RE: DL TTL flash madness
Crippled or not. If the new 10 MP Pentax body doesn't support ordenary TTL flash, I won't be buying it. I have too many flashes - I guess 7 or 8 TTL flahses, one of which is a Metz 60-CT2. Regards Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Godfrey DiGiorgi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 31. marts 2006 19:16 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: DL TTL flash madness On Mar 31, 2006, at 7:58 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote: ... I think of it as a crippled flash interface. ... I understand your disappointment; it is one of the reasons I prefer the DS body. However, for the newcomer to SLR cameras who is going to buy new flash equipment along with body and lens, I imagine it isn't even a consideration. Crippled is kind of a strong word ... If you bought a DL and the appropriate AF360FGZ (or Sigma EF 500 DG Super) flash unit, the system is anything but crippled. For my own use, although I prefer to have the potential capability in the DS body, I don't own any dedicated flash unit. I use a generic, inexpensive Sunpak 383 and a couple of Paterson ELite flash panels. The Sunpak has its own exposure metering and does a great job with flash metering, beyond that I use a flash meter to measure things and set the ISO/aperture/exposure time accordingly. A different way of working with flash, yes. One of these days I'll get a dedicated flash unit too, I imagine. I just haven't seen the need as yet. Godfrey -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006
RE: Wide Angle advice for *ist-DS
I can't speak to your idea of value or address your budgetary concerns. However, the 77 Ltd is a great lens, it works beautifully on the DS, and is worth every penny you'll pay for it. It's the first auto focus lens I've ever used, and the first I've used on the DS. Go for it! As for price, there are any number of lenses that are nowhere near the quality or pleasure to use that cost quite a bit more. Godfrey's gotten some great results with his 20~35/4.0, and while i don't care much for zooms, this is one of two or three that I'd consider. However, if you are happy with the 16~45, why look for something else in that range. The 14/2.8 is a nice, compact lens. I've only made a few snaps with it, but it seems like an optic worth consideration. I'll have to cajole Godders into letting me shoot a little more with his to make a final decision, but I like what I've seen and experienced thus far. Shel
Re: Wide Angle advice for *ist-DS
Thanks for your remarks Godfrey; always informative. I think I'll start working toward getting the DA14/2.8 and eventually a DA70/2.4Ltd (when available). The latter sounds absolutely ideal. Where does it fall on the roadmap? A couple people have mentioned that I ought to just get my use out of the 16-45. It has been a great lens for me, and I never feel that it's producing inadequate results. I just happen to actually *enjoy* shooting with non-zoom lenses more, for some reason. I've never been able to quite put my finger on the reason. I think that by picking a focal length and sticking with it for awhile helps me to see potential shots in terms of that focal length before I bring the camera up to my eye, and that helps me to achieve more meaningful composition. By the way, my *least* used lens, since acquiring the *ist-DS is the 80-320. I almost sold it a couple times, but stopped myself when I saw how cheap they go for on eBay; not even worth bothering to sell. So I hang onto it for the one or two times a year where it proves to be the right choice of equipment. Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On Apr 2, 2006, at 8:02 PM, David Oswald wrote: But where I'm always feeling a need is in my non-zoom lenses. First, I don't have anything that I would consider to be in the range of wide angle, mounted on the *ist-DS. I've considered the following options, but have been hesitant to jump in with wallet and both feet: SMC Pentax-FA 20mm f/2.8 AL Pros: Compact. Wide-ish angle. Not prohibitively expensive. Cons: Used on a DSLR, it's not really all *that* wide. I tested this lens, comparing it to the Canon EF20/2.8 and the Sigma 20/1.8, all on digital bodies only. It's the best of the three wide open, the Canon catches up by f/4, and the Sigma almost catches up between f/4.5-5.6. I owned the Canon 20/2.8 with my 10D. However, I decided that a zoom was more applicable in this range for me. I'm always wanting between a 24mm and 28mm lens. I tried the DA16-45 but didn't like its bulk/weight. I replaced that with the FA20-35/4 AL and find it produces results competitive with the primes in this range that I've owned and is a wonderful lens to work with: light, compact, quick and contrasty. The one stop slower speed has not proven to be a problem at all. If you already have and like the DA16-45, I wouldn't bother with the FA20. I'd want wider. SMC Pentax-DA 14mm f/2.8 AL Pros: Ultra-wide angle. Cons: Priced a little beyond my comfort level for a wide angle lens. A little wider than I feel my only wide angle lens should be. This was the only new lens I bought when I ordered the DS body. I'm very glad I did: it's an excellent performer in every regard, a LOT cheaper than the Canon or Nikon offerings in this focal length range, and balances very well on the *ist DS. It produces the field of view of a 21mm focal length on a 35mm film SLR, which has always been about as wide as I need. Excellent rectilinear correction, very low chromatic aberration, best aperture between f/4.5 and f/5.6. Page of example shots at http://homepage.mac.com/godders/14mm-examples/. Frankly, I feel that the right choice for me just isn't made. If it were, it would be called: SMC Pentax-DA 16mm f/2.8. Could such a contraption be on the horizon? You already have the DA16-45/4, which is only one stop slower and very nearly prime quality. Nothing like a DA16/2.8 is on Pentax lens roadmap for 2006-2007. Now on to the other gap I'm feeling: the moderate telephoto. I've got the 50mm lens, which is a good lens for not-so-tight portraits. And I've got the 135mm lens, which gets me in there really tight. But I'm always wishing for something between those two. Here are the options that I see: SMC Pentax-FA 77mm f/1.9 Limited Pros: Image quality, build quality, convenient focal length. Cons: What amateur can honestly justify its price tag? IMO, that's the only one to go for in this range unless you really want a macro lens. Small, light, excellent imaging quality, etc. Right now I jump from 50 to 135 as well, sold my M85/2 as I found I really prefer having all AF series lenses, and have been debating getting the FA77/1.8 limited too. It's not *that* expensive given the quality. But it's also a focal length I find I don't use all that often. I might wait for the DA70/2.4 Limited. Godfrey
Re: Wide Angle advice for *ist-DS
Why? What advantage do you see that the 70/2.4 has over the 77/1.8? Size, perhaps? Shel [Original Message] From: Godfrey DiGiorgi SMC Pentax-FA 77mm f/1.9 Limited Pros: Image quality, build quality, convenient focal length. Cons: What amateur can honestly justify its price tag? IMO, that's the only one to go for in this range unless you really want a macro lens. Small, light, excellent imaging quality, etc. [...] really prefer having all AF series lenses, and have been debating getting the FA77/1.8 limited too. It's not *that* expensive given the quality. But it's also a focal length I find I don't use all that often. I might wait for the DA70/2.4 Limited.
Focus confirmation on the SFXn at F8
Hi all to my surprise the Pentax SFXn gives me focus confirmation with the SP Tamron F8 mirror lens. A feature that should only work with lenses faster than F4 I thought ;-) greetings Markus
RE: PESO: Remake - Aristocrat in red
Hi Tim Maybe I misunderstood you but what has all this photoshopping to do with your original bird project? I strongly dislike the way you have choosen here and hope you have read my last post ;-) greetings Markus -Original Message- From: Tim Øsleby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 2:11 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: PESO: Remake - Aristocrat in red I have done a makeover on the Aristocrat in red picture. http://www.foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=228580 This is a sandwich of three different exposures, all from the same standpoint, and from the same session. The result is a new head ;-) and a improved(?) composition. This is the first time my hands have become dirty from working in PS. So I would really appreciate some comments on the result. Whatdoyuahthink? What about the photoshoping, anything I could have done better or different? Does it look real? And is it an improvement? Or could I have saved me the trouble? (The original is at a thumb below the picture for reference.) A lot of questions, but isn't that what life is, questions? Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds (Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)
Re: DL TTL flash madness
Expect it not to. Pre-flash based TTL and Auto-Thyristor flash are both more reliable with Digital than plain TTL. It's remarkable that TTL ever worked with the *ist's (the only other recent DSLR to support TTL flash was the Fuji S2 Pro, all others use a pre-flash based system like E-TTL, iTTL, D-TTL or whatever KM called theirs). In other words, TTL is dead. -Adam Jens Bladt wrote: Crippled or not. If the new 10 MP Pentax body doesn't support ordenary TTL flash, I won't be buying it. I have too many flashes - I guess 7 or 8 TTL flahses, one of which is a Metz 60-CT2. Regards Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Godfrey DiGiorgi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 31. marts 2006 19:16 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: DL TTL flash madness On Mar 31, 2006, at 7:58 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote: ... I think of it as a crippled flash interface. ... I understand your disappointment; it is one of the reasons I prefer the DS body. However, for the newcomer to SLR cameras who is going to buy new flash equipment along with body and lens, I imagine it isn't even a consideration. Crippled is kind of a strong word ... If you bought a DL and the appropriate AF360FGZ (or Sigma EF 500 DG Super) flash unit, the system is anything but crippled. For my own use, although I prefer to have the potential capability in the DS body, I don't own any dedicated flash unit. I use a generic, inexpensive Sunpak 383 and a couple of Paterson ELite flash panels. The Sunpak has its own exposure metering and does a great job with flash metering, beyond that I use a flash meter to measure things and set the ISO/aperture/exposure time accordingly. A different way of working with flash, yes. One of these days I'll get a dedicated flash unit too, I imagine. I just haven't seen the need as yet. Godfrey -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006
Re: Re: D'oh
From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/04/02 Sun PM 09:41:51 GMT To: pentax list pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: D'oh On 2/4/06, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed: Don't do *UV* filters. Couldn't get by without the occasional polarizer, myself... Yah, I'll give you that. Some guys did some tests over on a Canon list recently and the shots with filters on were not as sharp as those without. I'd like to see some Pentax lens tests with and without filters, especially on some decent long glass. Any takers? One or two lenses (300/2.8?) require a filter blank (filters at the back of the lens) to focus properly in the first place. m - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
Re: Re: OT: Website Help Needed
From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/04/02 Sun PM 10:11:03 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: OT: Website Help Needed On Sun, 2 Apr 2006, mike wilson wrote: The PUG works excellently because it oonly opens the one new window, which continuously loops the images. Not on IE6 over XP SP2. I get as many windows as clicks. Kostas I'll try very hard not to snigger about that. 8-))) Ooops! - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
Re: Wide Angle advice for *ist-DS
On Apr 2, 2006, at 11:42 PM, David Oswald wrote: Thanks for your remarks Godfrey; always informative. I think I'll start working toward getting the DA14/2.8 and eventually a DA70/2.4Ltd (when available). The latter sounds absolutely ideal. Where does it fall on the roadmap? The DA70/2.4 Limited looks to be targeted for around Fall 2006, I would assume Photokina or a little after, same as the 10Mpxel body. A couple people have mentioned that I ought to just get my use out of the 16-45. It has been a great lens for me, and I never feel that it's producing inadequate results. I didn't like the handling either. The FA20-35 feels like you're using a prime, that's one of the reasons I like it so much. I just happen to actually *enjoy* shooting with non-zoom lenses more, for some reason. I've never been able to quite put my finger on the reason. I think that by picking a focal length and sticking with it for awhile helps me to see potential shots in terms of that focal length before I bring the camera up to my eye, and that helps me to achieve more meaningful composition. It's often simply a matter of discipline. I often set the 20-35 on 28mm and leave it there, focus manually by zone/DoF, it keeps me in the prime frame of mind. By the way, my *least* used lens, since acquiring the *ist-DS is the 80-320. I almost sold it a couple times, but stopped myself when I saw how cheap they go for on eBay; not even worth bothering to sell. So I hang onto it for the one or two times a year where it proves to be the right choice of equipment. Yeah, sounds like the F100-300 I bought for $85. It works to well to just toss, but I use it so seldom I'm glad I didn't pay more for it. I rarely use much longer than the 135mm with the DS, and that only once in a bit. Godfrey
Re: Wide Angle advice for *ist-DS
It's smaller and lighter, and it will have the quick-shift focus feature. I hope it will be a little less expensive. The slightly shorter focal length would probably suit me a little better too. I'd might prefer the 77/1.8 over the 70/2.4, but for that focusing mount feature. Godfrey On Apr 2, 2006, at 11:36 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Why? What advantage do you see that the 70/2.4 has over the 77/1.8? Size, perhaps? Shel [Original Message] From: Godfrey DiGiorgi SMC Pentax-FA 77mm f/1.9 Limited Pros: Image quality, build quality, convenient focal length. Cons: What amateur can honestly justify its price tag? IMO, that's the only one to go for in this range unless you really want a macro lens. Small, light, excellent imaging quality, etc. [...] really prefer having all AF series lenses, and have been debating getting the FA77/1.8 limited too. It's not *that* expensive given the quality. But it's also a focal length I find I don't use all that often. I might wait for the DA70/2.4 Limited.
