intensity) at the same setting, which could be attributed to a number of things, not the least of which could be that the light changed during the minute I took to change lenses.  So I'm not concerned with that either.  What matters to me is sharpness.  I've been looking for a newer lens that will give me more sharpness overall, so that my panoramas can be blown up even bigger.  My current high score for a pano is twelve feet by forty-eight feet at a full 300 dpi.

It's clear that the Nikkor is sharper, discounting the portions of the Tamron image where there's motion blur.

The Good and The Bad

Here's what the Tamron has going for it:

1.  Works much better with the camera, taking some responsibility away from me.
2.  Much greater reach.  I used all 600mm of it when shooting from a mile away, and was very pleased with the results.
3.  Adobe has a lens profile for it, making it easy to correct in post.
4.  A truly great Image Stabilization system, increasing the lens's usefulness and ease of focus even on a tripod.  Getting stability at 600mm is no joke, no matter what kind of tripod you have.

Now on the Nikkor's side:

1.  Better sharpness.
2.  I already own it.

You can read everyone else's blog, where they will all say that lens sharpness isn't important, but technique is.  Let's say that's completely true (and I do believe that the technique argument is completely true).  If so, then why ever buy a new lens to replace one with the same zoom range you already own?  After all, whatever my technique level, it would be the same level with both lenses.  The only possible answers would be convenience and features.

The Tamron has wonderful new features that would make it more convenient for me to shoot.  But that's going to have to be a tremendous amount of convenience to make me part with that kind of money.  For me, the money can only be spent if the final product is better, which in this case, for what I shoot, it will not be.

If you shoot wildlife, motorsports, or celebrities, your shots will end up better with the Tamron.  In my case, my shots will suffer.  I'll just need to learn to live without the 600mm reach, and build my own lens profile for Photoshop.  When the Nikkor finally fails, I'll just get another one from EBay.

Carnage on Larimer - 2015

Carnage on Larimer is put on every year by Evil Souls Car Club of Colorado.  The art portion, Graffiti on Larimer, is put on by Raul DeLaTorre, owner of Raquelitas Tortillas, Colorado's premier manufacturer of tortilla chips.  Every day they produce over 25,000 POUNDS of tortillas!  And as of fairly recently, their 24,000-square foot plant became 100% wind-powered!  Raul has been very generous with me over the years, and I truly appreciate his kindness and excitement.  His wife Mari shows tremendous patience as she cooks an enormous amount of food, provided absolutely free, for the show participants.  And it's really tremendous food too.  I'm surprised Raul doesn't weigh 500 pounds having such a wonderful cook around the house.  She deserves much of the credit for the success of the show in general, and doesn't get enough recognition.

I've mentioned in a previous post why you should be going to this show, and this year's event was the perfect example.  There is quite simply no other show where you'd be able to see a Chevy pickup with tractor seats welded to the bumper, sitting right next to a Ferrari 250 GTO.  Bear witness, ye heathens, and rejoice:

That GTO's no trailer queen, either,  It had a transponder on the windshield for E-470, our local toll road/speedway, and there were obvious signs it had been driven quite a bit. Hey, are there any fun people who go to this show?  Why yes.  Yes, there are:

As is always the case here, there are all kinds of people.  All races, nationalities, cultures and ages appear alongside each other, just to have fun and be a big family.  I suppose it seems odd that I picked the white people as an example of that, but I took their picture because they were quirky and obviously having fun.

But wait, you say, were there any Rat Rods?  Um, yes.  A ton.  Here are a few:

  

 

Rat rods are reflections of the habits and predilections of their owners, most often with a wry sense of humor.  That humor is evident here in the fan shroud made of license plates, as well as the grille made to look like teeth.  That grille is what all owners of cars and trucks with that style of grille think of anyway, so why not just go for the gusto and make it obvious?

And there were Model A's, 30's, 40's and 50's classics as well.  Like these:

 

This is really just another view of two of the rat rods, since I feel like they belong in both categories.

Mercs are a mainstay of every type of car show, sometimes mild, often wild, and always with a healthy dose of style.

How about 70's and 80's rides?  Any of those?  Well, yes.

