Re: New Thread - Air Travel and film
- Original Message - From: Tonghang Zhou Subject: Re: New Thread - Air Travel and film I understand there are 3 ways to undergo the detection: A) checked-in luggage, B) X-ray machine at the gate for carry-on bags, C) the beeping door that you go thru. From what I'm hearing you guys are saying, A) and B) are ruinous to film. How about C)? You seems to be saying C) is safe? Option A has the most potential for damage. The CAT scanners are instant well done. Thats really all thats changed I think. The high dose X-Ray being used on checked baggage is relatively recent. The carry on X-Rays have always been problematic, I don't know if they have gotten worse or not. I am pretty sure the walk through is just detecting ferrous metals. If it was irradiating, it wouldn't be safe for people to pass through. William Robb
Re: New Thread - Air Travel and film
- Original Message - From: Bruce Dayton Subject: Re: New Thread - Air Travel and film William, Good to know - not necessarily good news. One option was to only take the 67 and the little digicam. That way, I would only be carrying 120 film. You know how it comes in the airtight wrapper - It seems the Kodak ones are plastic, but the Fuji and Agfa ones seem more like a very thin metal foil. I'm guessing that those wouldn't go through the detector. I could always unwrap them, but then that doesn't seem like too good of an idea. What do you think? Maybe only a Kodak trip? I do like Kodak film. Seriously, I only know what I have seen film wise, I don't know squat about which security systems are doing what. I have seen a heck of a lot of unaffected film too, so it's not all bad. No real pattern to where the people have been, one fellow had been on a 6 month sabbatical to India, and had about 30 wrecked rolls. That was the worst. Mostly Mexican vacations and the like. Wrong colour and too evenly cooked to be heat damage though. Have you considered buying your film at your destination and getting it processed there as well? Not printed, but process only.. William Robb
Re: New Thread - Air Travel and film
William, I'm going to be doing some checking into buying film there - the 120 variety may be a bit trickier and much more expensive on Maui. Same goes for developing. But it certainly is worth checking into. I've also heard of people having film shipped to their destination by a carrier that guarantees the film won't be irradiated in some fashion. Bruce Sunday, February 2, 2003, 11:54:50 PM, you wrote: WR - Original Message - WR From: Bruce Dayton WR Subject: Re: New Thread - Air Travel and film William, Good to know - not necessarily good news. One option was to only take the 67 and the little digicam. That way, I would only be carrying 120 film. You know how it comes in the airtight wrapper - It seems the Kodak ones are plastic, but the Fuji and Agfa ones seem more like a very thin metal foil. I'm guessing that those wouldn't go through the detector. I could always unwrap them, but then that doesn't seem like too good of an idea. What do you think? Maybe only a Kodak trip? WR I do like Kodak film. WR Seriously, I only know what I have seen film wise, I don't know squat about WR which security systems are doing what. I have seen a heck of a lot of WR unaffected film too, so it's not all bad. WR No real pattern to where the people have been, one fellow had been on a 6 WR month sabbatical to India, and had about 30 wrecked rolls. WR That was the worst. WR Mostly Mexican vacations and the like. WR Wrong colour and too evenly cooked to be heat damage though. WR Have you considered buying your film at your destination and getting it WR processed there as well? WR Not printed, but process only.. WR William Robb
Re[2]: New Thread - Air Travel and film
Tonghang wrote: TZ Personally I don't think these security checks can prevent anything. TZ It's just a harrassment for everyone. Even worse is that these TZ guards seem to enjoy their new found status very much. This is TZ not right. Back in October on the Kennedy airport, I had to undergo a third security check, this time a hand one. Two men and a woman very convinced of their importance went thoroughly through my luggage and dug out triumphantly the large tin can of 100 feet of bulk Provia 100F, which one of them tried to open! I had to patiently explain its content and repeat myself several times before they conceded it's harmless. I've seen in the past over here this brutal, negating attitude, often enough to tell my American friends your country is not on the right track... Servus, Alin
RE: New Thread - Air Travel and film
Bruce, There are special x-ray bags sold here in the Czech Republic, each holds from 6 to 20 rolls of film. I have not tested them but people on discussion groups here say that they either go through the x-ray with no problem or that the owner is obliged to take the rolls out of the bag and put them into the machine again (which of course simply ruins the effect of the bag). Moreover, new x-ray machines like CTX5000 can fry your film in this bag, because it increases the power if it cannot see through an object until it can or it overloads itself. Maybe you shall check out this thread on photo.net, there is clearly written that you shall ask for hand control according to the FAA regulations http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=003NpN Ondrej -Original Message- From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 9:33 AM To: William Robb Subject: Re: New Thread - Air Travel and film William, I'm going to be doing some checking into buying film there - the 120 variety may be a bit trickier and much more expensive on Maui. Same goes for developing. But it certainly is worth checking into. I've also heard of people having film shipped to their destination by a carrier that guarantees the film won't be irradiated in some fashion. Bruce Sunday, February 2, 2003, 11:54:50 PM, you wrote: WR - Original Message - WR From: Bruce Dayton WR Subject: Re: New Thread - Air Travel and film William, Good to know - not necessarily good news. One option was to only take the 67 and the little digicam. That way, I would only be carrying 120 film. You know how it comes in the airtight wrapper - It seems the Kodak ones are plastic, but the Fuji and Agfa ones seem more like a very thin metal foil. I'm guessing that those wouldn't go through the detector. I could always unwrap them, but then that doesn't seem like too good of an idea. What do you think? Maybe only a Kodak trip? WR I do like Kodak film. WR Seriously, I only know what I have seen film wise, I don't know WR squat about which security systems are doing what. I have seen a WR heck of a lot of unaffected film too, so it's not all bad. No real WR pattern to where the people have been, one fellow had been on a 6 WR month sabbatical to India, and had about 30 wrecked rolls. That was WR the worst. Mostly Mexican vacations and the like. WR Wrong colour and too evenly cooked to be heat damage though. WR Have you considered buying your film at your destination and getting WR it processed there as well? Not printed, but process only.. WR William Robb
Re: Snow Crystal Photographs
Amazing. Once upon a time, fellows of Penta Club discussed how one could grow snow flakes in controlled environment. I suppose for me in Israel it would be even more relevant... Truly amazing work. Thanks for sharing. --- Boris Liberman www.geocities.com/dunno57 www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=38625
Re: PUG access.
Hi, WR wrote: I think it was Mike Wilson who had the most grief, perhaps he could shed some light. Never solved my problem but it's not quite the same one. I find that _some_ images of each gallery won't load. When I revisit the same gallery it is always the same images but it does not seem to be linked to the poster, as I may be able to view their images in another gallery. I got round this by using another browser for PUG. I am assuming that it is a combination of browser and local network protocols that is causing my problem. mike
Epson 2450 question
Hi! I am given the opportunity to buy Epson 2450 scanner (flat bed, but seems to be the only reasonable one for scanning the film) for $250. It is about one year old, one owner. My questions would be: 1. Is it a fair price? What is a fair price? 2. What is the potential points of total failure of this unit? 3. How long usually flat bed scanners work before they have to be replaced? My purpose of using it would be to eliminate process variable of lab scanning my negatives, and doing the job myself. Time to time I would scan documents, thus making my home PC into complete copier/fax machine. Your help is very much appreciated. P.S. A moment ago by mistake I've posted it from my other account that is not registered with PDML, obviously bg. So you might get two very similar messages from me. I apologize for that. --- Boris Liberman www.geocities.com/dunno57 www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=38625
Re; New Thread - Air Travel and film
I have travelled recently with Provia 400F (35mm) without problems. I never leave film in checked baggage. I put all my film, exposed and fresh, in a jacket pocket and put that on the conveyor for the X-ray machine before I put any other hand luggage on. I find the jacket and film cruise straight through (minimal exposure) while they inevitably halt the system to have a longer look at the overnight bag. My eighty year-old mother (who uses a walking stick to get around) had her nail file confiscated recently during check-in. Then they offered her a wheel-chair to go out to the plane. Peter Jesser Brisbane, Australia _ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
Re: Sigma 24/2.8 Super Wide II
Thanks Alan, I guess I'll strick to Pentax, then. Regards, ukasz === www.fotopolis.pl [EMAIL PROTECTED] === internetowy magazyn o fotografii - Original Message - From: Alan Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 7:06 AM Subject: Re: Sigma 24/2.8 Super Wide II Anybody has this lens? How good/bad is it? I'm tempted by the 24 mm, but I'm not sure about the quality. How is the manual focus? I'm thinking about buying either this Sigma or a FA 28/2.8 AL. Is the Pentax lens significantly better? I had these Sigma 24mm and 28mm few years back, both manual focus. Optically, both are great imho. However, both suffers from flare problem and substandard mechanical design, particularly the aperture ring assembly. The 24mm even had worse rubber, aperture ring material and electrical contacts (all 3 wore noticably faster than the even older 28/2.8). The satin finish was a joke and the 10 years old shiny surface is better. Both hoods were useless to guard again flare, although they were well made. I don't know much about the FA28/2.8AL. But if you can afford the extra, either go for the FA*24/2 (which I am very happy with) or A24/2.8. regards, Alan Chan _ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- OnetPoczta: dua, szybka, bezpieczna! http://poczta.onet.pl/oferta/
Re: New Thread - Air Travel and film
One thought I had was to use plastic film cassettes and walk through the scanner. Since I bulk load most of my film, this could be an advantage. I will try it on my next international flight. Bob Rapp - Original Message - From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 7:00 PM Subject: Re: New Thread - Air Travel and film - Original Message - From: Tonghang Zhou Subject: Re: New Thread - Air Travel and film I understand there are 3 ways to undergo the detection: A) checked-in luggage, B) X-ray machine at the gate for carry-on bags, C) the beeping door that you go thru. From what I'm hearing you guys are saying, A) and B) are ruinous to film. How about C)? You seems to be saying C) is safe? Option A has the most potential for damage. The CAT scanners are instant well done. Thats really all thats changed I think. The high dose X-Ray being used on checked baggage is relatively recent. The carry on X-Rays have always been problematic, I don't know if they have gotten worse or not. I am pretty sure the walk through is just detecting ferrous metals. If it was irradiating, it wouldn't be safe for people to pass through. William Robb