Micro PDML
I'm happy to report that neither Jostein nor myself were arrested for photographing (in the dark) the militarily strategic bridges across the River Tyne. We were, however, accosted by a few young females in various stages of undress with certain requests (Take me photo, willya?) that we managed to resist. Apart from getting dizzy from the spiral staircases, I found out how extremely unfit I am on the trip to the top of Durham cathedral bell tower. To round off the weekend, we visited the ancestral home of George Washington to watch the rain come down. Pictures at 11. mike - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
Re: Wide Angle advice for *ist-DS
On 2/4/06, David Oswald, discombobulated, unleashed: Cons: What amateur can honestly justify its price tag? No amateur has to justify any price tag. What price lust? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Re: D'oh
On 3 Apr 2006 at 6:57, mike wilson wrote: One or two lenses (300/2.8?) require a filter blank (filters at the back of the lens) to focus properly in the first place. Not in the A*300/2.8 or any other of the long recent Pentax lenses that I'm aware of. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: DL TTL flash madness
By the way, I saw Metz did release a new version of their 45 flashes with E-TTL (and others) compatibility. Interesting I'd say ... On 4/3/06, Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Expect it not to. Pre-flash based TTL and Auto-Thyristor flash are both more reliable with Digital than plain TTL. It's remarkable that TTL ever worked with the *ist's (the only other recent DSLR to support TTL flash was the Fuji S2 Pro, all others use a pre-flash based system like E-TTL, iTTL, D-TTL or whatever KM called theirs). In other words, TTL is dead. -Adam Jens Bladt wrote: Crippled or not. If the new 10 MP Pentax body doesn't support ordenary TTL flash, I won't be buying it. I have too many flashes - I guess 7 or 8 TTL flahses, one of which is a Metz 60-CT2. Regards Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Godfrey DiGiorgi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 31. marts 2006 19:16 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: DL TTL flash madness On Mar 31, 2006, at 7:58 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote: ... I think of it as a crippled flash interface. ... I understand your disappointment; it is one of the reasons I prefer the DS body. However, for the newcomer to SLR cameras who is going to buy new flash equipment along with body and lens, I imagine it isn't even a consideration. Crippled is kind of a strong word ... If you bought a DL and the appropriate AF360FGZ (or Sigma EF 500 DG Super) flash unit, the system is anything but crippled. For my own use, although I prefer to have the potential capability in the DS body, I don't own any dedicated flash unit. I use a generic, inexpensive Sunpak 383 and a couple of Paterson ELite flash panels. The Sunpak has its own exposure metering and does a great job with flash metering, beyond that I use a flash meter to measure things and set the ISO/aperture/exposure time accordingly. A different way of working with flash, yes. One of these days I'll get a dedicated flash unit too, I imagine. I just haven't seen the need as yet. Godfrey -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- -- Thibouille -- *ist-D,Z1,SFXn,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ...
re: Wide Angle advice for *ist-DS
FA - are for 35mm SLR's, not small digital sensors, although, 23.7x17.5 is in the middle of its field, as such highest quality lense produce is expected on digital. Just remember 1.5x times focal length. Peace, --- David Oswald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote --- SMC Pentax-FA 77mm f/1.9 Limited Pros: Image quality, build quality, convenient focal length. Cons: What amateur can honestly justify its price tag? SMC Pentax-FA* 85mm f/1.4 Pros: It's an FA*! It's super fast. Cons: Big, expensive, reportedly not ideally suited to digital. SMC Pentax-FA 100mm f/2.8 Macro Pros: Excellent reputation for image quality. Macro is a bonus. Cons: Tending toward being a little longer than I need; I already have a 135, after all. And it's a little heavy. Not all that fast, compared to the 77 and 85. SMC Pentax-DFA 100mm f/2.8 Macro Pros: Reported to have excellent image quality. Macro also a bonus. Cons: A little spendy. Not real fast. And still, a little longer than I think I want, when I already have a 135. -- home http://roman.blakout.net/
Re: Focus confirmation on the SFXn at F8
I think f/5.6 is the general consensus for the limit a lens can provide honest AF. Some go till 6.7 or beyond. Keep in mind it might work nicely if you're in a well lighted area. I can confirm mine does that too on my Z1, and probably D also. On 4/3/06, Markus Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all to my surprise the Pentax SFXn gives me focus confirmation with the SP Tamron F8 mirror lens. A feature that should only work with lenses faster than F4 I thought ;-) greetings Markus -- -- Thibouille -- *ist-D,Z1,SFXn,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ...
re: Wide Angle advice for *ist-DS
On 3 Apr 2006 at 10:48, Roman wrote: FA - are for 35mm SLR's, not small digital sensors, although, 23.7x17.5 is in the middle of its field, as such highest quality lense produce is expected on digital. Just remember 1.5x times focal length. FA lens - are for all 35mm K mount SLRs, DA lenses are designed for use with cropped digital sensors only. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
RE: Daylight Savings, Aussie (well, NSW and VIC) digital cameras
We're not foreigners, Mate. We are Strailyun Hooroo. Regards, Trevor. Strailya -Original Message- From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, 3 April 2006 7:44 AM To: pentax list Subject: Re: Daylight Savings, Aussie (well, NSW and VIC) digital cameras On 2/4/06, William Robb, discombobulated, unleashed: I like taunting foreigners over the internet... Is that why you bait the yanks? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Another one bites the dust
8-( In the UK, most peoples' house contents insurance would cover that. I'd put in for the 28-80/2.8... From: cbwaters [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/04/03 Mon AM 12:50:55 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Another one bites the dust T.V. having left us a while ago, I guess I feel the need to take over his roll as chief Pentax equipment destroyer. In today's episode, we again featured the *ist D but this time with a different leading lady. My SMC-F 35-80 lens was actually broken in half! The D suffered a dislodged flash and a chip in the body right at the front of the flash. I was able to get the flash tucked back in and everything appears to be working right so far. The camera was on the kitchen counter (sort of a bar-type counter with some high stools on one side) when Kid-2 managed to tip over the stool. In her effort to keep herself from falling she reached out and grabbed for the stability, only managing to snatch the camera off the counter. I did not witness this. Wife, looking rather sheepish, not knowing how I would react, called me to the garage for consultation away from our various house guests. It was ok. I'm bummed but at least it wasn't a 77 Limited or something expensive. And the camera has managed to survive again. Cory Be careful out there. - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
Re: Wide Angle advice for *ist-DS
David Oswald wrote on 03.04.06 5:02: SMC Pentax-FA* 85mm f/1.4 Pros: It's an FA*! It's super fast. Cons: Big, expensive, reportedly not ideally suited to digital. That's not true. FA* 85/1,4 is an absolute top performer on digital. It is very useable at f1.4, getting razor sharp at f2.8 and it is actually sharper at f2 than 77 ltd. at the same aperture(!) Below are some tests - both made independently using DXO analyzer first from internet source: http://www.pictchallenge-archives.net/TESTNUM/BxuREV7.html and here from French magazine (sorry for poor quality of scans): http://nasdwoje.e9.pl/pictures/maly77-100.jpg and some wide angles tests from the same source: http://nasdwoje.e9.pl/pictures/maly24-31.jpg I have recently bought this lens and while it is quite big, it's performance is impressive. Some people complained about its performance at longer than portrait distances, but so far I didn't noticed such a problems with this lens and digital. If you want I can send you some samples in .DNG -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: OT - Eiffel Tower
I like enough of Louis Sullivan and Wright to have taken tours around Chicago. And I like the Empire State Building. Cheers, Gautam On 4/1/06, John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 02 Apr 2006 00:18:44 +0100, Gautam Sarup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's right here for people who haven't seen it: Thank you. The two buildings shown are roughly a hundred years apart. Have those years brought any improvements in architecture? Have the last two thousand years? Save for the Taj Mahal, can any later building compare with the Parthenon? John http://static.flickr.com/41/81262041_a936315f02.jpg Cheers, Gautam On 4/1/06, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The building is not quite in North Beach. It's actually on the edge of Chinatown, and very close to the Financial District. Shel [Original Message] From: Don Williams Its very useful for navigation. It marks North Beach well and can be seen from many different parts of the city. I once decided to take a close look, but was diverted on the way and never got there. SF is one of my absolute favorite cities in the world. Paris would be next -- if it were not for the smoking. -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: OT: Website Help Needed
Thanks to Dave and to all the numerous others who responded to my request for help. If I had know there would be this many, I would have suggested responding offline. But I'm very appreciative. My daughter has already made some changes in response to points raised here. Probably more to come. Thanks again to all. Paul On Apr 3, 2006, at 1:55 AM, David Mann wrote: On Apr 3, 2006, at 12:53 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote: http://www.stenquist.com/Paul/Paul.htm It looks nice but takes far too long to load. The background pic crawled in. Being a 260kb animated gif, I'd say that the file is too big. The other page backgrounds were similarly large. For this reason I only looked at a few pages, as I'm not the most patient of web viewers. I'd recommend splitting the image up so the animated gif portion is only a small section of the image. Use jpg for the rest, to reduce the filesize - that pic will compress very well. Fireworks can do this easily - I see that Dreamweaver was used so Fireworks may be available (I bought both in a bundle). From Fireworks, the whole lot becomes out bundled as a table which you can insert into your HTML file. According to my HTML book there are three ways to embed sound: 1) bgsound, IE only 2) DEFANGED_embed, which are IE and Netscape extensions (translation: non-standard so it won't work everywhere, as you've found here) 3) DEFANGED_object which, overall, seems a bit more complicated but is part of the HTML4 standard. I haven't tried this, but give it a go and see what happens... (this replaces the DEFANGED_embed ... /embed part in the code) DEFANGED_object data=../Typing.wav type=audio/x-wav/object Also, it's generally good practice to avoid capital letters and spaces in web directory/filenames. This makes it easy to avoid errors, especially when dictating a URL to someone (the behaviour of errors will differ depending on whether you're using a Windows or Unix-like host). Cheers, - Dave
