On Nov 21, 2005, at 5:04 PM, Jostein wrote:
Last Sunday I photographed a particular phenomenon that I've been
wanting to shoot for a long time. In the pictures I took home the
colours are a bit larger than life, but still less of a lie than a
traditional Fuji Velvia rendering would
On Nov 22, 2005, at 2:28 AM, Tim Øsleby wrote:
I like it. I wish it was larger. This kind of photo cries for a larger
format.
It just so happens that I had my RB67 with me that day.
I scanned the medium format slide a few years ago and I've managed to
track down a copy of the file. It's
On Nov 21, 2005, at 10:37 PM, Peter McIntosh wrote:
David Mann wrote:
I'm making good progress with my scanning so here's another one
from the archives.
http://www.bluemoon.net.nz/photo/printsdb/view.php?p=127t=1
Wow.
My mind's eye sees Gandalf and Frodo in the distance... :-)
Hi Jostein,
To see the motif in the viewfinder just pop out as I turned the
polariser was an amazing experience.
Large version: 1000x668 pixels, 315 Kb
http://www.oksne.net/paw/sprekk1000.html
very nice, one time I did some shooting through the window of the
airplane and I've got similar
On Nov 22, 2005, at 4:21 AM, frank theriault wrote:
Now that I think of it, I ~may~ have had the shutter at 1/1000th, not
1/2000th. And, if the meter was telling me 1/125th and 1/250th, I may
be only off by 2 or 3 stops on some of them. I'll tell him to push
two stops and hope for the best.
Sunlight is partially plane polarized.
Don
Peter Lacus wrote:
Hi Jostein,
To see the motif in the viewfinder just pop out as I turned the
polariser was an amazing experience.
Large version: 1000x668 pixels, 315 Kb
http://www.oksne.net/paw/sprekk1000.html
very nice, one time I did some
hi frank,
http://www.misenet.sk/USA/MV.html
I believe that Peter Alling and I will have to hate you now (if we
didn't already).
no need to hate me, it's the beautiful American nature and not my skills
who made this picture, after all. IMHO it's sufficient to be in the
right place at the
If anyone is interested in polarized
light there's a new (Red) button on my
website front page labeled 'Prints'.
This leads to a gallery of crystal
images taken with the *ist D.
Don W
--
Dr E D F Williams
___
http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams
See
On Nov 22, 2005, at 10:39 AM, graywolf wrote:
In really does not make any difference how old or primitive the
camera. Any large format photographer who says he has not taken
some gorgeous photos of his darkslides is a liar.
My attempts at photographing the RB67 darkslide were always
On Nov 22, 2005, at 12:28 PM, William Robb wrote:
The trick is to not move.
And to have exposure and focus set.
It's quite doable, though it's not something I would expect to have
much success with if I was using a normal lens or longer.
I do this quite often with the 90mm and 45mm lenses.
On Nov 22, 2005, at 3:20 PM, frank theriault wrote:
I'm happy to answer further questions along these lines, and also to
sing the praises of the truly spectacular 75mm f2.8 and generally
enable those who need enablement, just CC your questions/responses to
me since I'm not subscribed to the
Hi Marnie,
Boy, I am glad you made it there. :-)
yup, once again thanks for your advices regarding our trip. It was
quite a long way (we drove about 4000 miles in three weeks) but it was
totally worth it.
This particular sunrise was probably the most beautiful one in my life
so far (at
No, sunlight is unpolarized, but as such it contains all polarizations and you
can extract anyone you want.
The reason why you can see the effect in some windows (and ice and a lot of
transparent hard plastic) is that the material acts as a polarizor. So if you
have the window of a polarizing
On Nov 22, 2005, at 3:44 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Why screw around replacing and removing lens caps when changing film
anyway? It just slows you down, can sometimes be cumbersome, and
there's
little chance that a cap will provide any real protection to the
camera or
lens in a fall.
frank theriault wrote:
Check. Peter Mc's on the hate list. Thanks for the heads up, Peter.
H... I don't know whether to fight or flee...! ;-)
Ciao,
Peter in Sydney (now looking for an alias...)
