Bally's Neon Tube

One of the first toys I recall having as a child was a "Lite Brite", which is basically a plastic box with a low wattage light bulb inside and a plastic front panel full of holes. Multi-colored plastic pegs are inserted in the holes and light up like LEDs (light emitting diodes.) Different designs made from black paper come with the Lite Brite, and have letters showing which colored plastic pegs to insert to create a design. "G" would mean you insert a green peg; "R" means a red peg, etc. The black paper blocked light from leaking through unused holes.


It wasn't until my 12th or 13th trip to Las Vegas when I made the connection between my fascination for shooting photos of colored neon lights against a black background and my childhood toy, the Lite Brite. I was only 5 or 6 years old when I had the Lite Brite. I recall being attracted to colored lights at that time. I don't know, however, if that's just the way I am; or if having the Lite Brite made me that way.


The last time I was in Las Vegas, March 2006, I was staying at the Jockey Club next to Bellagio. My last night there, I recall walking past Bally's and feeling too tired to take more photos of the neon rings, which I had taken photos of the year before. A typical day of shooting photos in Las Vegas for me begins around 10 AM and ends around 2 AM; so by 10 PM I'm usually pretty tired of walking or driving (or both) and am pushing myself in search of that "one great photo."


I'd estimate that about one out of 100 of my photos are worthy of calling "great." The photo above, however, is not one photo; but four different photos taken from the same spot pasted together.


As I mentioned, I'd felt too tired to shoot these but my fascination for neon at night overrode my fatigue. I rode the moving walkway and got off at that special spot about halfway to the casino where you can capture this viewpoint of the neon rings around the pedestrian walkway looking west from Bally's property towards the strip.


I've seen a lot of photos of Bally's on the Internet, but don't recall ever seeing this particular angle on anyone else's web sites. And if I recall correctly, the neon did not always have this variety of color. My March 2005 photos only show the neon rings in green and blue; whereas in March 2006 there is also red, purple, and orange.


In any event, in March 2006 I learned that one should never ignore a nearby photo opportunity even if you've been there many times before and think you already have enough photos taken from that spot; because you may still capture something rare. Las Vegas is constantly changing and Bally's could decide to demolish their neon rings or reduce the variety of colors at any time.

February Rain

I remember the day I shot this photo, it was mid-February 2003 and I was using an Olympus C700 which is a fairly low quality camera (2 megapixels but with 10x zoom) compared to what's on the market today.

I had been walking along the strip near Paris & Bally's when it began to rain. I thought that was a good time to head downtown - Fremont Street is covered by a canopy. I hopped into a taxi in front of the Paris casino and told the driver to take me downtown.

The drive seemed to take a long time. While I wasn't a Las Vegas newbie and knew about being "long hauled through the tunnel" from the airport; I was less aware of the other potential long hauls (long hauling is when a cab driver intentionally does not take the shortest route to your destination, so that the fare will be higher.)

This driver took the freeway (I-15) from Paris to Fremont Street. Las Vegas Blvd. would have been a more direct route, but also has more traffic. So I'm still not certain if I was long hauled or not.

Upon arriving downtown I learned a valuable piece of information: the canopy over Fremont Street is not solid. I had never looked closely at it before. If I had, I'd have seen that it's kind of a latticework that lets the rain fall freely upon your head.

I visited some of the casinos, shot 20 or so photos, and when the rain stopped I decided to walk to the Stratosphere to ride the elevator up to the top. Most of my fellow tourists were wearing shorts and t-shirts, but I had checked the weather forecast and wore my waterproof hooded raincoat and waterproof hiking shoes.

With my camera slung over my shoulder under my waterproof coat, I headed south for the two mile walk to the Stratosphere. As luck would have it, the rain started shortly thereafter. I wasn't worried though, since I was waterproof. I thought.

After a few blocks of walking I felt cold water on my neck. My waterproof coat was leaking!

By the time I arrived at the Stratosphere I was like a drowned cat. Luckily my camera did not get wet enough to quit working. And that's the story behind the image posted above - a view of the downtown Las Vegas casinos from the top of the Stratosphere.

An Introduction to UrbanPhotos.net Las Vegas Photos Blog

I can remember the first time I visited Las Vegas (although I can't remember the date, it was either in August 1992 or August 1993, but I remember the experience) - the view of the strip from the air took my breath away. I don't have a photo of that particular moment; but the photo above (taken in August 2002) somewhat matches my first in-person view of the Las Vegas Strip.

Reading three different travel guides about Las Vegas, and viewing photos of the Las Vegas strip, still didn't adequately communicate what the real experience would be like.