Re: OT: Website Help Needed
On Apr 2, 2006, at 2:44 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: No problem. Thanks for the kudos on the photos, but they're not mine. This is my advertising website, not photography. (In real life, I'm an advertising hack.) The site is aimed at a very narrow audience of headhunters and creative directors. They will know exactly what it is. They appreciate gimmicks like sound effects. But I appreciate the input. For those of us who aren't headhunters or creative directors, just what the heck IS the main page? Torn piece of paper? Bob
Re: OT: Website Help Needed
Yep. On Apr 3, 2006, at 6:53 AM, Bob Shell wrote: On Apr 2, 2006, at 2:44 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: No problem. Thanks for the kudos on the photos, but they're not mine. This is my advertising website, not photography. (In real life, I'm an advertising hack.) The site is aimed at a very narrow audience of headhunters and creative directors. They will know exactly what it is. They appreciate gimmicks like sound effects. But I appreciate the input. For those of us who aren't headhunters or creative directors, just what the heck IS the main page? Torn piece of paper? Bob
Re: OT: Website Help Needed
BTW, two of the photos -- the Jeep and the PT Cruiser -- are the work of Clint Clemens. Paul On Apr 3, 2006, at 6:53 AM, Bob Shell wrote: On Apr 2, 2006, at 2:44 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: No problem. Thanks for the kudos on the photos, but they're not mine. This is my advertising website, not photography. (In real life, I'm an advertising hack.) The site is aimed at a very narrow audience of headhunters and creative directors. They will know exactly what it is. They appreciate gimmicks like sound effects. But I appreciate the input. For those of us who aren't headhunters or creative directors, just what the heck IS the main page? Torn piece of paper? Bob
Re: LONDON PDML SPRING 2006
I'm around at Easter and Mayday. Probably away mid-May. John On Sun, 02 Apr 2006 22:51:06 +0100, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2/4/06, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed: So, anyway, a PDML. I will mull over a suitable place and time. Is anybody up for a weekend one, or do you prefer a weekday evening? We have a number of bank holidays on the horizon - one of those might be suitable. The location needs to be reasonably centrish with photogenic stuff around and a wide selection of eateries and drinkeries. How about one of the markets? We've done Camden Lock before. What about Notting Hill or Portobello Road or similar. Or perhaps Brick Lane, Whitechapel and Spitalfields? I'm working the 29th May, free the 1st. In fact, here are those free weekends and Bank Hols in full: April 9 all of Easter 22/23 May 1 (BH) 7 13/14 28 June 3/4 10/11 17/18 July 2 8/9 Markets are fine - maybe with access to the river? I lurve the boats :-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: PESO: Remake - Aristocrat in red
Tim, I like the original better. This one is too dark, and for some reason it makes the color unappealing--it reminds me of Philadelphia air on a really hot, sticky July evening. Rick --- Tim Øsleby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have done a makeover on the Aristocrat in red picture. http://www.foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=228580 This is a sandwich of three different exposures, all from the same standpoint, and from the same session. The result is a new head ;-) and a improved(?) composition. This is the first time my hands have become dirty from working in PS. So I would really appreciate some comments on the result. Whatdoyuahthink? What about the photoshoping, anything I could have done better or different? Does it look real? And is it an improvement? Or could I have saved me the trouble? (The original is at a thumb below the picture for reference.) A lot of questions, but isn't that what life is, questions? Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds (Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy) http://www.photo.net/photos/RickW __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Z-series feature I miss on the ist D
I took my ist D along to a gathering of my extended family Saturday. I was able to get some okay pix using my old TTL Sunpak flash, but... I =REALLY= miss having the flash shoe over the grip, as it is on the Z-series cameras, instead of over the prism. My favorite way of shooting indoors with the (P)Z-1p is to bounce the external flash off the ceiling, and use the internal flash for direct lighting. Can't do that no more. I plan to buy a Sigma DG-something Super, but even then I'll have two things to hold instead of one to get the same lighting, unless I start using a flash bracket again (yuck!). One more thing I miss: the infrared focus beam. (piss, moan...) Rick http://www.photo.net/photos/RickW __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
RE: PESO: Remake - Aristocrat in red
Marcus. I did read your post. Don't worry, this is not a crappy lens... this is something different. It's a spin off idea. You say you strongly dislike this photoshoping. That's strong words, I'll give you credit for that ;-) I assume you dislike it out of ethical reasons. I should confess; I have mixed emotions towards it myself. Generally speaking I am against heavy manipulations. I do like the idea of being true to the original capture. The problem is where to draw the line. I may have crossed it here, I really don't know. Partly that's why I did this. I think it is kind of silly to reject something you don't know. I needed to experiment a bit to explore the possibilities. I have to debate a bit with myself what image to use in the bird project. Right now the purist in me says this is a deceiving lie. And, the less conservative part of me says this is not really a manipulation, it is the same spot, same background, nearly the same time, and all I really did was to change the position of the head. I may also end up rejecting both versions... But, I did not do this to start a list debate on the ethics. I simply needed to see what could be done, and the effect of the final image. To see, if the changes gave it more impact. On this, I have made up my mind. I now know what composition I will make, _if_ I go back and redo the shot. While writing this, I also believe I have made up my mind about the ethics. So this rant post has had it's purpose ;-) Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds (Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy) -Original Message- From: Markus Maurer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 3. april 2006 08:50 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: RE: PESO: Remake - Aristocrat in red Hi Tim Maybe I misunderstood you but what has all this photoshopping to do with your original bird project? I strongly dislike the way you have choosen here and hope you have read my last post ;-) greetings Markus -Original Message- From: Tim Øsleby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 2:11 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: PESO: Remake - Aristocrat in red I have done a makeover on the Aristocrat in red picture. http://www.foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=228580 This is a sandwich of three different exposures, all from the same standpoint, and from the same session. The result is a new head ;-) and a improved(?) composition. This is the first time my hands have become dirty from working in PS. So I would really appreciate some comments on the result. Whatdoyuahthink? What about the photoshoping, anything I could have done better or different? Does it look real? And is it an improvement? Or could I have saved me the trouble? (The original is at a thumb below the picture for reference.) A lot of questions, but isn't that what life is, questions? Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds (Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)
Re: PESO - Minimalism
I say very nice photo Boris. Good job Dave B Quoting Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi! http://not.contaxg.com/document.php?id=12858 What do you say? Boris Equine Photography in York Region
Re: PAW - Solitary Protester
I like the downward look to the photo. He does not seem to happy here Frank. BTW, no Pamela.??:-) Dave Quoting frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]: http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4285748 Thanks for looking and commenting! cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson Equine Photography in York Region
Re: PESO: Puppy Luv
Nice expressions on both faces. Colour mix is good. Dave B Quoting Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]: One more from today's trip into town. Again, the FA 40/1.4. This time at an ap and shutter speed that show off the lens: f6.7 @ 1/180th. This was going to be BW, but the skin tones, the dog's fur, and the orange sweater changed my mind. That's one think I like about digital: no commitment on the BW vs. color decision. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4285825 Equine Photography in York Region
Re: PAW - Cruizin' By
Pretty good even at high iso Dave Quoting Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Please forgive if this already came through. I didn't see it show up or in the archives. Shot at Monterey Aquarium - not sure how I'd feel in open water having one of these guys swimming so close. Pentax *istD, DA 16-45/4 @ 16mm, Handheld ISO 3200, 1/10 sec @ f/4.0 http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_2938.htm Comments welcome -- Bruce Equine Photography in York Region
Re: Re: D'oh
Nor my A*300 f/2.8. J --- Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3 Apr 2006 at 6:57, mike wilson wrote: One or two lenses (300/2.8?) require a filter blank (filters at the back of the lens) to focus properly in the first place. Not in the A*300/2.8 or any other of the long recent Pentax lenses that I'm aware of. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Z-series feature I miss on the ist D
On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 15:01:32 +0200, Rick Womer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I took my ist D along to a gathering of my extended family Saturday. I was able to get some okay pix using my old TTL Sunpak flash, but... I =REALLY= miss having the flash shoe over the grip, as it is on the Z-series cameras, instead of over the prism. My favorite way of shooting indoors with the (P)Z-1p is to bounce the external flash off the ceiling, and use the internal flash for direct lighting. Can't do that no more. I plan to buy a Sigma DG-something Super, but even then I'll have two things to hold instead of one to get the same lighting, unless I start using a flash bracket again (yuck!). Hi Rick, Bojidar Dimitrov states it in a rather roundabout way, but I think hot shoe adapter Fg will allow popping up the internal flash of MZ-, and probably *ist- bodies. See: http://bdimitrov.de/kmp/flashes/index.html Or you could get a flash with two reflectors. I bough a Metz 40 MZ-3 second hand a while ago, and it performs brilliantly. One more thing I miss: the infrared focus beam. Will the *ist-D trigger the infrared beam from an external flash? (piss, moan...) :o) -- Regards, Lucas
Re: Z-series feature I miss on the ist D
Lucas Rijnders wrote on 03.04.06 15:44: Will the *ist-D trigger the infrared beam from an external flash? As long as it is connected with suitable cable, yes. -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: DL TTL flash madness
