Re: [at-l] Camera: to take or not to take.

[tmcginnis@ucclan.state.in.us (Thomas McGinnis)]

     Mark, I go with Ken Bennet on this. A mileage log is a snap to write. (I 
     usually wrote mine in the morning last thing before the pack went on.) And 
     you'll really be glad you did.
     Photo-wise, Take the camera. I did not plan to take a camera (I didn't 
     *own* one!) when I throughhiked in '79, and just figured "The memories will 
     serve me" as they had on *all* of my previous hikes to that point (at least 
     900 four season miles, at perhaps 50miles/hike). My parents learned of this 
     as they were dropping my off at Amicalola Falls, and insisted I take their 
     Instamatic. "You can always send it home if you don't want it..."
     
     The Instamatic lasted on top of my pack (under a bungie, where I could grab 
     it without problem) until Shenandoah, when I dropped it on the ground and 
     it exploded. Bought another ($15) at the next SNP campground store, and it 
     went to Katahdin. I took around 500 pictures, and can remember where most 
     of them were taken, even 20 years later. (But I had two or three years 
     where I could identify *precisely* where each was taken.....)

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: [at-l] Camera: to take or not to take.
Author:  markusmc@hom.net at ima
Date:    10/19/99 11:40 AM

Even if I did keep one it wouldnt amount to much more than a mileage log,
so I figure why bother.

But a camera?  Did anyone go on a thru hike and NOT take a camera? Did you
regret it in anyway?

Mark Pearce
Sparta GA
2000 yoyo
* From the Appalachian Trail Mailing List |  http://www.backcountry.net  *

==============================================================================