You could just save it as an action and automate it couldn't you? Fred
Miranda has actions like this that he hawks for $5.00 or so.
rg
Tanya Mayer Photography wrote:
*blush*
Thanks Dave! That is so cute, but remember, you guys have never seen just
how much crap I also throw away!
Well, tv has,
Love it.
rg
Juan Buhler wrote:
With apologies to both Adams and Eggleston, a silly picture of
beautiful Wyoming:
http://flickr.com/photos/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/444987/
*ist D, FA35/2, quick Photoshop job to match the sky colors.
BTW, as I said before I'm driving across the US. I've been blogging a
bit
Wow. What were they thinking. Must have been in the pipeline and would
have cost more to kill it than to sell a couple thousand and then kill it.
Graywolf wrote:
http://nikonimaging.com/global/news/2004/0916_02.htm
He, he, told you so...
of the method over the *ist-D's current
support for pre-A-series lenses?
S
Gonz wrote:
I proposed this deep in another thread, but the idea might be feasible
as a firmware fix. All you photo wizards out there please shoot holes
in this:
What might be nice is if they had a smart AE mode for K M lenses
Anyone know what type of processor Pentax is using in the *istD? I want
to see if I could reverse compile the firmware to take a look under the
hood. I'm very interested in playing around with the firmware and
seeing what it would take to add incremental functionality.
Its too bad they dont
Thanks, I had not seen that one yet.
rg
David Dixon wrote:
Gonz wrote:
Anyone know what type of processor Pentax is using in the *istD? I
want to see if I could reverse compile the firmware to take a look
under the hood. I'm very interested in playing around with the
firmware and seeing what
Actually, they do allow you to do just about anything that can be put
into the R/W memory. The ROM is off limits for obvious reasons. But
there is enough functionality in the R/W to replace much of the ROM if
you really want. PDA's are another area where you can pretty much
convert it to
brightness changes or is it locked
to whatever speed the reading was when the green button
was released?
jco
-Original Message-
From: Gonz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 12:50 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: istDs - what a great camera!
J. C. O'Connell wrote
Thats excellent work Larry. Perfect subject for this technique. Do you
use a pano head tripod or just wing it? Also, do you use the
PTAssembler software that was used by someone to stitch the gigapixel
image? I've heard its really good and am tempted to get it.
rg
Larry Hodgson wrote:
Yes, you do have to compensate if taking geometry into account.
This fellow did it like I mentioned before, this is an extreme example:
http://tinyurl.com/6zmnj
He has many other images in his gallery that are very impressive.
rg
John C. O'Connell wrote:
If you pan the camera to take the sequence
That guy is carrying at least 5 cameras! Probably more.
rg
William Robb wrote:
I take no responsibilty for this, my Canon using friend sent me the
URL.
http://cakeru.image.pbase.com/image/33879157/large.jpg
William Robb
Wow. The MLU idea is a great one and probably pretty simple to do also.
rg
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 22 Sep 2004 at 14:18, Steve Jolly wrote:
This is pure speculation, but I suspect that what Pentax have done is
performed the Bayer interpolation with 16-bit precision and then kept
the extra
JCO
-Original Message-
From: Gonz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 8:44 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching
Yes, you do have to compensate if taking geometry into account. This
fellow did it like I mentioned before
My point exactly. Thank you Mr. Robb for putting it in words better than I.
rg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message -
From: J. C. O'Connell
Subject: RE: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching
Are you shooting moderate apertures and
near subjects? Infinity subjects and small
Not only that, but there is sofware than can and does compensate for
this. Take a look at the software I mentioned before, PTAssembler. It
is a user friendly interface on top of another tool that does the real
stitching and distortion compensation.
rg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original
, why he didn't carry just a coupler-three zooms.
Shel
From: Gonz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
That guy is carrying at least 5 cameras! Probably more.
Do you mean electronically? That would not work. Image stabilization
can only be done mechanically, either at the lens or on the film/sensor
plane.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That seems unlikely, it would be far cheaper to just do it digitally.