On Apr 3, 2006, at 2:22 AM, Jens Bladt wrote: Crippled or not. If the new 10 MP Pentax body doesn't support ordenary TTL flash, I won't be buying it. I have too many flashes - I guess 7 or 8 TTL flahses, one of which is a Metz 60-CT2. Why on earth would you expect that the new top-end body would have only the feature set of the very cheapest DSLR that Pentax makes? -Aaron
Re: Re: D'oh
Both the 300/2.8 and the 600/4 take rear filters. I've seen that it is a requirement for a filter blank to be in place for the optics to work properly with other lenses (the Tamron 300/2.8 for example) so assumed that it could be the case with those. From: Jack Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/04/03 Mon PM 01:32:50 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Re: D'oh Nor my A*300 f/2.8. J --- Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3 Apr 2006 at 6:57, mike wilson wrote: One or two lenses (300/2.8?) require a filter blank (filters at the back of the lens) to focus properly in the first place. Not in the A*300/2.8 or any other of the long recent Pentax lenses that I'm aware of. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
Re: LONDON PDML SPRING 2006
John Forbes wrote: I'm around at Easter and Mayday. Probably away mid-May. I'm away for Easter and Mayday, but probably around mid-May... and other times. :-) S
Gremlins in the camera bag
Gremlins come in threes, it seems. Went to nephew's birthday party: 1) My 28-80mm zoom lens was frozen at 50mm. Dang, switch to the 85mm. 2) My Sigma flash decided not to fire - everything looked normal, but just didn't fire. Then it just sat there blinking. Dirty contacts? Dud battery? No time to figure it out. Off it came. 3) The flash select and exposure lock buttons on my ZX-7 decided not to work. Camera insisted on popping up the RTF for every shot, and I had to adjust the exposures manually to compensate for strong backlight. So remember to give everything in the bag a workout before going out. Cheers, Mike
Re: DL TTL flash madness
Jens Bladt wrote on 03.04.06 8:22: If the new 10 MP Pentax body doesn't support ordenary TTL flash, I won't be buying it. I have too many flashes - I guess 7 or 8 TTL flahses, one of which is a Metz 60-CT2. Sell all these oldies and buy one solid, modern, P-TTL, HSS and wireless capable flash like Pentax AF540FGZ or Sigma 500 DG Super... -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
RE: Z-series feature I miss on the ist D
Hi Rick And with that setup did you just let both Flash at TTL setting and no further corrections for indoor shots? Frankly I haver never used the build in flash on the SFXn alone or in combination so far, would be interesting. I guess there has to be a minimal distance of about 1.5 meters to get good results and to not overexpose faces? greetings Markus -Original Message- From: Rick Womer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 3:02 PM To: Pentax List Subject: Z-series feature I miss on the ist D I took my ist D along to a gathering of my extended family Saturday. I was able to get some okay pix using my old TTL Sunpak flash, but... I =REALLY= miss having the flash shoe over the grip, as it is on the Z-series cameras, instead of over the prism. My favorite way of shooting indoors with the (P)Z-1p is to bounce the external flash off the ceiling, and use the internal flash for direct lighting. Can't do that no more. I plan to buy a Sigma DG-something Super, but even then I'll have two things to hold instead of one to get the same lighting, unless I start using a flash bracket again (yuck!). One more thing I miss: the infrared focus beam. (piss, moan...) Rick http://www.photo.net/photos/RickW __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Gremlins in the camera bag
Or buy a D2H. You'll need a back up body sure as shooting.:-) Dave(now with D200)Brooks Quoting Mike Nosal [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Gremlins come in threes, it seems. Went to nephew's birthday party: 1) My 28-80mm zoom lens was frozen at 50mm. Dang, switch to the 85mm. 2) My Sigma flash decided not to fire - everything looked normal, but just didn't fire. Then it just sat there blinking. Dirty contacts? Dud battery? No time to figure it out. Off it came. 3) The flash select and exposure lock buttons on my ZX-7 decided not to work. Camera insisted on popping up the RTF for every shot, and I had to adjust the exposures manually to compensate for strong backlight. So remember to give everything in the bag a workout before going out. Cheers, Mike Equine Photography in York Region
Re: Gremlins in the camera bag
Mike Nosal wrote on 03.04.06 15:54: 1) My 28-80mm zoom lens was frozen at 50mm. Dang, switch to the 85mm. I guess your lens has converted itself to varifocal type :-P 2) My Sigma flash decided not to fire - everything looked normal, but just didn't fire. Then it just sat there blinking. Dirty contacts? Dud battery? No time to figure it out. Off it came. Did you remove carrying case off flash before trying it? ;-) 3) The flash select and exposure lock buttons on my ZX-7 decided not to work. Camera insisted on popping up the RTF for every shot, and I had to adjust the exposures manually to compensate for strong backlight. Now seriously - it probably didn't have right communication with your external flash. My friend for instance had broken contact cable inside flash shoe. So remember to give everything in the bag a workout before going out. Especially before very important event like wedding ;-) -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
RE: Z-series feature I miss on the ist D
That's right. Works brilliantly on the PZ-1p; don't know about the SFXn. Nice even lighting, no shadows, and much more natural-looking than bounce flash alone, IMHO. Examples here: http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=528842 Rick --- Markus Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Rick And with that setup did you just let both Flash at TTL setting and no further corrections for indoor shots? Frankly I haver never used the build in flash on the SFXn alone or in combination so far, would be interesting. I guess there has to be a minimal distance of about 1.5 meters to get good results and to not overexpose faces? greetings Markus -Original Message- From: Rick Womer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 3:02 PM To: Pentax List Subject: Z-series feature I miss on the ist D I took my ist D along to a gathering of my extended family Saturday. I was able to get some okay pix using my old TTL Sunpak flash, but... I =REALLY= miss having the flash shoe over the grip, as it is on the Z-series cameras, instead of over the prism. My favorite way of shooting indoors with the (P)Z-1p is to bounce the external flash off the ceiling, and use the internal flash for direct lighting. Can't do that no more. I plan to buy a Sigma DG-something Super, but even then I'll have two things to hold instead of one to get the same lighting, unless I start using a flash bracket again (yuck!). One more thing I miss: the infrared focus beam. (piss, moan...) Rick http://www.photo.net/photos/RickW __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com http://www.photo.net/photos/RickW __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Z-series feature I miss on the ist D
Lucas, Thanks, but I don't think so. The adapter Fg has a 5p socket on top rather than a flash shoe. Rick --- Lucas Rijnders [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Rick, Bojidar Dimitrov states it in a rather roundabout way, but I think hot shoe adapter Fg will allow popping up the internal flash of MZ-, and probably *ist- bodies. See: http://bdimitrov.de/kmp/flashes/index.html Or you could get a flash with two reflectors. I bough a Metz 40 MZ-3 second hand a while ago, and it performs brilliantly. One more thing I miss: the infrared focus beam. Will the *ist-D trigger the infrared beam from an external flash? (piss, moan...) :o) -- Regards, Lucas http://www.photo.net/photos/RickW __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: DL TTL flash madness
On Apr 3, 2006, at 6:59 AM, Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: If the new 10 MP Pentax body doesn't support ordenary TTL flash, I won't be buying it. I have too many flashes - I guess 7 or 8 TTL flahses, one of which is a Metz 60-CT2. Sell all these oldies and buy one solid, modern, P-TTL, HSS and wireless capable flash like Pentax AF540FGZ or Sigma 500 DG Super... I'll probably continue using the Sunpak 383 ... Godfrey
Re: Z-series feature I miss on the ist D
On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 16:19:08 +0200, Rick Womer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lucas, Thanks, but I don't think so. The adapter Fg has a 5p socket on top rather than a flash shoe. Rick, You're right. I thought Fg was an evolution of F, but it obviously isn't. -- Sorry, Lucas --- Lucas Rijnders [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Rick, Bojidar Dimitrov states it in a rather roundabout way, but I think hot shoe adapter Fg will allow popping up the internal flash of MZ-, and probably *ist- bodies. See: http://bdimitrov.de/kmp/flashes/index.html Or you could get a flash with two reflectors. I bough a Metz 40 MZ-3 second hand a while ago, and it performs brilliantly. One more thing I miss: the infrared focus beam. Will the *ist-D trigger the infrared beam from an external flash? (piss, moan...) :o)
Re: Wide Angle advice for *ist-DS
I'd started writing an email similar to your original post several times over the past few months, but never finished it. I'm in a similar situation, although the lens lineup I have is a little different. I don't have the 16-45, but the kit 18-55 instead, and I have the FA100/2.8 Macro instead of the 135 Short-wise, I've pretty well decided to go to a 14/2.8. I was bouncing alot between the 16-45 and the 14, but I've pretty well come to the conclusion that the 16-45 would be too big for snaps, and the fact that it doesn't give me a *whole lot* more width than the 18-55. Probably the biggest issue was that it's taking me about 6-8 months to save up for the lens, and the FL difference between the two isn't that big. While I recognize that there is a quality difference between the 18-55 and the 16-45, a longer term plan to work toward primes tends to make me lean toward the 14mm. I've never actually had anything wider than 28mm (in 35mm) so this will be an interesting experiment. If I really don't like it, I expect the resale value of the 14mm would be pretty good. dk On 4/3/06, David Oswald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for your remarks Godfrey; always informative. I think I'll start working toward getting the DA14/2.8 and eventually a DA70/2.4Ltd (when available). The latter sounds absolutely ideal. Where does it fall on the roadmap? A couple people have mentioned that I ought to just get my use out of the 16-45. It has been a great lens for me, and I never feel that it's producing inadequate results. I just happen to actually *enjoy* shooting with non-zoom lenses more, for some reason. I've never been able to quite put my finger on the reason. I think that by picking a focal length and sticking with it for awhile helps me to see potential shots in terms of that focal length before I bring the camera up to my eye, and that helps me to achieve more meaningful composition. By the way, my *least* used lens, since acquiring the *ist-DS is the 80-320. I almost sold it a couple times, but stopped myself when I saw how cheap they go for on eBay; not even worth bothering to sell. So I hang onto it for the one or two times a year where it proves to be the right choice of equipment.
