FA 35/2 status at BH and Adorama
I'm not getting my hopes up (well, maybe a little), but BH currently lists it as Out Of Stock instead of Backordered, and Adorama has a note claiming This Item is on the way to our warehouse and is expected in a few days. Glenn
Re: FA 35/2 status at BH and Adorama
glenn murphy wrote: I'm not getting my hopes up (well, maybe a little), but BH currently lists it as Out Of Stock instead of Backordered, and Adorama has a note claiming This Item is on the way to our warehouse and is expected in a few days. :( I gave up and cancelled my BH order last week. Now I'm back at the end of the line, if they get a limited quantity in again. I guess maybe I should have held on longer, but I wanted to free up the $309.40 (with shipping) to use to bid on the next 35/2 to show up on eBay.
Re: Packing...
On 6/5/05, Amita Guha, discombobulated, unleashed: www.fancyapint.com - rates pubs throughout London. And you can download the site to your Palm. :) That's what I'm going to do...not sure if I'll actually use it though... Hey Amita, you carry a Palm? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
OT: Philosophical health check
Pain? Tension? Nervous headache? For fast-acting relief, try PHC. http://www.philosophers.co.uk/games/check.htm Mr. BW of South London says I tried PHC, and now I only have 13% philosophical tension.
RE: PESO -- Characters (For something completely different.)
Great picture! You have to smile back to these guys. Henk -Original Message- From: P. J. Alling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 07 May, 2005 4:17 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: PESO -- Characters (For something completely different.) Photographed at an event I attended. Posted the URL earlier to the LONDON PDML thread. http://www.mindspring.com/~webster26/PESO_--_characters.html Pentax *ist-D 43ltd. ISO 800 As usual comments are welcome but may be totally ignored. -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Re: OT: Philosophical health check
On 7/5/05, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed: Pain? Tension? Nervous headache? For fast-acting relief, try PHC. http://www.philosophers.co.uk/games/check.htm Mr. BW of South London says I tried PHC, and now I only have 13% philosophical tension. 33% low to medium Pass me the valium. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Price question for A 20/2,8
Hello PDML, I found a SMC A 20/2,8 to buy for around 300.-¤. Is this a good price if in good condition? If anyone could help me and tell some experiences with that lens and if it's worth the price, I'd be grateful. Thanks, Johannes.
Re: OT: Philosophical health check
I only have 13% and disagree with the test in one of the contradictions, so I guess I´m pretty relaxed .-) DagT På 7. mai. 2005 kl. 10.15 skrev Bob W: Pain? Tension? Nervous headache? For fast-acting relief, try PHC. http://www.philosophers.co.uk/games/check.htm Mr. BW of South London says I tried PHC, and now I only have 13% philosophical tension.
Re: what makes a photograph art...
BW Personally, I have never really understood why people feel the need to BW categorise things as art or not-art, or even as good, bad and indifferent BW art. I would rather approach the object or performance in question, and BW examine my own reaction to it, the reactions of other people, and its effect BW on the world. This is what really matters, not its art status. Extremely well said! Thanks. Frantisek
PESO: Trail Ridge Road
I know I'm not very good at monochrome conversions yet. I think I was a bit heavy handed with the channel mixing on the sky - the mottled texture bothers me. But this process makes you look at photos differently, so that's got to have some worth. http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc/PDML_misc/trail_ridge.htm D -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc
Re: PESO: Trail Ridge Road
Superb picture, Derby. I imagine you will continue to tweak until you reach almost perfection, but I'm sure it will repay whatever time you spend on it. John On Sat, 07 May 2005 11:23:44 +0100, Derby Chang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know I'm not very good at monochrome conversions yet. I think I was a bit heavy handed with the channel mixing on the sky - the mottled texture bothers me. But this process makes you look at photos differently, so that's got to have some worth. http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc/PDML_misc/trail_ridge.htm D -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.6 - Release Date: 06/05/2005
Salgado on wheels!
Hi, Leica Gallery Prague finally succeeded in organising second Salgado exhibition here, after several years and aftere our damned President (_not_ Havel!) declared Prague Castle unfit for any art like Salgado or World music festival... ousting Leica Gallery out of it. So, they chose to make the exhibition on wheels... and tracks! It's in a train! How fitting to Salgado's photographs! The train stays at each city for a week, then goes to another. I couldn't be at the vernisage, sadly, but here are few photographs from the exhibition itself, to show you how it looked. http://www.frantisekvlcek.com/temp/salgado It was very good of course. Salgado's printer/s are excellent, and his exhibitions always show why even 35mm BW is grades better than any BW converted digital mush. You could see great detail and tonality on even A1 sized prints. And of course even the blurred and not best sharp photographs were great, who cares :) All in all, a great exhibition, again. I am just extremely sorry I missed Mister himself, who was at the vernisage. BTW, IIRC, his latest work, Genesis is done with Pentax 645... Good light! fra
Re: OT: Philosophical health check
Bob W wrote: Pain? Tension? Nervous headache? For fast-acting relief, try PHC. http://www.philosophers.co.uk/games/check.htm; 13%. I may be full of $#!T but I'm consistent. I enjoyed that Bob. Thanks for posting it. Tom Reese
Re: Here's the turkey
I'll have to see the eye doctor vbg. Seriously, I only trust myself to evaluate prints in bright light with my best reading glasses. However, the degradation of my eyes hasn't really affected my ability to focus. The diopter adjustment on the *istD dials me in pretty close, and it's fairly easy for me to perceive relative sharpness. Paul On May 7, 2005, at 12:08 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Thanks Herb, Bill ... I really didn't want to see the eye doctor this week ;-)) Shel [Original Message] From: Bill Owens I think you're absolutely right Herb. He was trotting across the road at a fairly good clip and I think he had moved enough between the time the camera focused and the shutter tripped to cause it to be somewhat out of focus. Bill - Original Message - From: Herb Chong i think it is blurred because the focus is a few feet behind the bird. the foot is slightly motion blurred. [Original Message] From: Bill Owens You're right Shel, it is a bit fuzzy! I don't know whether it's the bird trotting pretty fast, or outrunning the autofocus.
Re: Enablement
I don't think it was ever sold as in a kit. David Oswald wrote: Francis Alviar wrote: Just grabbed a FA 28-70mm f/4 off of that auction site. It belonged to a former list member (I think) Gary Murphy. I've been reading comments for this lens from Stan's site and it's been getting good reviews. Any other comments you guys want to add? Can't wait to try it out. I think you'll love the lens. I really liked mine, until I eventually decided I needed a little more reach, eventually buying a 28-105 in its place. Of course that was back in film days. But even with digital the 28-70 f/4 ought to be a pretty good lens. If you put a filter on it, make sure it's a good one. I had a cheap UV on mine and noticed some blooming in bright light. I switched to a nicer Hoya Multi Coated UV, and the blooming issue went away. It's a very sharp lens, especially considering that it's not one of the more expensive ones out there. It's definately the best AF kit zoom Pentax ever made. Dave -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Re: Here's the turkey
at times like this, if i think it's likely i will encounter fast moving birds, i have the camera set on Continuous AF mode. uses batteries and only works on the center AF sensor, but it helps. Herb... - Original Message - From: Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, May 06, 2005 11:55 PM Subject: Re: Here's the turkey I think you're absolutely right Herb. He was trotting across the road at a fairly good clip and I think he had moved enough between the time the camera focused and the shutter tripped to cause it to be somewhat out of focus.