--
Martin Trautmann wrote:
Hi all,
I just had a
They do that at the expense of image smear. That would not be good for
stills.
rg
Graywolf wrote:
Tell that to the video camera makers, they apparently don't know that.
--
Gonz wrote:
Do you mean electronically? That would not work. Image stabilization
can only be done mechanically, either
Just sit back and enjoy the security. That little 36.1 Tera-FLOP is
just a drop in the bucket compared to the amount of power it would take
to crack the 2048 code, much less the 4096 one. 36.1 Tera-FLOPS is
36.1 x 10^15 flops. If you remember that post before, if each quark in
the universe
a million million times more I just dont
see it in 25 to 30 years. More like 200 to 300 years. But technology
is always finding new ways to keep up with Moore's law isn't it?
rg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gonz mused:
Just sit back and enjoy the security. That little 36.1 Tera-FLOP is
just
And I thought Francophiles were people who like fuzzy pictures, or are
those Frankophiles?
http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/uc/20041021/lnq041022.gif
And I thought Francophiles were people who like fuzzy pictures, or are
those Frankophiles?
http://tinyurl.com/6yfry
Man, and I thought french fries were already bad for you to begin with,
adding mayo seems to put them in the death wish category.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 00:05:17 -0400, Nicolas Colarusso
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We do [put mayo on fries] in Quebec.
Really? I didn't know
Gorgeous. You need to blow that up and put it in a large atrium or
other large open area for people to enjoy.
rg
Bruce Dayton wrote:
It's been a while since I last posted one. I've been quite busy with
work - not too busy to take some pictures, but haven't had time to get
any posted.
Today as
Wilko Bulte wrote:
On Sat, Feb 05, 2005 at 03:44:26PM +0100, Thibouille wrote..
* SuperA Grip: Sometimes I'd like to use it without the MotorA and
without the grip, it is a pain. Anybody having a spare one?
* MX MotorDrive: I have no idea about the price but I understand they
are quite rare and
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 1/25/2005 4:36:41 PM Pacific Standard Time, k
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I will add to this resend, that you are equating universal object truth with
external reality. A common mistake.
I'm intrigued. Since you brought it up, what's the difference?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 2/8/2005 9:49:32 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Are you confusing belief with reality maybe? What we perceive, what we
believe, and what is reality may be 3 different things. But it would be
very strange to think there is no
I apologize Marnie for digging up dead old threads on you. :(
I found the thread a fascinating read and your point of view was the
most fascinating of all. It just took me a long time to get on the top
of my to do list. Now its taken a whole life of its own again.
Including an excursion into
Ok, I missed the original set of posts. Whats going on here? Someone
pulling someone else's leg? Very funny Bill.
rg
frank theriault wrote:
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 19:38:28 -0600, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shot with the Pentax 6x7, with no lens attached.
Mark Roberts wrote:
The originating IP was 204.127.198.39 (comcast.net)
I've searched my most recent pdml emails, and the only comcast.net
address comes from Paul Stenquist. But the IP address does not match,
not even close.
rg
Note: I had to pull this off the archives, since Mark's response never
made it to my inbox.
-
Gonz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark Roberts wrote:
The originating IP was 204.127.198.39 (comcast.net)
I've searched my most recent pdml emails, and the only comcast.net
You can see it on dpreview.com
rg
Henri Toivonen wrote:
Cotty wrote:
http://www.pma-show.com/review/canon/001_EOS_digital_rebel_xt.html
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
That page has been
Love it. Nice catch.
rg
frank theriault wrote:
This poor kid could hardly keep his eyes open. vbg
Taken with the LX at waist level (I'm not taking a photo, I'm just
fixing something on the camera, just ignore me, I'm not doing
anything, dum de dum...) with the K 1.2 50 at about f2.0, auto
Peter J. Alling wrote:
Frank, I'm surprised at you, this is wonderfully focused. It's a great
composition by the way.