 

You don't see too many early-70's Mustang convertibles anymore, much less with a flame job that obviously took a great deal of time to complete.

Even a kit car!

But with all that, surely there couldn't have been bikes too, could there?

Yes, there could.

And this is only about a third of the bikes that showed up.  Here's a view of one portion of one block of the show as a whole:

 

So where was I in this show?  I was in the Art section.  Here's my booth:

I met a lot of new friends, and I can't wait to shoot their cars and bikes.

And here are a couple of booths of friends of mine, like Old School Alex:

Alex uses woodcutting as a base for his portraits, allowing him to make multiple identical copies of a completely analog process.  he even uses the subtractive technique to allow for color printing from one block.

Also showing was Steve Haugen from Victory Illustration:

I've known Steve for several years, and he's the go-to guy for poster art for almost every event in Colorado.  While his talent is well-known, it's worth noting that he's very unassuming, and is not impressed with himself, as so many artists are.  A wonderful guy to hang around.

I'm very pleased to report that this was my most successful show EVER, and that includes art shows and every car show I've ever done.  What a tremendous thrill, and a huge THANK YOU to Raul for inviting me back this year.

I hope to see YOU there in 2016!

Denver County Fair Post-Show Wrapup

A HUGE Thank You to all of my new friends who dropped by my booth at last weekend's Denver County Fair at the National Western Complex!

I've never shown at the Denver County Fair previously, and it's still a young show, with 2015 being its 5-year anniversary.  I admit I felt some trepidation when I started hearing about things like the Kitten Pavilion and Davey B. Gravey's Tiny Cinema.  I'm used to art fairs, gallery showings, and other affairs where everything's quiet and subdued.

This was not that.

Thunder and cacophony abounded throughout the entire Complex, with contests, classes, dancers, bands and poetry readings coming from every available stage, and those stages were everywhere.  There was a huge kid's area, the biggest model train setup I've ever seen outside of a permanent installation, food and diorama contests (sometimes in the same contest, with Peeps dioramas), an art gallery as big or bigger than any retail location, cosplay characters roaming the aisles, and none of that even touches on the vendor booths that were present.

Every imaginable type of booth was there, and then a bunch more you never dreamed could exist.  Not only clothing, food, souvenirs and storm windows, but also fortune tellers, booths hawking other conventions, knives, sculpture, travel, and I don't even know what else.  Local Legend Kenny Be had a booth too, offering giant prints of his utterly fantastic new Colorado Map.

My Booth at the Denver County Fair!

Other than meeting new people, the biggest highlight of the whole Fair for me was seeing the poetry reading contest, when one of the guys from Poetry on Demand was delivering a particularly dramatic reading during one of the contests on a nearby stage.  His mic had some feedback, but instead of standing there waiting for someone to do something, he instead used that opportunity to put the mic in the stand, walk out to the front of the stage, and quite forcefully address his audience one-on-one, intimately and aggressively.  It was so effective, he got the most rousing, cheering response of any reader that day, and it was very well-deserved.  I don't know his name, but if anyone does, let me know and I'll update this entry.  It was truly unforgettable.

In the end, it was far from ordinary.  One might even say it was off-center.  But it was a larger gathering than any of these individual groups would probably experience in Colorado.  And despite (perhaps because of) the disparate nature of all the groups, everyone got along just great.  There was no rivalry or territorialism, only fun, and people who came only for their specific interest still got to experience other cultural phenomena, and interact with people they would otherwise never see.

I had a great time, and if you did too, I invite you to go again next year.

See you then!

Ted Stevens Helps Me Prove It's Not Your Gear

Longtime readers will recognize that I spend a great deal of time telling you that it's not what gear you own that's important, or how much, but what you do with it.

Today I start to show real-world examples of this being the case.  To start off, I'll use Ted Stevens, who is currently traveling around the USA finding adventures to get into.  Here's one of his pictures from Arches National Park, one of my two favorite places on the planet, highlighting Skyline Arch and the area around it.

