- Original Message -
From: Rob Studdert
Subject: Re: Free image browser
Oops, I had Hepburn on my mind...
It's a man thing.
b...
Hi Joe,
I've already got a 30gb Ipod photo, but I'm still trying to find the best
way of getting images from cards to the unit itself. There are a couple of
proprietry connectors, but they are hideously slow. I'm sort of fishing at
the moment, and hopefully I come up with something useable.
The
I tend to agree, but bokeh was never realy a problem for my use. I use it
for candid portraits and panorama shots. So, to me sharpness and reslolution
is the main issue.
Like this: http://gallery13117.fotopic.net/p13541985.html
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
fra: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What sort of alterations are you implying?
Anything that according the honest photographer does not change the
content of the picture. It could be a plastic bag, some garbage, a lamp
This one time, at band camp, mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks. Thought that was what you meant but, from the way it was
written, I thought you might have some super-whizzo defence that
prevents the viruses even getting _to_ your machine.
Sure, on my other network I simply use
On 7 Apr 2005 at 8:27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry about that. I'll try an example: If you take a picture of Bush kissing
Clinton on the mouth it doesn't really change the picture if you later remove
the foot of a bird in the upper left of the frame. It does if the foot was
sticking out
ROTFLMAO
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Rob Studdert
Even a relatively straight photo can be misleading. The following pic is
the
Aussie PM (front) and the treasurer in session in the House Of Reps
Federal
Parliament (not my pic):
http://crazney.net/pics/Costello.jpg
Quoting Fred [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Try archive.org:
http://web.archive.org/web/20040716085338/home.att.net/~alnem/html/equipment_review.html
If there are any pages missing from those archivess, I have a mirror of the
site from back in January (2005).
Fred,
Can you give us the url of your
Hi,
Even a relatively straight photo can be misleading. The following pic is the
Aussie PM (front) and the treasurer in session in the House Of Reps Federal
Parliament (not my pic):
http://crazney.net/pics/Costello.jpg
thanks Rob. Now I have to clean the sprayed coffee off my monitor.
On 7/4/05, Rob Studdert, discombobulated, unleashed:
Even a relatively straight photo can be misleading. The following pic is the
Aussie PM (front) and the treasurer in session in the House Of Reps Federal
Parliament (not my pic):
http://crazney.net/pics/Costello.jpg
LOL!
Cheers,
Cotty
it seems KEH frequently replaces the rear cap with a
generic slip-on one and i always replace it with a genuine Pentax one when
i get a lens from KEH.
We're talking secondhand lenses I hope.
John
On Apr 7, 2005, at 6:19 AM, Bob W wrote:
Try one of these!
http://www.intelligent-energy.com/index_article.asp?
secID=15secondlevel=796artID=3709
That's pretty cool but I'll stick with pedal power for now.
A few guys around town have modified standard mountain bikes by putting
a big cog on the
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 7 Apr 2005 at 8:27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry about that. I'll try an example: If you take a picture of Bush kissing
Clinton on the mouth it doesn't really change the picture if you later remove
the foot of a bird in the upper left of the frame. It does if the foot
Herb Chong wrote:
but they are not identical, just very close. producing a limited edition
set of 25 or 50 that are close to one another isn't good enough.
What system do you believe gives you not just similarity but
identicality? I bet you a year's supply of Kodachrome 25 that I can
find a
Mark Roberts wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You neglected to post some of the addendums that followed this message vbg.
The shutter bounce vibration in the 6x7 is largely myth.
Doesn't look like it to me:
http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/pentax67ii.shtml
Mind you, it *is* just at
Since Cotty brought up the subject of Lithium batteries I thought I'd ask
about the suitability of this battery for replacing the standard cells in a
typical Pentax SLR, say KX, MX, ME Super etc.
CR1/3N / DL1/3N / 5008LC / K58L / 2L76 Battery 3V
Type: Lithium
Voltage: 3 V
Amperage: 150mAh
William Robb wrote:
I need a shorter URL
Anyway, this is straight off the RAW converter, where I adjusted white
balance and exposure, and nothing else.
The files were resized for the web, no sharpening or softening.
Lens used was the 77mm at around f/8.
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: Alan Chan Subject: Re: Backordered:
SMC Pentax-FA 135mm f/2.8 (IF)
Or we are about to see some new lenses coming. Who knows?
