I know what you mean about the 70-300 AF focusing. The manual focus
version, alas, no longer made, was not nearly as bad mechanically.
My MF version has developed some creep, though
Mike Hamilton wrote:
All I can say is wow. This is my first Takumar, and I'm simply
amazed at the build
Bob Shell wrote:
I'm doing some research and keep coming across odd units of measure
that I need to convert to more common ones. For example, in
measurements of concentration of dissolved solids I'm used to using
mg/L but came across a French research paper that has everything in
Thibouille wrote:
I have to produce a software as a final evaluation of my computer
sciences studies.
Exif/ipct collecting from files?
How about a full Exif for pentax cameras, including maker's marks?
I've not seen anything like that before. Might be suitable for an
undergrad kind of
Good trial to see if you want an f/8 mirror lens?
BTW, I find mirror lenses very difficult to focus.
Paul Stenquist wrote:
I sold my 105 some time ago. I could try it with a 90. But I would
never focus any lens at f8. What's the point?
Paul
On Nov 15, 2006, at 7:49 PM, William Robb wrote:
If I keep the camera at a constant distance from the
subject, I agree with you. But if the subject has the
same magnifaction in the finder, I don't.
You haven't mentioned that yet in this new diatribe.
-Lon
J. C. O'Connell wrote:
I never said it was always a problem, I said its
harder to
Thine will shall be done.
Lasse Karlsson wrote:
Thanks for posting the results, Lon.
If possible, you can add my name to the aye:s.
Thanks,
Lasse
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
I was awaiting your orders, Sir. Now loading the blunderbuss to counter the
invasion
Joseph Tainter wrote:
jw2904387 e87dc x 19893o-127e olu1e818e xmshsl201[ w2j4
n1989210
0256smsx-1036
NAKJE SY
-
Let us know when they produce the works of Shakespeare.
Joe
--
PDML
And there has nebber nebber ebber been a sensical Cotty.
Wink
Cotty wrote:
On 30/10/06, Lon Williamson, discombobulated, unleashed:
Nonsensical responses:
==
Cotty (there will be no K1D)
Love it ! :-)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
I find this to be true on my M bodies. You can't just use your fore or mid
finger to twist the shutter dial easily. My KX bodies, however, don't
have as much friction that way. I think this depends on the body.
I have 3 MX bodies and 4 KX bodies, so I suspect I have a reassonable
sampling of
Heck folks, I'm usually a lurker but I DID start The JCO survey.
It was intended as a survey, but I'm now thinking it is one of the largest,
stupidest, and most bitter threads yet spawned here.
I think I deserve a prize.
Thistles thrown at twenty paces?
Pizza without sauce or cheese?
Rocks in
My macros have an external hood. In the case of the Phoenix 100mm/f3.5,
even with a
well-recessed front element, such a thing seems justified. For the SMC
lenses, it can't hurt
and it can help and if I dump the lens, theres something on the front to
take impact and
mebbe keep it working well
Yup, cheap rubbert hoods for those that didn't come with something.
Unlike some others, I keep my hoods mounted. And for the most part,
my hoods work somewhat or nicely with caps. I won't swap hoods to save
space in a camera bag. Those who differ with me probably have systems that
work fine for
I started this here thread as a survey. It is depressingly long running.
JCO, many of the people here who have lambasted you would LIKE
TO HAVE decent K/M lens support. Most think it ain't gonna happen.
And, I like you, would like to see it. Look at Wm Robb's lenses to see
why he actually
Film is flat, too. Most of the time.
John Francis wrote:
On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 10:32:46AM -0700, Jack Davis wrote:
Would it make sense to develop a concave sensor? Finest possible focus
would then be possible due to a constant light path distance across the
sensor.
Varying focal
Mark Roberts wrote:
And what part of Frank Theriault and Doug Brewer didn't you understand?
Well, most of it. Frank wears bunny ears and Doug runs a list.
My understanding of life is that they should both chop more wood.
It is good for anyone's soul but mine.
I'm lazy..
--
PDML
Shel, consider the ZX-M. Not an exensive camera. I've used it, and
purchased it.
It has the bits you mentioned. It's actually kinda sweet.