Skyline Arch, taken by Ted Stevens

This is quite simply a wonderful shot.  Here are the things that I find to be "right" about this shot:

1. The foreground - we see something of interest that catches our eye, and is in focus
2. The background - this is obviously of interest as well, and it's framed so that we can see the entire formation.  Although it's mostly in focus, it doesn't need to be in perfect focus, as it would compete too much with the cactus, and make the image as a whole feel "flat."
3. It tricks the eye into looking at both the foreground and the background.  While most people would be content to shoot only the Arch (and you can see thousands of examples of that kind of thinking on the Web with this very formation), Ted decided that highlighting the cactus, something usually overlooked in such a grandiose location, would be more interesting.  But to hold our interest, he added Skyline Arch, so that we could judge both of them in context with each other.  Neither one detracts from the other, they only add together.
4. The Sun is behind the Arch.  I wouldn't have even thought to do this, but having the Arch in shade prevents it from drawing too much attention away from the cactus.  We still see how majestic it is, enhanced by the oblique sun hitting portions of the Arch at an angle.  mostly shadow, with a few highlights, but we still see the entire formation.
5. Objects of interest are scattered around the frame, following the Rule of Thirds, rather than being centered.  The Rule of Thirds doesn't always need to be followed, but doing so is quite effective in this case.

Search for Arches Skyline Arch on Google, and look at what everyone else, even pro photographers, are shooting.  Ted;s shot has given us more context than most other shots, showing Skyline Arch in its natural environment, rather than trying to show nothing but the Arch.

So what big full-frame camera and expensive lens did he use?  Did he have to buy a special tripod to get so low?  Was this shot 45 of 76 in trying to get the best shot?

No.  He used an iPhone 6 on full auto mode, handheld.  First try.  Because he cared about what he was shooting, and took the time to get it right.

Now get out there and take some interesting shots!

Sigh... Another Waterfall Shot?

I found an interesting entry in another photographer's blog, who shall remain nameless, talking about how he loved photographing waterfalls, but didn't do it too much because he hadn't figured out a way to make money doing it.  It seems as though everyone has a camera, there are waterfalls everywhere, and people just don't want to buy a picture of something they see all the time.

The same can be said of so many photographs of nature in all its forms.  There's an almost uncountable number of people taking pictures and putting them on the Web and Facebook, resulting in such viewer saturation that there's no reason to buy them.  Why pay for a picture of Maroon Bells when you've seen a thousand views of it already?

It's an interesting problem for the professional photographer, and not many people have figured out how to get around it.  No matter what you're shooting, no matter how long you waited for the shot, how much time you spent in the lab processing, no matter what nifty technique you used, you'll find an almost identical shot done by someone else, and it might be done better.  Even if it's not as good, a professional knows that not many people can tell the difference, so it can still be a little deflating to see the sheer volume of like-minded people.

I didn't mention the photographer at the outset of this post, mostly because I didn't think his waterfall shot was all that great.  There wasn't really anything wrong with it; the colors were very nice, he had spent some time processing it to make it look very sunny and pleasant.  But it didn't speak to me at all.

Don't get me wrong, art is art if it speaks to someone.  But in trying to start that conversation, any artist must first come up with a conversation that's meaningful to them.  What I'm saying is, I would have deleted that picture, and tried to take another one that said something that was important to me.  Only then can an artist communicate with someone else, and only at that point will money be made.  If that particular photographer was thrilled with the shot he took, then more power to him.  But I want to speak to people who are driven by different things.

So I'll put my money where my mouth is.  Here's a picture I took of Bridalveil Falls in Yosemite earlier this year.

Bridalveil Falls, Yosemite

It speaks to me in a vintage, foreboding sort of way.  It reminds me of the Hudson River School of painting, and is all the more interesting to me because it wasn't taken at the lookout point.  It was taken at a spot where most people wouldn't even think to look up, much less try to frame a shot.  To me, that helps make it more unique, and the lighting makes it timeless as well.

I'm interested in whether or not this picture speaks to you as a viewer on some emotional level.  If it does, I'm willing to send you, absolutely free, a signed 8x10 print of this picture to hang in your home or office.  Drop me an email, and I'll get it right off in the mail to you.  I'll need your mailing address, obviously, so don't forget to include it.  But I'm also going to put you on my once-a-month mailing list, if you're not already on it.