Re: New Thread - Air Travel and film
Bruce. Thanks for a interesting post that I can help with :) Rule 1 NEVER, EVER travel with film in checked luggage. Do not put a boby with film in checked luggage. The CTX 1500 (and newer) machines that they have all over (LAX, SAF, and on HI) will trash all and any film Rule 2 ARRIVE 20 MINUTES BEFORE YOUR NORMAL ARIVAL TIME Rule 3 All film containers (even metallic packaging) will set the machines off. The scanners are 'set to stun' as it were. Removal of the wrappers will normally work, but remember if nowdays AOLL items (coats, bags, etc) need to be passed through the checked luggae. Rule 3 Have each and every SINGLE roll of film stripped and placed in a (one\few) large clear ziploc bags. Explain early to the xray operators, and state that there are high speed and professional film rolls in the bag. IMPORTANT. PUT SOME TMX 6400 in the bag. One of two rolls is all you will need. Forget xray pouches through xray machines - opaque to the scanner? use a much bigger power, and nuke it! The execution of a good plan - Clearly (and happy, happy, happy) ask for a hand film check. At the earliest stage of this, be happy and nice. EVEN IF THEY SAY NO. If they say no, state that all FAA rules and regulations say you can still have hand check. If they continue to say no, firmly and clearly state that you arrived 20 minutes earlier so you can get your federally mandated check, and you would like to speak to their security supervisor. Should work. Time is on your side at that point. REMEMBER: even though these guys are generally dumb minimum waqe and SO, SO LAZY, they can have you in a federal cell being strip searched REAL quick.. All of my recent trips (15 flights since December last year) have been through domestic US airlines, and all have the same policies : no check, no fly. Don't get aggressive, don't OVERLY bitch and moan if anyone gives you trouble. Ask firmly and repeatadly for their supervisor if they are being unreasonable. What happens is they will commonly (and mistakenly) check each individual roll for explosives. Pretty dumb, as the machine is meant to detect such small quantities that they are actually meant to scan the bag and a sample of rolls. Like I said, majority of security staff are dumb. Where this works!!! --- LAX, JFK, LGA, SAF, ATL, BOS, CHI, and 8 flights in and out of Hawaii (Hawaii, Oahu, Mai). I have actually done this in LHR (Heathrow, UK) which is reknown for saying if your film does not go through the xray machine, you don't fly. On Sun, 2003-02-02 at 21:37, Bruce Dayton wrote: In about a month I am going to Hawaii for a short vacation. Most likely I will take the 67II and leave home the 35mm gear. Still deciding on that one. Anyway, I am wondering what the current state of film going through the detectors is. Is there any noticeable damage coming from the x-ray machines? At what speed is the film problematic? An interesting angle for me is that the 120 roll film is spooled on plastic cores so theoretically I could walk through the metal detector with them on my person. Has anyone tried this? It seems that all the Kodak film comes in plastic outer wrapper (sealed), but the Fuji and Agfa use something more like a metal film of some type. I'm guessing that would make a difference. Does anyone have any experience with this? Anything else I need to watch out for? How stringent are the airlines (United in this case) about carry-on regulations (size, weight)? If it helps the discussion, I'll be flying out of San Francisco and landing in Maui. Any tips or suggestions are welcome. Thanks, Bruce
Re: Re[2]: New Thread - Air Travel and film
THIS IS A DAMN THREAD ON GETTING THROUGH CUSTOMS AND SECURITY SCANS WITH LOADED FILM. LEAVE YOUR DAMN GEOPOLITICAL MEWLING OUT OF THIS. RIGHT TRACK? Stopping idiots who want to blow up planes in mid flight? I presume you condone international terrorism then? Where the HELL are YOU from anyway? They don't need to have security checks where you come from? Never had any domestic terrorism? On Mon, 2003-02-03 at 03:35, Alin Flaider wrote: Tonghang wrote: TZ Personally I don't think these security checks can prevent anything. TZ It's just a harrassment for everyone. Even worse is that these TZ guards seem to enjoy their new found status very much. This is TZ not right. Back in October on the Kennedy airport, I had to undergo a third security check, this time a hand one. Two men and a woman very convinced of their importance went thoroughly through my luggage and dug out triumphantly the large tin can of 100 feet of bulk Provia 100F, which one of them tried to open! I had to patiently explain its content and repeat myself several times before they conceded it's harmless. I've seen in the past over here this brutal, negating attitude, often enough to tell my American friends your country is not on the right track... Servus, Alin
Re: Epson 2450 question
on 03.02.03 11:09, Boris Liberman at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi! I am given the opportunity to buy Epson 2450 scanner (flat bed, but seems to be the only reasonable one for scanning the film) for $250. It is about one year old, one owner. ... My purpose of using it would be to eliminate process variable of lab scanning my negatives, and doing the job myself. Time to time I would scan documents, thus making my home PC into complete copier/fax machine. I'd better consider Minolta Dual Scan III (about 300$) dedicated film scanner if I were you, and add cheap (60-70$) flatbed scanner for documents. It will offer much better scan quality, additional features like auto dust brush (automatic picture cleaning almost like ICE - removes scratches and dust almost not affecting picture quality) will save your time. Of course it makes sense if you use only 35mm equipment. -- Best Regards Sylwek
Re: deer with arrow in head update- TPDML note
Someone brings in a Sun each day for the cafeteria,I'll keep an eye out for the article. Dave Begin Original Message From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 23:21:23 EST To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: deer with arrow in head update- TPDML note TPDMLers can check the Toronto Sun for the latest in the deer saga. A reporter interviewed me today so I think a story is going in Monday's paper... Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada Art needs to be in a frame.That way we know when the art stops and the wall begins--Frank Zappa http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
Re: Sigma 24/2.8 Super Wide II
Alan Chan wrote: I had these Sigma 24mm and 28mm few years back, both manual focus. Optically, both are great imho. However, both suffers from flare problem and substandard mechanical design, particularly the aperture ring assembly. The 24mm even had worse rubber, aperture ring material and electrical contacts (all 3 wore noticably faster than the even older 28/2.8). The satin finish was a joke and the 10 years old shiny surface is better. Both hoods were useless to guard again flare, although they were well made. Hi Alan, I would agree with all of the above, but should add that the later 24mm Sigma has severe barrel distortion and a yellow colour cast that sets it apart from the neutral rendition of Pentax optics. The earlier Sigma lenses were indeed better made. John
Re: Re: Epson 2450 question
Boris. I have gotten ok results from colour 35mm negs,good results from BW negs,and very good results from MF negs(6x6)on the 2450.I think JOC gets good results from his 35mm colour stuff,so i think it could be hit and miss. On the whole,until i get something better,it fine. Dave Begin Original Message From: Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 13:38:59 +0100 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Epson 2450 question on 03.02.03 11:09, Boris Liberman at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi! I am given the opportunity to buy Epson 2450 scanner (flat bed, but seems to be the only reasonable one for scanning the film) for $250. It is about one year old, one owner. ... My purpose of using it would be to eliminate process variable of lab scanning my negatives, and doing the job myself. Time to time I would scan documents, thus making my home PC into complete copier/fax machine. I'd better consider Minolta Dual Scan III (about 300$) dedicated film scanner if I were you, and add cheap (60-70$) flatbed scanner for documents. It will offer much better scan quality, additional features like auto dust brush (automatic picture cleaning almost like ICE - removes scratches and dust almost not affecting picture quality) will save your time. Of course it makes sense if you use only 35mm equipment. -- Best Regards Sylwek End Original Message Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada Art needs to be in a frame.That way we know when the art stops and the wall begins--Frank Zappa http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
Re: Epson 2450 question
Boris, If the film you are planning on scanning is 35mm, then the 2450 is not the ideal scanner. Specially if you are planning on making prints from the scanned images. I recently purchased a Microtek Scanmaker 5900. I purchased it primarily for scanning 120 film. It does a fair job at that. When I compare 35mm scans between the 5900 and my dedicated HP S-20 film scanner, the HP wins hands down. For documents scanning, OCR, faxing and copying the 59000 (as well as the 2450) is a fine machine. But for film scanning you should look for a dedicated Minolta, Nikon, Canon (or even the inexpensive HP S-20). HTH, Jeff. Boris Liberman wrote: Hi! I am given the opportunity to buy Epson 2450 scanner (flat bed, but seems to be the only reasonable one for scanning the film) for $250. It is about one year old, one owner. My questions would be: 1. Is it a fair price? What is a fair price? 2. What is the potential points of total failure of this unit? 3. How long usually flat bed scanners work before they have to be replaced? My purpose of using it would be to eliminate process variable of lab scanning my negatives, and doing the job myself. Time to time I would scan documents, thus making my home PC into complete copier/fax machine. Your help is very much appreciated. P.S. A moment ago by mistake I've posted it from my other account that is not registered with PDML, obviously bg. So you might get two very similar messages from me. I apologize for that. --- Boris Liberman www.geocities.com/dunno57 www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=38625
Re: New Thread - Air Travel and film
Oliver Raymond wrote: THIS IS A DAMN THREAD ON GETTING THROUGH CUSTOMS AND SECURITY SCANS WITH LOADED FILM. LEAVE YOUR DAMN GEOPOLITICAL MEWLING OUT OF THIS. R-e-l-a-x, friend... RIGHT TRACK? Stopping idiots who want to blow up planes in mid flight? I presume you condone international terrorism then? Such checks didn't do much to stop the terrorists on 9-11, nor did they do much to stop earlier ones. Where the HELL are YOU from anyway? This has very little to with anything, but if it helps you, Alin is Romanian, I am Bulgarian. Boz
Help - cant find an old message...