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Yes, I understand that, but I wonder of JCO grasps the concept. I knew a
number of people in the automotive business many years
Cain
George Sinos
Gonz
J. C. O'Connell
J. Munro
Jan van Wijk
Jens Bladt
Jim Apilado
Jim King
Kostas Kavoussanakis
Lon Williamson
Marnie aka Doe
Mike Wilson
P. J. Alling
Rob Studdert
Ryan Brooks
Scott Loveless
Shel Belinkoff
Stanley Halpin
Thibouille
Tim Osleby (via private email)
Tom C.
Vince
Bill, you'll outlast us all, cane or walker be danged.
So blow out a pile of candles, if you haven't already.
On 10/18/06, Doug Brewer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yesterday was Bill's birthday, though I got myself too involved in my
day to remember to post something about it. Sorry, Bill.
Given
His soul is in my prayers.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
I don't think the number of k/m lenses should limit the survey; I do
suspect
it influences a person's vote, like it did for JCO on on end of the spectrum
and Godfrey on the other.
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Why three? Why not one, or two?
Define good?
Are you now being elitist? Which K/M lenses
It's a thingie visible inside the body's mount that lets you use open
aperture metering on
any lens with an aperture ring. Almost all film bodies had this
feature, and many permited
both metered manual and aperture priority shooting modes with such lenses.
Absence of this thingie on the DLSRs
I'm thinking more in terms of ratio of responses than absolute numbers.
So far it looks like
about 70 percent of the respondents think that k/m lens compatibility
would be
_HIGHLY_ desirable in a flagship body.
Of course, the more people that respond, the more likely the results
extrapolate
My rule of thumb is, when in doubt of what you'll shoot, always take a
fast lens.
I could count on the fingers of one hand the times I've not taken a
50/1.4 with me.
All my other lenses are f2.8 or slower, though.
David Savage wrote:
G'day All,
I'm going up north tomorrow (Dampier) for
In order to cut down on list traffic, anyone still wanting to respond
should, perhaps, email me privately. I notice old antagonisms
developing as a result of my little survey. It was not my intention
to provide an arena for that.
In a few days I'll present a final summary and a request for any
My guess is that you have several useful A/F/FA/DA etc type lenses.
I don't. I want Av and fully metered manual mode if I'm gonna shell
out hundreds to a few thousand for a body. It's my money and my
decision, right? Wink.-Lon
Christian wrote:
Lon Williamson wrote:
I'd like a DLSR
I'll word it carefully. Everyone will see it before it is sent. I may
leave out the names
of respondents and any reference to PDML. I sure don't want the
listmeister upset at me.
-Lon
Doug Brewer wrote:
Lon, please do not presume to speak for the list. If you wish to
communicate your
understand responses:
Yea:
Lon Williamson
Dario Bonazza
Boris Liberman
Bob Sullivan
Scott Loveless
Ryan Brooks
Shel Belinkoff
William Robb
P. J. Alling
Thibouille
J. Munro
Adam Maas
Jens Bladt
Tim Osleby
J. C. O'Connell
Vince MacBournie
Kostas Kavoussanakis
Mike Wilson
Cory Papenfuss
Marnie aka Doe
Shel, the only other thing I can think of is to send timely PJ or other
type stuff out very soon after you shoot,
not necessarily to family/friends.
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
A friend who has ordered a K10D asked me what benefit there is to
converting a RAW file to a JPEG file in camera. I offered
I'm not sure that protecting new lens sales by prohibiting open
aperature metering
for K and P lenses makes sense. Most people I know with AF cameras WANT
AF lenses, and some, like my ex wife, can no longer reliably perform
manual focus
(eye problems). But IF the K1D is produced and IF it is a
P. J. Alling has a legitimate gripe, but remember that the K10D is not
the flagship.
Perhaps the coming flagship, the so called K1D, will finally permit
manual/AV with
pre-A lenses.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On the offhand chance that Pentax peeks at this list,
I propose the following question:
How many people here would consider an aperature
simulator permitting (for K,M, and all other lenses with
aperature rings) CW metering, open aperature metering
in manual and AV modes a _highly_ desirable
And if JCO doesn't respond positively to the survey, I, for one,
am gonna feel hornswaggled wink.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Add another to the JCO list.
JCO RULES!
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Paul, according to stuff we've all read recently, the K1D should exceed
the K10D.