As a "newbie" low budget tourist who had to rely on a travel agency in my pre-Internet days; I of course was roped into staying on the north strip. I think most newbie tourists who want low price paired with an on-strip location end up either on the north strip (New Frontier, Westward Ho, Circus Circus, Stardust, Riviera, Sahara, and Stratosphere) or at Imperial Palace or Excalibur. Those are almost always the lowest priced resort properties on the strip; therefore shopping by price and refusing to stay off-strip means you most likely end up in one of those nine resorts.


I had chosen the Sahara for my first Las Vegas vacation, and foolishly booked a five night stay. (I say foolish because in hindsight, that was too long of a stay.) At that time I wasn't interested in photography so I did what the typical newbie tourist does: gamble. After about three days my gambling funds were gone so I had two days left to kill in Las Vegas without much cash.


As a "lowroller" I typically budgeted $200 to $400 for gambling and mainly played 25 cent video poker (playing max coins, of course, $1.25 per hand) and 25 cent slots. I lost it all on my first trip but stayed pretty even for my next few trips. I'd lose $100 then win $80; lose $50 then win $100, etc. My only "big" winning trip (big to me) was in 1996 or 1997 when I was staying at the Luxor. For a four hour period, my last night, I couldn't lose. Every machine I played paid off. I broke my luck by switching to a $1 video poker machine. Total winnings for the night were $700.


I had learned that the ideal stay, for me, was two or three nights. And at about this time, after my fourth or fifth trip to Las Vegas, digital cameras had become popular. At the time, one megapixel was the standard. I had brought cheap disposable cardboard film cameras with me once or twice and had taken a few photos; but in the mid 1990's I started bringing digital cameras and spending more time taking pictures.



By my 11th or 12th trip to Las Vegas (my next trip will be #16), I was gambling very little; usually $40 or less, and spending most of my time taking photos and scouting out new photo shooting locations. The parking garage roofs of the Palms, Wynn, and MGM Grand are nice spots.

This has almost become an obsession for me. The huge architecture and dazzling array of neon lights compel me to try to capture the most spectacular images possible. As I upgraded to two megapixels and then three megapixels; then 10x "super zoom" cameras; the increasing quality of the 8x10 prints I could spit out from an inkjet printer motivated me to try for better photos next time.


Initially a large number of my photos were of poor to fair quality. You can view these in my "Las Vegas #1" series (the link is on my web site), which covers what I would call my "newbie photographer" years, 1993 to 2003. Musicians say it takes 10 years to master a musical instrument; actors and actresses seem to be largely unknown for their first 10 years in the industry; so that seems to be a fairly standard period of time to spend practicing through trial and error before getting good at something.

My Las Vegas #2 series, shot in December 2003 with a Fuji S5000 three megapixel super zoom, marks the point where I started to consider myself a photographer; for I had begun to learn how to use the camera's manual shutter speeds and F-stop settings instead of leaving it on "auto"; and also learned the value of a tripod or other solid base for shooting at night.

Series #3 introduced the six megapixel digital camera, which allowed decent quality prints at 20" x 30" poster size. This was very exciting to me; and it was at about this time that I stopped selling compilations of my photos burned to CDs and switched to offering prints for sale along with commercial copyright options. I upgraded to a better six megapixel camera for Series #4 in March 2006. I'd like to upgrade to a digital SLR or at least an eight megapixel "prosumer" model before my next trip.

I put up my web site, urbanphotos.net, on March 23, 2002. My first idea was to sell CDs containing hundreds of my photos for personal viewing at $25 each. This was not such a good idea, as distributing hundreds of full sized photos on CDs resulted in a few incidents of copyright infringement (people using my photos without permission.) I found two different people selling copies of my CDs on ebay at ridiculously low prices. That's when I learned about copyright law and registering copyrights with the US Library of Congress Copyright Office.

Considering that selling CDs was not profitable and left me vulnerable to copyright infringement, it seemed a smart strategy to change business models. So I did.


I now offer three image copyright purchase options: $10 web site use, $25 one-time event use, and $99 commercial use. Delivery is electronic (via email or download). I also offer the options of purchasing 8x10 and 20x30 prints, which are processed through an online photo processor (I upload the photo to them, they make the print and ship it to the customer.)


In any case, why this blog?

My site is all business, and mainly visual. Most visitors probably spend most of their time on the site viewing photos. This blog is intended to give a more personal insight behind the photos that are displayed on my web site. The old cliche says "A picture is worth 1,000 words." So here I will occassionally post a photo and a story that goes with it.