Hi, can someone help me. I am looking for a message posted, I think, by Boz lately which had a link to Pentax 'oddities' such as their first Af lens and some belt clips or some such. Can anyone remember the link to help me find it again? Thanks
Re: Snow Crystal Photographs
Thanks, Paul - glad you like them! The snowflakes are caught on glass, a blue light and diffuser provide the background. The biggest challenge is trying to focus, especially the 50mm f4 on ~300mm of extension! - MCC At 09:06 PM 2/2/2003 +, you wrote: Wow! Awesome work, Mark. Did you shoot it on glass? How did you light the background. Paul Stenquist - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Kalamazoo, MI [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - - - - - - - - - Photos: http://www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - -
Re: Snow Crystal Photographs
At 08:51 PM 2/2/2003 -0500, you wrote: Stunning! Thanks, Mark, for taking and sharing them with us. I'm sure that I saw two of them that were the same though - nah, can't be true vbg thanks, frank Thanks, Frank - they actually _do_ start to look alike after a while! - MCC - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Kalamazoo, MI [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - - - - - - - - - Photos: http://www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - -
OT: The tale of #2 son a Beetle
He's selling off stuff to get one he found for $550. Guess a car has more alure to a 15-/16-year-old than does a camera. Wonder why. Anyway, here's the stuff: 500ftz -- good condition -- $120 -- external wear but operates properly A135 2.8 -- excellent condition -- $100 Rollie panorama head (from his 2.8E) -- excellent condition -- $70 -- This is a level base that mounts onto the camera. G3 and flash -- Excellent condition -- $70 A50 1.4 -- Excellent condition-- $90 Anyone wanting anything, contact me I'll pass the info onto him. Collin
Re: New Thread - Air Travel and film
Sorry boz - getting fed up with political junk and side swiping of US. Yesterday one of the streets in the area was named after a firefighter friend who lost his life Sep11. I personally worked on Wall street - about 200 yards from WTC footprint, and had to run for my life on the day: was too close to see #2 go down, but saw #1 go down from a bridge Just fed up with it all. People who have never been involved in terrorist act's have no idea what's involved. I lived and worked in London in the 80's and 90's (Hyde Park bomb, Victoria bomb, Bishopgate bomb etc) and figured the US was far enough away from it all. On Mon, 2003-02-03 at 08:23, Bojidar Dimitrov wrote: Oliver Raymond wrote: THIS IS A DAMN THREAD ON GETTING THROUGH CUSTOMS AND SECURITY SCANS WITH LOADED FILM. LEAVE YOUR DAMN GEOPOLITICAL MEWLING OUT OF THIS. R-e-l-a-x, friend... RIGHT TRACK? Stopping idiots who want to blow up planes in mid flight? I presume you condone international terrorism then? Such checks didn't do much to stop the terrorists on 9-11, nor did they do much to stop earlier ones. Where the HELL are YOU from anyway? This has very little to with anything, but if it helps you, Alin is Romanian, I am Bulgarian. Boz
Re: Tantalizing news
Great, now we are going to have another 1,000 messages of unending speculation on what Pentax may or may not have. Maybe Mike and Pal can start an on-line, real time, 24x7 forum on the subject. Oh, sorry, I didn't realize that the Pentax DSLR was off limits as a topic too. Well, then, you won't hear another word about it from me. --Mike
Re: New Thread - Air Travel and film
On Sun, 2 Feb 2003 23:38:24 -0800 (PST), Tonghang Zhou wrote: I understand there are 3 ways to undergo the detection: A) checked-in luggage, B) X-ray machine at the gate for carry-on bags, C) the beeping door that you go thru. My understanding has been that (A) is very high risk these days due to improved scanner technology (B) is moderate to low risk (C) is the lowest risk (that door is basically a magnetometer, not an x-ray machine) TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
RE: New Thread - Air Travel and film
On Mon, 3 Feb 2003 10:24:28 +0100, Ondrej Maly wrote: There are special x-ray bags [...] I have no scientific evidence, but I believe that the best option today might be the lead bag in carry on luggage, if you can't get all your film in your pockets. With the lead bag, you'll get a hand check when the check-in scanner can't see through the bag (the big CTX units are only used on checked luggage AFAIK). And the super cop on the scanner probably won't be in any worse a mood than spending five minutes fighting over getting a hand-check either. :-) TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re[4]: New Thread - Air Travel and film
Oliver wrote: OR RIGHT TRACK? Stopping idiots who want to blow up planes in mid flight? I OR presume you condone international terrorism then? Where the HELL are YOU OR from anyway? Romania, a terrorism haven. OR They don't need to have security checks where you come from? Never had OR any domestic terrorism? No, we breed terrorists. Servus, Alin :oT
Re: Snow Crystal Photographs
Beautiful pictures, Mark. You perfected your technique indeed. Servus, Alin Mark wrote: MC Last month's cold snap brought some really nice snow to west Michigan, and MC the opportunity for more snow crystal photography. I just updated my MC website with 30 new snow crystal photographs. These were shot with an MC Mz-S, AF360 flash, various extension tubes, bellows, and either a reverse MC mounted SMC-M 50 f1.7 or SMC-M 50 f4 Macro. All shots were at 4 - 8 x MC lifesized. MC If you are interested take a look at this link: MC http://www.markcassino.com MC The monthly feature photo is the best of the lot (IMO) and there's a link MC to the other shots from it.
Re: New Thread - Air Travel and film
Bruce Dayton wrote: Anyway, I am wondering what the current state of film going through the detectors is. Is there any noticeable damage coming from the x-ray machines? At what speed is the film problematic? ... Bruce, I've flown domestic US numerous times since last Nov. always with film. My reccommendations are to carry all exposed unexposed film in Zip lok bags that can be separated from your carry on luggage and run thru the scan adjacent to the metal detector that you walk thru. My experience has been that if I ask for a hand check of the film it always leads to a maximum personal search of everything I am carrying onboard. The TSA has taken over security @ airports that was previously handled by private firms. So far this appears to be an improvement. Also, anything you send as checked is subject to opening and airlines are advising not to lock any checked baggage as the lock will be broken if TSA wants to look inside, so I would reccommend against checking any valuables. Enjoy Hawaii, burn much film... Ken Waller PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart. http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: The tale of #2 son a Beetle
- Original Message - From: Collin Brendemuehl Subject: OT: The tale of #2 son a Beetle He's selling off stuff to get one he found for $550. Guess a car has more alure to a 15-/16-year-old than does a camera. Wonder why. When I was 16, I sold off a Crown Graphic and a whole whack of accessories to buy a Mazda RX2. It happens. William Robb
RE: NYC PDML: 2/22/03?
On Mon, 3 Feb 2003, Cesar Matamoros II wrote: I will let those 24/7 locals select the where and when. I will be there, maybe I can drag my sister along, though I doubt it... As a non-local, I should have no problems coming in and meeting up. I just ask that people consider that I'll have to come into the PA and once you leave Manhatten I couldn't find my way around... Let's see, what gear should I cart along? MZ-S, LXen (normal and snaked), my usual 24/2, 31/1.8, 77/1.8 combo, ... any inputs greatly appreciated. Well, I'd sure like to see the MZ-S... And should I bring a real snake to match your skinned LXes? ;) Looking forward to it, now to work on a DC PDML..., Just remember, last time we tried this it fell apart. -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio.
Re: New 67 and new generation of K-mount?
Pål, Now a new 67 would excite me even more than a DSLR. Any more to the rumor? Bruce Monday, February 3, 2003, 6:41:24 AM, you wrote: PJ Seems I was wrong. I though the 67 was doomed. Apparently Pentax might show a new, more compact 67 (will it be a digital solution as well?). PJ Rumors in Japan says something will happen with the K-mount. I guess this is the KAF3. Theres definitelt a new generation of cameras coming. PJ The usual disclaimers apply. PJ Pål
Re: OT: Epson ink use printing issues
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I also bought a box of Epson heavyweight Matte (forgive me, I like matte finish better) today so we'll see if these look better than the Kodak stuff I just finished. The glossy stuf is so much mroe expensive anyway. One thing I noticed, this Epson paper is one-sided, as oposed to the Kodak so I'll use more paper in my testing (read: screw-ups). using double sided Kodak paper is one reason your previous results look lousy. Epson's double sided matte paper is excellent for mockups of printed pages and for tear sheets. Herb
Re: New 67 and new generation of K-mount?
Bruce wrote: Now a new 67 would excite me even more than a DSLR. Any more to the rumor? Nope. That's all I have for now. However, you are free to speculate. Since it is supposedly smaller, I suspect a total redesign. Anyway, the source is reliable so this seems to be real. Those who suspected that the Limited edition of the 67II signalized its discontinuation was apparently right. Pål
Tantalizing news - the name of the DSLR
Cotty wrote: I can think of very few threads at the moment that are as on topic as the forthcoming Pentax DSLR, and I for one am interested in reading any and all info that is forthcoming, including speculation. Ok. Here it goes. As I've said previously the DSLR has a film sibling. It is now being confirmed by other sources whose reliability is unproven. Apparently, it might be bull, but the name of the new camera is ist (pronounced Yi-st). My guess is that this might be some translation of some greek letter like Ypsilon and Alpha and such (though I've really no idea). The name of the DSLR is istDigital apparently. Note this may all be bullshit but several are claiming this is so. The name may of course also be Japan only with other names for export. Who knows? I certainly don't. The camera is supposedly entry level and very compact. Pål
Re: New 67 and new generation of K-mount?