The 10D is hi-amateur (whatever that means) and the 1D is pro. Hell,
I'm thinking
LX + 10D.BTW, I'm collecting respones to the JCO survey and intend to
bring the results to Pentax's attention.. I'm gonna ask
Yeah, and if one shoots that way, one can count on a few comments like
I would have reframed to avoid the _distracting_highlights_ in the
upper left..
etc. etc.
Ya like it or ya don't, I'm beginning to feel.
frank theriault wrote:
Boris' recent PESO (or was it a PAW?) featured at least two
One of the most difficult AND one of the most expensive.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Having tried a tiny bit of bird photography, and my awareness and admiration
just goes up for those that actually do it well. I think it's one of the
subgenres of photography that can be ranked as difficult
It seems to me that the recent spate of messages about PUG resulted in a
healthy number of photos.
Maybe we should all gripe a bit a week before the due date. Sorry I
didn't contribute this month.
Tom C wrote:
Hi Adelheid,
Respectfully, none of the comments on that topic was ever intended
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I was asked to submit five cat photos to the ASPCA. I put up a small
gallery from which five have to be selected. Perhaps you can take a moment
and let me
know which 5 you prefer. Thanks!
http://home.earthlink.net/~ebay-pics/SPCA_Gallery/
Mantle shot or the yellow
I've read with interest what PDMLers say about Pentax antishake,
but I remember reading, I think on DPreveiw, about the Optio A10
where antishake results were inconsistent. Mind, many think those
folks have a bias against Pentax. I would guess the DLSRs that are
a' coming would have better
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
LOL ... That's exactly what I said in the first response to this
thread .. :-)
Godfrey
On Jun 15, 2006, at 7:55 AM, Lon Williamson wrote:
Try shooting jpg as if you were shooting slide film. In my
experience,
they're quite similar.
Yeah, I know that now
I haven't used Macs since the Quadra days, but Norton Utilities
was sold for Macs in those days and did have a hard disk scrubbing
utility; essentially multiple writes to each empty sector.
-Lon
Mark Roberts wrote:
I know of several Windows freeware apps for secure - or at least more
secure -
Yup.. every zoom I've owned has changed focus slightly from
wide to long. I use a simple solution for fixed subjects: focus
at the long end and pray that greater DOF as I zoom wider will
compensate. I'm pleased with this simple approach using the 3 zooms
I still own. But I have never printed
Some of us can ONLY shoot jpeg. Lower end Optios spring to mind
'cause I gots one. I think jpeg is kinda neat; makes me think about
exposure much more than using neg film in a real camera.
Thank heavens for manual exposure in the SV. Makes balancing the
flash and ambient much easier.
--
PDML
I read long ago that the M35 f2.8 was prone to
grease causing the aperature to stick. When I bought
mine, it had a sluggish aperature. Local repair was
under $40, and the repairman did report grease as the
cause. Hope this helps.
-Lon
Good Luck, Mr. Robb
You mentioned there's a few things on your job plate for the
next few months. Photo related?
-Lon
Bob, as an owner of an SV, I'd like to know why she prefers
the S/S4. Size?
Bob Sullivan wrote:
Anybody had an Optio S or S4 serviced?
Are repairs expensive?
My daughter wants the S4 back in return for the new SV we bought her.
I would like to find an old S4 or S, maybe even a broken one.
But
I recall a book I borrowed from the library about shooting pets that
had a few pages about a photographer that specialized in aquarium shots.
As I recall, he hand held a macro lens with rubber hood, the hood edges
touching the aquarium glass. Flash was directed from above, on a cord
attatched to
Jane Bown - Faces: the Creative Process Behind Great Portraits
A great BW photographer who used a meterless Oly SLR and carried
a lightbulb in her purse as her only accessory.
-Lon
David Savage wrote:
G'day All,
OK, if you were to recommend just 2 books on or about photography,
preferably
The bad pixels are built in to your sensor, and everyone has them in a
different location. It's not hard to make a photoshop action that will
minimize them at a certain capture size. Email me for details.
-Lon
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
Dave, that's from your D. The spots I'm
Hurrah Boris. Nice shot.
Now don't let this go to your head.
I doubt it will.
-Lon
LOL. Huge static problem there with that bug.
Pancho's been reading your posts, Boris.
So have I.
Pancho Hasselbach wrote:
Congratulations, Boris, you nailed that bug!