Re: D'oh
I had a 72mm Hoya Circular Polarizer hit the boat deck in Alaska. It landed on edge, split in two and I was chasing the two halves which rolling around the deck. Tom C. From: John Coyle [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: D'oh Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 07:45:15 +1000 Yep, been there, done that! I've lost two or three Hoya filters that way, and a couple of times it's been because the retaining ring has unscrewed through friction with my clothing (I always carry the camera with the lens pointing into my body - it feels better balanced that way), and the first I've known is hearing the tinkle of expensive optical grade glass smashing on the pavement. John Coyle Brisbane, Australia - Original Message - From: Derby Chang [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax Discuss pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Sunday, April 02, 2006 8:59 PM Subject: D'oh Has this ever happened to you? Sportin' a new Hoya Super HMC Pro UV filter. Walk around town doin' stuff, hoping for some good street shots, but none eventuate. Come home, and find the lens sans filter. Screw those filters on tight, kids. D -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc
RE: DL TTL flash madness
Who said only? Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Aaron Reynolds [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 3. april 2006 15:49 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: DL TTL flash madness On Apr 3, 2006, at 2:22 AM, Jens Bladt wrote: Crippled or not. If the new 10 MP Pentax body doesn't support ordenary TTL flash, I won't be buying it. I have too many flashes - I guess 7 or 8 TTL flahses, one of which is a Metz 60-CT2. Why on earth would you expect that the new top-end body would have only the feature set of the very cheapest DSLR that Pentax makes? -Aaron -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006
RE: Z-series feature I miss on the ist D
Does that method use the flash's contrast control mode? Joe That's right. Works brilliantly on the PZ-1p; don't know about the SFXn. Nice even lighting, no shadows, and much more natural-looking than bounce flash alone, IMHO. Examples here: http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=528842 Rick --- Markus Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Rick And with that setup did you just let both Flash at TTL setting and no further corrections for indoor shots? Frankly I haver never used the build in flash on the SFXn alone or in combination so far, would be interesting. I guess there has to be a minimal distance of about 1.5 meters to get good results and to not overexpose faces? greetings Markus
Re: DL TTL flash madness
Jens Bladt wrote: Who said only? Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Aaron Reynolds [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 3. april 2006 15:49 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: DL TTL flash madness On Apr 3, 2006, at 2:22 AM, Jens Bladt wrote: Crippled or not. If the new 10 MP Pentax body doesn't support ordenary TTL flash, I won't be buying it. I have too many flashes - I guess 7 or 8 TTL flahses, one of which is a Metz 60-CT2. Why on earth would you expect that the new top-end body would have only the feature set of the very cheapest DSLR that Pentax makes? -Aaron Because TTL flash is a dead end on digital. There's a good reason every other manufacturer abandoned it, and I expect Pentax will follow. It's unfortunate that they were late to the game with P-TTL, but at least they aren't in the situation that Nikon was with D-TTL, which quickly got abandoned, leaving all of the Nikon shooters with an option of buying either the top-end Nikon bodies (D2x, D2Hs) or new flashes, as the low and midrange bodies all abandoned it in favour of iTTL. Note the only DSLR on the market today which supports plain TTL is the DS2. -Adam
Flash Compensation istDS
Last night, while trying to get some pics of my cat in a very dark room, I decided to try the pop-up flash on the istDS. A little symbol in the viewfinder was blinking, and upon checking into the cause, I found that flash compensation had been set. So, what is flash compensation and when would it be used? Shel
RE: Z-series feature I miss on the ist D
Yes, but it's the camera's contrast control mode. --- Joe Wilensky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does that method use the flash's contrast control mode? Joe That's right. Works brilliantly on the PZ-1p; don't know about the SFXn. Nice even lighting, no shadows, and much more natural-looking than bounce flash alone, IMHO. Examples here: http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=528842 Rick --- Markus Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Rick And with that setup did you just let both Flash at TTL setting and no further corrections for indoor shots? Frankly I haver never used the build in flash on the SFXn alone or in combination so far, would be interesting. I guess there has to be a minimal distance of about 1.5 meters to get good results and to not overexpose faces? greetings Markus http://www.photo.net/photos/RickW __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Flash Compensation istDS
The flash exposure compensation (FEC) control adjusts the total amount of flash exposure in much the same way as the EV compensation control affects the ambient exposure calibration: it sets the flash metering circuit to adjust the amount of flash used in the exposure up or down based upon its setting, in EV. On the occasions when I use the built-in flash, I use it primarily as a way to obtain a little bit of direct, on-camera fill for high- contrast situations (like a sunlit day at the beach, etc). For that reason, I normally have the FEC set to either -0.7 or -1.0 EV and use the camera in Tv mode at 1/125 second. The result is that the ambient meter sets the aperture based on the ambient light to a reasonable value, and the flash metering cuts the flash importance to be under the daylight by that amount. The integrated result with P-TTL is to reduce the hot-looking glare of on-camera flash and fill in shadows nicely. The FEC control only affects the built-in or dedicated external flash systems running P-TTL or TTL metering. It has no effect on something like my non-dedicated Sunpak 383 external flash. Godfrey On Apr 3, 2006, at 8:51 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Last night, while trying to get some pics of my cat in a very dark room, I decided to try the pop-up flash on the istDS. A little symbol in the viewfinder was blinking, and upon checking into the cause, I found that flash compensation had been set. So, what is flash compensation and when would it be used? Shel
Re: DL TTL flash madness
-- Original message -- From: Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note the only DSLR on the market today which supports plain TTL is the DS2. And the D. Probably the DS as well, although I have no personal experience with that camera. However, both of my Ds work fine in TTL mode with the AF400T, and the manual indicates that TTL is supported. Paul
OT Mirroragent application
Question for the Mac users. Lately and only on occasion, when i shut down the ibook, i get a pop up screen that says to the efect: Unable to shut down, Mirror agent application did not quit properly. You can force quite.etc etc. Any idea whats happening here. It seems to do it after using a usb jump drive or usb card reader, but not always. I tried to use Mac help, but i can never seem to get it to do anything other than get the coloured wheel spinning.Nothing ever prints in the whelp window. G4 with OSX Tiger. I have done some of the upgrades since owning it. Dave Equine Photography in York Region
Re: Re: D'oh
One or two lenses (300/2.8?) require a filter blank (filters at the back of the lens) to focus properly in the first place. 600mm FA f4.0, although I never shot without the filter in place so I have no idea of the effect. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Re: D'oh On 3 Apr 2006 at 6:57, mike wilson wrote: One or two lenses (300/2.8?) require a filter blank (filters at the back of the lens) to focus properly in the first place. Not in the A*300/2.8 or any other of the long recent Pentax lenses that I'm aware of. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
OT Testing only
Non of my replies, or postings to day have made it back to me, so i'll do a test. Dave Equine Photography in York Region
Re: Re: D'oh
Really? Both my A* 300/f2.8 and my FA* 250-600/f5.6 came with a set of drop-in filters (albeit different sizes for each lens) that included what appears to be a plain glass filter. I'm pretty sure it's recommended practice to have a piece of glass in the optical path there - why else would there be a filter blank included? Sure, the lenses will focus just fine without anything there. But presumably the CA corrections, etc., assume a filter is present. On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 06:32:50AM -0700, Jack Davis wrote: Nor my A*300 f/2.8. J --- Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3 Apr 2006 at 6:57, mike wilson wrote: One or two lenses (300/2.8?) require a filter blank (filters at the back of the lens) to focus properly in the first place. Not in the A*300/2.8 or any other of the long recent Pentax lenses that I'm aware of. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
RE: DL TTL flash madness
BTW, I didn't know that my PENTAX *ist D was their very cheapest DSLR? I knew it was their first one, though. Regards Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 3. april 2006 17:29 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: RE: DL TTL flash madness Who said only? Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Aaron Reynolds [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 3. april 2006 15:49 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: DL TTL flash madness On Apr 3, 2006, at 2:22 AM, Jens Bladt wrote: Crippled or not. If the new 10 MP Pentax body doesn't support ordenary TTL flash, I won't be buying it. I have too many flashes - I guess 7 or 8 TTL flahses, one of which is a Metz 60-CT2. Why on earth would you expect that the new top-end body would have only the feature set of the very cheapest DSLR that Pentax makes? -Aaron -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006
Re: OT Mirroragent application
Do all the Software Updates. Things do get fixed in them... I login to my Admin account once a week and apply any Software Updates available. Haven't been any for a couple of weeks now. Are you using automatic synching of your .Mac account iDisk or synching calendars/address book, etc to .Mac? I've seen this behavior most often when using the automatic iDisk synching feature. The synching feature works well most of the time, but if the connection is slow for some reason it can get confused. The other possibility is that you're using a jump drive or card reader that has poorly implemented the mass storage device class firmware: it might not be closing the volume correctly. The USB driver might not be loading properly, etc. When using such devices, be sure that you first eject (dismount) the volume before pulling the drive from the USB port, and be sure that any activity light on the drive has stopped flashing before you pull it too. I know that on my Belkin card reader, the activity light flashes when I've dismounted a storage card volume for about 2-3 seconds. After that it's safe to pull the card from the reader. Godfrey On Apr 3, 2006, at 9:39 AM, David J Brooks wrote: Question for the Mac users. Lately and only on occasion, when i shut down the ibook, i get a pop up screen that says to the efect: Unable to shut down, Mirror agent application did not quit properly. You can force quite.etc etc. Any idea whats happening here. It seems to do it after using a usb jump drive or usb card reader, but not always. I tried to use Mac help, but i can never seem to get it to do anything other than get the coloured wheel spinning.Nothing ever prints in the whelp window. G4 with OSX Tiger. I have done some of the upgrades since owning it. Dave Equine Photography in York Region
RE: DL TTL flash madness
What is E-TTL? I don't know. All I know is, that I'm not interested in using ANY preflash - at all. It's bad enough, that the people I photograph must put up with one flash light. I would never use a flash system that requires more than one flash burst. First of all, it will give me a shutter lag - I can't capture the right moment. Secondly I believe that more than one flash is an unnecessary annoyance for the people being photographed. I almost exclusively use bounced flash (ceiling or other surfaces (except for studio photography and outdoor photography). A direct flash is not very polite. is it?. It leaves people blind for several minutes. This is often quite unacceptable. A direct flash provides a very unnatural looking light (horizontal in stead of vertical). Direct flash will result in over exposure of the foreground and under exposure of the background. Thus very unpleasant pictures. A direct flash will result in long horizontal shadows, which are not very pleasing IMO. No pre flash system for me, thank you very much! One flash light is actually one flash too many, as far as I'm concerned. I just want noiseless 12800 ASA . I guess my grand children will have this feature in - let's say - 20 years time ;-) Regards Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 3. april 2006 19:00 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: RE: DL TTL flash madness BTW, I didn't know that my PENTAX *ist D was their very cheapest DSLR? I knew it was their first one, though. Regards Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 3. april 2006 17:29 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: RE: DL TTL flash madness Who said only? Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Aaron Reynolds [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 3. april 2006 15:49 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: DL TTL flash madness On Apr 3, 2006, at 2:22 AM, Jens Bladt wrote: Crippled or not. If the new 10 MP Pentax body doesn't support ordenary TTL flash, I won't be buying it. I have too many flashes - I guess 7 or 8 TTL flahses, one of which is a Metz 60-CT2. Why on earth would you expect that the new top-end body would have only the feature set of the very cheapest DSLR that Pentax makes? -Aaron -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006