If sunlight (skylight) were not
polarized, then polarizing filters would
have no effect and would not improve
your nice cloudy skies. The highest
percentage of polarized light from the
sky is to be found at about 90 degrees
to the sun's direction. To get the best
effect, have the sun to the
OK, I see where the differences are.
Sunlight as such is unpolarized, but once reflected, refracted or scattered you
may have a partial separation of some polarization modes depending on the
direction. So, if you look at a blue sky through a window of polarizing
materials, and at the right
On 21/11/05, frank theriault, discombobulated, unleashed:
Much like the last one, but this time with her eyes closed:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3896653size=lg
No problem Frank, I looked at this one with my eyes closed too.
Another nice shot.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
||
On 22/11/05, Don Williams, discombobulated, unleashed:
Sunlight is partially plane polarized.
I find you get better effects on bigger planes. The 747-400's a real doozy.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
On 21/11/05, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed:
There's no precision in what you're showing us
Cotty, and you're using a lens with a great DOF and wide angle of
acceptance.
Funny, I worked out a method of shooting in this way that took what I
considered a certain amount of precision.
On 11/22/05, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 22/11/05, Don Williams, discombobulated, unleashed:
Sunlight is partially plane polarized.
I find you get better effects on bigger planes. The 747-400's a real doozy.
Ooooh...I can only imagine what it's like on an Airbus A380.
Dave
Sunlight outside the ionosphere is
unpolarized. But we never encounter it
unless we take a trip in the space
shuttle or one of those Russian Soyuz
rockets. Once the light hits the
ionosphere it becomes plane polarized to
a degree. That's the sunlight we
encounter down here on earth. The
Hi Don,
Your crystal pics are lovely.
It's interesting to see that many of your crystals produce the same palette of
colours in polarised light as do natural ice.
Of course, ice can be regarded as a crystal lattice of water, but in ice I've
only seen this effect in cracks; where the lattice is
On 22 Nov 2005 at 9:38, Peter Lacus wrote:
very nice, one time I did some shooting through the window of the
airplane and I've got similar rainbow effects. I still don't understand
how it works, though...
Relating to the effect when shooting through aircraft windows:
On 22 Nov 2005 at 21:47, David Mann wrote:
My attempts at photographing the RB67 darkslide were always thwarted
by the interlock that locks out the shutter release when the
darkslide is in place.
Thankfully the Mamiya 7 has an interlock on the darkslide too :-)
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE
Ice is amorphous -- like glass -- but
reflective. The rainbow effect is
probably caused the layer of water on
the surface. Compare this to a film of
oil on water. The thickness of the film
will determine the color that is
reflected. The thinnest of films will
reflect almost silver; after
Hi Frank,
I went through the posts to your dilemma rather quickly so forgive me if I
am repeating what someone else has said.
The reason I put the lens cap on when firing up a new roll is that I'm
cheap and don't want to pay for pics of nothing on the first couple of
frames. I have been there and
fra: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 22 Nov 2005 at 9:38, Peter Lacus wrote:
very nice, one time I did some shooting through the window of the
airplane and I've got similar rainbow effects. I still don't understand
how it works, though...
Relating to the effect when shooting
The reason I put the lens cap on when firing up a new roll is that I'm
cheap and don't want to pay for pics of nothing on the first couple of
frames. I have been there and done that firing off many frames before
realizing the LX was still on 1/2000's. What I do now is set the speed to
1/15's
I'm getting excellent BW results from my Epson C86 and Epson Enhanced
Matte paper. Moab Kayenta paper is even better. The C86, being a Quad
Ink Printer, quite thouroughly sucks for colour. Next up is getting the
MIS EZ inkset and trying a QuadBlack setup.
-Adam
graywolf wrote:
Boy you are
Hi Fred !!
Very cool you still have the original post !!
Steve
- Original Message -
From: Fred [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Steve Larson pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2005 4:31 AM
Subject: Re: How my LX Ruined my Weekend
The reason I put the lens cap on when firing
On 11/21/05, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Frank,
Many of your Pirate jenny and similar shots are ruined by the microphone
obscuring the performer's face. Maybe you can station yourself in such a
position (on stage, back stage, wherever, maybe use different lenses) that
you're
On 11/22/05, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 21/11/05, frank theriault, discombobulated, unleashed:
Much like the last one, but this time with her eyes closed:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3896653size=lg
No problem Frank, I looked at this one with my eyes closed too.