Re: Digital profligacy
one of the first things you learn about any art or craft when you go into business is that if you can't stop when it's good enough, your business fails. hundreds of thousands of professional photographers learn it or fail. the difference is that what is good enough for them is far above many of the it's my best that everyone else does. Herb - Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 12:58 AM Subject: Re: Digital profligacy Maybe I just have a different standard than others - maybe good enough is good enough, and most people when looking at a print can't see an off couple of pixels, but if I know there's something that can be made better, and I know how to make it better, I'll make the choice to spend the extra time and energy to do it better. I just can't stand that good enough attitude that we see so much of today.
Re: Price question for A 20/2,8
Yes this is a good price if it's in good condition. I spent a long time trying to find one in good condition at that low a price. It's even a very good lens. Johannes Schwab wrote: Hello PDML, I found a SMC A 20/2,8 to buy for around 300.-¤. Is this a good price if in good condition? If anyone could help me and tell some experiences with that lens and if it's worth the price, I'd be grateful. Thanks, Johannes. -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Re: OT: Philosophical health check
I'm amazed that I only scored 20% on their tension quotient since the deck is stacked against any complex understanding of the issues. I kept reading their questions and saying, yes, or no with an explanation or caviot, or I want an I don't know option. If I took it seriously the test would have caused more stress than I have normally... Bob W wrote: Pain? Tension? Nervous headache? For fast-acting relief, try PHC. http://www.philosophers.co.uk/games/check.htm Mr. BW of South London says I tried PHC, and now I only have 13% philosophical tension. -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Re: PESO PAW - Abandoned But Not Forgotten
G'day Shel, I like it. I thought the same as others that it might look good in BW so I did a conversion that I thought mimicked the effect of a red filter. With darkened sky water the hull really pops out. But on comparing it against the original colour version I can't say I prefer one over the other. They both work for me in different ways. Anyway, great shot. Dave S P.S. Even in it's heyday that was an ugly boat:-) On 5/7/05, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's another shot of my favorite fishing boat. Nothing special ... I was using the photo to practice some Photoshop techniques last night, and decided to post the pic here. Shot on Ektachrome 100G http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/warm.html Shel
Re: OT: Philosophical health check
On 5/7/05, Tom Reese [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bob W wrote: Pain? Tension? Nervous headache? For fast-acting relief, try PHC. http://www.philosophers.co.uk/games/check.htm; 13%. I may be full of $#!T but I'm consistent. I enjoyed that Bob. Thanks for posting it. MIssed the initial post, so thanks for including the url in your response, Tom. This is HILARIOUS, because like you, I scored 13%. We probably answered the questions in the exact opposite manner, Tom, but we ended up with the same TQ. Too funny! vbg cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: OT: Philosophical health check
On 5/7/05, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm amazed that I only scored 20% on their tension quotient since the deck is stacked against any complex understanding of the issues. I kept reading their questions and saying, yes, or no with an explanation or caviot, or I want an I don't know option. If I took it seriously the test would have caused more stress than I have normally... Yeah, that's the problem of course. Many of the question simply can't be properly answered with a yes/no or agree/disagree choice. They almost demand a full discussion, don't they? I really had trouble answering a couple of them. Still, a fun exercise. Thanks for posting it, Bob. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Here's the turkey
On 5/6/05, Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Got this shot within 10 minutes of leaving GFM. *istD, Tamron 75-300 at 300, ISO 400 http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3340897 Bill Terrific shot, Bill! NIce dof, the Turkey's sharp enough against the OOF background. You got him mid-stride (just about perfect). I like that he's crossing a road - you know, why did the turkey cross the road? and all. And, to top it all of, he just has this dumb turkey expression on his face. I think it's the way his head is cocked or something. Wonderful stuff! cheers, frank I really like this -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: OT: Philosophical health check
Yeah, that's the problem of course. Many of the question simply can't be properly answered with a yes/no or agree/disagree choice. Agreed. But I got a 0% tension so my conclusion was that the test is quite awesome. Cheers, David
Re: OT: Philosophical health check
You have so little stress you're in a coma, or maybe just asleep. David Nelson wrote: Yeah, that's the problem of course. Many of the question simply can't be properly answered with a yes/no or agree/disagree choice. Agreed. But I got a 0% tension so my conclusion was that the test is quite awesome. Cheers, David -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Re: OT: Philosophical health check
P. J. Alling wrote: You have so little stress you're in a coma, or maybe just asleep. Philosophically speaking that is... David Nelson wrote: Yeah, that's the problem of course. Many of the question simply can't be properly answered with a yes/no or agree/disagree choice. Agreed. But I got a 0% tension so my conclusion was that the test is quite awesome. Cheers, David -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Re: OT: Philosophical health check
On 5/7/05, David Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Agreed. But I got a 0% tension so my conclusion was that the test is quite awesome. Ah, but what makes you think that 0% tension is a good thing? Don't you think a bit (like around 13%) of tension is necessary in life? All things in moderation and all... vbg cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: OT: Philosophical health check
Lol (-: Not so - it indicates that I have non-contradictory views/beliefs (and if you believe that you'll believe this: Where there is little or no tension between beliefs, little intellectual effort is required to balance both beliefs it's a manifestation of my laziness (-:) Cheers, David P. J. Alling wrote: You have so little stress you're in a coma, or maybe just asleep. David Nelson wrote: Yeah, that's the problem of course. Many of the question simply can't be properly answered with a yes/no or agree/disagree choice. Agreed. But I got a 0% tension so my conclusion was that the test is quite awesome. Cheers, David
signing off for a few weeks to do a job
Got a little gig to do so I will miss some of my education. Tan if you need to contact me it will need to be after that. Kind regards and good health Kevin -- Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.