As with the KMount for 35mm, preservation of current lens usage is important to me in a new 67. I would dearly love to see a 75mm leaf shutter lens. The 90 is liveable, but not quite wide enough and is not in production anymore. I've looked over the 67II and can't see any radical way to shrink the size. I'm sure little cuts here and there would shrink it a bit - maybe using more materials like in the MZ-S would reduce it's weight a bit more. Bruce Monday, February 3, 2003, 8:55:40 AM, you wrote: PJ Bruce wrote: Now a new 67 would excite me even more than a DSLR. Any more to the rumor? PJ Nope. That's all I have for now. However, you are free to speculate. Since it is supposedly smaller, I suspect a total redesign. PJ Anyway, the source is reliable so this seems to be real. Those who suspected that the Limited edition of the 67II signalized its discontinuation was apparently right. PJ Pål
RE: New 67 and new generation of K-mount?
This would answer the constant criticism of Pentax not having changeable backs perhaps? Man this is going to be a long month... -Original Message- From: Pål Jensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 03 February 2003 16:56 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: New 67 and new generation of K-mount? Bruce wrote: Now a new 67 would excite me even more than a DSLR. Any more to the rumor? Nope. That's all I have for now. However, you are free to speculate. Since it is supposedly smaller, I suspect a total redesign. Anyway, the source is reliable so this seems to be real. Those who suspected that the Limited edition of the 67II signalized its discontinuation was apparently right. Pål
RE: New 67 and new generation of K-mount?
Maybe it's a rangefinder. HAR! tv -Original Message- From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 12:15 PM To: Pål Jensen Subject: Re: New 67 and new generation of K-mount? As with the KMount for 35mm, preservation of current lens usage is important to me in a new 67. I would dearly love to see a 75mm leaf shutter lens. The 90 is liveable, but not quite wide enough and is not in production anymore. I've looked over the 67II and can't see any radical way to shrink the size. I'm sure little cuts here and there would shrink it a bit - maybe using more materials like in the MZ-S would reduce it's weight a bit more. Bruce Monday, February 3, 2003, 8:55:40 AM, you wrote: PJ Bruce wrote: Now a new 67 would excite me even more than a DSLR. Any more to the rumor? PJ Nope. That's all I have for now. However, you are free to speculate. Since it is supposedly smaller, I suspect a total redesign. PJ Anyway, the source is reliable so this seems to be real. Those who suspected that the Limited edition of the 67II signalized its discontinuation was apparently right. PJ Pål
RE: Tantalizing news - the name of the DSLR
-Original Message- From: Pål Jensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Ok. Here it goes. As I've said previously the DSLR has a film sibling. It is now being confirmed by other sources whose reliability is unproven. Apparently, it might be bull, but the name of the new camera is ist (pronounced Yi-st). My guess is that this might be some translation of some greek letter like Ypsilon and Alpha and such (though I've really no idea). The name of the DSLR is istDigital apparently. 1st (first) of a new breed and 1st digital perhaps?? Note this may all be bullshit but several are claiming this is so. The name may of course also be Japan only with other names for export. Lets hope not... We have enough trouble with mz/zx etc... The camera is supposedly entry level and very compact. Auto 110 anybody? Seriously, this statement is a little strange. I think we had all expected it to be 'mid-level'. Its not going to be an MZ-60 type thing is it?? I always though it a little strange anyway that Pentax designed a totally new body style for this camera, only to use it for one body. I still wonder if some of the styling cues will come from this 'experiment'. It must at least represent some of the ideas going through the development department at that time?
Re: New 67 and new generation of K-mount?
A digital option for 67 is a joke. You're not going to get anywhere near a full frame unless it's megabucks. They need to start with 35mm, then do 645- which makes a lot more sense. Rob Brigham wrote: This would answer the constant criticism of Pentax not having changeable backs perhaps? Man this is going to be a long month...
Re: Epson 2450 question
Hi! Bill, from your response and from other responses I gather that Epson 2450 is a satisfactory film scanner, even for 35 mm film. It is not top quality, but I suppose to expect a top film scanning quality from flatbed scanner is at least illogical. OTOH, at the moment I am struggling with local labs. Obviously they wouldn't babysit and fine tune their machine for my films. So, quite often scans come out with very lousy quality. Another problem would be that for sure in Israel to find a dedicated film scanner would cost me at least 1.5 times more than its actual price. So I suppose I am left with little choice. The only thing that would stop me is too steep a price or too old a unit. Since none of you reported any aging problems or any mechanical glitches with your scanners I must conclude that Epson 2450 is a reasonably reliable machine. As for the scans themselves. I've witnessed a person who is going to sell me the scanner getting roughly 12 MP file from 35 mm negative. Of course 12 MP exceeds by some 3 MP maximal optical power of the sucker. Still the 30x40 cm print was very good. Since at the moment my aim is at most! 30x40 cm prints, I'd say it would be acceptable. My rough estimate would be that if it does not break down within a year, it will return the investment... Then it could be replaced or augmented with another device. Am I terribly wrong someplace in my reasoning? --- Boris Liberman www.geocities.com/dunno57 www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=38625
RE: New 67 and new generation of K-mount?
But you could put a 645 size sensor on an insert for a 67 based system... 645 sales could be hit by claims that digital has now surpassed this. Perhaps Pentax feel film based medium format has a longer future in 67 format. Not saying I agree, but its possible. Besides the criticism of not having changeable backs came up WELL before the age of digital. Perhaps they are finally adressing it. -Original Message- From: Ryan K. Brooks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 03 February 2003 17:35 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: New 67 and new generation of K-mount? A digital option for 67 is a joke. You're not going to get anywhere near a full frame unless it's megabucks. They need to start with 35mm, then do 645- which makes a lot more sense. Rob Brigham wrote: This would answer the constant criticism of Pentax not having changeable backs perhaps? Man this is going to be a long month...
Re: Epson 2450 question
Boris. My reply earlier to you went missing.I tried Veuscan trial version last night and it looks like it might work well with the 2450(35 mm BW and Colour looked ok. It scanned about the same time lenght as Epson software,but Epson tneds to crash on me with big files.The vuescan did not. For the price you willget it for i think its a good starting scanner(i plan to up grade in 2004)for35mm but very good for 120. Dave Brooks Hi! Bill, from your response and from other responses I gather that Epson 2450 is a satisfactory film scanner, even for 35 mm film. It is not top quality, but I suppose to expect a top film scanning quality from flatbed scanner is at least illogical. OTOH, at the moment I am struggling with local labs. Obviously they wouldn't babysit and fine tune their machine for my films. So, quite often scans come out with very lousy quality. Another problem would be that for sure in Israel to find a dedicated film scanner would cost me at least 1.5 times more than its actual price. So I suppose I am left with little choice. The only thing that would stop me is too steep a price or too old a unit. Since none of you reported any aging problems or any mechanical glitches with your scanners I must conclude that Epson 2450 is a reasonably reliable machine. As for the scans themselves. I've witnessed a person who is going to sell me the scanner getting roughly 12 MP file from 35 mm negative. Of course 12 MP exceeds by some 3 MP maximal optical power of the sucker. Still the 30x40 cm print was very good. Since at the moment my aim is at most! 30x40 cm prints, I'd say it would be acceptable. My rough estimate would be that if it does not break down within a year, it will return the investment... Then it could be replaced or augmented with another device. Am I terribly wrong someplace in my reasoning? --- Boris Liberman www.geocities.com/dunno57 www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=38625
Re: New Thread - Air Travel and film
On Mon, 03 Feb 2003 09:56:35 -0800 (PST), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Forgot to add: Check out the TSA web info re film - http://www.tsa.gov/public/display?theme=56 Bruce Dayton wrote: Anyway, I am wondering what the current state of film going through the detectors is. Is there any noticeable damage coming from the x-ray machines? At what speed is the film problematic? ... Bruce, I've flown domestic US numerous times since last Nov. always with film. My reccommendations are to carry all exposed unexposed film in Zip lok bags that can be separated from your carry on luggage and run thru the scan adjacent to the metal detector that you walk thru. My experience has been that if I ask for a hand check of the film it always leads to a maximum personal search of everything I am carrying onboard. The TSA has taken over security @ airports that was previously handled by private firms. So far this appears to be an improvement. Also, anything you send as checked is subject to opening and airlines are advising not to lock any checked baggage as the lock will be broken if TSA wants to look inside, so I would reccommend against checking any valuables. Enjoy Hawaii, burn much film... Ken Waller PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart. a href=http://mail.peoplepc.com/jump/http://www.peoplepc.com;http://www.peoplepc.com/a Ken Waller PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart. http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: NYC PDML: 2/22/03?
gfen wrote: On Mon, 3 Feb 2003, Cesar Matamoros II wrote: I will let those 24/7 locals select the where and when. annsan sez Would all of you who are planning to do this CC me when you chat about this - I could then make a little list that includes all of us in my address book - also I toss the PDML stuff regularly and keep every shred of email that isn't from strangers in my inbox forever... gfen wrote: As a non-local, I should have no problems coming in and meeting up. I just ask that people consider that I'll have to come into the PA and once you leave Manhatten I couldn't find my way around... We have friendly native guides. g But Manhattan sounds good to me as I live in the east village. Ceasar wrote: Let's see, what gear should I cart along? MZ-S, LXen (normal and snaked), my usual 24/2, 31/1.8, 77/1.8 combo, ... any inputs greatly appreciated. Gfen wrote Well, I'd sure like to see the MZ-S... And should I bring a real snake to match your skinned LXes? ;) annsan requests: Only if it is alive! tree-hugger on board. Gfen worried: Just remember, last time we tried this it fell apart. ann replies: well, not totally - 3 of us made it. :) lets try to be optimistic. not an easy thing these days, I'll admit. annsan -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio.