Only thing is, so caught in the moment, it looks somewhat - static...
SCNR,
Pancho
I have the 300 DX pro, which is quite similar to the 400Dx.
There is an optional short centerpost, which I purchased, and
the centerpost is reversible.
I consider the 300 to be a much better tripod than the Bogen 3001,
which I've also used. I currently own a 3021, but use the Slik
much more
Oh, one thing I forgot: the 300/400 locks the centerpost with
TWO adjustments, making post extension much more secure.
My 3021 is very bouncy with even an inch of extension.
David J Brooks wrote:
Just pondering over the Slik Pro 700DX or the 400Dx models. They both
have adjustable multi
they can turn upside down. for low macro.
I'm sure they can but :-)
Dave Brooks
-
Lon Williamson
Tue, 28 Mar 2006 05:16:39 -0800
Oh, one thing I forgot: the 300/400 locks the centerpost with
TWO adjustments
Ken, this is a truism. But if the lens is short enough and the tripod
with post extension is good enough, I do it without thinking twice.
Mind you, once I have even a K135 f2.5 on the pod, I tend to go into
big glass mode. But heck, an M50 f1.4? Yeah, extend if you want to.
-Lon
Kenneth
And I always thought you existed to swerve.
Hoist the topsails, then spanker.
Cotty wrote:
I exist to serve :-)
I had a flash image in my noggin of Wm Robb in a bad mood.
Even though I don't know him. grin.
\Cotty wrote:
On 28/3/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi, discombobulated, unleashed:
Who is the Satan and how does he differ from the one true Satan?
Why do I suddenly get a vision of Godders sat at his Mac, a
Interesting post, that. My only SLRs are still film and likely to
remain that way. I'm still playing with a newly acquired Optio, having
just bailed in. Anyone who thinks a fairly new digi PS is simple
just doesn't understand things. With a film camera, I take a different
approach; this I can
Live and let live.
Paul Stenquist wrote:
This whiney film nostalgia is nice, but it's bullshit.
there too.
Jostein
- Original Message - From: Lon Williamson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Using a two axis rail as a substitute for custom pano heads -
crazy or viable with modest lens lengths?
I've read that the nodal point is usually somewhere near the aperature
blades of a lens
Toine, yeah, the SV does have an assist function, the tripod mount
is off center, and I guess I'd try to put the middle of the lens in the
center of the tripod for a first go. I'd experiment with it now, except
that there's still plenty else more useful to learn about the SV.
Thanks for the
I've read that the nodal point is usually somewhere near the aperature
blades of a lens. It seems to me, that with modest length lenses, doing
either vertical or horizontal panos would be kind of easy to do with a
two axis rail. The L-R axis could compensate for any off-lens-axis
tripod
Yeah it was awkward. As I recall, you had to create one large file
on disk that became the FAT16 drive. My neighbor had one of those
cards in his machine for his wife to use. Kinda like installing
the freebie BeOs on a Wintel machine.
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On Mar 17, 2006, at 4:07 PM, Lon
LOL. Mr. Brooks, never try for concordance, even on this
nice list. Tell 'em to shut up, place their orders, and
praise what is given. BTW, make mine puce
-Lon
David J Brooks wrote:
Do you KNOW how long that outline took me.??Now more.
I have Picture Window Pro, and have run it a few times.
I think had I stumbled onto it before photoshop, I'd be
using it happily. But I'm so USED to layers, and PWP ain't
got 'em. And right now I don't want to learn another editing
program well. Norman Koren (spelling on last name?) has a web
Here's a quote from Ken's filter section. In fact, it is the
first paragraph:
The selection of the proper filter is actually far more important than
any choice of lens or camera.
To be fair, much of what is on his site is interesting. My take is that
KennyBoy cannot be bothered to write an
Not satisfied with missed focus, Frank is now combining it with
too-slow-shutterspeeds. Artsy. Grin. I like it Frank, but even though
sharpness is a bullshit concept, I do wish the horn player's face
was a tad sharper. I've taken plenty like this one, myself.
And like you, I prefer to shoot
I understand this about Macro entirely. Some people can use flash
and handhold, and that makes sense when trying to freeze a bumblebee
or something similar, but if I can slow down, take my time, and use
a tripod, manual focus works far better for me on static subjects.