RE: PESO: Trail Ridge Road
Hi, This looks to be a great photo to work with in BW. I agree that the conversion is heavy-handed, both in the sky as you noted and in the contrast and tonality of the rest of the photo. Keep working on it and you may end up with something that's outstanding. If you want suggestions from others on the list, post the original color pic. Channel Mixer, BTW, while a decent tool to use for conversion, is limited in what it can do. Depending on the rendering in the original color photo, other techniques may be a better alternative. CM, however, is a good place to start. Is this a film or a digital image? Shel [Original Message] From: Derby Chang I know I'm not very good at monochrome conversions yet. I think I was a bit heavy handed with the channel mixing on the sky - the mottled texture bothers me. But this process makes you look at photos differently, so that's got to have some worth. http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc/PDML_misc/trail_ridge.htm
RE: Off for vacation and a customs question
Nobody in their right mind would leave the US and buy camera equipment in the UK! -- Cheers, Bob Agreed. :)
Re: PESO PAW - Abandoned But Not Forgotten
Hi David ... Your comments gave me an idea for further tweaking, so I tried a BW version with a darker sky and a few other adjustments. The dark sky is a nice effect. Thanks. Shel [Original Message] From: David Savage I like it. I thought the same as others that it might look good in BW so I did a conversion that I thought mimicked the effect of a red filter. With darkened sky water the hull really pops out. But on comparing it against the original colour version I can't say I prefer one over the other. They both work for me in different ways. Anyway, great shot. Dave S P.S. Even in it's heyday that was an ugly boat:-) http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/warm.html
Re: Price question for A 20/2,8
I found a SMC A 20/2,8 to buy for around 300.-¤. Is this a good price if in good condition? If anyone could help me and tell some experiences with that lens and if it's worth the price, I'd be grateful. Yes this is a good price if it's in good condition. [snip] It's even a very good lens. It's a very good lens (my most used wide-angle lens), and, in my opinion, if it is indeed in at least very good condition, it's a very good price. Fred
Re: Here's the turkey
Thanks for the kind comments, Frank. However in all honesty the *istD was set on auto, so everything is just as the camera decided it should be. I took about 6 exposures in the 10 seconds or so while he left the feeding area and went across the road. BTW, these were taken about where PDML central was parked at last year's NPW Bill - Original Message - From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 9:23 AM Subject: Re: Here's the turkey On 5/6/05, Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Got this shot within 10 minutes of leaving GFM. *istD, Tamron 75-300 at 300, ISO 400 http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3340897 Bill Terrific shot, Bill! NIce dof, the Turkey's sharp enough against the OOF background. You got him mid-stride (just about perfect). I like that he's crossing a road - you know, why did the turkey cross the road? and all. And, to top it all of, he just has this dumb turkey expression on his face. I think it's the way his head is cocked or something. Wonderful stuff! cheers, frank I really like this -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
RE: Salgado on wheels!
Hi, I've seen Salgado's prints. I don't know off hand what the dimensions are for A1, although iirc, they are quite large. His prints that measure 24 x 36 or so are outstanding in terms of quality and tonality, even when viewed close up. The format of the show is most interesting. Bring the photos to the people! Perhaps some day you'll get to meet the man and hear him speak. I was lucky enough to see him twice ... he's a very commanding presence for someone so small and soft spoken in his physicality. Thanks for posting this! BTW, I've seen some of his Genesis work - effin' amazing! Shel [Original Message] From: Frantisek [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: PDML pentax-discuss@pdml.net Date: 5/7/2005 3:43:44 AM Subject: Salgado on wheels! Hi, Leica Gallery Prague finally succeeded in organising second Salgado exhibition here, after several years and aftere our damned President (_not_ Havel!) declared Prague Castle unfit for any art like Salgado or World music festival... ousting Leica Gallery out of it. So, they chose to make the exhibition on wheels... and tracks! It's in a train! How fitting to Salgado's photographs! The train stays at each city for a week, then goes to another. I couldn't be at the vernisage, sadly, but here are few photographs from the exhibition itself, to show you how it looked. http://www.frantisekvlcek.com/temp/salgado It was very good of course. Salgado's printer/s are excellent, and his exhibitions always show why even 35mm BW is grades better than any BW converted digital mush. You could see great detail and tonality on even A1 sized prints. And of course even the blurred and not best sharp photographs were great, who cares :) All in all, a great exhibition, again. I am just extremely sorry I missed Mister himself, who was at the vernisage. BTW, IIRC, his latest work, Genesis is done with Pentax 645... Good light! fra
RE: Price question for A 20/2,8
I paid 225 USD a couple years ago. It wasn't exactly in mint condition. 300 Euro is appr. 385 USD. That'a a little expensive even if it's MINT. I'd saay the right price should be around 300-325 USD. It's a bruilliant lens. It's one of my favorites - especially after I got the D. Even before then, I always carried it in my camera bag (still do): http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/12683438/ http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt/DreamHC/Side8.html (top one) http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt/DreamHC/Side3.html Not stoped down: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/2695269/in/set-68002/ and http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/2699584/in/set-68002/ Horisontal Panorama: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/2705463/in/set-68002/ Vertical Panorama: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/2687021/in/set-68002/ The only regrets I have is: 1) I don't have a dedicated hood (i use a third party rubber one) 2) I'd love to have the AF-version, if there ever was one. Regards Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Johannes Schwab [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 7. maj 2005 11:02 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Price question for A 20/2,8 Hello PDML, I found a SMC A 20/2,8 to buy for around 300.-¤. Is this a good price if in good condition? If anyone could help me and tell some experiences with that lens and if it's worth the price, I'd be grateful. Thanks, Johannes.
Re: Digital profligacy
--- Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just can't stand that good enough attitude that we see so much of today. I agree with some of what you say, Shel, but this is a bit much, don't you think? Being a middle aged cranky old fart, I get the same feeling sometimes, but I'd be willing the bet that when they were building the Parthenon, some of the older marble cutters were complaining about the new fangled iron tools and shortcuts the new guys had figured out. I am also still puzzling in my mind what exactly makes a good photograph. A shot can be technically perfect in every regard but just not very good. And another photo could be shot with a Holga and poorly printed at Wal-Mart, yet still have a powerful effect. In the example you mentioned, the artist and the printer reproducing one of her works, the essential fact was the original painting, no? To have labored mightily over mediocre subject matter would be pointless. I am still trying to understand and learn what makes some shots work, and reading you folks' discussions and looking at your photos is making me think, which is good. I think. *UncaMikey Yahoo! Mail Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour: http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html
Re: Price question for A 20/2,8
P. J. Alling schrieb: Yes this is a good price if it's in good condition. I spent a long time trying to find one in good condition at that low a price. It's even a very good lens. Hi Peter, so you would prefer it instead of taking a Tokina 17/3,5 for around 200.-¤? If yes, I would assume the Pentax lens is far better in any optical respect? I mean, the Tokina is attractice because of the wider angle... though I'm no WA specialist, so I probably wouldn't be able to handle the 17 in a proper way...