Have fun with whatever art you enjoy!

How I Created This Panorama with a Point and Shoot Camera

In previous posts, I've talked directly and indirectly about how your gear doesn't matter.  Don't be confused about I'm talking about - you definitely need some gear as a photographer, just like any other profession.  You can only do a task when you have tools.  But there's a difference between owning an oil filter wrench, and owning the latest osmium-infused, perfectly-balanced oil filter wrench that you just bought because you think the standard one isn't good enough for your new client's '67 GTO.

I took this panorama (Figure 1) of the Golden Gate Bridge with a Canon PowerShot.

Figure 1

I deliberately chose not to use any pro gear to prove this very point.  Let's go step by step to see how you too can make a large-scale panorama in perfect focus with decidedly non-professional gear, and little or no software investment.  We'll start with the hardware and software, progress into the shoot itself, collating the images, and finally get into postprocessing.  By the time we're done, you'll see that, while it's easier to do this with a Hasselblad medium-format camera, it's not necessary.  Don't worry - the process is much simpler than this wall of text makes it seem.

The Gear

Here's what you'll need to get started:

Hardware:
Canon PowerShot SX-280HS, or any other small digital camera.

Panorama Stitching Software (pick one):
Microsoft ICE (Free, and highly recommended)
Hugin (Free)

Other Software (Pick one):
Adobe Photoshop ($10 a month)
GIMP (Free)

You'll also need a computer on which to run those software packages.  Judging by the fact that you're reading this, you most likely already have one.

Notice there's no tripod.  We'll be covering this later, but don't worry.  You won't have to prop the camera up against a doorframe.  Now grab your camera and go find a suitable panorama spot.  Let's get started.

The Shoot

 

1. If you shoot this entire scene as one photograph, then crop it to a desirable ratio in an image editing program, you won't have a suitable panorama in the end.  It won't be of high enough resolution to print higher than about 2x8, depending on the camera you're using.  Panoramas are built by taking a number of shots, one of each part of the scene, then stitching them together to form the whole picture.  So with that in mind, we'll get the highest resolution pano by zooming in as much as we can (without using digital zoom - it's a lie), and starting the shoot that way. You should know your camera well enough to know when you've reached the maximum zoom allowed, without going over into digital zoom.  Find the entry about it in the manual if you don't know.  You'll probably get the best results using between 10x and 20x zoom, so keep that in mind if you have a camera like the Nikon P900, which has an absolutely insane 83x zoom.
2. How about exposure?  We know that the most precise panoramas are best done with manual exposure, so that the camera doesn't guess a little differently between shots, and end up giving you some shots that are darker than others.  This behavior comes to light most obviously when you're shooting superzoomed, getting sky in one image, only bridge in the next, and then only a boat sail in another one.  The camera will guess differently for each of those types of shots, and that's not good.  For this particular shoot, I decided that the different shots wouldn't be enough different in exposure to worry about, so I let the camera decide.  I was also trying to keep it as simple as I reasonably could.
3. Now that you're zoomed in, you'll be taking shot number one in your panorama.  Go to the upper left of your anticipated scene, and then move up and to the left a little more.  This will give you some room to crop later, which you'll need because the shots never precisely line up, and they'll line up a little less when you're handheld.  Always better to have too much in the scene and crop, than to have too little.  Our finished cropped resolution will be the same as if you hadn't included the extra, so there's no penalty for overshooting when shooting a pano.
   
4. For that first shot, and every subsequent shot, take at least three frames in quick succession.  Whether you have to simply hold the shutter release button down, or press it several times, will depend on your camera.  You're taking at least three because we don't have a tripod, and we need to be sure we have at least one in perfect focus.  Having three will help ensure that this will occur, provided you're not in high winds or riding in a car. (Figure 2.)  If you want to take more than three, go for it.  