On 11/21/05, Mark Stringer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The mic is part of the photo, part of her performance. I can see her face
and her passion. Great photo.
You cause me to blush, Mark.
Thanks for your comments. Glad you liked it.
cheers,
frank
--
Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri
On Nov 22, 2005, at 4:50 AM, frank theriault wrote:
Much like the last one, but this time with her eyes closed:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3896653size=lg
Good shot. You caught a fine moment of emotion and passion, rendered
it well.
Godfrey
On 11/22/05, Fred [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The reason I put the lens cap on when firing up a new roll is that I'm
cheap and don't want to pay for pics of nothing on the first couple of
frames. I have been there and done that firing off many frames before
realizing the LX was still on
I've seen examples of simple mechanical devices (ring spanner is the
first that comes to mind) prototyped in plastic, had a load applied
and then photographed like this, to determine where the stress is. The
colours are a lot like those seen in FEA (Finite Element Analysis)
software output.
Dave
On 11/22/05, frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
But, Shel: The shot is ruined by the mic? I guess you're entitled
to your opinion, but ruined? That's fairly strong language.
BTW, I'm not in any way insulted or hurt by the use of the word. I'm
just surprised by your use of it.
I need a light 100mm or wider lens in a shutter, that would cover 6x12cm
without movements for a project camera, maybe somebody on the list has one
they wouldn't miss? I am on a tight budget so please don't offer me those
$1000+ used lenses, my heart bleeds just looking at ebay :)
I really like this one.
There is so much emotion in this picture. Focus and DOF is perfect. The
background is pleasant. Her pose is (I can't find the right word in
English). Her right hand is visible, underlining some point. I love the
white dots on her blouse.
Think I'm in love.
Tim
Mostly
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005, frank theriault wrote:
On 11/21/05, Mark Stringer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The mic is part of the photo, part of her performance. I can see her face
and her passion. Great photo.
You cause me to blush, Mark.
But it is really good, Frank. Fuji Neopan, eh? May give it
More from Brother Aaron (in response to Shel):
-- Forwarded message --
From: Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Nov 21, 2005 11:20 PM
Subject: Re: Possibility of Medium Format enablement
To: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Oh, now you've sucked me in. I looked at the site
My first reaction was: Strange.
Now my reaction is: Strange.
I don't get it, but I like it ;-)
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-
I ordered an Epson RX700 yesterday, after talking myself about 100USD up
from the RX620. Judging from the data, this printer is a R800 with six ink
tanks, instead of eight. The scanner has a better resolution too, so I
wasn't that hard to convince ;-)
I believe it will be here when I'm back from
Sunlight is partially plane polarized.
I find you get better effects on bigger planes. The 747-400's a real doozy.
Ooooh...I can only imagine what it's like on an Airbus A380.
And think of those lucky dudes on Antonovs or C-5s ;-)
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People,
In a message dated 11/21/2005 2:03:56 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Last Sunday I photographed a particular phenomenon that I've been
wanting to shoot for a long time. In the pictures I took home the
colours are a bit larger than life, but still less of a lie than a
I like this one too. There is a lot of lines working together, making a
pleasant image.
BTW. Thats flare? For some reason I have mixed flare with another
phenomena.
Thanks for posting the picture. And thanks for expanding my photo
vocabulary.
Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
Is anyone happy using Adobe Elements
4 and
Adobe Raw converter?
What about RawShooter?
Hi Mark.
I have not upgraded to El 4 from El 3 yet, but i find the raw converter in El 3
works
well.I have limited
experience in Raw, but it does what i'm
Hi!
Yup, another question...
Right now I'm using (with my DS) the FA 50mm f/1.7. A very nice lens,
however I'd like a wide/normal - the DA16-45 sounds great but at this
moment I can't afford it :(
A friend of mine told me about the Tokina 19-35, in fact he is also
looking for a 'standard' lens.
Ann,
A way long time back, when virtually everything was BW, the little
yellow Kodak box and enclosed instructions, recommended the user load
the film in low light.
While there have been numerous times when conditions require I take a
chance and load film in blazing sunlight, the 'guilt' of that
In a message dated 11/20/2005 4:24:02 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Whew, feels like forever since I've put a PAW photo up. Figured I'd
get these two on the site before I leave for NY tomorrow ... two at
once.