Another GFM photo
Carolina the bear and her new cub, Boomer. http://groups.msn.com/BillOwensPhotos/shoebox.msnw?action=ShowPhotoPhotoID=90 Bill
Re: Enablement
It was, with the ZX-5n. As a buyer I bought the ZX-5n QD kits with the 28-70mm f/4 as the kit lens. P. J. Alling wrote: I don't think it was ever sold as in a kit. David Oswald wrote: Francis Alviar wrote: Just grabbed a FA 28-70mm f/4 off of that auction site. It belonged to a former list member (I think) Gary Murphy. I've been reading comments for this lens from Stan's site and it's been getting good reviews. Any other comments you guys want to add? Can't wait to try it out. I think you'll love the lens. I really liked mine, until I eventually decided I needed a little more reach, eventually buying a 28-105 in its place. Of course that was back in film days. But even with digital the 28-70 f/4 ought to be a pretty good lens. If you put a filter on it, make sure it's a good one. I had a cheap UV on mine and noticed some blooming in bright light. I switched to a nicer Hoya Multi Coated UV, and the blooming issue went away. It's a very sharp lens, especially considering that it's not one of the more expensive ones out there. It's definately the best AF kit zoom Pentax ever made. Dave
Re: Digital profligacy
The young lady at the local Wal-Mart Minilab as so happy. She told me she had a hard time getting all the yellow out of my photo of a tan hat... Wal-Mart print: http://meanderings.graywolfphoto.com/_images/walmart-hat.jpg Uncorrected scan of negative: http://meanderings.graywolfphoto.com/_images/my-block.jpg Sometimes a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Luckily I only wanted a scan to send to the guy who had given me the hat to show how it had cleaned up. Both images are uncorrect scans. Note how off the exposure looks in the print. The negative shows that I did better than that. In a way these two images are a pro-digital argument. But bad printing is not a real problem as I could have insisted that they redo the print correctly. If I do not so insist it is my problem, not theirs. It does show how hard it is to evaluate exposure from minilab prints by inexperienced photographers. With digital however it is just as hard. An experienced photographer can read the negative and know who is at fault. How do you do that with digital, there are so many varitables involved before you can see a readable image. The real advantage with slides for a beginner is that he can see exactly what he shot, though that can be pretty frustrating to start, eventually he learns to get his exposure within 1/3 stop in most lighting conditions. Of course if one depends on the camera to do that... Well, Bill, explained all that better than I could. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Tom C Subject: Re: Digital profligacy I'm jumping in the middle of the thread, not having read all the posts, risking ridicule. I personally doubt that autoexposure, autofocus, etc., etc., etc, has led to a decline in quality of photographs taken. Sure some people, alot of people, who take photographs don't ever learn exposure for example. Technology makes it easier for more people not to learn it, I agree. But so what. Would they have otherwise? Probably not. Alot of people just take pictures and it's not because they consider photography to be a hobby or passionate pursuit. They just snap the shutter, never mind composition. I would guess that exposure for exposure, there are more good, correctly exposed photographs taken now than 30 years ago, 40 years ago, ad infinitum. Before automation, you had no choice about learning the technical end of photography. It was part of the game. You learned how to adjust an aperture and shutter speed to match a needle in the viewfinder. This, in itself, may seem like a small thing, but it isn't. In the process of learning how to set the camera to correct exposure, you were also, by default, learning much of the workings of light itself, which is what photography is about. You would be guessing wrong, btw, about properly exposed photographs taken 3 decades ago vs. today. Automatic exposure does not necessarily give correct exposure, it gives a best guess exposure, that guess coming from a rather retarded brain. What I find amusing is that over the past 30 years, the skill set required to be a photographer has changed from learning the rather simple operation of a manual camera with a grand total of 3 controls to the more complicated operation of a device with sometimes a dozen or more buttons, a few dials, a rocker swith, and several hidden and often inscrutable modes. You need to know far more about machine operation to run a modern camera, especially a digital, than you needed to know about photography when you set everything yourself with a Spotmatic II. If it is a passionate pursuit, then they will learn. OK, take away the in camera light meter, matrix, spot, center. Is anyone seriously stating they would get more accurate exposure by not using the meter (don't think I'm stating that one should always believe the meter)? That they would get a better exposure more often by not using the meter? I find that pretty hard to believe. I agree that one may learn how to judge exposure better, having acquired a sixth sense after viewing many many *poor* exposures. People no longer use light meters. For the most part, they trust their camera to make the right judgement call, with little or no input. They walk around an inanimate object taking a dozen or more exposures in the hope that one may be the right one, and then when they get lucky, they put up a PESO and say look how wonderful am I? And it only took 16 tries to get it. They may not be wasting film, but they are wasting something far more precious. They are wasting their very lives. It's all a moot point pretty much, right? If the printer has the ability to compensate for exposure variations that fall within a range of acceptable to bang-on, and they have that ability *by design*, then that's just the other side of the coin, so to speak... exposure can be controlled in
RE: Price question for A 20/2,8
...BH is selling an FA version for 499.95 USD - I guess it's new. Man, I'd love to have this one! Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 7. maj 2005 16:40 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: RE: Price question for A 20/2,8 I paid 225 USD a couple years ago. It wasn't exactly in mint condition. 300 Euro is appr. 385 USD. That'a a little expensive even if it's MINT. I'd saay the right price should be around 300-325 USD. It's a bruilliant lens. It's one of my favorites - especially after I got the D. Even before then, I always carried it in my camera bag (still do): http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/12683438/ http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt/DreamHC/Side8.html (top one) http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt/DreamHC/Side3.html Not stoped down: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/2695269/in/set-68002/ and http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/2699584/in/set-68002/ Horisontal Panorama: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/2705463/in/set-68002/ Vertical Panorama: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/2687021/in/set-68002/ The only regrets I have is: 1) I don't have a dedicated hood (i use a third party rubber one) 2) I'd love to have the AF-version, if there ever was one. Regards Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Johannes Schwab [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 7. maj 2005 11:02 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Price question for A 20/2,8 Hello PDML, I found a SMC A 20/2,8 to buy for around 300.-¤. Is this a good price if in good condition? If anyone could help me and tell some experiences with that lens and if it's worth the price, I'd be grateful. Thanks, Johannes.