Re: The tale of #2 son a Beetle
In a message dated 03/02/03 16:48:08 GMT Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: When I was 16, I sold off a Crown Graphic and a whole whack of accessories to buy a Mazda RX2. It happens. William Robb Hey Bill, You and I must have similar tastes in cars. My first car was a Mazda R-100. What a blast! Until it desintegrated 6 years later. Jeff. Folks - you can bet that the Crown Graphic would not have suffered the same fate. Rust I presume? I have suffered the same fate but we should keep this for the 240KGT list. Kind regards Peter
Re: Epson 2450 question
Boris, Have you considered ordering from BH in New York? My own experience and those of friends leads me to believe that they are very honest, efficient, and reliable. I am saying this because I have recently been scanning 35mm negs with a flatbed scanner and it is a VERY time consuming process. I have spent probably 10-12 hours and only have 12 scanned negatives to show for it. I would definitely encourage you to look at a film scanner. Michael Cross Boris Liberman wrote: Hi! Bill, from your response and from other responses I gather that Epson 2450 is a satisfactory film scanner, even for 35 mm film. It is not top quality, but I suppose to expect a top film scanning quality from flatbed scanner is at least illogical. OTOH, at the moment I am struggling with local labs. Obviously they wouldn't babysit and fine tune their machine for my films. So, quite often scans come out with very lousy quality. Another problem would be that for sure in Israel to find a dedicated film scanner would cost me at least 1.5 times more than its actual price. So I suppose I am left with little choice. The only thing that would stop me is too steep a price or too old a unit. Since none of you reported any aging problems or any mechanical glitches with your scanners I must conclude that Epson 2450 is a reasonably reliable machine. As for the scans themselves. I've witnessed a person who is going to sell me the scanner getting roughly 12 MP file from 35 mm negative. Of course 12 MP exceeds by some 3 MP maximal optical power of the sucker. Still the 30x40 cm print was very good. Since at the moment my aim is at most! 30x40 cm prints, I'd say it would be acceptable. My rough estimate would be that if it does not break down within a year, it will return the investment... Then it could be replaced or augmented with another device. Am I terribly wrong someplace in my reasoning? --- Boris Liberman www.geocities.com/dunno57 www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=38625
Re: New 67 and new generation of K-mount?
tom, Ok, that would shrink it quite a bit. Guess I just have to think even more Radical. :) Bruce Monday, February 3, 2003, 9:34:00 AM, you wrote: t Maybe it's a rangefinder. t HAR! t tv -Original Message- From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 12:15 PM To: Pål Jensen Subject: Re: New 67 and new generation of K-mount? As with the KMount for 35mm, preservation of current lens usage is important to me in a new 67. I would dearly love to see a 75mm leaf shutter lens. The 90 is liveable, but not quite wide enough and is not in production anymore. I've looked over the 67II and can't see any radical way to shrink the size. I'm sure little cuts here and there would shrink it a bit - maybe using more materials like in the MZ-S would reduce it's weight a bit more. Bruce Monday, February 3, 2003, 8:55:40 AM, you wrote: PJ Bruce wrote: Now a new 67 would excite me even more than a DSLR. Any more to the rumor? PJ Nope. That's all I have for now. However, you are free to speculate. Since it is supposedly smaller, I suspect a total redesign. PJ Anyway, the source is reliable so this seems to be real. Those who suspected that the Limited edition of the 67II signalized its discontinuation was apparently right. PJ Pål
Re: New 67 and new generation of K-mount?
Rob, The odd thing there is that it sounds to be smaller. Adding an interchangeable back would probably make it larger - like the Mamiya RB. Unless, of course, you didn't count the back in your measurements for the body size. Bruce Monday, February 3, 2003, 9:38:32 AM, you wrote: RB But you could put a 645 size sensor on an insert for a 67 based RB system... RB 645 sales could be hit by claims that digital has now surpassed this. RB Perhaps Pentax feel film based medium format has a longer future in 67 RB format. Not saying I agree, but its possible. RB Besides the criticism of not having changeable backs came up WELL before RB the age of digital. Perhaps they are finally adressing it. -Original Message- From: Ryan K. Brooks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 03 February 2003 17:35 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: New 67 and new generation of K-mount? A digital option for 67 is a joke. You're not going to get anywhere near a full frame unless it's megabucks. They need to start with 35mm, then do 645- which makes a lot more sense. Rob Brigham wrote: This would answer the constant criticism of Pentax not having changeable backs perhaps? Man this is going to be a long month...
Re: OT Pentax wife (Was: Shit, Crap Politics, Was:Re: Vs: car shit, not politics, not Pentax, but about as valid as any of the crap that is allowed without rancor. WAS: bRe: PMA and Pentax DSLR
Lasse Karlsson wrote: John M. wrote: On Sun, 02 Feb 2003 09:41:09 -0500, you wrote: If I wanted to have an aggravating, pointless discussion, I would go talk to my wife. BR I refrained from replying to Bruce to ask him if I could supply the name of a good divorce lawyer because I really found his comments were offensive and didn't want to make too much of a joke of it. However, I was more disturbed not just by by Lasse's comments but even more by those who _only_ considered the suggestiveness of his comments to be offensive, not the entire demeaning ramble. Please remember there are a number of women on this list, too. annsan
Re: Epson 2450 question
Michael, I have both the Epson 2450 and the Minolta Scan Dual II Film scanner. I have not found either to be significantly faster than the other. The only real advantage that I see right now is by using Vuescan for speed. It can handle batch scans on the Minolta. The path Boris is planning on going down will be somewhat time intensive, as you become the lab for yourself. The Epson is good enough. If it were me, and I didn't have any needs beyond 35mm, I would go with a film scanner, however. Bruce Monday, February 3, 2003, 10:03:13 AM, you wrote: MC Boris, MC Have you considered ordering from BH in New York? My own experience MC and those of friends leads me to believe that they are very honest, MC efficient, and reliable. MC I am saying this because I have recently been scanning 35mm negs with a MC flatbed scanner and it is a VERY time consuming process. I have spent MC probably 10-12 hours and only have 12 scanned negatives to show for it. MC I would definitely encourage you to look at a film scanner. MC Michael Cross MC Boris Liberman wrote: Hi! Bill, from your response and from other responses I gather that Epson 2450 is a satisfactory film scanner, even for 35 mm film. It is not top quality, but I suppose to expect a top film scanning quality from flatbed scanner is at least illogical. OTOH, at the moment I am struggling with local labs. Obviously they wouldn't babysit and fine tune their machine for my films. So, quite often scans come out with very lousy quality. Another problem would be that for sure in Israel to find a dedicated film scanner would cost me at least 1.5 times more than its actual price. So I suppose I am left with little choice. The only thing that would stop me is too steep a price or too old a unit. Since none of you reported any aging problems or any mechanical glitches with your scanners I must conclude that Epson 2450 is a reasonably reliable machine. As for the scans themselves. I've witnessed a person who is going to sell me the scanner getting roughly 12 MP file from 35 mm negative. Of course 12 MP exceeds by some 3 MP maximal optical power of the sucker. Still the 30x40 cm print was very good. Since at the moment my aim is at most! 30x40 cm prints, I'd say it would be acceptable. My rough estimate would be that if it does not break down within a year, it will return the investment... Then it could be replaced or augmented with another device. Am I terribly wrong someplace in my reasoning? --- Boris Liberman www.geocities.com/dunno57 www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=38625
RE: NYC PDML: 2/22/03?
Would all of you who are planning to do this CC me when you chat about this - Could you guys please include me as well, in case my plans for that weekend fall through? Thx. Amita
Re: New 67 and new generation of K-mount?
Rob Brigham wrote: But you could put a 645 size sensor on an insert for a 67 based system... But there's already AF and full automation for the 645Nii, so it makes more sense to stick with that. 645 would still be a crop. R
Vs: Re[2]: New Thread - Air Travel and film
I did not know that you are a security check person. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Oliver Raymond [EMAIL PROTECTED] Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Päivä: 03. helmikuuta 2003 13:34 Aihe: Re: Re[2]: New Thread - Air Travel and film THIS IS A DAMN THREAD ON GETTING THROUGH CUSTOMS AND SECURITY SCANS WITH LOADED FILM. LEAVE YOUR DAMN GEOPOLITICAL MEWLING OUT OF THIS. RIGHT TRACK? Stopping idiots who want to blow up planes in mid flight? I presume you condone international terrorism then? Where the HELL are YOU from anyway? They don't need to have security checks where you come from? Never had any domestic terrorism? On Mon, 2003-02-03 at 03:35, Alin Flaider wrote: Tonghang wrote: TZ Personally I don't think these security checks can prevent anything. TZ It's just a harrassment for everyone. Even worse is that these TZ guards seem to enjoy their new found status very much. This is TZ not right. Back in October on the Kennedy airport, I had to undergo a third security check, this time a hand one. Two men and a woman very convinced of their importance went thoroughly through my luggage and dug out triumphantly the large tin can of 100 feet of bulk Provia 100F, which one of them tried to open! I had to patiently explain its content and repeat myself several times before they conceded it's harmless. I've seen in the past over here this brutal, negating attitude, often enough to tell my American friends your country is not on the right track... Servus, Alin
Re: OT: Epson ink use printing issues
CBWaters wrote: T I also bought a box of Epson heavyweight Matte (forgive me, I like matte finish better) today so we'll see if these look better than the Kodak stuff I just finished. The glossy stuf is so much mroe expensive anyway. One thing I noticed, this Epson paper is one-sided, as oposed to the Kodak so I'll use more paper in my testing (read: screw-ups). day... Cory Waters Cory - Epson does have a double-sided matte paper - good prices at: http://www.atlex.com Someone posted good prices at Costco, too - Could you repost the prices for the cartridges for the 820? Thanks, annsan
Re: Epson 2450 question
Thanks Bruce, I thought maybe the film scanners would have some software to fix the dust and scratches. Trying to fix all that stuff in PS is what is taking me so much time. It's very tedious. Michael Bruce Dayton wrote: Michael, I have both the Epson 2450 and the Minolta Scan Dual II Film scanner. I have not found either to be significantly faster than the other. The only real advantage that I see right now is by using Vuescan for speed. It can handle batch scans on the Minolta. The path Boris is planning on going down will be somewhat time intensive, as you become the lab for yourself. The Epson is good enough. If it were me, and I didn't have any needs beyond 35mm, I would go with a film scanner, however. Bruce Monday, February 3, 2003, 10:03:13 AM, you wrote: MC Boris, MC Have you considered ordering from BH in New York? My own experience MC and those of friends leads me to believe that they are very honest, MC efficient, and reliable. MC I am saying this because I have recently been scanning 35mm negs with a MC flatbed scanner and it is a VERY time consuming process. I have spent MC probably 10-12 hours and only have 12 scanned negatives to show for it. MC I would definitely encourage you to look at a film scanner. MC Michael Cross MC Boris Liberman wrote: Hi! Bill, from your response and from other responses I gather that Epson 2450 is a satisfactory film scanner, even for 35 mm film. It is not top quality, but I suppose to expect a top film scanning quality from flatbed scanner is at least illogical. OTOH, at the moment I am struggling with local labs. Obviously they wouldn't babysit and fine tune their machine for my films. So, quite often scans come out with very lousy quality. Another problem would be that for sure in Israel to find a dedicated film scanner would cost me at least 1.5 times more than its actual price. So I suppose I am left with little choice. The only thing that would stop me is too steep a price or too old a unit. Since none of you reported any aging problems or any mechanical glitches with your scanners I must conclude that Epson 2450 is a reasonably reliable machine. As for the scans themselves. I've witnessed a person who is going to sell me the scanner getting roughly 12 MP file from 35 mm negative. Of course 12 MP exceeds by some 3 MP maximal optical power of the sucker. Still the 30x40 cm print was very good. Since at the moment my aim is at most! 30x40 cm prints, I'd say it would be acceptable. My rough estimate would be that if it does not break down within a year, it will return the investment... Then it could be replaced or augmented with another device. Am I terribly wrong someplace in my reasoning? --- Boris Liberman www.geocities.com/dunno57 www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=38625
Re: NYC PDML: 2/22/03?