He does?
WW
Who?
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 6 Apr 2005 at 22:14, mike wilson wrote:
LOL, I prefer my women alive ;-)
You'd better tell her:
http://www.sophialoren.com/
Oops, I had Hepburn on my mind...
Welcome to the club
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
[EMAIL
On Apr 6, 2005, at 11:10 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
Thanks for the mention. In truth, I was a drag racing photographer.
You just conjured up some very strange images in my mind.
Please tell me you're talking about cars :)
Cheers,
- Dave
http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
On Apr 7, 2005, at 6:16 PM, Shaun Canning wrote:
The Ipod's don't have direct card access (i.e. there is no card slots,
only the built in USB/Firewire support). The problem is that the ipod
can't power a card reader etc through its USB/firewire port. More's the
pity...
Have you seen this?
Brings to mind that there is another meaning of the word congress.
John
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 08:28:02 +0100, Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Even a relatively straight photo can be misleading. The following pic
is the
Aussie PM (front) and the treasurer in session in the House Of Reps
Federal
John Whittingham wrote:
Since Cotty brought up the subject of Lithium batteries I thought I'd ask
about the suitability of this battery for replacing the standard cells in a
typical Pentax SLR, say KX, MX, ME Super etc.
CR1/3N / DL1/3N / 5008LC / K58L / 2L76 Battery 3V
Type: Lithium
On Apr 7, 2005 1:18 AM, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bill, They're your pics, make 'em any way you like, regardless of comments
and crits from others.
I know I do.
Contrast! I need more contrast!
She can't take it any more, frank! She'll blow if I crank it any more!!
I don't
More than one person here has mentioned using them. I find them
impossible to obtain at other than breathtaking prices. Been
badgering 7dayshop for a while. If anyone would care to join in,
maybe they will start to stock them.
I was looking at these on eekbay:
http://tinyurl.com/7ywzl
On Apr 7, 2005 1:17 AM, Juan Buhler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Apr 5, 2005 3:12 PM, frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3256532
I just saw this now, Frank, but just wanted to say, it's great! She
is obviously the predator. I hope he was
On Apr 7, 2005 12:57 AM, Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi!
Alternate titles:
The Hunter and the Hunted,
Body Language,
What's Your Sign?
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3256532
And then she swings the beer bottle and the guy falls on the floor
I've been offered one for USD 300. Is it worth it?
(Notice that list price for the 31mm LTD in Norway is USD 1500 ...)
--
Best regards,
Morten
--
Morten Dahl, USIT, University of Oslo,
P.O.Box 1059 Blindern, 0316 Oslo, Norway
Tel. : +47 22 85 24 70
Mob. : +47 93 08 53 43
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
fra: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 7 Apr 2005 at 8:27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry about that. I'll try an example: If you take a picture of Bush
kissing
Clinton on the mouth it doesn't really change the picture if you later
remove
the foot of a bird in the upper left of
What I see is:
he's rooling a joint which leads her attention, you can see the
enlarged pupils which means she strongly desire it (the joint).
He's been fooled by her body language you all have already noticed,
just the few minutes necessary to finish his work (the joint) and
smoke it.
The very
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quoting Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The newest prime I have (FA50/1.7) focusses at
0.45cm, I think, which is ballpark.
I really doubt that. I think you mean 45 cm (about 15 inches).
You are right. And to think imperial is new to
Hi Godfrey
Anyone who knows anything about security tells people **first** to backup
data on several media/generations and keeps them on different places. Just
had to tell that again yesterday to a client with a crashed hardisk loosing
all his data :-(
this is a Pentax photo forum,
On Wed, 6 Apr 2005, Norman Baugher wrote:
I was just being a bit humorous, the lens doesn't have the greatest
reputation. However, considering the fact that you can get an M135 for
about $50, I'd say it's in the ballpark.
Not the SMC 135/2.5. You can get the M135/3.5 for $50 (perhaps).
John Whittingham wrote:
More than one person here has mentioned using them. I find them
impossible to obtain at other than breathtaking prices. Been
badgering 7dayshop for a while. If anyone would care to join in,
maybe they will start to stock them.