Re: OT: Philosophical health check
- Original Message - From: P. J. Alling Subject: Re: OT: Philosophical health check I'm amazed that I only scored 20% on their tension quotient since the deck is stacked against any complex understanding of the issues. I kept reading their questions and saying, yes, or no with an explanation or caviot, or I want an I don't know option. If I took it seriously the test would have caused more stress than I have normally... The test is stacked against moral relativism. As soon as you put caveats on your moral beliefs, your score on this sort of thing should increase. William Robb
Re: Digital profligacy
Professionally Acceptable The problem is that most professional photographers do not do professionally acceptable work. All it takes, in the US at least, to be a professional photographer is a camera and registering a DBA with county (If you use your own name in stead of a made up name for your business, you do not even need the DBA). There are many poor photographers making money from people who do not know a good photograph from a bad one. Maybe the top ten thousand of those hundred thousands you mention are decent photographers. And I think there is a far higher percentage of good photographers than that on this list. Also most of those here are here because they want to learn to be better than they now are. Serious fine art photographers are by and large the people to emulate for quality, they do not settle for merely professionally acceptable (although to be honest professionally acceptable is all I ever strived for). graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Herb Chong wrote: one of the first things you learn about any art or craft when you go into business is that if you can't stop when it's good enough, your business fails. hundreds of thousands of professional photographers learn it or fail. the difference is that what is good enough for them is far above many of the it's my best that everyone else does. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.5 - Release Date: 5/4/2005
RE: Digital profligacy
Very interesting. So, the is realy yellowish, right? When shooting slides, colour temperature is an issue too, I believe :-). Jens mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Graywolf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 7. maj 2005 17:24 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: Digital profligacy The young lady at the local Wal-Mart Minilab as so happy. She told me she had a hard time getting all the yellow out of my photo of a tan hat... Wal-Mart print: http://meanderings.graywolfphoto.com/_images/walmart-hat.jpg Uncorrected scan of negative: http://meanderings.graywolfphoto.com/_images/my-block.jpg Sometimes a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Luckily I only wanted a scan to send to the guy who had given me the hat to show how it had cleaned up. Both images are uncorrect scans. Note how off the exposure looks in the print. The negative shows that I did better than that. In a way these two images are a pro-digital argument. But bad printing is not a real problem as I could have insisted that they redo the print correctly. If I do not so insist it is my problem, not theirs. It does show how hard it is to evaluate exposure from minilab prints by inexperienced photographers. With digital however it is just as hard. An experienced photographer can read the negative and know who is at fault. How do you do that with digital, there are so many varitables involved before you can see a readable image. The real advantage with slides for a beginner is that he can see exactly what he shot, though that can be pretty frustrating to start, eventually he learns to get his exposure within 1/3 stop in most lighting conditions. Of course if one depends on the camera to do that... Well, Bill, explained all that better than I could. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Tom C Subject: Re: Digital profligacy I'm jumping in the middle of the thread, not having read all the posts, risking ridicule. I personally doubt that autoexposure, autofocus, etc., etc., etc, has led to a decline in quality of photographs taken. Sure some people, alot of people, who take photographs don't ever learn exposure for example. Technology makes it easier for more people not to learn it, I agree. But so what. Would they have otherwise? Probably not. Alot of people just take pictures and it's not because they consider photography to be a hobby or passionate pursuit. They just snap the shutter, never mind composition. I would guess that exposure for exposure, there are more good, correctly exposed photographs taken now than 30 years ago, 40 years ago, ad infinitum. Before automation, you had no choice about learning the technical end of photography. It was part of the game. You learned how to adjust an aperture and shutter speed to match a needle in the viewfinder. This, in itself, may seem like a small thing, but it isn't. In the process of learning how to set the camera to correct exposure, you were also, by default, learning much of the workings of light itself, which is what photography is about. You would be guessing wrong, btw, about properly exposed photographs taken 3 decades ago vs. today. Automatic exposure does not necessarily give correct exposure, it gives a best guess exposure, that guess coming from a rather retarded brain. What I find amusing is that over the past 30 years, the skill set required to be a photographer has changed from learning the rather simple operation of a manual camera with a grand total of 3 controls to the more complicated operation of a device with sometimes a dozen or more buttons, a few dials, a rocker swith, and several hidden and often inscrutable modes. You need to know far more about machine operation to run a modern camera, especially a digital, than you needed to know about photography when you set everything yourself with a Spotmatic II. If it is a passionate pursuit, then they will learn. OK, take away the in camera light meter, matrix, spot, center. Is anyone seriously stating they would get more accurate exposure by not using the meter (don't think I'm stating that one should always believe the meter)? That they would get a better exposure more often by not using the meter? I find that pretty hard to believe. I agree that one may learn how to judge exposure better, having acquired a sixth sense after viewing many many *poor* exposures. People no longer use light meters. For the most part, they trust their camera to make the right judgement call, with little or no input. They walk around an inanimate object taking a dozen or more exposures in the hope that one may be the right one, and then when they get lucky, they put up a PESO and say look how wonderful am I? And it only took 16 tries to get it. They may not be wasting film, but they are wasting
Re: Digital profligacy
- Original Message - From: Graywolf Subject: Re: Digital profligacy The young lady at the local Wal-Mart Minilab as so happy. She told me she had a hard time getting all the yellow out of my photo of a tan hat... Wal-Mart print: http://meanderings.graywolfphoto.com/_images/walmart-hat.jpg Uncorrected scan of negative: http://meanderings.graywolfphoto.com/_images/my-block.jpg Sometimes a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Luckily I only wanted a scan to send to the guy who had given me the hat to show how it had cleaned up. Both images are uncorrect scans. Note how off the exposure looks in the print. The negative shows that I did better than that. In a way these two images are a pro-digital argument. But bad printing is not a real problem as I could have insisted that they redo the print correctly. If I do not so insist it is my problem, not theirs. It does show how hard it is to evaluate exposure from minilab prints by inexperienced photographers. With digital however it is just as hard. An experienced photographer can read the negative and know who is at fault. How do you do that with digital, there are so many varitables involved before you can see a readable image. This brings up the interesting concept that the photo finisher should what the inside of your house looks like, and should automatically know what colour things are, given no references regarding it. Her exposure is off by a couple of buttons (too light), but there is nothing in the scene to tip off the printer regarding what the correct colour should be. One of the things we deal with on an ongoing basis is the tan wall syndrome. It's not unusual for us to get negatives (especially) that have no colour reference for us to key on to make a colour judgement, so we make a nice looking print, and get accused of being idiots because the walls of the room are the wrong colour. William Robb
Re: PESO: Trail Ridge Road
Hello Derby, For me, right now, it seems like there is more to do. It has the makings of a nice photo, but the conversion is too much. This one certainly looks worth the effort. I look forward to seeing more of it. -- Best regards, Bruce Saturday, May 7, 2005, 3:23:44 AM, you wrote: DC I know I'm not very good at monochrome conversions yet. I think I was a DC bit heavy handed with the channel mixing on the sky - the mottled DC texture bothers me. But this process makes you look at photos DC differently, so that's got to have some worth. DC http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc/PDML_misc/trail_ridge.htm DC D
RE: Digital profligacy
Pretty much so as I do photography and desk top publishing in my job. Powell At 10:28 AM 06/05/2005 , Shel wrote: OK, that begs the question: Why would you have needed all this equipment anyway? Would you have needed the same equipment? For example, before using Photoshop and scanning (or working with digital cameras) I was able to get by very nicely with my old computer. In order to take advantage of Photoshop and the programs needed to run and process the scanner, etc., I had to upgrade to a new system. So, did you need this new equipment anyway? [Original Message] From: Powell Hargrave I have spent a lot more money on photography since going digital. Not counting computers, printers, monitors etc. I would have needed these anyway.