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/44.htm
Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote:
Hi!
Yup, another question...
Right now I'm using (with my DS) the FA 50mm f/1.7. A very nice lens,
however I'd like a wide/normal - the DA16-45 sounds great but at this
moment I can't afford it :(
A friend of mine told me about the Tokina 19-35, in fact he is
2005/11/22, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
A friend of mine told me about the Tokina 19-35, in fact he is also
looking for a 'standard' lens. It's cheap, and - while affordable -
I'm concerned about it's optical quality: if any of you have this
lens, I would appreciate if you'll
frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Much like the last one, but this time with her eyes closed:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3896653size=lg
Hope you enjoy it. Comments are always welcome. Thanks in advance.
Another great Pirate Jenny shot!
BTW, I don't mind the microphone
Great, Tim!
My experience has been that there is a learning
curve involved in getting scans that resemble the
original slides. Don't get discouraged with your
first several attempts.
Rick
--- Tim Øsleby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I ordered an Epson RX700 yesterday, after talking
myself about
A new amazing development in the robo-photography age?
http://graphics.stanford.edu/papers/lfcamera/
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg18825255.000feedId=online-news_rss20
From: Jostein [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/11/22 Tue AM 11:30:52 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Polarized light
Hi Don,
Your crystal pics are lovely.
It's interesting to see that many of your crystals produce the same palette of
colours in polarised light as do
Hi Fred !! Very cool you still have the original post !!
Yeah, Steve (it's kinda sad, isn't it? - g).
My email folders just get bigger and bigger over time - threads that don't
get deleted right away may not get deleted for several years - g. And,
my email client, The Bat (makes the *ist name
Well, perhaps for you and some others. However, when I make a shot and
something upsets or detracts from my intent, I consider the shot ruined.
That's my standard for my own work. I didn't get the shot i wanted. Maybe
I'm just more critical (at least about my work in general). If you find
the
I believe I will try to learn one thing at the time. First getting the
prints right, then I'll start with the scans. As I have understood both
processes requires a lot of fiddling.
Knowing myself, I know I will do some test scans as I play with the printer.
Just to confuse myself a bit ;-)
I can
I have since learned the 67 lends itself to this sort of technique. At
some point the discussion about MedFormat in general became specific to the
use of the 67, as it's the only MedFormat choice out there (coincidentally,
it wasn't on the list of choices the original poster asked about). I
Fred and Steve,
Thanks for the good idea. I've always set it at 1/2000th or 1/1000th,
so as to let as little light in as possible, but hell, that don't make
no difference, especially with a cap on! A slow shutter speed would
make it hard to take more than a frame without noticing.
Well,
Frank, is this a departure from your fuzzy genre? Are you now into
grainy and murky? Or maybe you are going to combine both? vbg
frank theriault wrote:
Okay, that's an exaggeration. It didn't ruin my weekend, but it
pissed me off some. And, really, it was my fault, not the camera's
Check out a Kodak Wide-Field Ektar 100mm/6.3 it will cover 4x5 and
shouldn't run you much more than $200-250. In fact there is one on ebay
right now (I don't imagine many others on the list are watching it),
item number 7565116114
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
Idiot Proof == Expert
As a kid, when it was my turn to do the dishes, it would take me
forever. The reason? I would play with the bubbles. My favorite
pastime during this ritual was to gently blow on large bubbles, watching
them perform a unique dance of colors and swirls on the surface. They
eventually reached
Don't worry, Frank wouldn't hurt a fly, Canada Geese maybe, but not a fly...
Peter McIntosh wrote:
frank theriault wrote:
Check. Peter Mc's on the hate list. Thanks for the heads up, Peter.
H... I don't know whether to fight or flee...! ;-)
Ciao,
Peter in Sydney (now looking
I agree, Herb. I'd like to get comfortable with one convertor and
stick with it. I was/am looking at RSE for *all* raw conversions,
largely because of the ablity to do batch conversions. However I use
the organizer in PSE to import and manage images, so I'm still using
PSE3. Ends up something
Another option is a Graflex Optar/Wollensak Raptar (same lens) 90/6.8.
Or a Schneider Angulon 90/6.8.