I was looking at these on eekbay:
On Wed, 6 Apr 2005, Mishka wrote:
what i don't like is the weight of AA batteries
Try Lithium, they made a difference on my AA-powered MZ-5n and
AF500FTZ.
Kostas
Hi,
Can't remember who was asking about this - Sylwek? Anyway, it is in
stock here.
http://www.7dayshop.com/catalog/product_info.php?manufacturers_id=products_id=99150
http://www.7dayshop.com/catalog/product_info.php?manufacturers_id=products_id=71185
Let me know how much you want. I'll deliver
ft I wanna know if Steady handholds his 6x7 with a 300mm at 1/30th of a
ft second. LOL
Aaron is quite good at handholding 67 - I remember seeing him focus
than quickly flick up the mirror than release the shutter all in one
moment at 1/15 or so :-)
Dunno if he still has the 67 - Anyone from
RS Just did a QD shot of the M6 + 21/2.8 ASPH, M7 + 43/4.5 and LX + A20/2.8
RS together.
RS http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio/temp/IMGP1979.jpg (~121kB)
Nce :-)
How many sat channels can you get on the LX lenshood g ?
Good light!
fra
WR I suspect we would get along well in the darkroom.
WR The Mamiya 7 might be a good camera to look at.
WR Kind of a Texas Leica.
I always heard Texas Leica is generally meant this:
http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/fujig690.html
(although I would call it Texas Zorkij or Texas Fed, myself - the damn
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Morten Dahl wrote:
I've been offered one for USD 300. Is it worth it?
It's a K, not an M (no functional difference). It is fairly rare and
reputed to have excellent correction. Shel (I believe) finds its
colours unappealing (too blue?). I paid signifcantly less for mine off
SC way of getting images from cards to the unit itself. There are a couple of
SC proprietry connectors, but they are hideously slow. I'm sort of fishing at
[...]
SC The Ipod's don't have direct card access (i.e. there is no card slots,
[...]
SC can't power a card reader etc through its
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
On Wed, 6 Apr 2005, Mishka wrote:
what i don't like is the weight of AA batteries
Try Lithium, they made a difference on my AA-powered MZ-5n and
AF500FTZ.
Try NiCads in an LX motor grip. Offensive weapon for the discerning
photographer
mike
That's precisely what I mean about breathtaking. When they can do
CR123As for £1.99 and you can get 2CR5s from 7dayshop for less than
£2, I'm not going to pay over £5 for a battery I can get free from
work. 8-)
I wouldn't grumble at US$2.95 they do have a long shelf life apparently, I
Morten,
There is no M version of the 30/2.8, it is only available in the K
flavour. Its full name will be either SMC PENTAX 1:2.8/30 or smc PENTAX
1:2.8 30mm, depending on its age, see www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/. It has a
reputation for high optical quality, but I've never had one so I can't
comment
Get it. But negotiate.
It will only get more expensive.
@ 30mm it's an ideal normal lens for digital
and
it's one of the sharpest lenses you may ever own.
It's sharper than my A35/2 and as sharp as my FA50/1.4.
(With a few different characteristics, of course.)
I currently use it pretty much
John Whittingham wrote:
That's precisely what I mean about breathtaking. When they can do
CR123As for £1.99 and you can get 2CR5s from 7dayshop for less than
£2, I'm not going to pay over £5 for a battery I can get free from
work. 8-)
I wouldn't grumble at US$2.95 they do have a long shelf
Wow fabulous complexion. No, she doesn't really need a gaussian blur. I
might put it back with just 10% opacity or so just for a touch of
romance. But she's excellent as is.
On Apr 7, 2005, at 12:45 AM, William Robb wrote:
I need a shorter URL
Anyway, this is straight off the RAW
Hi Mike
The ebay price is ok but you have to reckon in the postage and money
transfer costs. Where did you get the £2.65 price from? The URL
you listed just took me to the battery-force home page and I had to
search. Only found the Panasonic (I think) for well over £5 each.
To
Steady does keep his hands on the camera when he releases the shutter
with that 300 at 1/30th. This does a lot to dampen any vibration. I do
the same with my *istD and the 400. I have done a lot of handheld stuff
with the 6x7 and 300. It's a piece of cake at 1.250th and hit and miss
at
John Whittingham wrote:
Just typed CR1/3N into the search and got Energizer 2L76 £2.65 inc VAT, or
box of 10 £23.79p.