On Mon, 3 Feb 2003, Ann Sanfedele wrote: Would all of you who are planning to do this CC me when you chat about this - I could then make a little list that includes all of us in my address book - also I toss the PDML stuff regularly and keep every shred of email that isn't from strangers in my inbox forever... I've kept copies of all, I'll email you the list. We have friendly native guides. g But Manhattan sounds good to me as I live in the east village. Oh, I don't fear the friendly guides, I just don't know where anythign actually IS outside of Manhatten.. It was a long time bfore I realized that Staten Island was actually part of NYC. Only if it is alive! tree-hugger on board. I actually think reptile skin anything is pretty silly. The hide doesn't hold up, its not meant to, its too thin. Leather, on the other hand, is perfectly acceptable. well, not totally - 3 of us made it. :) lets try to be optimistic. not an easy thing these days, I'll admit. Point made. :) -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio.
Re: NYC PDML: 2/22/03?
What: The PDML NY area meeting. Where: NYC. When: 2/23/03? Who: bruce rubenstein, [EMAIL PROTECTED] butch black, [EMAIL PROTECTED] herb chong, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ann sanfedele, [EMAIL PROTECTED] bob kelly, [EMAIL PROTECTED] cesar matamoros, [EMAIL PROTECTED] amita guha, [EMAIL PROTECTED] me!, [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, so, here's who's expressed interest thus far.. and I belive the 23rd (Saturday) is the day of choice? Who's interested, and whatever to do? I believe Ann volunteered to put together an off-list list for discussion. -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio.
RE: NYC PDML: 2/22/03?
-Original Message- From: gfen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] OK, so, here's who's expressed interest thus far.. and I belive the 23rd (Saturday) is the day of choice? Who's interested, and whatever to do? The 23rd is a Sunday. I could come Sunday, not Saturday the 22nd. I believe Ann volunteered to put together an off-list list for discussion. Put me down please. If I can't come this time, maybe next. tv
Re: Epson 2450 question
Hi Boris; Your reasoning is fine. If your needs are modest and you can get your return on investment in a year then go for it. As far as reliability I have owned an Epson 636 scanner for nearly 4 years now with no trouble. Flatbeds are generally reliable and should last for years. BUTCH Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself. Hermann Hess (Damien)
Re: OT: Hassleblad aquired
(god, its taken me like a half dozen tries to send this, I'm not sure when I became this stupid, but it hurts...it hurts) From rec.photo.equipment.medium-format http://www.hasselblad.com/news/newsItem.asp?secId=224itemId=2534iShowYear=20 03 Uh-oh, they used that businesspeak buzzword, synergies...could be trouble. (Isn't that the word that Time Warner and AOL have made, er, famous?) --Mike
Re: Tantalizing news
Hey Mike, your trolling now for another thread full of endless speculation. You know what I think of it. You gonna offer us more 'secret/insider knowledge' that you can't say anything more about. Give it a rest... Bob S. In a message dated 2/3/2003 8:38:15 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Great, now we are going to have another 1,000 messages of unending speculation on what Pentax may or may not have. Maybe Mike and Pal can start an on-line, real time, 24x7 forum on the subject. Oh, sorry, I didn't realize that the Pentax DSLR was off limits as a topic too. Well, then, you won't hear another word about it from me. --Mike
Re: NYC PDML: 2/22/03?
Manhattan sounds good to me. I will probably be coming in via Metro North, so a starting point easily accessible by public transportation would be good.
RE: Tantalizing news
I'd much rather hear this than all the mean spirited, ill-reasoned ranting we've been subjected to lately. tv -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 2:07 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Tantalizing news Hey Mike, your trolling now for another thread full of endless speculation. You know what I think of it. You gonna offer us more 'secret/insider knowledge' that you can't say anything more about. Give it a rest... Bob S. In a message dated 2/3/2003 8:38:15 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Great, now we are going to have another 1,000 messages of unending speculation on what Pentax may or may not have. Maybe Mike and Pal can start an on-line, real time, 24x7 forum on the subject. Oh, sorry, I didn't realize that the Pentax DSLR was off limits as a topic too. Well, then, you won't hear another word about it from me. --Mike
Re: Snow Crystal Photographs
MC Last month's cold snap brought some really nice snow to west Michigan, and MC the opportunity for more snow crystal photography. I just updated my MC website with 30 new snow crystal photographs. These were shot with an MC Mz-S, AF360 flash, various extension tubes, bellows, and either a reverse MC mounted SMC-M 50 f1.7 or SMC-M 50 f4 Macro. All shots were at 4 - 8 x MC lifesized. MC If you are interested take a look at this link: MC http://www.markcassino.com MC The monthly feature photo is the best of the lot (IMO) and there's a link MC to the other shots from it. Mark Cassino, Are you aware that there's a children's book out now about an early pioneer of snowflake photography? I can't remember the name of the book/man, but I know it's being widely read in public schools around here right now. Maybe you could piggyback on that interest to get yourself some good publicity. --Mike
Re: New Thread - Air Travel and film
Remember the guy who moved away from Manassas in the Civil War after the First Battle of Bull Run, to get away from the fighting, to a peaceful place called Appomattox...and the surrender was signed in his living room. (Am I remembering this correctly?) Yes, you are. Mr. McLean. First name Wilmer, IIRC. Doug, It must have been Wilmer McLean who first coined the phrase, You can run but you can't hide. g --Mike
Re: Epson 2450 question
Michael, I have found that the Epson 2450 does a better job on that front than the Minolta film scanner. I believe that the diffused light source in the lid makes the difference. I have taken some dirty slides and found that on the Epson they are not nearly as bad. Probably 2-3 times cleaner. Bruce Monday, February 3, 2003, 10:34:30 AM, you wrote: MC Thanks Bruce, MC I thought maybe the film scanners would have some software to fix the MC dust and scratches. Trying to fix all that stuff in PS is what is MC taking me so much time. It's very tedious. MC Michael MC Bruce Dayton wrote: Michael, I have both the Epson 2450 and the Minolta Scan Dual II Film scanner. I have not found either to be significantly faster than the other. The only real advantage that I see right now is by using Vuescan for speed. It can handle batch scans on the Minolta. The path Boris is planning on going down will be somewhat time intensive, as you become the lab for yourself. The Epson is good enough. If it were me, and I didn't have any needs beyond 35mm, I would go with a film scanner, however. Bruce Monday, February 3, 2003, 10:03:13 AM, you wrote: MC Boris, MC Have you considered ordering from BH in New York? My own experience MC and those of friends leads me to believe that they are very honest, MC efficient, and reliable. MC I am saying this because I have recently been scanning 35mm negs with a MC flatbed scanner and it is a VERY time consuming process. I have spent MC probably 10-12 hours and only have 12 scanned negatives to show for it. MC I would definitely encourage you to look at a film scanner. MC Michael Cross MC Boris Liberman wrote: Hi! Bill, from your response and from other responses I gather that Epson 2450 is a satisfactory film scanner, even for 35 mm film. It is not top quality, but I suppose to expect a top film scanning quality from flatbed scanner is at least illogical. OTOH, at the moment I am struggling with local labs. Obviously they wouldn't babysit and fine tune their machine for my films. So, quite often scans come out with very lousy quality. Another problem would be that for sure in Israel to find a dedicated film scanner would cost me at least 1.5 times more than its actual price. So I suppose I am left with little choice. The only thing that would stop me is too steep a price or too old a unit. Since none of you reported any aging problems or any mechanical glitches with your scanners I must conclude that Epson 2450 is a reasonably reliable machine. As for the scans themselves. I've witnessed a person who is going to sell me the scanner getting roughly 12 MP file from 35 mm negative. Of course 12 MP exceeds by some 3 MP maximal optical power of the sucker. Still the 30x40 cm print was very good. Since at the moment my aim is at most! 30x40 cm prints, I'd say it would be acceptable. My rough estimate would be that if it does not break down within a year, it will return the investment... Then it could be replaced or augmented with another device. Am I terribly wrong someplace in my reasoning? --- Boris Liberman www.geocities.com/dunno57 www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=38625
Re: New 67 and new generation of K-mount?