The Schneider is more likely to be a coated lens, but will also be a
bit more expensive.
They both cover 4x5 without movements, which should be enough to cover
your desired 6x12 negative
The issue, as I see it, is that Frank's photograph isn't yours, Shel.
When critiquing someone else's work, you cannot answer to what
*their* intent was, you can only respond to the photograph. For you,
the microphone ruins the shot, but that isn't true for Frank, I or
several other people,
On Nov 22, 2005, at 7:36 AM, Tim Øsleby wrote:
I believe I will try to learn one thing at the time. First getting the
prints right, then I'll start with the scans. As I have understood
both
processes requires a lot of fiddling. ...
That's backwards, Tim. If you get the best scan, the rest
Hi everybody!
I am still looking for a used Sigma 100-300 f/4 with Pentax AF mount.
It looks like nobody wants to part with one, but just in case -
if you are thinking about selling one, - please contact me off the list.
Does anybody know why this lens is not carried by, say, BH, Adorama, etc.?
Every medium format SLR I've owned (Mamiya RB67, 1000S; Bronica SQ;
Hasselblad 500C/M) had mirror lock up. It is an essential feature on
medium format SLRs. On the Hassy, it's a little lever that falls
right under your thumb when you're holding the camera with a waist
level finder, with
On 11/21/05, Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wheatfield's suggestion. I liked it, and several of us signed up.
But I would have liked to call it The 600 Club. We could call
ourselves a ministry and deduct all photo gear from our taxes.
I like your idea. The Brotherhood sounded too
Hi,
Go to http://www.resellerratings.com/ and do a search on sigma4less. If
people have commented on the store's operation, service, and policies,
you'll see that information. Be sure to read not only the rating figures,
but comments by the customers as well. Reseller Ratings is a very good
Good advice ... sometimes I'm too direct or focused on what I think the
photo (or anything) should be. It's a bad habit from my childhood,
instilled by an over-domineering, abusive mother and too absent father,
coupled with an underlying level of low self . In my weak defense it
should be noted
There are a few that don't, notably the non-MLU version of the Kiev88.
-Adam
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Every medium format SLR I've owned (Mamiya RB67, 1000S; Bronica SQ;
Hasselblad 500C/M) had mirror lock up. It is an essential feature on
medium format SLRs. On the Hassy, it's a little lever
Good point Godfrey ;-)
You are absolutely right. But, when talking about getting the printing right
first, I was thinking about printing out the files I have on computer now.
I have taken near 4000 exposures with my DS, and none of them is printed
out. The reason is simple, because the printer I
Workflow and directory structure work hand in hand. My workflow goes
this way:
1) Download PEFs to external drive 1 in DL folder
2) DNG Convert to DNGs on working drive in new folder named by date
3) Move PEFs to PEFArchive on external drive 1.
4) Open DNG folder with Bridge, let it build
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: keith_w
Subject: Re: eBay help
For the curious
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=7563099669rd=1sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AITrd=1
Huh.
What would anyone *do* with all that NIKON stuff?
It's just one lens..
On Nov 22, 2005, at 10:20 AM, Tim Øsleby wrote:
Good point Godfrey ;-)
You are absolutely right. But, when talking about getting the
printing right
first, I was thinking about printing out the files I have on
computer now.
I have taken near 4000 exposures with my DS, and none of them is
Hi!
Returned to the state park with the circular dam from a while back,
decided to use a non fisheye to capture this.
http://www.mindspring.com/~webster26/PESO_--_circwfrev.html
Technical info:
Pentax *ist-D ISO 200 @ 1/20sec
smc Pentax-FA 20-35mm F4.0 AL @ f6.7
Notes: Couldn't decide if
Very nice, very nice, indeed. Are you pretty much able to control the
bleaching process, or is there some luck involved as well?
Shel
You meet the nicest people with a Pentax
[Original Message]
From: luben karavelov
Hello to all,
A week before I noticed that a beautiful and abandoned
Hi!
A couple of snaps I took while watching football this afternoon. They're
on the *istD, FA 50/1.4, f2 @ 1/125th, ISO 800
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3894117size=lg
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3894122
Cute, definitely cute...
Boris
Hi!