   

   Figure 2

5. Take overlapping shots, overlapping about a third of the scene between each shot.  Usually you don't need this much overlap, but I try to always have too much, because if you have too little, all your effort will be wasted if the stitching software can't figure it out.  Go from left to right, then come back to the left-hand side, overlapping about a third of the vertical from the first shot, and do the next row.  You may only have two rows, or you may have more.  It depends on the scene you're shooting, and your camera's ability to zoom. (Figure 3.)  It's also possible to take the shots in vertical (portrait) orientation, but since the end result will be in landscape, I find it easier to mimic that layout when shooting.  If you prefer the other way, go for it.  

   

   Figure 3

6. Once you've started shooting, do not stop until you're done.  If you put the camera down, you'll never know exactly where you were, and getting distracted is also a sure way to have a cloud cover the sun, making you start over.  I had 16 different shot positions for this panorama, with three of each position, making a total of 48 pictures.  
7. After having taken all the shots, check them for focus by zooming in on the viewfinder.  If they seem close, with one or two of each set in good focus, you're done.  If they're all a jumbled mess, you might want to work on your handheld technique.  Notice that I didn't say this was going to be a cakewalk, I said it was possible.  It will take effort.  You may have to start over and work a little harder.

If the shots look good, you're done in the field.  Put all your gear in your shirt pocket, and let's go home and see what we can make out of this.

Processing

 

There isn't much in the way of processing, since you only have JPEGs.   For what we're doing, processing will mean culling the junk away so that the best images are left.

Transfer all the images you shot onto the computer, so that you can look at them individually.  If you have software that helps you do this, great.  If not, you can use Windows Explorer to view the directory you just dumped them in, and you'll need to look at every one of them to pick the best-focused shot from each set of three.  You're welcome to delete all the ones that fall short, leaving only one full set of well-focused images for use in creating the pano.  More than likely, you have JPEGs that came out of the camera, as very few small cameras shoot in RAW.  The JPEGs will have artifacts which we will remove later, so don't worry if you don't have RAW.  Professionals will almost always use RAW, because it gives much greater latitude in editing, but we won't have to deal with that here.  The tools you have will work just great.

No matter your organizational technique, make sure you have exactly one full set of images in a directory so that we can begin postprocessing.  Don't have anything else in that directory.

PostProcessing

There are three basic steps here - doing the pano, fixing any issues with the result, and making the whole thing look pretty.

1. Open the pano software you chose, and follow the instructions to load the pictures you took.  let the program do its work, and very quickly you'll be presented with the result.  If you followed the instructions above, there shouldn't be any issue with what you see.  If there's a missed spot, then you'll need to go out and do it again, learning from that mistake.  If you know the shots are good, but the pano software shows oddities in the intersections between shots, then try other software.  Even the free software is exceptionally good, but always try something else if you don't get satisfactory results.
   
   The edges in the result of the pano software will look jagged, as in Figure 4.  Don't worry - we'll take care of that later.  Many pano software packages have the ability to straighten and crop images before they're saved.  If the one you've chosen has that ability, go ahead and use it now.  If not, wait until we open the image in an editor.  

   

   Figure 4

   
    
2. Save that image as a TIFF, or other high-quality lossless format.  Don't use JPEG at this point - we've already lost some information by virtue of using that format to begin with, and recompressing it will only degrade the image further.  Once the image has been saved, close the pano software.
    
3. The following steps are necessary for finalization of the image.  I won't go into detail about exactly how to do it for a couple of reasons.  First, the exact method varies between programs, whether you're using GIMP or Photoshop, and explaining each would take more time than we have here.  Second, I encourage you to experiment with the program you choose, to help you learn it more thoroughly.  I believe that's a great way to learn - get an outline, and fill it in by experimentation.  So let's continue.  Open the TIFF file in an image editor, and do these steps: 
   A.  Straighten the image
   B.  Crop it to a meaningful ratio, say 3:1 or 4:1, taking care to frame the result in the most meaningful way.
   C.  Adjust levels so that blacks are all the way black, and white are all the way white.  The camera most likely wasn't too good at this, so we need to fix it.  you're welcome to move away from this rule and not have any full black or whites, or even blow out the black or whites.  The final choice is up to your taste.  But know the "rule," so that you know why you're breaking it.
   D.  Clone away any imperfections that bother you.  These may include ghosting from the pano software, people, trees, or any other imperfections.
   E.  Remove the artifacts caused by the camera's JPEG compression.  In a shot like this, the color range and brightness range is quite limited, because of the fog.  This exacerbates the JPEG artifacts.  The best way to do this is with noise reduction, provided you don't use so much that you lose detail.  It can also be helpful to add a little noise to the image at the same time, reducing the eye's ability to see the imperfections.  See Figure 5.  You can tell that the result isn't perfect, but it's a darn sight better than what we started with.