Re: DL TTL flash madness
Jens Bladt wrote: What is E-TTL? I don't know. E-TTL is Canon's primary flash system, introduced in 1998 and recently updated to E-TTL 2 with the introduction of the 20d some 18 months ago or so. It's a pre-flash based system, but not intrusive (unlike the horrible A-TTL system Canon used through the 1990's) All I know is, that I'm not interested in using ANY preflash - at all. It's bad enough, that the people I photograph must put up with one flash light. I would never use a flash system that requires more than one flash burst. First of all, it will give me a shutter lag - I can't capture the right moment. Secondly I believe that more than one flash is an unnecessary annoyance for the people being photographed. The preflash is indistinguishable from the main flash with these systems. We're talking a few extra milliseconds for the preflash. We're not talking red-eye reduction and the consequent 1/2 second+ delays inherent to that. I almost exclusively use bounced flash (ceiling or other surfaces (except for studio photography and outdoor photography). A direct flash is not very polite. is it?. It leaves people blind for several minutes. This is often quite unacceptable. A direct flash provides a very unnatural looking light (horizontal in stead of vertical). Direct flash will result in over exposure of the foreground and under exposure of the background. Thus very unpleasant pictures. A direct flash will result in long horizontal shadows, which are not very pleasing IMO. No pre flash system for me, thank you very much! Pre-flash systems meter more accurately with bounce flash than TTL does, especially with a balanced fill system. One flash light is actually one flash too many, as far as I'm concerned. I just want noiseless 12800 ASA . I guess my grand children will have this feature in - let's say - 20 years time ;-) Regards Jens Then you want balanced fill flash done with a preflash based system. It tends to be less intrusive and harsh than plain TTL as it automatically will handle balancing ambient and flash exposures. I'm not sure if P-TTL offers this, and if it does, it likely requires a hotshow flash, not the pop-up. -Adam Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 3. april 2006 19:00 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: RE: DL TTL flash madness BTW, I didn't know that my PENTAX *ist D was their very cheapest DSLR? I knew it was their first one, though. Regards Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 3. april 2006 17:29 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: RE: DL TTL flash madness Who said only? Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Aaron Reynolds [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 3. april 2006 15:49 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: DL TTL flash madness On Apr 3, 2006, at 2:22 AM, Jens Bladt wrote: Crippled or not. If the new 10 MP Pentax body doesn't support ordenary TTL flash, I won't be buying it. I have too many flashes - I guess 7 or 8 TTL flahses, one of which is a Metz 60-CT2. Why on earth would you expect that the new top-end body would have only the feature set of the very cheapest DSLR that Pentax makes? -Aaron -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006
Re: Re: D'oh
As you stated, the lens focuses just fine with an empty filter port. I found no plain glass filter when purchased new. Would, also, seem logical for such to have been referenced in the user's manual.(?) The filters you mentioned may be UV/daylight.(?) Jack --- John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Really? Both my A* 300/f2.8 and my FA* 250-600/f5.6 came with a set of drop-in filters (albeit different sizes for each lens) that included what appears to be a plain glass filter. I'm pretty sure it's recommended practice to have a piece of glass in the optical path there - why else would there be a filter blank included? Sure, the lenses will focus just fine without anything there. But presumably the CA corrections, etc., assume a filter is present. On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 06:32:50AM -0700, Jack Davis wrote: Nor my A*300 f/2.8. J --- Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3 Apr 2006 at 6:57, mike wilson wrote: One or two lenses (300/2.8?) require a filter blank (filters at the back of the lens) to focus properly in the first place. Not in the A*300/2.8 or any other of the long recent Pentax lenses that I'm aware of. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
RE: DL TTL flash madness
And P-TTL does not cause shutter lag. -- Original message -- From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] What is E-TTL? I don't know. All I know is, that I'm not interested in using ANY preflash - at all. It's bad enough, that the people I photograph must put up with one flash light. I would never use a flash system that requires more than one flash burst. First of all, it will give me a shutter lag - I can't capture the right moment. Secondly I believe that more than one flash is an unnecessary annoyance for the people being photographed. I almost exclusively use bounced flash (ceiling or other surfaces (except for studio photography and outdoor photography). A direct flash is not very polite. is it?. It leaves people blind for several minutes. This is often quite unacceptable. A direct flash provides a very unnatural looking light (horizontal in stead of vertical). Direct flash will result in over exposure of the foreground and under exposure of the background. Thus very unpleasant pictures. A direct flash will result in long horizontal shadows, which are not very pleasing IMO. No pre flash system for me, thank you very much! One flash light is actually one flash too many, as far as I'm concerned. I just want noiseless 12800 ASA . I guess my grand children will have this feature in - let's say - 20 years time ;-) Regards Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 3. april 2006 19:00 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: RE: DL TTL flash madness BTW, I didn't know that my PENTAX *ist D was their very cheapest DSLR? I knew it was their first one, though. Regards Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 3. april 2006 17:29 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: RE: DL TTL flash madness Who said only? Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Aaron Reynolds [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 3. april 2006 15:49 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: DL TTL flash madness On Apr 3, 2006, at 2:22 AM, Jens Bladt wrote: Crippled or not. If the new 10 MP Pentax body doesn't support ordenary TTL flash, I won't be buying it. I have too many flashes - I guess 7 or 8 TTL flahses, one of which is a Metz 60-CT2. Why on earth would you expect that the new top-end body would have only the feature set of the very cheapest DSLR that Pentax makes? -Aaron -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006
Re: OT Mirroragent application
Quoting Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Do all the Software Updates. Things do get fixed in them... I login to my Admin account once a week and apply any Software Updates available. Haven't been any for a couple of weeks now. My last one that i uploaded was about 10 days ago.I must have Auto check on as it has opened a window the last two times and asked me what i wanted to update.I have done several on the OS and itunes etc. Are you using automatic synching of your .Mac account iDisk or synching calendars/address book, etc to .Mac? I've seen this behavior most often when using the automatic iDisk synching feature. The synching feature works well most of the time, but if the connection is slow for some reason it can get confused. I'm using the auto sync. Maybe thats upsetting it. The other possibility is that you're using a jump drive or card reader that has poorly implemented the mass storage device class firmware: it might not be closing the volume correctly. The USB driver might not be loading properly, etc. When using such devices, be sure that you first eject (dismount) the volume before pulling the drive from the USB port, and be sure that any activity light on the drive has stopped flashing before you pull it too. I know that on my Belkin card reader, the activity light flashes when I've dismounted a storage card volume for about 2-3 seconds. After that it's safe to pull the card from the reader. I'm clicking the eject arrow next to the devise name when i'm done with it. Its usually listed as No Name with the arrow. I usually wait until the jump drive light stops, but i cannot say that on all ocassions.:-) I thought it might be the jump, but maybe the sync is the culprit. Thanks for the info. Any reason i cannot access Mac help. I just get a blank box and the spinning wheel.??I can access help in PS etc.I'm using an always on dsl connection and Airport Express. Dave Godfrey On Apr 3, 2006, at 9:39 AM, David J Brooks wrote: Question for the Mac users. Lately and only on occasion, when i shut down the ibook, i get a pop up screen that says to the efect: Unable to shut down, Mirror agent application did not quit properly. You can force quite.etc etc. Any idea whats happening here. It seems to do it after using a usb jump drive or usb card reader, but not always. I tried to use Mac help, but i can never seem to get it to do anything other than get the coloured wheel spinning.Nothing ever prints in the whelp window. G4 with OSX Tiger. I have done some of the upgrades since owning it. Dave Equine Photography in York Region Equine Photography in York Region
RE: DL TTL flash madness
You can bounce P-TTL flash just as you would any other flash. The preflash is barely noticed. It's insignificant. Paul -- Original message -- From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] What is E-TTL? I don't know. All I know is, that I'm not interested in using ANY preflash - at all. It's bad enough, that the people I photograph must put up with one flash light. I would never use a flash system that requires more than one flash burst. First of all, it will give me a shutter lag - I can't capture the right moment. Secondly I believe that more than one flash is an unnecessary annoyance for the people being photographed. I almost exclusively use bounced flash (ceiling or other surfaces (except for studio photography and outdoor photography). A direct flash is not very polite. is it?. It leaves people blind for several minutes. This is often quite unacceptable. A direct flash provides a very unnatural looking light (horizontal in stead of vertical). Direct flash will result in over exposure of the foreground and under exposure of the background. Thus very unpleasant pictures. A direct flash will result in long horizontal shadows, which are not very pleasing IMO. No pre flash system for me, thank you very much! One flash light is actually one flash too many, as far as I'm concerned. I just want noiseless 12800 ASA . I guess my grand children will have this feature in - let's say - 20 years time ;-) Regards Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 3. april 2006 19:00 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: RE: DL TTL flash madness BTW, I didn't know that my PENTAX *ist D was their very cheapest DSLR? I knew it was their first one, though. Regards Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 3. april 2006 17:29 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: RE: DL TTL flash madness Who said only? Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Aaron Reynolds [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 3. april 2006 15:49 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: DL TTL flash madness On Apr 3, 2006, at 2:22 AM, Jens Bladt wrote: Crippled or not. If the new 10 MP Pentax body doesn't support ordenary TTL flash, I won't be buying it. I have too many flashes - I guess 7 or 8 TTL flahses, one of which is a Metz 60-CT2. Why on earth would you expect that the new top-end body would have only the feature set of the very cheapest DSLR that Pentax makes? -Aaron -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006
Re: D'oh
Similarly, the Zenitar 16mm f/2.8 FE includes a set of screw-in filters that fit at the back of the lens. One must always be fitted for the lens to achieve proper focusing and correction. This is different from using a front-mounted filter that was not designed in as part of the optical design. Godfrey On Apr 3, 2006, at 9:40 AM, John Francis wrote: Really? Both my A* 300/f2.8 and my FA* 250-600/f5.6 came with a set of drop-in filters (albeit different sizes for each lens) that included what appears to be a plain glass filter. I'm pretty sure it's recommended practice to have a piece of glass in the optical path there - why else would there be a filter blank included? One or two lenses (300/2.8?) require a filter blank (filters at the back of the lens) to focus properly in the first place.