Check out http://mypeoplepc.com/members/kwaller/offwallphoto/id2.html
Something a little different from me.
All comments solicited
Yeah, nay, and/or otherwise
What would you do differently?
Ken, I have two thoughts that kinda cross my mind:
1. What if you lost the white circles/dots?
Hi!
My girlfriend REALLY likes this one, but I am unconvinced.
I know it's underexposed, I know the colors are off, but do you like it anyway?
http://www.matoe.org/gallery2/v/tomatoe/Ithaca/016_14.JPG.html
No, not really, sorry... It just does not work for me...
Boris
Really, is it that bad? I have a 1 meter wide print on my wall. My
wife hates it :)
Jack
On 11/21/05, Rick Womer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jack,
This doesn't do anything for me, I'm afraid. There is
no foreground, no center of interest, and the patch of
green scum-covered water (if that's
Hi!
I did a group picture of a family I have known for about 30 years last
night.
Roy is one of the people who more or less mentored me into making
quality pictures.
We would go out and shoot the same locations with each other, sometimes
shooting every day for weeks on end, then dissapearing
Hi!
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3891535
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3891436
Hi,
Not sure about the merits of these ones.
When I took them, the sun was almost setting. Besides, the scan aint
that good. No cropping.
All I could do is join the praising chorus
Hi!
http://www.misenet.sk/USA/MV.html
It was pleasant calm dawn and then the Sun began to rise...
Bedo.
--
PS: I changed PESO to PAW because I have some more slides from my
southwest trip scanned and ready to show you. So stay tuned. ;-)
Hope you won't be disappointed...
Have Martians
Hi!
Last Sunday I photographed a particular phenomenon that I've been
wanting to shoot for a long time. In the pictures I took home the
colours are a bit larger than life, but still less of a lie than a
traditional Fuji Velvia rendering would have been.
To see the motif in the viewfinder
Hi!
Whew, feels like forever since I've put a PAW photo up. Figured I'd get
these two on the site before I leave for NY tomorrow ... two at once.
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/44.htm
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/45.htm
Comments, critique, flames all
Hi!
This is one of the first photos taken with my new ist-DL. It's a weed -
a thistle. Just love the flowers they produce, though.
I like the DL. Easy to handle, and hasn't taken too long to get using
with a little confidence. I'm blissfully ignorant of the D and DS, so I
can't compare
Hi!
Many of your Pirate jenny and similar shots are ruined by the microphone
obscuring the performer's face. Maybe you can station yourself in such a
position (on stage, back stage, wherever, maybe use different lenses) that
you're able to capture more face and, therefore, more unobscured
I can't help imagining this scenario:
Somebody submitting a picture; of a sweet kid having a great time eating a
lollypop.
And, you Shel: Posting a comment;
your shot is ruined by the lolly obscuring the lolly eaters' mouth.
Sorry Shel. This just came into my mind, can't help it ;-)
Tim
Mostly
First results with the new toys:
http://www.photosight.ru/photo.php?photoid=1145051
Arcelor's coking plant in Seraing, Belgium. Nothing extraordinary in
this shot, BTW. Just normal routine operation with a few badly sealed
oven doors and a bit of excess gas being flared off in the background.
Shel, I've emailed you off-list.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
I know it's not a Pentax-specific question, but I'm wondering if
anyone knows anything about these units. In particular, I'm looking to
find info on the sensor pinouts. I'm thinking of trying to hack them
together to have multple master/slave setups. Maybe even figure out how
to convert
Really nice Ralf.
CW
- Original Message -
From: Ralf R. Radermacher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2005 2:41 PM
Subject: PESO: my favourite hell-hole
First results with the new toys:
http://www.photosight.ru/photo.php?photoid=1145051
Great shot.
I will note that it's most likely not the LX's meter that is at fault
for the exposure, but rather the reciprocity characteristics of the
film, which has cost you about 3 stops of speed at that point. You need
to compensate for reciprocity on exposures like this, but once you know
Beautiful shot Peter! Makes we want to go put some Velvia in the 67. It
looks slightly tilted, with the right horizon being lower than the left.
Maybe it's just the perspective, or maybe a slight rotation would help.
Nice of you to rise and be ready so early.
Tom C.
From: Peter Lacus
1 - 100 of 155 matches
Mail list logo