Re: Digital profligacy
Thanks William! Bill - Original Message - From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 11:41 AM Subject: Re: Digital profligacy - Original Message - From: Graywolf Subject: Re: Digital profligacy The young lady at the local Wal-Mart Minilab as so happy. She told me she had a hard time getting all the yellow out of my photo of a tan hat... Wal-Mart print: http://meanderings.graywolfphoto.com/_images/walmart-hat.jpg Uncorrected scan of negative: http://meanderings.graywolfphoto.com/_images/my-block.jpg Sometimes a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Luckily I only wanted a scan to send to the guy who had given me the hat to show how it had cleaned up. Both images are uncorrect scans. Note how off the exposure looks in the print. The negative shows that I did better than that. In a way these two images are a pro-digital argument. But bad printing is not a real problem as I could have insisted that they redo the print correctly. If I do not so insist it is my problem, not theirs. It does show how hard it is to evaluate exposure from minilab prints by inexperienced photographers. With digital however it is just as hard. An experienced photographer can read the negative and know who is at fault. How do you do that with digital, there are so many varitables involved before you can see a readable image. This brings up the interesting concept that the photo finisher should what the inside of your house looks like, and should automatically know what colour things are, given no references regarding it. Her exposure is off by a couple of buttons (too light), but there is nothing in the scene to tip off the printer regarding what the correct colour should be. One of the things we deal with on an ongoing basis is the tan wall syndrome. It's not unusual for us to get negatives (especially) that have no colour reference for us to key on to make a colour judgement, so we make a nice looking print, and get accused of being idiots because the walls of the room are the wrong colour. William Robb
Re: Digital profligacy
Well there are two sides of photography. There is the technical side. Just as an artist has to know what brushes and paints to use and what their effect are on the canvas, so a good photographer has to know his tools and how to use them effectively. There is the meaning side. I use meaning instead of artistic because photography is used for many purposes, art being only one of them. You have to learn how to put across your intended meaning effectively. That often involves triggering an emotional response which is what you seem to be looking for in photos. One is skill in the craft, the other is the ability to see a picture to be recorded. To some that emotional response is all that matters. But I submit that a technically excellent print that triggers the same response is better than a poor one. Seeing + Skill = excellent photos. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- UncaMikey wrote: --- Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just can't stand that good enough attitude that we see so much of today. I agree with some of what you say, Shel, but this is a bit much, don't you think? Being a middle aged cranky old fart, I get the same feeling sometimes, but I'd be willing the bet that when they were building the Parthenon, some of the older marble cutters were complaining about the new fangled iron tools and shortcuts the new guys had figured out. I am also still puzzling in my mind what exactly makes a good photograph. A shot can be technically perfect in every regard but just not very good. And another photo could be shot with a Holga and poorly printed at Wal-Mart, yet still have a powerful effect. In the example you mentioned, the artist and the printer reproducing one of her works, the essential fact was the original painting, no? To have labored mightily over mediocre subject matter would be pointless. I am still trying to understand and learn what makes some shots work, and reading you folks' discussions and looking at your photos is making me think, which is good. I think. *UncaMikey Yahoo! Mail Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour: http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.5 - Release Date: 5/4/2005
Re: Digital profligacy
- Original Message - From: Graywolf Subject: Re: Digital profligacy Professionally Acceptable The problem is that most professional photographers do not do professionally acceptable work. It's not just photographers. I am giving an older couple a hand by rebuilding their wheelchair ramp. At the moment they are virtual shut ins because the ramp scares the hell out of them. The slope is OK, but it's a bit too narrow for her to get her powered chair out the front door and onto the ramp. She was also complaining that the ramp seemed a bit spongey (the combined weight of the lady and her chair is around 400 pounds). The contractor who built the ramp didn't put footings under it, so the thing is sagging, and he used 2x4, 16 on center for the ramp joists, with a single 3/4 inch sheet for the deck. Local code calls for 2x8 joists if you are going 16 on center with a 3/4 inch deck, and doesn't allow for 2x4 to be used as joists at any time. This idiot not only didn't follow code, he created a really unsafe situation for a couple of people who trusted him to do the job, and had no way to check up on whether the job was done right. William (Mike Holmes, Western Division) Robb
RE: Digital profligacy
On Fri, 6 May 2005, Powell Hargrave wrote: I have spent a lot more money on photography since going digital. Not counting computers, printers, monitors etc. I would have needed these anyway. What then? Kostas Well the cameras to start with. Five digitals of increasing ability. All purchased used except the Nikon 990 which was a demo deal. And then the Pentax DS which cost almost as much as the most expensive, a 4x5 view camera, I once had. And now I have this lens enablement problem. :( Powell http://members.shaw.ca/hargravep/photos.htm
Re: Digital profligacy
You are of course correct about that, Bill. But the fact the highlights are all burned out in the print but not the negative is pretty damning. As I said if the print mattered it was my job to insist that it be done over correctly. Also I could have specified No Corrections on the envelope. However, I do not expect Wal-Mart to do really high grade prints these images were not intended to put down the lab, but to illustrate the points I made in the text. I only mentioned the girls intense pride in scewing up the photo because I thought it was humorous, in fact I did not mention it to her as I did not want to make her feel bad. The unfortunate thing is many of the so called pro labs do no better, even when you include a gray card in the first frame. The fact is that really excellent color printers are far and few between. That was so 25 years ago as well as today. The labs would probably do better hiring art students than photo students as universities and colleges still teach mainly BW fine art photography, while art students presumably learn to work with color. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Graywolf Subject: Re: Digital profligacy The young lady at the local Wal-Mart Minilab as so happy. She told me she had a hard time getting all the yellow out of my photo of a tan hat... Wal-Mart print: http://meanderings.graywolfphoto.com/_images/walmart-hat.jpg Uncorrected scan of negative: http://meanderings.graywolfphoto.com/_images/my-block.jpg Sometimes a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Luckily I only wanted a scan to send to the guy who had given me the hat to show how it had cleaned up. Both images are uncorrect scans. Note how off the exposure looks in the print. The negative shows that I did better than that. In a way these two images are a pro-digital argument. But bad printing is not a real problem as I could have insisted that they redo the print correctly. If I do not so insist it is my problem, not theirs. It does show how hard it is to evaluate exposure from minilab prints by inexperienced photographers. With digital however it is just as hard. An experienced photographer can read the negative and know who is at fault. How do you do that with digital, there are so many varitables involved before you can see a readable image. This brings up the interesting concept that the photo finisher should what the inside of your house looks like, and should automatically know what colour things are, given no references regarding it. Her exposure is off by a couple of buttons (too light), but there is nothing in the scene to tip off the printer regarding what the correct colour should be. One of the things we deal with on an ongoing basis is the tan wall syndrome. It's not unusual for us to get negatives (especially) that have no colour reference for us to key on to make a colour judgement, so we make a nice looking print, and get accused of being idiots because the walls of the room are the wrong colour. William Robb -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.6 - Release Date: 5/6/2005
Re: Digital profligacy
William Robb wrote: This brings up the interesting concept that the photo finisher should what the inside of your house looks like, and should automatically know what colour things are, given no references regarding it. Her exposure is off by a couple of buttons (too light), but there is nothing in the scene to tip off the printer regarding what the correct colour should be. One of the things we deal with on an ongoing basis is the tan wall syndrome. It's not unusual for us to get negatives (especially) that have no colour reference for us to key on to make a colour judgement, so we make a nice looking print, and get accused of being idiots because the walls of the room are the wrong colour. William Robb Yup, exactly, I can relate to this SO much. /Henri
Re: Digital profligacy
Well a contractor is liable if his work is not to code. Most places require him to post a bond to get his license. So it is fairly easy to get you money back for small jobs (the bond won't cover anything substancial, and fly-by-night contractors usually have nothing else you can get to). graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Graywolf Subject: Re: Digital profligacy Professionally Acceptable The problem is that most professional photographers do not do professionally acceptable work. It's not just photographers. I am giving an older couple a hand by rebuilding their wheelchair ramp. At the moment they are virtual shut ins because the ramp scares the hell out of them. The slope is OK, but it's a bit too narrow for her to get her powered chair out the front door and onto the ramp. She was also complaining that the ramp seemed a bit spongey (the combined weight of the lady and her chair is around 400 pounds). The contractor who built the ramp didn't put footings under it, so the thing is sagging, and he used 2x4, 16 on center for the ramp joists, with a single 3/4 inch sheet for the deck. Local code calls for 2x8 joists if you are going 16 on center with a 3/4 inch deck, and doesn't allow for 2x4 to be used as joists at any time. This idiot not only didn't follow code, he created a really unsafe situation for a couple of people who trusted him to do the job, and had no way to check up on whether the job was done right. William (Mike Holmes, Western Division) Robb -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.6 - Release Date: 5/6/2005
RE: OT: Philosophical health check
47%, uptight little [EMAIL PROTECTED]@@# aren't I? :-( Don -Original Message- From: Tom Reese [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 6:03 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: OT: Philosophical health check Bob W wrote: Pain? Tension? Nervous headache? For fast-acting relief, try PHC. http://www.philosophers.co.uk/games/check.htm; 13%. I may be full of $#!T but I'm consistent. I enjoyed that Bob. Thanks for posting it. Tom Reese
Re: OT: Philosophical health check
33% I need another drink. Dave S On 5/7/05, Tom Reese [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bob W wrote: Pain? Tension? Nervous headache? For fast-acting relief, try PHC. http://www.philosophers.co.uk/games/check.htm; 13%. I may be full of $#!T but I'm consistent. I enjoyed that Bob. Thanks for posting it. Tom Reese
Re: FA 35/2 status at BH and Adorama
Last eBay sale $330.00 plus shipping http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemcategory=48558item=7511527617 rd=1 glenn murphy wrote: I'm not getting my hopes up (well, maybe a little), but BH currently lists it as Out Of Stock instead of Backordered, and Adorama has a note claiming This Item is on the way to our warehouse and is expected in a few days. :( I gave up and cancelled my BH order last week. Now I'm back at the end of the line, if they get a limited quantity in again. I guess maybe I should have held on longer, but I wanted to free up the $309.40 (with shipping) to use to bid on the next 35/2 to show up on eBay.
Re: OT: Philosophical health check
Rather one sided views the authors have. For instance brain dead, and continued existance of the spirit does not necessarily contradict each other. One is of the body, the other is not. It is like the the computer is burned out, but we can not get rid of it because we want to keep the program it was running. Morals are culturally dependant, genocide is evil. Where did I say my values are not culturally molded just like about everybody elses? Also morals, ethics, and ethos are three different things. People should be judged upon merit, but restitution is not necessarily based on that. Now if they asked should people be given special consideration because their grandparents were treated unjustly, I would have answered no. I guess my point is that knowledge and feelings are two different things. If I answered the questions purely one way or the other I would have had a zero score, but the questions were not worded that way. Some were asking for beliefs, while others were asking for feelings at least by my interpertation of them. But then thinking about it a bit I guess that is the same for all of these little tests, they say more about the test makers than about the test takers. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Tom Reese wrote: Bob W wrote: Pain? Tension? Nervous headache? For fast-acting relief, try PHC. http://www.philosophers.co.uk/games/check.htm; 13%. I may be full of $#!T but I'm consistent. I enjoyed that Bob. Thanks for posting it. Tom Reese -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.6 - Release Date: 5/6/2005
Re: Digital profligacy
On Fri, 6 May 2005, William Robb wrote: Before automation, you had no choice about learning the technical end of photography. It was part of the game. You learned how to adjust an aperture and shutter speed to match a needle in the viewfinder. snip Automatic exposure does not necessarily give correct exposure, it gives a best guess exposure, that guess coming from a rather retarded brain. I cannot see how these two differ, assuming the same metering algorithm behind the needle reading/auto exposure. Actually, the auto exposure has a higher chance of being consistent for a learner on the same scene (assuming that the learner bothers to change the aperture or speed setting). Kostas
Re: OT: Philosophical health check
I also scored 33, so I'll drink to that as well Dan M David Savage wrote: 33% I need another drink.