Re: OT Mirroragent application
On Apr 3, 2006, at 10:41 AM, David J Brooks wrote: Are you using automatic synching of your .Mac account iDisk or synching calendars/address book, etc to .Mac? I've seen this behavior most often when using the automatic iDisk synching feature. The synching feature works well most of the time, but if the connection is slow for some reason it can get confused. I'm using the auto sync. Maybe thats upsetting it. Most likely. Set it to sync Manually (on demand only) and the problem will likely go away. At least that's been successful with my primary contract client so far. Any reason i cannot access Mac help. I just get a blank box and the spinning wheel.??I can access help in PS etc.I'm using an always on dsl connection and Airport Express. I've seen this occasionally too, wrote Apple a bug report about Help Viewer operation. It works correctly most of the time for me, but perhaps whatever is the underlying cause for the MirrorAgent failure is also hitting the Help browser. Sometimes, I notice that the Help Browser window comes up blank but if I click the home icon in the top bar, it then does the right thing. I also notice that it is more reliable when I unset the option in the Help Viewer menu to Perform Product Support Searches and pick the product I want help on directly from the Library menu. Godfrey
Re: OT Mirroragent application
Any reason i cannot access Mac help. I just get a blank box and the spinning wheel.??I can access help in PS etc.I'm using an always on dsl connection and Airport Express. BTW: Adobe supplies their own Help Viewer application independent of Mac OS X's Help Browser. They are not related at all. Godfrey
copyrights
Guys and Gals, Someone wants to use an image of mine for a t-shirt. The problem (?) is that it's a portrait of a stranger and her child (about 1 year old) that I took about 5 years ago while just walking through a local street fair. I've contributed nature and animal photos before, put never people shots (without permission). In short, the question is, can I really sell this photo for usage without permission from the person in it? I guess I'm picturing a hilarious (albeit unlikely) event of the person eventually coming across someone wearing a tee-shirt with THEIR photo on it. How weird would that be? Thoughts? Experiences? - Jerome Reyes
Re: copyrights
On 3/4/06, Jerome Reyes, discombobulated, unleashed: Guys and Gals, Someone wants to use an image of mine for a t-shirt. The problem (?) is that it's a portrait of a stranger and her child (about 1 year old) that I took about 5 years ago while just walking through a local street fair. I've contributed nature and animal photos before, put never people shots (without permission). In short, the question is, can I really sell this photo for usage without permission from the person in it? I guess I'm picturing a hilarious (albeit unlikely) event of the person eventually coming across someone wearing a tee-shirt with THEIR photo on it. How weird would that be? Thoughts? Experiences? Without a doubt, unless you have a signed model release form of the subject, you are infringing personal liberties by 'publishing' the pic in this way - especially making financial gain from it. That said, it was 5 years ago and the chances of the subject coming across the one T-shirt are remote, so why not. If she sees it, your friend can claim ignorance and say he picked it up at a flea market :-) Publish and be damned! Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: OT: Website Help Needed
For what it's worth, Paul, I only get a blank page of a piece of torn paper. (No links). (I've got some features disabled as default, though: sounds, animations and video.) Lasse From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 1:19 PM Subject: Re: OT: Website Help Needed Thanks to Dave and to all the numerous others who responded to my request for help. If I had know there would be this many, I would have suggested responding offline. But I'm very appreciative. My daughter has already made some changes in response to points raised here. Probably more to come. Thanks again to all. Paul On Apr 3, 2006, at 1:55 AM, David Mann wrote: On Apr 3, 2006, at 12:53 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote: http://www.stenquist.com/Paul/Paul.htm It looks nice but takes far too long to load. The background pic crawled in. Being a 260kb animated gif, I'd say that the file is too big. The other page backgrounds were similarly large. For this reason I only looked at a few pages, as I'm not the most patient of web viewers. I'd recommend splitting the image up so the animated gif portion is only a small section of the image. Use jpg for the rest, to reduce the filesize - that pic will compress very well. Fireworks can do this easily - I see that Dreamweaver was used so Fireworks may be available (I bought both in a bundle). From Fireworks, the whole lot becomes out bundled as a table which you can insert into your HTML file. According to my HTML book there are three ways to embed sound: 1) bgsound, IE only 2) DEFANGED_embed, which are IE and Netscape extensions (translation: non-standard so it won't work everywhere, as you've found here) 3) DEFANGED_object which, overall, seems a bit more complicated but is part of the HTML4 standard. I haven't tried this, but give it a go and see what happens... (this replaces the DEFANGED_embed ... /embed part in the code) DEFANGED_object data=../Typing.wav type=audio/x-wav/object Also, it's generally good practice to avoid capital letters and spaces in web directory/filenames. This makes it easy to avoid errors, especially when dictating a URL to someone (the behaviour of errors will differ depending on whether you're using a Windows or Unix-like host). Cheers, - Dave
RE: copyrights
It depends on which country you are in. In general, you own the copyright unless you have assigned it to someone else. On the other hand, some countries such as France have privacy laws which might make it illegal to publish the photo if the people are identifiable. Printing it on a t-shirt would probably be construed as publishing. -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: Jerome Reyes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 03 April 2006 19:29 To: pdml Subject: copyrights Guys and Gals, Someone wants to use an image of mine for a t-shirt. The problem (?) is that it's a portrait of a stranger and her child (about 1 year old) that I took about 5 years ago while just walking through a local street fair. I've contributed nature and animal photos before, put never people shots (without permission). In short, the question is, can I really sell this photo for usage without permission from the person in it? I guess I'm picturing a hilarious (albeit unlikely) event of the person eventually coming across someone wearing a tee-shirt with THEIR photo on it. How weird would that be? Thoughts? Experiences? - Jerome Reyes
Re: OT: Website Help Needed
-- Original message -- From: Lasse Karlsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] For what it's worth, Paul, I only get a blank page of a piece of torn paper. (No links). H (I've got some features disabled as default, though: sounds, animations and video.) In that case, everything is working :-). Paul
Re: copyrights
There's no such thing as the copyright. You own a copyright in the image, based on the fact that you took it. But it's quite possible for other people to have copyright interests in the shot (as, for example, if it is a photograph of a copyrighted subject). Plus, as you note, there's more than simply copyright involved. On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 07:56:34PM +0100, Bob W wrote: It depends on which country you are in. In general, you own the copyright unless you have assigned it to someone else. On the other hand, some countries such as France have privacy laws which might make it illegal to publish the photo if the people are identifiable. Printing it on a t-shirt would probably be construed as publishing. -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: Jerome Reyes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 03 April 2006 19:29 To: pdml Subject: copyrights Guys and Gals, Someone wants to use an image of mine for a t-shirt. The problem (?) is that it's a portrait of a stranger and her child (about 1 year old) that I took about 5 years ago while just walking through a local street fair. I've contributed nature and animal photos before, put never people shots (without permission). In short, the question is, can I really sell this photo for usage without permission from the person in it? I guess I'm picturing a hilarious (albeit unlikely) event of the person eventually coming across someone wearing a tee-shirt with THEIR photo on it. How weird would that be? Thoughts? Experiences? - Jerome Reyes
Re: Another one bites the dust
Wow! graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- cbwaters wrote: T.V. having left us a while ago, I guess I feel the need to take over his roll as chief Pentax equipment destroyer. In today's episode, we again featured the *ist D but this time with a different leading lady. My SMC-F 35-80 lens was actually broken in half! The D suffered a dislodged flash and a chip in the body right at the front of the flash. I was able to get the flash tucked back in and everything appears to be working right so far. The camera was on the kitchen counter (sort of a bar-type counter with some high stools on one side) when Kid-2 managed to tip over the stool. In her effort to keep herself from falling she reached out and grabbed for the stability, only managing to snatch the camera off the counter. I did not witness this. Wife, looking rather sheepish, not knowing how I would react, called me to the garage for consultation away from our various house guests. It was ok. I'm bummed but at least it wasn't a 77 Limited or something expensive. And the camera has managed to survive again. Cory Be careful out there.
Re: copyrights
There are too things involved here. Legality and ethics. Legally you do not have a leg to stand on. It would be a clear violation of the subjects rights, if she chose to sue you she would get about anything she asked for. Ethically, well, how would you feel if you saw some stranger wearing a photo of your wife and kid on his tee-shirt? graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Jerome Reyes wrote: Guys and Gals, Someone wants to use an image of mine for a t-shirt. The problem (?) is that it's a portrait of a stranger and her child (about 1 year old) that I took about 5 years ago while just walking through a local street fair. I've contributed nature and animal photos before, put never people shots (without permission). In short, the question is, can I really sell this photo for usage without permission from the person in it? I guess I'm picturing a hilarious (albeit unlikely) event of the person eventually coming across someone wearing a tee-shirt with THEIR photo on it. How weird would that be? Thoughts? Experiences? - Jerome Reyes
Re: copyrights
I am not a copyright lawyer. This position was stated at a recent exhibition sponsored by the Bay Area Press Photographers Association... one of their more successful local photographers who has sold such work broadly to both national and international magazine publications for editorial use gave this guideline for when releases are necessary in his experience: 'Photos of people taken in public places where the expectation of privacy is not assumed do not require releases if used for editorial publication. There's a lot of qualitative assessment in that statement, but unless the photo is being printed as advertising for some brand name product or event, it would be considered an editorial photograph just like a print I sell out of my gallery listing. I don't have releases for such work, and the act of obtaining releases would likely make it impossible for the work to be done in the first place. Work that is to be used in promoting events and/or products, where the significance of the person in the photo is linked to the value/ use of the advertisement and desirability to a purchaser of the promoted item, always requires a release.' If the T-shirt is not being used as an advertisement for some product or event, I think it would fall under the notion of editorial use and therefore not require a release unless it were a photo made under private or exceptional circumstances that assume an expectation of privacy. Godfrey On Apr 3, 2006, at 11:41 AM, Cotty wrote: Without a doubt, unless you have a signed model release form of the subject, you are infringing personal liberties by 'publishing' the pic in this way - especially making financial gain from it. That said, it was 5 years ago and the chances of the subject coming across the one T-shirt are remote, so why not. If she sees it, your friend can claim ignorance and say he picked it up at a flea market :-) Publish and be damned!
Re: copyrights
This is not a copyright issue. It would be considered a commercial (even if the t-shirt was a one off) use of someone's image without permission. This is a clear case where a model release would be needed to legally use the photo that way. The only possible way around a release is if the persons were famous and the image was clearly a political comment about them --then it would be a case for the courts to decide. And unless he has decamped Jerome is in the US. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- John Francis wrote: There's no such thing as the copyright. You own a copyright in the image, based on the fact that you took it. But it's quite possible for other people to have copyright interests in the shot (as, for example, if it is a photograph of a copyrighted subject). Plus, as you note, there's more than simply copyright involved. On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 07:56:34PM +0100, Bob W wrote: It depends on which country you are in. In general, you own the copyright unless you have assigned it to someone else. On the other hand, some countries such as France have privacy laws which might make it illegal to publish the photo if the people are identifiable. Printing it on a t-shirt would probably be construed as publishing. -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: Jerome Reyes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 03 April 2006 19:29 To: pdml Subject: copyrights Guys and Gals, Someone wants to use an image of mine for a t-shirt. The problem (?) is that it's a portrait of a stranger and her child (about 1 year old) that I took about 5 years ago while just walking through a local street fair. I've contributed nature and animal photos before, put never people shots (without permission). In short, the question is, can I really sell this photo for usage without permission from the person in it? I guess I'm picturing a hilarious (albeit unlikely) event of the person eventually coming across someone wearing a tee-shirt with THEIR photo on it. How weird would that be? Thoughts? Experiences? - Jerome Reyes
Re: DL TTL flash madness
On Apr 3, 2006, at 13:01, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You can bounce P-TTL flash just as you would any other flash. The preflash is barely noticed. It's insignificant. Except that it makes my daughter blink every time, so almost every flash photo I take of her makes it look like she's half drunk. And she barely drinks at all! (She's 19 - so I'm not naive enough to believe that she *never* drinks even though legal drinking age is 21...) -Charles -- Charles Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org
Re: copyrights
I think Tom is right here. A t-shirt is commercial use, because the image is being used to generate profit. Editorial use implies that the persons image is used in the course of reporting events. Selling photos of people shot on the street is probably a grey area. Paul -- Original message -- From: graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is not a copyright issue. It would be considered a commercial (even if the t-shirt was a one off) use of someone's image without permission. This is a clear case where a model release would be needed to legally use the photo that way. The only possible way around a release is if the persons were famous and the image was clearly a political comment about them --then it would be a case for the courts to decide. And unless he has decamped Jerome is in the US. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- John Francis wrote: There's no such thing as the copyright. You own a copyright in the image, based on the fact that you took it. But it's quite possible for other people to have copyright interests in the shot (as, for example, if it is a photograph of a copyrighted subject). Plus, as you note, there's more than simply copyright involved. On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 07:56:34PM +0100, Bob W wrote: It depends on which country you are in. In general, you own the copyright unless you have assigned it to someone else. On the other hand, some countries such as France have privacy laws which might make it illegal to publish the photo if the people are identifiable. Printing it on a t-shirt would probably be construed as publishing. -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: Jerome Reyes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 03 April 2006 19:29 To: pdml Subject: copyrights Guys and Gals, Someone wants to use an image of mine for a t-shirt. The problem (?) is that it's a portrait of a stranger and her child (about 1 year old) that I took about 5 years ago while just walking through a local street fair. I've contributed nature and animal photos before, put never people shots (without permission). In short, the question is, can I really sell this photo for usage without permission from the person in it? I guess I'm picturing a hilarious (albeit unlikely) event of the person eventually coming across someone wearing a tee-shirt with THEIR photo on it. How weird would that be? Thoughts? Experiences? - Jerome Reyes
[OT] Mamiya ZD presentation
Today, thanks to the biggest Polish photo portal I had an opportunity to be on official Polish presentation of Mamiya ZD - for these who are not aware - 22 megapixel medium format DSLR ;-) The camera appeared to be a very interesting tool for professional photographers (with its price around 1 Euros it won't rather find place among amateurs ;-) The body had some nice features like dual card slots (CF and SD), had good ergonomics, felt very nice in hand especially that it is around size and weight of Pentax 645 - this means around size and weigth of hi-end 35 mm bodies. Just LCD was far too small for today's standards - only 1.8. With camera there was presented Mac software for it, enabling tethered shooting (taking photographs and sending them directly to computer) among other interesting features. ZD 120/4 macro lens was mounted on ZD, and while it was top performing glass 9See samples below), I was less than impressed by its build quality - one class lower than Pentax FA645 120/4 macro. During presentation visitors had an opportunity to try the camera themselves. You could take either macro photos of car model or do some portraits of model. Fortunately I had my SD card with me so I gave ZD a try taking shots of beautiful model. Photos were saved as RAWs (MEF format - each file around 35 MB), then converted to .DNG and slightly edited in Lightroom to be finally exported as high quality JPEGs. If you are interested in how good can look photos from 22 MPix MF DSLR you can download them from my page. I put two samples with low-res previews as target linked photos are ~4 MB each compressed (61 MB after decompression) so it is better to save them to your local disk and open in your favourite photo editing application. Colour space of target photos is Adobe RGB. Here they are: http://nasdwoje.e9.pl/pictures/MamiyaZD.html Of cource for hardcore lovers - I can send RAWs straigth from the camera ;-) Now let's wait for presentation and samples from Pentax 645D. I bet it can be even more impressive machine than ZD ;-) Cheers, Sylwek
Re: OT: Ultraportable enabled soon
Ok I will report in due time :) On 4/3/06, Leon Altoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: HI, I thought someone else would have replied to this. I would like to know the results. I travel with a Fujitsu Lifebook P1120. It weighs 1 kg and takes very little space, but is a bit slow. Leon http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon Thibouille wrote: Will receive an IBM (sorry I should say Lenovo) ThinkPad X60 with all the stuff (dockstation etc) based on Intel Core Duo. If anyone is interested (as some could find that kind of laptop useful in conjunction with Digital Photo) I can report here my impressions are a full review or whatever, if anyone cares. Should have it in couple weeks or something. -- -- Thibouille -- *ist-D,Z1,SFXn,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ... -- -- Thibouille -- *ist-D,Z1,SFXn,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ...