You have discovered Frank's problem. He shouldn't look through the
viewfinder, when he doesn't, they are in focus. When he does, well
rg
frank theriault wrote:
This
Wait and see if there are any new announcements from Pentax this coming
week (PMA). They are letting the D inventory sell itself out without
replacing it, so there might be something in the works. Don't forget
that the DS does not take CF cards.
rg
Steve and Tanya wrote:
I'm in need for a
As reported in Spiegel online and dpreview. Is this the end of Leica?
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0502/05022203leica_financialtrouble.asp
I need some help with my *istD. For the longest time, I've been having
problems with my pics being quite soft wide open. I thought that it was
just because the lens was wide open. I have alot of manual focus
lenses, which I use often. The problem showed up mainly with them, so I
went back
Wow, I just posted a similar question with my *istD and wide open focus
problems. Pancho, welcome to the list and hopefully someone can help us
sort out what is going on.
rg
pancho hasselbach wrote:
Hello,
I've been following the list for quite a while, now it's time to join
in, in spite of
Reposting, since the first didnt seem to make it.
I need some help with my *istD. For the longest time, I've been having
problems with my pics being quite soft wide open. I thought that it was
just because the lens was wide open. I have alot of manual focus
Maybe there is a different path from lens to AF and to MF? There is,
but they both have to go through the focusing screen don't they? So I'm
thinking I must be having vision issues. I blurred up several nice
shots the other day in a theatre production that had to use MF because
AF would
without focussing
aids is a worst case scenario. If you really want to rule out focussing errors
on your side you need to use a magnifier or refconverter in the 2X position.
I need some help understanding how this helps.
Sven
Zitat von Gonz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I need some help with my *istD
I heard on Dpreview about a compatible ac adapter, so I bought it online
for about $12, its a Lenmar acon6, and it works just fine. It supplies
2100ma @ 6.5vDC and its a regulated DC switching supply. Unless you are
paranoid about getting the exact 3000ma one from Pentax, this one should
mike wilson wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 2/27/2005 4:06:30 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tie-breaker :-)
What single thing do you consider to be the most important element of
photography?
==
The front element.
Silver.
Scotch
The D is a pretty good DSLR. I'm not sure any more pixels would buy me
anything, given my usage, i.e. I rarely if ever go over 8x10, and 6Mp is
perfect for that size. If you keep the ccd the same size but increase
the pixel density, the increase in resolution does not offset the
increase in
Here is one I got the other day.
The Brothel
Two Irishmen were sitting at a pub having beer and watching the brothel
across the street.
They saw a Baptist minister walk into the brothel, and one of them said,
Aye, 'tis a shame to see a man of the cloth goin' bad.
Then they saw a rabbi enter the
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Y'know, for me, photography isn't about resolution, it's about trying to
get a certain look and feel to the photos I produce. Sometimes an older
lens and an old style film will provide the desired results, sometimes a
very sharp lens and very high resolution or acutance
alex wetmore wrote:
It can hold 4 soda kegs, a CO2 canister, and about 30 12oz bottles of
beer and a smaller number of 22oz bottles. I brew my own beer (and
ginger beer soda) and that is what fills the kegs.
In this picture of my brewing you can see the outside of my
normal fridge on the right:
Really captures a lost time. Kathy looks like she is getting ready for
Woodstock and her niece exudes a kind of confidence that you dont see
often in kids anymore, like we've lost a kind of optimism in the
future. Must be the internet.
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
It was the summer of 1968, and I
How strict are the submission rules for the PUG gallery? Last night I
submitted my PUG entry, and what I thought was a 74k pic, was sized by
the PUG autosubmit software as 76k. Is it going to automatically throw
it out? I guess I can resubmit, unless thats also a problem.
TIA
rg
Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
I missed a chance last night, but it will return. I'm certain.
Our cat (stupidly, but that's why they're cats and we have cameras) ascended our apple
tree and investigated a blue jay nest. The jays were furious but the cat was
well-shielded by the many small branches
Peter J. Alling wrote:
Gonz wrote:
Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
snip
d) put a high voltage wire around the tree and feed the resultant
chicken-fried cat to the jays
Wouldn't that be sudden fried?