-Lon
Jack Davis wrote:
I agree with Frank. A few previous posts referenced trite
technique. I think that can freeze us (group pressure being
applied) from experimenting further.
For example, I used to think that pictures taken deliberately
unsquare (ie camera tilted noticably off plumb square) were
trite. I still
Go back to CS and enable Maximize Backwards Compatibility for file
saves. It might help.
-Lon
Dave Brooks wrote:
Hi Troops.
Do earlier versions of PS have problems opening up files from newer versions.?
The logo i'm doing was done on the ibook (PSCS)G4 OSX. I saved as a Jpg ( I
didi not
Hell, in the mid 90s Apple had a hardware solution: a 386 card,
if I remember correctly. And someone at the same time had a software-
only solution. This is back in the 68K processor days.
Cotty wrote:
On 17/3/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi, discombobulated, unleashed:
Of course. I had Windows and
, at 7:07 PM, Lon Williamson wrote:
Hell, in the mid 90s Apple had a hardware solution: a 386 card,
if I remember correctly. And someone at the same time had a software-
only solution. This is back in the 68K processor days.
Though I've had a web cam and that ilk before, the OptioSV is the
first digicam I've purchased that can do prints.
It only does JPEGs, which, I discovered, are as fickle as slide film
with regard to exposure. However, the LCD helps a bunch, so I've
paridoxically learned more about metering
Yup. Keeping something like this list going cannot be fun.
Altruist definition: Doug Brewer.
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Thanks for your attention to this and for running the list, Doug. I know a
lot of us, myself included, have come to depend upon and appreciate the
work that you do for the PDML.
My new SV has two areas that seems consistently corrupted.
Sstisfactory for a 5MP sensor?
-Lon
As we get old, we get senile. I argue with myself about
brown vs white sugar on my oatmeal every morning. Sometimes
the debate lasts til noon.
-Lon
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
AAARGH. Why can I never remember to change the reply-to address?
I hate aging. Take very good care, Collin.
-Lon
Doug Brewer wrote:
yeesh, it doesn't, does it? Get well, Collin.
Ok ok ok ok.
So I've been fooling with the OptioSv for hours and decided
it might be a keeper. I got another several days to return it.
Yesterday was snapping, chimping, reading the manual, etc.
Today I decided to move a few shots to the computer, Win98Se is
all I have except for even older
Nope. I got a film scanner, mouse, two printers, and a Wacom
tablet all going thru USB. Besides, 98SE shipped with USB drivers,
and both my mashines support USB in CMOS setup.
Doug Franklin wrote:
I think you need Win98 USB drivers from Microsoft's web site.
This is the first camera, Pentax or otherwise,
that I bought new for MySelf. Today.
Accesories: two 512MB cards, a spare battery,
and a cute little Lowepro case.
The cards I bought I did for one reason: the
salesman showed me they can be pulled a bit to
reveal a USB interface. No reader
A definate advantage of a tripod and remote release. It can make
a difference.
William Robb wrote:
I learned to not look through the viewfinder by shooting portraits on
sheet film.
By not having the camera between the photographer and subject, it is
possible to catch some wonderful
Having previously only shot film, it is worthwhile to note
that the OptioSV and others of it's ilk are smaller than
my danged Olympus XA, and get smaller and smaller when you
toss in a few rolls of film. In terms of cuddly size, this
thing rocks.
Still love the XA, though. -Lon
Yup. Been there, done that.
And undoubtably will do it again.
Jon Myers wrote:
I did that once. Grabbed my K-1000 and went for a
hike... had been out a while when I noticed the rewind
knob wasn't turning when I advanced the film. I
assumed it hadn't loaded properly, so I opened the
back.
Last time I saw a comprehensive camera review, all the ZX cameras
would tolerate a 300V signal across the hotshoe from flashes. Not
sure about the MZ-S. Ask Pentax. I'd be surprised if it didn't,
because it is film.
Pete Ziminski wrote:
How do I know if my flashes will not damage my MZ-S.
Yes, I think two 512s were overkill, but I bought them
in part because I've read that you can buy an SDCF converter,
and I'm thinking future. The other thing is I kind of pent
buying rages up and want to get MORE than I think I'm gonna need.