Re: PESO - By the Tyne
WELL DONE! Perspective is impressive. As an observation only, the image has sort of an overall tobacco color. Not necessarily a negative, just noted. Jack --- Jostein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As Mike Wilson has already mentioned, we spent Saturday evening strolling along the river Tyne. Here's one shot from the session, with the blue arc of the Millenium Bridge in the background. http://www.oksne.net/paw/20060403-0139.html All comments appreciated. Jostein __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: copyrights
On Apr 3, 2006, at 2:29 PM, Jerome Reyes wrote: Someone wants to use an image of mine for a t-shirt. The problem (?) is that it's a portrait of a stranger and her child (about 1 year old) that I took about 5 years ago while just walking through a local street fair. I've contributed nature and animal photos before, put never people shots (without permission). In short, the question is, can I really sell this photo for usage without permission from the person in it? I guess I'm picturing a hilarious (albeit unlikely) event of the person eventually coming across someone wearing a tee-shirt with THEIR photo on it. How weird would that be? Don't even think of doing it unless you want to risk the lady in the picture owning your house and car. Bob
Re: PESO - By the Tyne
Gorgeous! The curving line of the fence, the sturdy posts in contrast to the delicate arc of the bridge, the lighting, the colors... I like all of it! Rick --- Jostein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As Mike Wilson has already mentioned, we spent Saturday evening strolling along the river Tyne. Here's one shot from the session, with the blue arc of the Millenium Bridge in the background. http://www.oksne.net/paw/20060403-0139.html All comments appreciated. Jostein http://www.photo.net/photos/RickW __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Would you recommend Pentax?
My friend finally want to make the digital transition. He currently owns a film PS (Pentax BTW), and I some months ago I lent him my MZ-M, along with my AF 28-70/4 and a Cosina 135/2,8, so he can learn the basics of SLR photography. When he asked me, first we were discussing if a 'bridge' digicam wold be enough for him but I didn't recommend it. Mainly due to the current low DSLR prices, and also due to poor performance for high ISOs that I read in every bridge review (specially compared to a DSLR). Also, I personally don't like the idea of using an electronic viewfinder. In the DSLR area, I of course let him use my Ds but I have trouble recommending it for him hands down. Why? He doesn't own legacy lenses as I did, so he can choose with 'more freedom'. The D50 is really cheap here, in Spain, even cheaper than the DL, and available almost anywhere. On the other hand, there is the 350D, a little more expensive, but with 2 more Mpix, and presumably better AF performance, and great high ISO, and full frame path,... I don't consider Olympus (noise) nor K-M (discontinued). I have the feeling that Pentax is good enough for us, who already own Pentax glass, but maybe not enough attractive for someone starting from zero (unless you strongly like small and lightweight equipment, which I do). So...what do you think? 1.- Is there any bridge digicam worth considering for someone who likes photography but maybe have enough with a performer 'ultra-zoom'? If so, which one? 2.- Would you recommend Pentax over C or N DSLRs, even for someone without previous film equipment? Why? Thanks a lot, and regards, Jaume __ LLama Gratis a cualquier PC del Mundo. Llamadas a fijos y móviles desde 1 céntimo por minuto. http://es.voice.yahoo.com
Re: copyrights
On Apr 3, 2006, at 2:28 PM, Bob Shell wrote: Don't even think of doing it unless you want to risk the lady in the picture owning your house and car. Ok, bob and colin ... and anyone else who cares to respond. In your considered opinions, this would put the photographer, publisher and seller of the tshirt at risk. How does printing a photograph of a woman and her child, taken in a public setting at a flea market, and printed on a t-shirt, with no other text or advertising associated, differ from taking that same photograph, printed and framed, and hung on a gallery wall for sale? or sold to the local newspaper for use on page 11 of the magazine section in a feature article entitled People Walking Through A Fair? I know the latter two cases are done all the time with no releases. I'm trying to understand the distinction in your view. Godfrey
Re: PESO - By the Tyne
On Apr 3, 2006, at 2:04 PM, Jostein wrote: http://www.oksne.net/paw/20060403-0139.html Very nice job. Godfrey
Re: PESO - By the Tyne
Testbook shot, Jostein. Perfect composition, great colours. Just lovely. John On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 22:04:46 +0100, Jostein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As Mike Wilson has already mentioned, we spent Saturday evening strolling along the river Tyne. Here's one shot from the session, with the blue arc of the Millenium Bridge in the background. http://www.oksne.net/paw/20060403-0139.html All comments appreciated. Jostein -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: PESO - By the Tyne
On 2006-04-03, at 23:04, Jostein wrote: As Mike Wilson has already mentioned, we spent Saturday evening strolling along the river Tyne. Here's one shot from the session, with the blue arc of the Millenium Bridge in the background. http://www.oksne.net/paw/20060403-0139.html No comments. It is just beautiful, perfectly composed and exposed night photo :-) -- Best regards Sylwek
Re: copyrights
Makes sense to me. I'm no lawyer either. Thinking along these lines though, TV stations routinely shoot footage on street corners, at public events., etc., of persons who have not given explicit signed consent to be photographed. Nor have they given consent for the footage to be aired. That footage is shown on television news. Stepping out on a limb... Somewhat implicit in everything a news organization (at least here in the US) does is the idea that it will attract advertisers and readership/viewership, hence generate income. I don't see the difference in showing a picture on the air vs. on a T-shirt. Tom C. From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: copyrights Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 12:22:18 -0700 I am not a copyright lawyer. This position was stated at a recent exhibition sponsored by the Bay Area Press Photographers Association... one of their more successful local photographers who has sold such work broadly to both national and international magazine publications for editorial use gave this guideline for when releases are necessary in his experience: 'Photos of people taken in public places where the expectation of privacy is not assumed do not require releases if used for editorial publication. There's a lot of qualitative assessment in that statement, but unless the photo is being printed as advertising for some brand name product or event, it would be considered an editorial photograph just like a print I sell out of my gallery listing. I don't have releases for such work, and the act of obtaining releases would likely make it impossible for the work to be done in the first place. Work that is to be used in promoting events and/or products, where the significance of the person in the photo is linked to the value/ use of the advertisement and desirability to a purchaser of the promoted item, always requires a release.' If the T-shirt is not being used as an advertisement for some product or event, I think it would fall under the notion of editorial use and therefore not require a release unless it were a photo made under private or exceptional circumstances that assume an expectation of privacy. Godfrey
Re: copyrights
- Original Message - From: Jerome Reyes Subject: copyrights Guys and Gals, Someone wants to use an image of mine for a t-shirt. The problem (?) is that it's a portrait of a stranger and her child (about 1 year old) that I took about 5 years ago while just walking through a local street fair. I've contributed nature and animal photos before, put never people shots (without permission). In short, the question is, can I really sell this photo for usage without permission from the person in it? I guess I'm picturing a hilarious (albeit unlikely) event of the person eventually coming across someone wearing a tee-shirt with THEIR photo on it. How weird would that be? Thoughts? Experiences? It isn't a copyright issue, it is a model release issue. What you are proposing is illegal under the laws of your country, and unethical to boot. William Robb
RE: copyrights
-Original Message- From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 03 April 2006 22:47 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: copyrights On Apr 3, 2006, at 2:28 PM, Bob Shell wrote: Don't even think of doing it unless you want to risk the lady in the picture owning your house and car. Ok, bob and colin ... and anyone else who cares to respond. In your considered opinions, this would put the photographer, publisher and seller of the tshirt at risk. How does printing a photograph of a woman and her child, taken in a public setting at a flea market, and printed on a t-shirt, with no other text or advertising associated, differ from taking that same photograph, printed and framed, and hung on a gallery wall for sale? or sold to the local newspaper for use on page 11 of the magazine section in a feature article entitled People Walking Through A Fair? or, indeed, displayed on a public website. Bob
PESO - By the Tyne
As Mike Wilson has already mentioned, we spent Saturday evening strolling along the river Tyne. Here's one shot from the session, with the blue arc of the Millenium Bridge in the background. http://www.oksne.net/paw/20060403-0139.html All comments appreciated. Jostein
Attn. Paulus Erikson
Mail for you at your telia account. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds (Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)