Or KFC (Kentucky Fried Cat). lol
Your opinions please. ;=)
Collin
the toddler. He turned out to be
the main staff photog for the Corpus Christi Caller-Times, I saw one of
his pics on the next days front page.
Here is one of the shots I got of the planes in a daredevil formation:
http://home.austin.rr.com/randj/pics/imgp1693.jpg
Cheers,
Gonz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
Thats disgusting, plain and simple. :)
And taken with a Canon, no less!
rg
Alan Chan wrote:
This is what happened when an uninspired person got nothing better to
photograph... :-(
http://www.pbase.com/image/29427294
Regards,
Alan Chan
http://www.pbase.com/wlachan
week or so. I wondered if it were a restored vintage photo or
something. Now that I read the body of your post, Gonz, I do recall
hearing of the play; sounds really interesting. Hopefully it will
end up on the road and in Toronto some day. I don't know as much
about him as I should, but I
frank theriault wrote:
And, to find that you mention me in the same sentence as him is an
(undeserved) honour. Funny, but my roomate made an offhand comment
about me being like the Miles Davis of photographers - again
undeserved - but I knew what she meant. I've thought that what I do
is
Awesome shot Christian. Can't believe you caught him fish in
hand...er..beak. Would have been nice to have gotten his eye sharp
though, looks like the focal point is on the feathers in his hind end.
I like the colors very much.
rg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, it's another bird
Hack saw.
rg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, the crappy Sears lens that Tanya bought has managed to get stuck on her
D.
The aperture ring says KR, and it has an (A)P marking.
Suggestions?
tv
--
Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas.
Experience the convenience of buying
I just emailed the INS warning them of a potential Al-Queda infiltration
being planned by operatives wearing bunny ears and attempting to cross
the border through Canada. ;)
rg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, boys and girls,
We're all packed and set to go. I can't find my birth certificate, so
Very nice Mark. I miss the Pittsburgh area. Lived in Beaver for 10
years. I miss the fantastic Belgian beers that the Sharp Edge (pub)
offered, and the dramatic view coming into town from the tunnel.
rg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just came home about an hour ago as a band of dramatic clouds
I love potted meat. Just dont read the ingredients though, its
basically all the stuff thats left over after every other use has taken
its portion. One of the ingredients is mechanically separated
chicken, whatever that means. I picture some strange whirring machine
that you throw unwanted
Next you will see a Time magazine bearing the cover:
Film is Dead
Bruce Dayton wrote:
Hello Cliff,
Pentax being the first to spell out reality, I would think that the
others are right behind. On top of that, the film manufacturers and
labs are rapidly moving in the same direction. Film will
Very nice. I think Miranda had an action that does this automatically.
It appears that it is now a full blown plug-in:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/DRI
rg
Rob Studdert wrote:
This PAW is the product of an experiment the focus of which was to preserve the
colours of the sun rise and sky in the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ten megapixel bodies will sell for less than $1000 in two years or less.
That's when Pentax will make one available. I can wait.
Paul
But if its not full frame, then the noise will be alot higher (but
you'll also probably get ISO 50). Its hard to say whether you can
What is your flow like? When I first started, I used the *istD with jpg
best, so I had to jack up the sharpen, saturation, and contrast settings
to avoid a PS fixup afterwards. I was not happy with the results, so I
switched to RAW. But the Pentax convertor was a pain, and the only way
to
I like this one better than #7. Its very warm and it has presence,
makes you feel like you are there. I love the architecture of those old
buildings.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.dariobonazza.com/paw/paw08e.htm
Well, this picture was taken the same night of the previous one (PAW 7),
Its a bit of a drive, but at least at one point Precision Camera in
Austin had them. I bought mine over the net however, the price
discrepancy was too much to ignore.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Peter J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED]
True enough, but if they're bringing out a camera to compete
Interesting article. Do you think Laurenceau's work falls in that category?
rg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Gonz
Subject: Re: photography vs cameras
Have you ever seen this fellow's (contemporary) work?
http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=338558
In his
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I shot a wedding last winter (I don't do them often, anymore). While
at the location we had chosen for our portraits, another photographer
was also working.