   

   Figure 5

     
4. The final step for me was adding a color gradient filter (black into brown into yellow) to change the feel from fog to sunset.  Spend some time adjusting where the three colors fall in the brightness spectrum to get the best result.  There's no rule here - whatever you feel is the most aesthetically pleasing is the right way to do it.

End Result

Final Panorama - Figure 6

The size of this image at 300 dpi is 10x40 inches, and if we print it at 150 dpi, still perfectly okay for a large panorama, we get 20x80 inches.  How big your image is will depend on how many shots you took and the resolution of each shot.

Not only would I be proud to display this image, I'm actually selling it at shows right now.

And you can do the same thing!

Four Denver Car Shows You Might Otherwise Miss

At some point in our journey of discovering the wonderful world of automobiles, most of us get tired of seeing ordinary cars with decals, and the same old treatment of the same old cars over and over... and over.  Surely there must be more shows featuring more interesting cars, higher-quality builds, and an overall reason to come out and be excited.

The number of shows in Colorado is truly staggering.  But because there are so many, they often tend to melt together into exercises in futility, at least if one's desire is to see something different.  I don't mean to put down people's individual cars, so I won't mention any specific makes or models, but we've all seen way too many of certain cars, built using the same ideas as everyone else, showing not only little imagination, but also a level of skill that seems increasingly disappointing. 

Let's see what else we can find.  Here are a few shows that I feel have shown consistently that they have something unique to offer:

1.  The Colorado English Motoring Conclave, September 19 and 20, 2015.  Oak Park, 64th Place and Oak Street, Arvada.  From what we see on the streets one might think there are only about a dozen British automobiles in the Denver area, but this show consistently pulls over 500 cars every year, and it's been going on for over thirty years.  Many of these cars are taken out only two days a year - for this show.  The attention to correctness and detail is often wonderful.  You'll get to see cars you've previously only read about.

2.  O'Reilly Auto Parts Creme de la Chrome Show, November 27 - 29, Colorado Convention Center, Denver.  This show is famous for the incredibly high quality of entrants.  It's also comfortable, being one of the few indoor shows in Colorado.  Past shows have included Ridler and Great 8 winners, magazine cover cars, movie cars, and great examples of extremely rare rides from all periods of automotive history.  Local builders know they have to work hard, since cars come here from all over the country, and they're not here to mess around.  If you win Best of Show here (The Chrome Award), you've got bragging rights for the next decade.

3.  Carnage on Larimer, August 29, Larimer Street in Denver between 30th and 33rd.  Three blocks of pure fun, displaying street cruisers from several subcultures as one big family.  And I do mean family.  Everyone is welcomed here, and you can strike up a conversation with a perfect stranger just as though you were brothers.  Here you'll gain a new appreciation for cars you don't see at mainstream shows.  These cars reflect the personalities of their drivers, often with a wry and self-aware sense of humour.  This is the true old-school spirit of hot rodding.

 4.  High Plains Raceway Open Lapping Days, Fridays and some Thursdays all Summer long,
93301 East US Highway 36, Deer Trail.  Okay, so this isn't a car show per se, but it's the logical extension of appreciation.  A great time, and a perfect way to actually legally race your own car on a real, race-used 2.5 mile long course.  A professional, knowledgeable track staff and pits you can camp in (if you need to) combine with the adventure of racing with people just met, totaling up to an unforgettable experience.  It'll be much more fun than when your cousin tried to race his Corolla down Lookout Mountain and ended up rolling it six times.  Many car clubs also race here on the weekends, which should encourage you to join one with fellow owners.  See their calendar for details.

Do you think I've shortchanged your favorite show?  Let me know!