Ryan, But everyone is already saying that Canon 1DS is competing head to head with 645 already. Why bother? The next generation of chips will probably surpass it. On the film front, there still may be advantages (cost for sure) in using 67. In the end, maybe it will have a longer life than the 645. Bruce Monday, February 3, 2003, 10:35:37 AM, you wrote: RKB Rob Brigham wrote: But you could put a 645 size sensor on an insert for a 67 based system... RKB But there's already AF and full automation for the 645Nii, so it makes RKB more sense to stick with that. RKB 645 would still be a crop. RKB R
Re: NYC PDML: 2/22/03?
I'll add the list-cliche me too! as well :-) I live upstate, but Amtrak gets me there... -Mat Amita Guha wrote: Could you guys please include me as well, in case my plans for that weekend fall through? Thx.
Re: OT: Hassleblad aquired
Mike, Anytime there is an acquisition, changes are going to happen. Philosophies between the companies. Usually the Acquirer is more money oriented (that's why they are doing the acquiring). That will always have an effect on how business is done in the future - Sales, Marketing and Support can all be affected - usually for the worse. Leastways that has been my experience. If I were a Hasselblad user, I would be mildly concerned. Bruce Monday, February 3, 2003, 11:06:03 AM, you wrote: (god, its taken me like a half dozen tries to send this, I'm not sure when I became this stupid, but it hurts...it hurts) From rec.photo.equipment.medium-format http://www.hasselblad.com/news/newsItem.asp?secId=224itemId=2534iShowYear=20 03 MJ Uh-oh, they used that businesspeak buzzword, synergies...could be trouble. MJ (Isn't that the word that Time Warner and AOL have made, er, famous?) MJ --Mike
Re: New 67 and new generation of K-mount?
Bruce wrote: I've looked over the 67II and can't see any radical way to shrink the size. I'm sure little cuts here and there would shrink it a bit - maybe using more materials like in the MZ-S would reduce it's weight a bit more. It can anything from update of the current version to a 6X7 version of the Nikon F5. My guess is, which is only a guess and might be totally wrong, is that they will remove the removable prism, get rid of the shutter dating from the 60's, get rid of the film transport and replace it with a motor. The current one is dating fundamentally from the 60's. A complete new camera may make sense as it can be a blue copy of any coming 35mm slr body. Pentax have given all their slr's the AF treatment. Perhaps now the time has come for the 67? Not to mention a suitable platform for MF digital (I do believe that sensor prices will come down at some stage making MF digital as affordable as high-end 35mm digital today). All of the above is just guesses. Pål
Re: Tantalizing news - the name of the DSLR
Rob wrote: Seriously, this statement is a little strange. I think we had all expected it to be 'mid-level'. Its not going to be an MZ-60 type thing is it?? You cannot take the rumors at this stage litterally. It probably only means that it is competitively priced and not top of the line. Pål
Re: New 67 and new generation of K-mount?
Rob wrote: This would answer the constant criticism of Pentax not having changeable backs perhaps? Very unlikely as this will make the camera larger, not smaller. Besides, I suspect the interchangeable back crowd will go digital real soon, if not already. No, this is again the MF field camera more field-like than ever I suspect. This, of course, adress my main criticism towards the 67; its size. So I'm tempted Pentax is in a miniaturization frenzy these days. It seems like all they are about to release will be exceptionally small for what it does. It is indicated to me that the DSLR is incredible small compared to every other DSLR. Pål
Re: Tantalizing news
Me, too. It actually gives me something that I'm willing to converse about on this list. Keep it up! Bruce Monday, February 3, 2003, 11:27:54 AM, you wrote: t I'd much rather hear this than all the mean spirited, ill-reasoned t ranting we've been subjected to lately. t tv -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 2:07 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Tantalizing news Hey Mike, your trolling now for another thread full of endless speculation. You know what I think of it. You gonna offer us more 'secret/insider knowledge' that you can't say anything more about. Give it a rest... Bob S. In a message dated 2/3/2003 8:38:15 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Great, now we are going to have another 1,000 messages of unending speculation on what Pentax may or may not have. Maybe Mike and Pal can start an on-line, real time, 24x7 forum on the subject. Oh, sorry, I didn't realize that the Pentax DSLR was off limits as a topic too. Well, then, you won't hear another word about it from me. --Mike
Re: New Thread - Air Travel and film
Just got back from a trip from DC/Baltimore to The Grand Canyon. I just asked the security guys to hand inspect my film. They had no issues. I had ASA 50, 100 and 400 films and they were extremely polite about not x-raying them. To make it quick and easy I had the film in zip-lock bags at the top of my camera bag. When I approached the inspection area I pulled out the bag and asked for it to be hand inspected. The guy in BWI that swabbed each roll (looking for explosives I guess) did so with a smile. When I thanked him he said We are happy to do this for you. This is your tax dollars at work. Have a great flight!. Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, February 02, 2003 9:37 PM Subject: New Thread - Air Travel and film In about a month I am going to Hawaii for a short vacation. Most likely I will take the 67II and leave home the 35mm gear. Still deciding on that one. Anyway, I am wondering what the current state of film going through the detectors is. Is there any noticeable damage coming from the x-ray machines? At what speed is the film problematic? An interesting angle for me is that the 120 roll film is spooled on plastic cores so theoretically I could walk through the metal detector with them on my person. Has anyone tried this? It seems that all the Kodak film comes in plastic outer wrapper (sealed), but the Fuji and Agfa use something more like a metal film of some type. I'm guessing that would make a difference. Does anyone have any experience with this? Anything else I need to watch out for? How stringent are the airlines (United in this case) about carry-on regulations (size, weight)? If it helps the discussion, I'll be flying out of San Francisco and landing in Maui. Any tips or suggestions are welcome. Thanks, Bruce
Women in photography
Please remember there are a number of women on this list, too. And that's another good thing about this list. I used to teach photography at a girls' school, and it was nice to be able to point out that there have been significant female photographers virtually from the medium's beginnings until now. (Many significant scholars too--Maria Morris Hambourg at the Met, Anne Tucker in Texas, Sarah Greenough, Naomi Rosenblum, to name a few). --Mike
Re: New Thread - Air Travel and film
ALL the signs (and the new Federal security staff) warn against ANY speed film in checked baggage. Carry it on and ask for hand inspection regardless of film speed (the signs in security say anything below 800 is safe. I wasn't going to push it.). Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, February 02, 2003 10:42 PM Subject: Re: New Thread - Air Travel and film - Original Message - From: Bruce Dayton Subject: New Thread - Air Travel and film Anyway, I am wondering what the current state of film going through the detectors is. Is there any noticeable damage coming from the x-ray machines? At what speed is the film problematic? In a word, ruined. So far this winter I have seen something like a dozen customers with film that has been fogged past redemption by the x-ray devices. Most of them had packed their film in checked lugguge, not carry on. Film speed wasn't an issue, 100 speed was nearly as wrecked as 800, the difference being that on the 100 you could tell that the film had discreet frames on it if you held it up to a bright enough light. Several customers insisted that their film had been in carry on luggage and had been run through those machines, after recieving assurance from the security people that it was perfectly safe. If you are taking 120 film only, it might be an idea to put as many rolls as you can into a photo vest and wear them onto the plane. William Robb
RE: NYC PDML: 2/22/03? - which is a SAturday
-Original Message- From: gfen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Mon, 3 Feb 2003, Ann Sanfedele wrote: ack! it is 2/22/03, look up - look at subject line -- compare to calendar on wall. annsan tsktsks :) 2/22 is the Friday, I thought more people were compelled for the Saturday? You're looking at last year's calendar. 2/22/03 is a Saturday. tv
Re: PZ-20 owners
The only downside to the PZ-20, a wonderful, inexpensive little camera, is that owning one will make you buy a PZ-1p right away. -- Bob Keefer Keefer Photography (541) 914-9259 www.bkpix.com
RE: NYC PDML: 2/22/03? - which is a SAturday
On Mon, 3 Feb 2003, tom wrote: You're looking at last year's calendar. 2/22/03 is a Saturday. -cough- Actually, I was. Whoops. -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio.