She had a couple of cheap studio flash units, I think they were the
low end Photogenics that aren't actually called
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Gonz
Subject: Re: photography vs cameras
Interesting article. Do you think Laurenceau's work falls in that
category?
Heck no, I just like stirring the pot..
Trouble maker... ;)
But much of what he says it true, alot of the photos
Shawn K. wrote:
Reagan was a dumb blonde, obviously the current government is stirring up
this mess in order to turn up some republican converts. Otherwise I doubt
very much that 90% of the country really gives a rip.
Not true, Reagan was very loved by much of the country. You are
obviously
Tom, you did nothing wrong. This is just good photojournalism. People
shouldn't put their own political commentary onto something that is
apolitical. Just because the funeral procession was for a political
figure does not make it a political event. He was the leader of our
country, but he
Tan, this actually is a woman. With a middle name like Taimana, it has
to be woman right. I mean isn't Sean the male version of this name, not
Shawn, which like Dawn, is feminine?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
well, i'm a woman, and i can't say you are doing much for me right now...
tan.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey Gonz,
Talk to the flamers, not me. When people start making claims about
Reagan being a good president, etc. etc. then it is only normal that
those who disagree with that statement will voice their opinions too.
For what its worth, I was saddened to hear of his
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I doubt it, probably not and I don't think so.
I don't know, I have my suspicions, but you may be right.
keith
Gonz wrote:
TMP wrote:
well, i'm a woman, and i can't say you are doing much for me right
now...
tan.
Tan, this Shawn person actually is a woman
They are great pics.
I was showing my wife the pics and she commented that I *WILL* be going
to GFM next year, she really liked what she saw. Wow, I didn't even
have to bribe her. Then she saw the pic with the mountain lion and
changed her mind. LOL.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For those on
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree, Fred, on all counts.
It's not as bad a lens as everyone says. $50 is a bit high. Not that
it's a bad lens for $50, but rather, they can usually be gotten for
cheaper.
I have one, and I wasn't unhappy with it - until I bought the SMC 2.5
135mm from Shel. A
Great snaps Cotty. Love the one with the alien and the bridge.
You're commentary made my laugh, you are a natural comedian. Looks like
you guys had a lot of fun. Are you doing it next year again?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A day earlier than advertised, here ya go. Some of the Powershot pics
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Its amazing boys and girls.
Set up a couple of filters and suddenly fully 1/3 of the content of
the PDML, all of it apparently randomly generated noise, judging from
a cursory QC inspection, goes straight to the bit bucket.
It's a beautiful thing.
Yes it is.
William Robb
Sorry Tom, but the image is s tiny, I can hardly make a comment on
it. Is this the only size they let you show?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's the right link. I'm a dufus sometimes...
http://www.photo.net/photodb/presentation?presentation_id=250983
Tom C.
From: Keith Whaley [EMAIL
the colors as well.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gonz, you should be able to click on it... and go up to the photo.net
large size...
Tom C.
From: Gonz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Optio S40
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 23:00:28 -0500
Sorry Tom, but the image
In the earliest days of the *istD, I almost ordered from Arlington
Camera, which was going to get an early shipment of them. You might
want to email mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
rg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey Folks,
I'm in Dallas for a few days. Anyone have an
recommendation for where I would be
Took my Grandson to get his first haircut. Wasn't sure what to expect,
some kids whine, some kids scream, some are mixed. He totally enjoyed
it, and was fascinated by the whole experience. Helps when you have a
good barber too.
Caught this one when he was almost done, she didn't want her
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Very cute. I wish that brush on the left of his head was just a bit
less intruding into his head. The difference between the barber and
your grandson's look on their faces is great. Obviously someone had
more fun than the other. It tells a nice story.
Thank you Bruce.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A marvelous picture. Everything but the people just out of focus and
those two expressions. Give a copy to the barber for her collection.