That's a tolerable price. They will surely last longer than the LR44s.
Hundreds of LR44s dare I ask what for?
Being the fifth biggest FE College in the UK, we have three centres
-Original Message-
From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
You are right. And to think imperial is new to me... :-)
Not to worry, didn't NASA crash their Mars Rover thing
due to a similar error ;-)
--
Peter Williams
Being the
cheapest College in the UK, we buy whatever junk is on sale and they
last weeks if we are lucky.
No you can't be we are, I'm sure 8)
John Whittingham
Technician
William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Mark Roberts
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You neglected to post some of the addendums that followed this message
vbg.
The shutter bounce vibration in the 6x7 is largely myth.
Doesn't look like it to me:
John Whittingham wrote:
Being the
cheapest College in the UK, we buy whatever junk is on sale and they
last weeks if we are lucky.
No you can't be we are, I'm sure 8)
I won't argue with you.
mike
technician (a sadly degraded post these days) too
I agree. But there is a style of photography, called boudoir over here,
which involves kitschy, romantic, backgrounds, and very soft focus.
Some people love it. For them, Bill's soft-focus photos would look much
nore professional than the un-retouched ones.
Horses for courses. Bill was
AnnSan asked this about the GFM photo weekend:
am I gonna be the only um girl photog?
Susan (my SO) will be there again this year. She'll me shooting Canon
digital so it's a matter of opinion as to whether she's a photog. G
Tom Reese
Bill she's quite lovely. Seeing these she doesn't need anywhere near
the amount of Gaussian blur you originally used.
I had a bit of a play and at that image size I found 0.8 pixels of
blur was enough, but still keeping the eye's, lips hair sharp.
BTW after having another look, IMGP7183ns is
William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The N.C. Press Photographers Association has rescinded three awards given
to Observer photographer Patrick Schneider in its 2002 statewide
competition.
The board ruled that Schneider had altered the editorial content of some
photos he entered by overly
To me the point is that the transparency is the first (and for me the last)
generation of the image as I saw it captured it, whereas the print digital
RAW are starting points.
The calibration issue is a given with all processes.
Kenneth Waller
-Original Message-
From: Godfrey
Bruce,
I guess it depends on why you took the image. If you wanted to show the sunset,
you used the wrong lens. If you wanted to show the wires you succeded.
Kenneth Waller
-Original Message-
From: Ann Sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Apr 6, 2005 10:48 PM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
- Original Message -
From: Ann Sanfedele
Subject: Re: GFM PDML
I wish you both were coming -
am I gonna be the only um girl photog?
annsan
We'll dress Frank up as a lumberjack.
William Robb
I have a closet full of Kenora
Thanks Don.
I don't often take stuff like this, but was happy with a few of them. Hopefully
one will
end up in the Fair
contest this fall.
Dave
Number 9 is awesome Dave!
I think number 10 is my favorite though, I'm a sucker
for old red brick buildings.
On Wed, 6 Apr 2005 22:45:52 -0600, William Robb wrote:
The files were resized for the web, no sharpening or softening.
http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb//pictures/flannery/sharp/flanneryns_index.html
Those look better to me than the original (softened) ones. Personally,
I don't think she
On Thu, 07 Apr 2005 00:47:25 -0400, Ann Sanfedele wrote:
Frank made a reference to this as well - I think I'm missing
this joke - must be a Canadian thing
maybe one that shouldn't be repeated in polite company -
not that that would exclude it here!
Monty Python's The Lumberjack Song.
I understand that Apple sells a proprietary connector that allows one
to download images directly from digital cameras to the iPod Photo.
However, the iPod Photo does not display RAW files, and the connector
itself apparantly consumes a lot of battery power.
On Apr 7, 2005 6:03 PM, Frantisek
One of the few classic Python skits I've actually seen :-)
For those unfamiliar with it, the lyrics can be found here:
http://www.metrolyrics.com/lyrics/10850/Monty_Python/Lumberjack_Song
A selection of Python songs in mp3 wav formats (including the
lumberjack song) can be downloaded here:
On 7 Apr 2005 at 10:25, John Whittingham wrote:
And this site in the UK, quite reasonable for rip-off Britain 8)
http://www.battery-force.co.uk/index.html?via=pgbt=kw42
That's a very good price, better than I can buy Sanyos wholesale.
