Fox News – Breaking News Updates

latest news and breaking news today

source : visualfractions.com

## Fraction as Percentage

Enter a numerator and denominator

Next Fraction to Percentage Calculation

Express 35/50 as a percentage – Percentage Calculator – The fraction 35/50 is equivalent to 70 percent. To workout this, divide the numerator by the denominator, sum this value to the integer part then multiply the result by 100%, so: 35/50 in percent = 35 ÷ 50 × 100% = 0.7 × 100% =Free math problem solver answers your algebra, geometry, trigonometry, calculus, and statistics homework questions with step-by-step explanations, just like a math tutor.6 decimal number to percent: 6 × 100 = 600%; 15 decimal number to percent: 33 decimal number to percent: 33.333 decimal number to percent: 77.5 decimal number to percent: 100 decimal number to percent: 125 decimal number to percent: Maths formula from percentage into decimal result – First divide the number in percent by 100 value, then take

Convert to a Percentage 35/50 | Mathway – To find what percentage 35 is of 50, the first step is to divide 35 by 50. This is because 35 is the smaller number, and you want to know what portion of 50 it is.To write 35/50 as a decimal you have to divide numerator by the denominator of the fraction. We divide now 35 by 50 what we write down as 35/50 and we get 0.7 And finally we have: 35/50 as a decimal equals 0.7In other words, a 20% discount for an item with original price of £35.50 is equal to £7.1 (Amount Saved). Note that to find the amount saved, just multiply it by the percentage and divide by 100. Supose Have you received a ROBLOX promotional code of 20 percent of discount.

Percentages calculator | % equivalent | Percent numbers – 35 is 50% of 70. Steps to solve "35 is 50 percent of what number?" We have, 50% × x = 35; or, 50 / 100 × x = 35 Multiplying both sides by 100 and dividing both sides by 50, we have x = 35 × 100 / 50 x = 70. If you are using a calculator, simply enter 35×100÷50, which will give you the answer.35/50 in percentage form is 70%. If you were to scale this on a general marking scheme it would be around a B. Wills scored 35 out of 50 what was wills percentage score? 70%.5% of 35.00 = 1.7500: 5% of 35.25 = 1.7625: 5% of 35.50 = 1.7750: 5% of 35.75 = 1.7875: 5% of 35.01 = 1.7505: 5% of 35.26 = 1.7630: 5% of 35.51 = 1.7755: 5% of 35.76

Native American Fishweir – Bob: Well here is John Peters, who is the Executive Director of
the Commission on Native American Affairs for the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts.
Great to see you. John: Well thank you, thank you. It's a great day to be down here celebrating the Fishweir and all the other festivities that go on here in June. You know, I like to
were doing the trolley station over there underground. 45 feet down they found these sticks in the ground and finally figured out that it was a fishweir. Bob: So, can you tell us what a fishweir is? John: It is a way of fishing, you know, how we caught fish in those
days. You know, the tide came in, and fish are on cycles and when they come in in schools we drive them towards the fishweir and push them over the top so that we are able to clean them later and dry them so that they'll last us for a few months at
a time. You know, we're hunters and gatherers, so when the fish
come you have to be there to get them and harvest them and prepare
them for the months to come. Bob: What's life like for Native Americans in Massachusetts now? What can you tell us? John: Well, we're like everybody else I would say, except that we're still struggling and fighting for our rights here in
Massachusetts, and trying to help our future generations
to hang on to the culture that has been here. Our blood comes from this land, we can trace our lineage to before there was an America here, right down there where I live in Mashpee. So, we want to carry on that tradition, it's only been 400 years, less than. So, things have changed in such a rapid pace, you
know, even in my lifetime things have changed
so dramatically, but this is America and that's what it's about.
Bob: Well thank you, thank you for sharing, and thank you for preserving this important
part of American history. John: And this is very important, that everybody has a chance to see that, and you know, you look at the blue lines out
there and that's where the waterfront used to be. And we didn't have all these
buildings and so forth, they would've been under water. (Native American music) Ross Miller: You know if we were walking along here 4500 years ago, there would be a structure like this that we could see in the tidal area. But it wouldn't
be grass like this, we would actually be looking out over here at the ocean. But this is a fishweir, a rebuilding of a fishweir, that's based on some structures they started to discover in
1911 over here at Boylston St. when they
were digging for the subway. And they were down 27 to 40 feet
below the surface, they started finding wooden stakes, not little ones like this, but more big
ones, maybe an inch and a half, two inches in diameter. And they first started finding a few of them,
and then they founds tens of them, and then they started finding thousands of
these wooden sticks. And they're thinking, you know, maybe these were part of a
fence for Native Americans or something.
And then with the subsequent archaeological work, they start to
understand these were part of a seasonal fishing structure. They were
built at the time of year within the Wampanoag
about as big as a mouse's ear. So, if you look around and you see the
oak leaf just beginning, at that time that's the same part of
the season when the fish would return to spawn. Bob: Now, what kind of fish are we talking about? Ross: Small things similar to a herring or
a mummichog or and what we would think of as a bait fish now. And they would come in on the high tide and they would school around in this area on the up-shore side of the fishweir, and then as the ocean would go out the
water would filter out through the structure, and a certain number fish were left. It
wasn't that efficient; it might catch 10% of the fish that were schooling around. But for a subsistence culture, if you caught five or ten percent of what was there,
that was enough for a daily catch. And the thought was that these were
built by family groups, so maybe 35-50 people in a
family clan. It'd be the kids, the grandparents, the parents, everybody would be sort of involved
in making this, and they would have it for during the
spawning season, so most of May into June, and they would leave it, and
the next year they would come back and maintain it. And from what we know, over here in Back Bay there are fishweir sticks from 3700-5200 years ago. So the people who were
here were maintaining and building the things for fifteen hundred
years. Have we maintained
anything in our Western culture for fifteen hundred years, really? So that's why I'm so excited about these fishweirs. .