Thank you. Yes, as I was looking at the photos shot during this
occasion, this one was my favorite and I thought it would make a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
http://home.austin.rr.com/randj/pics/IMGP1988-bw.jpg
You should have seen his before pics. Wow, what a change!
Comments and critique welcome.
eat your heart out, Norman Rockwell! Nice shot.
Thank you. Wow, thats a hell of a compliment! I love Rockwell's sense
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wonderful shot, Gonz!!
Thank you.
You caught the moment there, not only the grandson, but the semi-scowl
of the barber (do we call them stylists these days?).
Yes, she kept telling me to keep her out of the frame, but this one was
just too tempting! I'm sure she'll
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gonz,
Love those expressions!
Thanks Bob. I know, that's the first thing that caught my eye when I
reviewed the photos. I knew that I had possibly a real interesting shot
when I snapped it, but it wasn't until I went home and looked at them
that I realized what
Very nice shot Dave. Excellent timing. How much latitude do you have
in timing a shot like this? If you were fast/slow by 1/10 sec would it
have ruined the shot? The only change I would like, but which is out of
your control is the folks in the background are distracting. The
composition
Ok. Are you going to keep us in suspense???
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, that's pretty much just what *will* happen after I make a certain move
to a certain new city in a certain new country...
;-)
tan.
-Original Message-
From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, 19 June
Dang. If the 16-45 is better than the 24/2, and the 24/2 is better than
the 24-90, then my 24-90, which is my mainstay for the *istD when I
travel light, is going to get re-thought. That also means I'm going to
have to add the 16-45 to my drool list. ;)
I was kind of ignoring the 16-45 for
wired, but have never done this with more than one
flash.
TIA,
Gonz
Well, Frank and Tanja, I wish you guys the best. Just watch out for
Frank, or you be full of bunnies in no time! LOL.
rg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
graywolf, there is so much irony in that statement, you just wouldn't
believe it.
tan.
-Original Message-
From: graywolf [mailto:[EMAIL
I take it your on broadband now? Woo hoo.
rg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
testing testing 1 2 3,
The big brown fox jumped over the lazy somethingorother
Mary had a little lamb with spuds and gravy
yep, looks like it's working
Mutley snigger
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places,
Geez guys, get a room will ya!
;)
rg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 24/6/04, frank theriault, discombobulated, offered:
Kripes, Cotty,
For that kind of money, just pay to fly me over the pond:
I'll whisper my posts into your ear...
LOL.
Right now I could do with a shoulder massage. Been filming in
I concur. The SMC PENTAX-A 70-210/4 has been a very sharp and good
performer overall for me. I've not purchased the 80-200 2.8 because
this lens is so good that its hard to justify the expense and size for
just one more stop and probably marginal sharpness improvement.
rg
Alan Chan wrote:
I
Dang. Those are beautiful shots.
rg
Jostein wrote:
Anyone remember the Chinese PUG contributor Aconquija?
He/she submitted to many of the galleries in 2002, and all the submissions
except one were taken with the FA* 70-200/2.8.
Here are links to the ones with this lens:
Keith Whaley wrote:
Fred wrote:
I concur. The SMC PENTAX-A 70-210/4 has been a very sharp and good
performer overall for me. I've not purchased the 80-200 2.8 because
this lens is so good that its hard to justify the expense and size for
just one more stop and probably marginal sharpness
First, I like what you tried to do here. The main comp is ok, as a
concept. But the branches are a distraction though, and it would have
been nicer in plain BW film instead of IR, IMHO. This would have
allowed a darker sky, maybe?, with filters I suppose. The sky is too
close to the color
Too tight, left right edges over-cropped. No sense of context. Good
tonality though, excellent detail. But the comp is wrong, sorry, but
doesn't live up to a shelbel.
rg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Marilyn has a small garden at the front of her small home in a quiet part
of Oakland, California.
Very interesting. My eyes are drawn to the odd assortment to the right,
I'm trying to find some meaning in them. Is is random, or intentional?
I don't know. The shot has become more interesting, but I want more,
there has to be more, given the story you gave us behind it. Where is
the
501 - 600 of 2292 matches
Mail list logo