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
-Original Message-
From: Doug Franklin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
That lumberjack isn't quite as
... uh ... butch as most would expect. ;-)
He's a lumberjack and he's alright...
--
Peter Williams
Hi Rob
Any ideas if they're safe to use with older electronics i.e. Pentax KX, MX
etc.
John Whittingham
Technician
-- Original Message ---
From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 22:41:51 +1000
Subject: Re: CR1/3N / DL1/3N /
On 7 Apr 2005 at 9:26, John Whittingham wrote:
Any comments, advice or experience much appreciated.
Used them for years in all sorts of cameras, they won't break anything, the
voltage is spot on the only disadvantage is when they finally let go they do it
fast. However given that they have a
On 7 Apr 2005 at 11:36, Morten Dahl wrote:
I've been offered one for USD 300. Is it worth it?
(Notice that list price for the 31mm LTD in Norway is USD 1500 ...)
You could definitely do better though you need to be vigilant:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemrd=1item=7502926895
Used them for years in all sorts of cameras, they won't break
anything, the voltage is spot on the only disadvantage is when they
finally let go they do it fast. However given that they have a shelf
life of at least 10 years you've no excuse for not having a fresh
one about :-)
Cheers
Hey all... I recently got an old Sears-branded 300mm f/5.6
screwmount telephoto. From the looks of it, it seems to be identical to
a vivitar on ebay like this:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemcategory=707item=7502072857rd=1ssPageName=WDVW
From the S/N, its alegedly Tokina-built
On 7 Apr 2005 at 13:50, John Whittingham wrote:
Hi Rob
Any ideas if they're safe to use with older electronics i.e. Pentax KX, MX
etc.
Many older cameras use a bridge circuit for metering and even if they didn't
I'll bet none used the internal resistance of the battery as a current
John Whittingham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Rob
Any ideas if they're safe to use with older electronics i.e. Pentax KX, MX
etc.
They've worked fine in my MX.
--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com
Thanks again Rob, I hate expensive mistakes and nasty suprises 8)
John
John Whittingham
Technician
-- Original Message ---
From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 23:06:51 +1000
Subject: Re: CR1/3N / DL1/3N / 5008LC / K58L / 2L76
And is very slow...
Dr. Shaun Canning
Cultural Heritage Services
11 Lawrence Way
Karratha, Western Australia,
6714
0414-967644
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.heritageservices.com.au
-Original Message-
From: Chan Yong Wei [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 8:30 PM
Thanks mark.
John
-- Original Message ---
From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 09:20:21 -0400
Subject: Re: CR1/3N / DL1/3N / 5008LC / K58L / 2L76 Battery 3V
John Whittingham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Rob
Any ideas if
Yeah Dave, this is the one that is really slow, and chews batteries...
Thanks anyway though...
Shaun
Dr. Shaun Canning
Cultural Heritage Services
11 Lawrence Way
Karratha, Western Australia,
6714
0414-967644
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.heritageservices.com.au
-Original Message-
Primary job as an MP3 player that doubles as a PDA and photo library (which is
incidentally, beautifully designed and built).
Cheers
Shaun
Dr. Shaun Canning
Cultural Heritage Services
11 Lawrence Way
Karratha, Western Australia,
6714
0414-967644
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Not me I love the K30/2.8.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Kostas Kavoussanakis
It's a K, not an M (no functional difference). It is fairly rare and
reputed to have excellent correction. Shel (I believe) finds its
colours unappealing (too blue?). I paid signifcantly less for mine off
There is no M 30/2.8 lens. There's an M35/2.8 and a K30/2.8 perhaps
you mean one of these?
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Morten Dahl
I've been offered one for USD 300. Is it worth it?
(Notice that list price for the 31mm LTD in Norway is USD 1500 ...)
David Savage wrote:
Bill she's quite lovely. Seeing these she doesn't need anywhere near
the amount of Gaussian blur you originally used.
I had a bit of a play and at that image size I found 0.8 pixels of
blur was enough, but still keeping the eye's, lips hair sharp.
BTW after having another
mike wilson wrote:
http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb//pictures/flannery/sharp/flanneryns_index.html
Much,_much_ better. No softening needed on that skin.