Re: Re: PZ-20 owners
Dually noted and recorded,Bob. Dave Begin Original Message From: Keefer Photography [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 12:17:18 -0800 To: Pentax group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PZ-20 owners The only downside to the PZ-20, a wonderful, inexpensive little camera, is that owning one will make you buy a PZ-1p right away. -- Bob Keefer Keefer Photography (541) 914-9259 www.bkpix.com End Original Message Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada Art needs to be in a frame.That way we know when the art stops and the wall begins--Frank Zappa http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
Re: New Thread - Air Travel and film
Does the possible damage apply to both negative and slide film? Feroze - Original Message - From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 5:21 PM Subject: Re: New Thread - Air Travel and film - Original Message - From: Cesar Matamoros II Subject: RE: New Thread - Air Travel and film Something that I forgot to mention is that unexposed film is far less prone to X-Ray damage than exposed film. William Robb
Re: Women in photography
Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please remember there are a number of women on this list, too. And that's another good thing about this list. I used to teach photography at a girls' school, and it was nice to be able to point out that there have been significant female photographers virtually from the medium's beginnings until now. (Many significant scholars too--Maria Morris Hambourg at the Met, Anne Tucker in Texas, Sarah Greenough, Naomi Rosenblum, to name a few). I'm in the middle of volume 3 of Simon Schama's A History of Britain and just read a long, fascinating section about Julia Margaret Cameron. (Quite a refreshing surprise considering Schama's focus otherwise is almost entirely on political history.) Has just 4 reproductions of her photographs, but I think that's more coverage than any other artist gets in the whole series. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: 120 -Rays
Bill, Great information! Thanks, Bruce Monday, February 3, 2003, 12:00:58 PM, you wrote: BL Bruce wrote: BL An interesting angle for me is that the 120 roll film is spooled on BL plastic cores so theoretically I could walk through the metal detector BL with them on my person. Has anyone tried this? It seems that all the BL Kodak film comes in plastic outer wrapper (sealed), but the Fuji and BL Agfa use something more like a metal film of some type. I'm guessing BL that would make a difference. Does anyone have any experience with BL this? BL .. BL Bruce, I have tested 120 at San Francisco airport and found that Fuji and BL Agfa film wrappers set off the metal detector when carried in my pockets. I BL don't remember if Kodak did. Then the guards spend five minutes trying to BL figure out what 120 film is. It gets x-rayed anyway while all your BL carrry-on gets searched. BL Because I carry 800 and 400 ISO 120/220 sometimes I take them out of the BL foil packages and carry them in my baggy travel pants and shirts pockets BL through the metal detector. Then I put them in my carry-on shoulder bag. BL I also buy 100 ft rolls of Velvia and Provia and load them on PLASTIC BL cassettes available from BH for fifty cents. These plastic casettes are BL reusable for a long time and also do not trigger the metal detector if in BL your pockets. BL I travel in North Face nylon clothes that have no metal fasteners and I BL use an all synthetic web money belt and wear non-metallic sneakers. My BL watch and pen go in the carry-on bag. I look pretty lumpy when I am in the BL line! BL I really do this ritual for the off chance that a carry on x-ray is running BL out of specs and might toast my film. I started doing this when I made an BL around the world trip in 1999. I carried a lot of film, too much to put in BL my pockets but I reserved a limited number of rolls for the special BL treatment. I shipped a load of exposed film home from Asia by a friend - BL courrier. I traveled on to Europe and went through at least 22 airport BL carry-on scanners altogether. Some of these scanners were in low-tech third BL world ccountries. BL I paid attention to what film was in my pockets, what film went to India, BL and what film went all around the world. I shot some comparison rolls at BL home and sent it all off for processing. I used 120/220 Fuji Reala, Agfa BL Optima 400, Agfa APX 100 and Kodak Tri-X, 35mm Provia II, APX 100,Agfa RSX BL II 100, Kodak Gold 100 and a bunch of no-name bw 100 Indian film. BL None of the film showed any x-ray damage. BL However, we know that current checked baggage scanners are fatal to film. I BL still carry the 800 and 400 film in my pockets. BL Bill Lawlor
RE: OT Pentax wife
Please remember there are a number of women on this list, too. Yeah, there are, what, four of us? g We lost that nice lady from New Zealand, right? I could probably say a few choice words about Pentax husbands, as well, but I'll save that for another day. vbg
Re: NYC PDML: 2/22/03?
Frank usually does the TPDML,and he still talks to us,so it cannot be that bad of a jobG btw ALL 6 of us managed to get together in one spot for a change, even though Aaron was a captaive audienceg Hopefully Vic can make one, one of these days. Dave On Mon, 3 Feb 2003, Ann Sanfedele wrote: apparently the volunteer gatherer (I may regret this!) Remember, you volunteered for it.. I was happy to pass my self-appointed voltuneer gathering on. :) -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio.
Re: Re: PZ-20 owners
I'm still resisting the PZ-1p --- David Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dually noted and recorded,Bob. Dave Begin Original Message From: Keefer Photography [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 12:17:18 -0800 To: Pentax group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PZ-20 owners The only downside to the PZ-20, a wonderful, inexpensive little camera, is that owning one will make you buy a PZ-1p right away. -- Bob Keefer Keefer Photography (541) 914-9259 www.bkpix.com End Original Message Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada Art needs to be in a frame.That way we know when the art stops and the wall begins--Frank Zappa http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail __ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
RE; PDML NY Dates
I checked a calendar Fri is the 21st, Sat 22nd, Sun 23rd. We are off to a great start gang. VBG BUTCH Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself. Hermann Hess (Damien)
Re: Three Tips and an Announcement
Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've just discovered a very inexpensive source for inkjet inks, Tyler-Martin (www.tylermartin.com). Canon inks for my S800, for instance, are $11.95 at the CompUSA down the street, whereas Tyler-Martin's equivalents are $2.95 or $2.85. I haven't used these yet but I'm got a box on the way and will report once I know more. Wow, their prices are amazing. Do keep us informed as to how the stuff works. Could really take the sting out of home printing. Now if I could just find a way to make fine art paper affordable... -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Tantalizing news
On Monday, February 3, 2003, at 01:39 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote: Me, too. It actually gives me something that I'm willing to converse about on this list. Keep it up! Bruce Me, too. Spill yer guts. Dan Scott
Re: Three Tips and an Announcement
I don't think the words fine art and affordable go together in the same sentance :) Feroze Mark Roberts Wrote: Wow, their prices are amazing. Do keep us informed as to how the stuff works. Could really take the sting out of home printing. Now if I could just find a way to make fine art paper affordable... -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: PUG access.
I use Mozilla, which is the same as Netscape basically, but it is the open source version of it. http://www.mozilla.org One of the nicest features is the tabbed browsing. New windows open in the same browser window, and ad a tab for the new window, rather then a complete new seperate window. On Friday 31 January 2003 19:53, Feroze Kistan wrote: Hi Mike, I get that often too, always the same pics that wont load. Herb's idea to use Netscape seems good. What are you using? Feroze - Original Message - From: mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 12:06 PM Subject: Re: PUG access. Hi, WR wrote: I think it was Mike Wilson who had the most grief, perhaps he could shed some light. Never solved my problem but it's not quite the same one. I find that _some_ images of each gallery won't load. When I revisit the same gallery it is always the same images but it does not seem to be linked to the poster, as I may be able to view their images in another gallery. I got round this by using another browser for PUG. I am assuming that it is a combination of browser and local network protocols that is causing my problem. mike -- Frits Wüthrich Pentaxianado
Re: PUG access.
But does it work, I just need to browse the net, and see the PUG, not too much to ask for is it? Feroze - Original Message - From: Frits Wüthrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 11:16 PM Subject: Re: PUG access. I use Mozilla, which is the same as Netscape basically, but it is the open source version of it. http://www.mozilla.org One of the nicest features is the tabbed browsing. New windows open in the same browser window, and ad a tab for the new window, rather then a complete new seperate window. On Friday 31 January 2003 19:53, Feroze Kistan wrote: Hi Mike, I get that often too, always the same pics that wont load. Herb's idea to use Netscape seems good. What are you using? Feroze - Original Message - From: mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 12:06 PM Subject: Re: PUG access. Hi, WR wrote: I think it was Mike Wilson who had the most grief, perhaps he could shed some light. Never solved my problem but it's not quite the same one. I find that _some_ images of each gallery won't load. When I revisit the same gallery it is always the same images but it does not seem to be linked to the poster, as I may be able to view their images in another gallery. I got round this by using another browser for PUG. I am assuming that it is a combination of browser and local network protocols that is causing my problem. mike -- Frits Wüthrich Pentaxianado
2.5/28mm
Hi All, Does anyone have any experience with the 2.5/28mm (not 2.8) Panagor wideangle (62mm filter, it is multicoated. I think it was made by Kino Precision Optics and also marketed as Vivitar (series 1?) I can buy one, mechanical its feel very nice, but I don't have the time this moment to filmtest it. Is it any good, compared to the 2.8/28mm Pentax M? What price is a good price? Thanks in advance, René
Re: Another lens hood question
Thanks for all the suggestions. Ken Archer had the hoods mentioned and brought them and some of his other goodies over today. I ended up buying the hood for the 85-210/4.5 and he picked up the tab for lunch, too. :-) Don't get deals like that too often. Thanks again, Dan Scott
Re: PUG access.
In 000c01c2c96e$e323e080$6a55ef9b@angel, on 01/31/03 at 11:22 PM, Feroze Kistan [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: |But does it work, I just need to browse the net, and see the PUG, |not too much to ask for is it? I ditched netscape in favour of mozilla over a year ago and have had no complaints WRT the browser. Bran -- --- You want to buy a magical chia pet? [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
Re: New 67 and new generation of K-mount?
If I recall, Pentax also had a patent for a new AF system along with the KAF3 mount. I wonder how different this AF will be. Cross sensors? More AF pts? Faster? Peter --- Pål_Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rob wrote: This would answer the constant criticism of Pentax not having changeable backs perhaps? Very unlikely as this will make the camera larger, not smaller. Besides, I suspect the interchangeable back crowd will go digital real soon, if not already. No, this is again the MF field camera more field-like than ever I suspect. This, of course, adress my main criticism towards the 67; its size. So I'm tempted Pentax is in a miniaturization frenzy these days. It seems like all they are about to release will be exceptionally small for what it does. It is indicated to me that the DSLR is incredible small compared to every other DSLR. Pål __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Re: Snow Crystal Photographs
Hi, Mike and Mark, I have a friend who's a children's librarian at the Toronto Public Library. If such a book exists, my guess is that she'll know of it. I've sent her an e-mail, and I'll let you (and the list) know if she's familiar with it. regards, frank Mike Johnston wrote: Mark Cassino, Are you aware that there's a children's book out now about an early pioneer of snowflake photography? I can't remember the name of the book/man, but I know it's being widely read in public schools around here right now. Maybe you could piggyback on that interest to get yourself some good publicity. --Mike -- The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer
Re: Tantalizing news - the name of the DSLR
It seems that with DSLR's that entry-level is more like a mid-level 35mm SLR. The Canon D60 Nikon D100 are entry-level DSLR's for both companies, and are based on mid-level 35mm SLR's. Go figure... Peter --- Pål_Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rob wrote: Seriously, this statement is a little strange. I think we had all expected it to be 'mid-level'. Its not going to be an MZ-60 type thing is it?? You cannot take the rumors at this stage litterally. It probably only means that it is competitively priced and not top of the line. Pål __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