The Perfect Travel Lens: Exploring Photography with Mark Wallace – In this episode I will explain to you
why I've learned that the 35mm lens is the perfect
lens for travel photography.
presents Exploring Photography with Mark Wallace. Hi everybody welcome to this week's
episode of Exploring Photography right here on AdoramaTV. I'm Mark Wallace. I’ve been traveling the world for about 13 months now. I haven't been back to the United States the entire time. A lot of people ask me on Facebook and through my blog. Can you tell us what's working and what isn't working? Well absolutely, that's what this episode
is about what I learned in my past year, a little over a year of
travel and travel photography. Well I started shooting with a DSLR
systematic Canon 5D mark III with a few lenses. Then about of five or six months ago I
switched over to a rangefinder camera and so what I wanted to do is see, well
did that switch which work for me and which lenses are working for me, what worked
with the Canon system what didn’t? All that kinda stuff and so the way I
wanted to approach this is to do something that Jared Platt
thought me how to do that is to. I'll dive into Lightroom and look at the statistics and find out
what the numbers are telling me. If you don’t know how to do that you can check an episode that I previously made all about meta data and how to learn
from it. Well let's figure out what I've learned from my travel. The first thing I wanted
to know is which lenses do I tend to favor. Which ones work best for me, and my criteria for judging that was
when I throw pictures into Lightroom all the pictures that I put in there
which ones, or how many am I flagging. How many am I picking, saying ya this is a winning photo so I looked in Lightroom, I look at
all the lenses and you can see that the data shows that the 21mm, the 16-35mm lens, the 24-70mm at the wide side of that lens, my success rate is about 11 or 12
percent. In other words I'm getting more good
shots out of my wide angle lenses then I am with my telephoto lenses. At
the 135mm and the 70-200mm side, the long end of that lens. My success rate drops to about
eight-percent. So, wide-angle lenses for travel photography are clearly better by about a 4% margin,
which isn't huge. But I learned a little bit more as I
looked closely, more closely at this data. The other
thing I wanted to know was let's take a look at me Canon versus
the Leica argument. Don't get caught up on Leica it could be
any rangefinder or mirrorless camera, a Sony a7R. It could be a Fujifilm, anyone of the many awesome cameras that they have. It could be anything. So I chose a Leica but it could be any mirrorless camera. So a light weight
small camera versus a DSLR camera. When I looked at the data of all the images
I shot with my Canon system versus the rangefinder system, they were equal. In terms of winning percentage. In other words about 10% or exactly 10% of the images that I shot with both systems came out as winners. So they're on equal footing as far as the image quality and the
images that I liked. I didn't compare the Leica versus the
Canon so it's not that comparison, but just looking equally, I liked about the same amount of photos. One of the things that I really hoped
for in a smaller camera and I talked a lot about this in a previous episode was that the larger system I had no camera
in hand, in other words I just wasn't shooting a lot because my camera was always in my bag or leave I'd it at the hotel. So my hope was with a smaller camera
like this that I would take it with me a lot more
and so I wanted to see am I shooting more, and if so does that translate into more
winning shots, and absolutely I am shooting a lot more and when I
looked in, looked closely at the data I see
that I on my DSLR camera, on my Canon camera, I was taking about 44 winning photos per month and with my rangefinder I'm
shooting at about 75 winning photos per month. That's a170% increase in winning photos and because both of them have the the
same success rate all that means is that I'm shooting more
pictures with my small camera that I am with my large camera. Which is a sort of a no brainer. Of course if you take a small camera you're going to use it more then a big camera that you have to carry around and it might also be that I'm
sorta have new toy joy and so I'm just using this a lot
more than my other camera. I don't know but the data says that I'm shooting with