I agree. My favourite is:
http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb//pictures/flannery/sharp/IMGP7182ns.html
perhaps little bit provocative, but
- Original Message -
From: Mark Roberts
Subject: Re: Taking, Making, Creating Images
Here's an interesting editorial from ZoneZero about the controversy. It
includes all three of Schneider's disqualified photos, both in their
original and altered versions:
- Original Message -
From: Rob Studdert
Subject: Re: Re: Taking, Making, Creating Images
On 7 Apr 2005 at 8:27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Even a relatively straight photo can be misleading. The following pic is
the
Aussie PM (front) and the treasurer in session in the House Of Reps
- Original Message -
From: mike wilson
Subject: Re: peso: A Small Gallery, no softening this time.
Lens used was the 77mm at around f/8.
http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb//pictures/flannery/sharp/flanneryns_index.html
Much,_much_ better. No softening needed on that skin. My wife hates
- Original Message -
From: Doug Franklin
Subject: Re: peso: A Small Gallery, no softening this time.
http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb//pictures/flannery/sharp/flanneryns_index.html
Those look better to me than the original (softened) ones. Personally,
I don't think she needs the
- Original Message -
From: mike wilson
Subject: Re: Backordered: SMC Pentax-FA 135mm f/2.8 (IF)
Or we are about to see some new lenses coming. Who knows?
He does?
WW
Who?
Thats right.
William Robb
- Original Message -
From: David Savage
Subject: Re: peso: A Small Gallery, no softening this time.
Bill she's quite lovely. Seeing these she doesn't need anywhere near
the amount of Gaussian blur you originally used.
I had a bit of a play and at that image size I found 0.8 pixels of
- Original Message -
From: Paul Stenquist
Subject: Re: peso: A Small Gallery, no softening this time.
Wow fabulous complexion. No, she doesn't really need a gaussian blur. I
might put it back with just 10% opacity or so just for a touch of
romance. But she's excellent as is.
Thanks
- Original Message -
From: John Whittingham
Subject: Re: CR1/3N / DL1/3N / 5008LC / K58L / 2L76 Battery 3V
Hi Rob
Any ideas if they're safe to use with older electronics i.e. Pentax KX, MX
etc.
Nikon used to ship them as standard equipment with their cameras.
I've used them off and on
- Original Message -
From: John Forbes
Subject: Re: peso: A Small Gallery, no softening this time.
Horses for courses. Bill was shooting for her, not for himself (at least,
that's what he told her). The client is queen.
Actually, I shoot for myself. If my agenda happens to match the
Hi Bill ...
My favorite is:
http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb//pictures/flannery/sharp/IMGP7182ns.html
The degree of softness on these pics is, imo, just right.
shel
ROTFL
Dave S
On Apr 7, 2005 9:11 PM, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message -
From: mike wilson
Subject: Re: Backordered: SMC Pentax-FA 135mm f/2.8 (IF)
Or we are about to see some new lenses coming. Who knows?
He does?
WW
Who?
Thats right.
William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Mark Roberts
Here's an interesting editorial from ZoneZero about the controversy. It
includes all three of Schneider's disqualified photos, both in their
original and altered versions:
http://www.zonezero.com/editorial/octubre03/october.html
I really like this, as well. The expression on her face say I really
like being photographed!And those bright eyes reveal a bit more
than the photographer intended - a self portrait! Excellent
photograph of a superbly chosen subject.
On Apr 5, 2005 4:34 PM, Gonz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm going to agree that a slight shift to the left may have helped a
bit. However, it was obvious to me that the person in the background
was pointing with the umbrella handle (at least I think that's an
umbrella). I like this photograph, Godfrey, and must disagree with
the rest of the field
Who does?
- Original Message -
From: mike wilson
Subject: Re: Backordered: SMC Pentax-FA 135mm f/2.8 (IF)
Or we are about to see some new lenses coming. Who knows?
He does?
WW
Who?
Thats right.
William Robb
- Original Message -
From: mike wilson
Subject: Re: peso: A Small Gallery, no softening this time.
She's definintely got the look there. Show it to her, get her to do
it again and step back a bit, Bill. 8-)
Try this one instead.
1 - 100 of 271 matches
Mail list logo