I understand your point, though, especially when the
Thanks, Dario. Less purple fringe than the Optio60, and less noise,
I think. I downloaded every one of your JPGs and looked at them.
Thanks. I owe you.
-Lon
Dario Bonazza wrote:
SVi @ 50 ISO, 35mm, F3.6
http://www.dariobonazza.com/provv/SVi_50_35mm_F3.6.jpg
SVi @ 200 ISO, 135mm, F4.7
For what it's worth, I shot at the Newport Aquarium near Cincinnati
Ohio one day. The aisles were deliberately kept quite dark, no lighter
than the average movie theatre here in the USA. The tanks therefore
looked bright, but they weren't.
I had either 400 or 800 speed film, can't remember
Weren't the early 645s pure mechanical coupling? If so, given
that this is the beast that Pentax is taking into the Pro DLSR
arena, what are the chances that the 645 prototype at PMA does
retain mechanical couplings? Anyone?
-Lon
John Forbes wrote:
Just what is the attraction of a
I always wondered about this. Being still a film-only user,
I'd like to know what 135 is derived from.
-Lon
I know the Optio60 ain't got SMC. My guess
is that it is sluggish and slow. JPG only, etc.
But it's small, has an optical viewfinder, and
might be good enough to produce nice CRT-only
shots. Cheap, too. Comments?
-Lon
Now I know. Thanks.
Bob Shell wrote:
On Mar 1, 2006, at 8:26 AM, Lon Williamson wrote:
I always wondered about this. Being still a film-only user,
I'd like to know what 135 is derived from.
It's a Kodak film designation. Kodak had a convention of three-digit
film numbering, e.g.: 120
John Mustarde used to show up regularly on the list, and had
a page about long telephotos, including a few 500mm mirror lenses.
As I recall, he raved about a specific Soligar or Spiratone, can't
remember which, as being good. Google it; the page was up a year ago
as I recall. One thing he
,
Dario
- Original Message - From: Lon Williamson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2006 5:45 PM
Subject: Anyone used the cheapo Pentax Optio60?
I know the Optio60 ain't got SMC. My guess
is that it is sluggish and slow. JPG only, etc.
But it's small
Pentax USA still lists the Optio60 as being available.
HA!
So I'm looking at the OptioSV, which does have manual, AV,
and TV, but buried in some damn menu. Local cost, US$250.
Anyone used it? Comments needed before I go to the store,
fiddle with a digicam awkwardly, and fork over some bucks.
adds
quite a bit of randomness in the process.
Here is a Flickr set of some pictures I shot. Processed to BW and
cropped to 3:2 aspect. You can see the full res images by clicking on
all sizes on each picture page:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jbuhler/sets/1610069/
hth,
j
On 3/1/06, Lon
Frank mentioned that this is in his Public Phone collection.
Personally, I think the US FBI should investigate this apparently
harmless Canadian. PINKO bunnie ears, an intrest in
telecommunications, and a camera. Terrorist tie ins?
Excessive use of catsup and/or vinegar on potatoes? Bush would
Yeah, you were missed. I like your nick, for one thing, and folks
seemed to report from the mountain get togethers that you, and even
Wm Robb are good folks. I believed that to be true of both of you
years ago. Frank is a nice guy too, but I'm NOT into bunny ears.
Wish I could meet some of
Tom, I just tried to look for my Wacom Graphire, purchased about 2000,
to see what model it is and couldn't find it. It was the smallest and
cheapest at the time, probably under 100 US dollars. It worked well.
But I didn't find it that useful for photography. Mousing seemed about
as effective.
I vote with Frank. Polish your skin, you red haired debbil.
-Lon
Mark Roberts wrote:
frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
and polish your skin...
Now that's just *weird*.
I am adamant that our own Mark Roberts can blast Ken away, if Mark
would Just Practise. It's very very important.
grin. -Lon
frank theriault wrote:
On 2/21/06, Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
and polish your skin...
Now that's just *weird*.
You ~do~ know to whom I was referring,
I agree. I'd frame and hang this one. Very well done.
Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote:
On 2006-02-18, at 11:01, Cotty wrote:
http://www.cottysnaps.com/snaps/landscapes/images/pic41.html
Wow! What a beatiful composition of trees on the hill and buildings
below. Toned colours add much to the
1 - 100 of 881 matches
Mail list logo