this camera more than my larger camera. Alright well now
that we know that, my question is will which lenses are the best. We already know that I’m favoring wide angle lenses which was sort of a surprise to me because for years
I've been saying long lenses, long lenses, long lenses. Well let's look and see. So in both
systems, the Canon system and my rangefinder system I used, if you take everything and put it
together and average it. Not average, it’s added up. 51%
of all the photos were shot with a 35mm range and wider. So I looked at my 24-70mm and said how many of those were 35mm or wider. My 16-35mm, I added those in there and then my 21mm and my 35mm Leica lenses and so 51%. But I wanted to see how exactly that
broke down just looking at my rangefinder camera. So when I look at that it's still about the same about 54% of the shots are shot with a 35mm
lens or wider. Except I didn't have this 35mm lens until about three months ago. So I was very curious, I
wanted to see what happened three months ago when I added this lens. Now the reason I bought this lens was
because I was shooting a lot with my 21mm lens but just every day shooting it felt just too wide, too
much in the frame. So I go back and forth
between that and my 50mm lens, my standard lens. But the 50mm felt a little bit to long, a
little bit too close, a little bit to cropped. So I just wasn't happy with either
one of those and so I read a lot of blogs and a did a lot of research
and peopled swear by the 35mm lens.
Steve Huff Photos one go those guys says if you just shoot with this and nothing
else, it will dramatically increase your skills. I wanted to see, well maybe that's true so I bought my 35mm lens. And wow what a change. We look at the
data after I bought the 35mm. 79% all of my photos were shot with a 35mm or the 21mm. So it’s a dramatic shift between these lenses and these
lenses. So almost exclusively I'm shooting wide. Why, why is that? While the 35mm is just the right porridge. It's not too wide, it's not too
long and you can stick it on your lens, you can carry it around. It’s very, very small. At night if you don't need a lens hood you can see this is a very compact small lens, it's not intimidating. it
works for portrait photography, you can shoot scenic’s with it, you can do anything with this lens. In fact I can take all these lenses and leave them at home in a bag and just use the 35mm and I will be successful. I wanted to
look at the data to see what it said. Of the two lenses sure enough,
66% of them were shot with this 35mm lens. So the takeaway on the things that I've
learned in my last 13 months is this: you should travel with a small
camera that has a 35mm lens
because you're gonna shoot more with it. It's a lens that you can do almost
anything you want with and because they're so readily available for
all different brands Sony, Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Fuji-film, you name it they all have 35mm lenses. They're all very affordable, all way up
to skyrocket high prices but you can get low light performance, you can get scenic performance, there really sharp, there awesome. You can get old
35mm vintage lenses, you can get brand new lenses. They are everywhere and so what I've
learned is the 35mm lens coupled with a mirrorless camera is
absolutely the way to go. So if you're looking for a
solution, a one lens solution, or a starting point. Get a mirrorless camera, get a 35mm lens and go for it. That's what I've learned in my last 13 months. Well there you have it. Thank you so much for joining me on this episode of Exploring Photography.
Don't forget there's a tone of information on Adorama TV. It's absolutely free and all you need to do is subscribe so you don’t miss a single episode. So click on the subscribe button and you can look back at past episodes like how to learn from your meta data and do the kind of number crunching that I just did as well as shooting with
wide-angle lenses and all kinds of things it's absolutely free so check that out.
Thanks again for joining me and I will see you again next time. Do you want great-looking prints at low-cost? Be sure to visit our easy to
use online printing service. Adorama pixs has professionals who treat your images with the utmost care that you can count
on. For a quick turnaround on photos, cards or albums use adoramapix.com .

Physical vs Chemical Sunscreen | Sunscreen 101 🧴☀️ – Hey everyone! It's your girl, Jacquelyn.