Re: Enablement
I had one briefly, and got a 24-90 to replace it. Watch for vignetting at the wide end. Rick --- Francis Alviar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just grabbed a FA 28-70mm f/4 off of that auction site. It belonged to a former list member (I think) Gary Murphy. I've been reading comments for this lens from Stan's site and it's been getting good reviews. Any other comments you guys want to add? Can't wait to try it out. Francis M. Alviar Yahoo! Mail Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour: http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html __ Yahoo! Mail Mobile Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail
Re: Digital profligacy
Well, just matching the needle and using auto exposure is exactly the same thing. Now intelligently adjusting for different lighting, say back lighting, is easier with a manual camera than with an automatic camera. With a manual camera you just change the f-stop or shutter speed a couple of stops. With the auto camera you have to go to a fourth control to override the camera. Of course with most advanced auto cameras today you can select manual control, but the fact that you do not use that normally makes the adjustment that comes automatically to you after awhile on the manual camera something you have to think about with the auto camera. Skills do require constant practice to be something you do almost without thinking. Only using them sometimes, if you learn them at all, does not work as well. As for auto focus, anyone who gets a higher percentage of in focus shots with auto focus simply does not know how to focus his camera. It is a skill easily learned if someone shows you, but hard to figure out on your own. Of course most snapshooters do not have any desire to learn how to be a photographer they just want pictures of their kids and vacations. Amateur photographers on the other hand are interested in photography and should learn everything about it they can. Gadgets do have their fascination and most modern multi-mode auto cameras cater to that with a vengeance. I do not think it helps in learning photography however. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Fri, 6 May 2005, William Robb wrote: Before automation, you had no choice about learning the technical end of photography. It was part of the game. You learned how to adjust an aperture and shutter speed to match a needle in the viewfinder. snip Automatic exposure does not necessarily give correct exposure, it gives a best guess exposure, that guess coming from a rather retarded brain. I cannot see how these two differ, assuming the same metering algorithm behind the needle reading/auto exposure. Actually, the auto exposure has a higher chance of being consistent for a learner on the same scene (assuming that the learner bothers to change the aperture or speed setting). Kostas -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.6 - Release Date: 5/6/2005
Re: Digital profligacy
- Original Message - From: Kostas Kavoussanakis Subject: Re: Digital profligacy On Fri, 6 May 2005, William Robb wrote: Before automation, you had no choice about learning the technical end of photography. It was part of the game. You learned how to adjust an aperture and shutter speed to match a needle in the viewfinder. snip Automatic exposure does not necessarily give correct exposure, it gives a best guess exposure, that guess coming from a rather retarded brain. I cannot see how these two differ, assuming the same metering algorithm behind the needle reading/auto exposure. Actually, the auto exposure has a higher chance of being consistent for a learner on the same scene (assuming that the learner bothers to change the aperture or speed setting). Depends on if the photographer has a less retarded brain than the camera, I guess. If you are forced to learn exposure on a manual only camera (or better still, with an external light meter), you will quickly learn when the meter will fall down, an when it will be accurate, mostly accurate, or not at all accurate. If you don't learn this, you will never know if the meter is doing it's job, since you don't know what it is doing. The learning process involves making mistakes and learning from them. Auto exposure inhibits this process. William Robb
Re: FA 35/2 status at BH and Adorama
- Original Message - From: Powell Hargrave Subject: Re: FA 35/2 status at BH and Adorama Last eBay sale $330.00 plus shipping http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemcategory=48558item=7511527617 rd=1 This makes a point that people who always wait for the best price will sometimes lose. People waiting for BH to get them one at $309.00 may wait for a long while. I picked mine up a few weeks ago from an eBay seller. NIB for $329.00 I paid an extra 20 bucks, but the thing is sitting on my camera right now. William Robb
Re: Digital profligacy
- Original Message - From: Graywolf Subject: Re: Digital profligacy You are of course correct about that, Bill. Of course I am. We wouldn't want it any other way... HAR!! The fact is that really excellent color printers are far and few between. That was so 25 years ago as well as today. The labs would probably do better hiring art students than photo students as universities and colleges still teach mainly BW fine art photography, while art students presumably learn to work with color. Fine art students are wonderful printers, they have been taught how to see. Quite often, we have to guess at what the photographer is doing, so it helps to have a visual education. William Robb
Re: Digital profligacy
- Original Message - From: Graywolf Subject: Re: Digital profligacy Well a contractor is liable if his work is not to code. Most places require him to post a bond to get his license. So it is fairly easy to get you money back for small jobs (the bond won't cover anything substancial, and fly-by-night contractors usually have nothing else you can get to). Sadly, a lot of contract work is done cash, with no paper. Our tax regime is such that tax avoidance is a national pastime. Deal with one of these guys, and when they screw up, you really have no options whatsoever. One of my strategies with my ongoing Adventures in Home Renovation website is to get the bastard that ripped me off to sue me. Once I have him in court admitting he worked for me,I can fry his behind. Won't get anything other than satisfaction, these types make sure they don't have anything. My moron even has his phone in his wife's name. Liability avoidance is the name of their game. William Robb
Re: OT: Philosophical health check
- Original Message - From: Don Sanderson Subject: RE: OT: Philosophical health check 47%, uptight little [EMAIL PROTECTED]@@# aren't I? :-( Oh my, you are. The best I was able to do was 27%. William Robb
Re: Digital profligacy
successful serious fine art photographers are just as aware and just the same when it comes time to staying in business. if you don't know when to stop fondling the bits, paint, chisel or whatever, you won't be in business very long, especially if you are very good. Herb - Original Message - From: Graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 11:37 AM Subject: Re: Digital profligacy Serious fine art photographers are by and large the people to emulate for quality, they do not settle for merely professionally acceptable (although to be honest professionally acceptable is all I ever strived for).
Re: OT: Philosophical health check
Mellow out dudes! 7% Powell
RE: FA 35/2 status at BH and Adorama
I'm still waiting for mine.. every day I look at the 200$ 28-105, and think, hmm, maybe I should just give up on the 35 and save myself some money? I guess I'll wait another week or so, I'm miffed that BH still hasn't responded to my 2 week old question about when I might see it. I gather that they haven't had a good answer, but a non-automated reply to my queries would have been nice. Even if all they said was we can't answer your question yet, but will let you know as soon as we have a better idea. jp From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Powell Hargrave Subject: Re: FA 35/2 status at BH and Adorama Last eBay sale $330.00 plus shipping http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemcategory=48558it em=7511527617 rd=1 This makes a point that people who always wait for the best price will sometimes lose. People waiting for BH to get them one at $309.00 may wait for a long while. I picked mine up a few weeks ago from an eBay seller. NIB for $329.00 I paid an extra 20 bucks, but the thing is sitting on my camera right now. William Robb
Re: FA 35/2 status at BH and Adorama
On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 03:01:10PM -0400, Jon Paul Schelter (R* Toronto) wrote: I guess I'll wait another week or so, I'm miffed that BH still hasn't responded to my 2 week old question about when I might see it. I gather that they haven't had a good answer, but a non-automated reply to my queries would have been nice. Even if all they said was we can't answer your question yet, but will let you know as soon as we have a better idea. Courtesy to (prospective) customers? From BH? You can't be serious!
Re: Another GFM photo
On 5/7/05, Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Carolina the bear and her new cub, Boomer. http://groups.msn.com/BillOwensPhotos/shoebox.msnw?action=ShowPhotoPhotoID=90 Bill Little bear cubs are so cute! It's easy to forget that they grow up into big bears that can rip your face off with one swipe of their paw. g Look forward to seeing mom and cub in a couple of weeks. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Digital profligacy
On 5/7/05, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip This idiot not only didn't follow code, he created a really unsafe situation for a couple of people who trusted him to do the job, and had no way to check up on whether the job was done right. William (Mike Holmes, Western Division) Robb A Holmes on Homes. One of my favourite TV shows. As soon as you said that nothing was up to code, I thought of Mike. When I read your signature, I howled! vbg -frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Digital profligacy
- Original Message - From: frank theriault Subject: Re: Digital profligacy A Holmes on Homes. One of my favourite TV shows. As soon as you said that nothing was up to code, I thought of Mike. When I read your signature, I howled! vbg I watch it to feel lucky. At least my house (except for one area) isn't activly trying to self destruct. William Robb
Re: PESO -- Characters (For something completely different.)
On 5/6/05, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Photographed at an event I attended. Posted the URL earlier to the LONDON PDML thread. http://www.mindspring.com/~webster26/PESO_--_characters.html Pentax *ist-D 43ltd. ISO 800 As usual comments are welcome but may be totally ignored. Love it! For some reason that I'm not able to articulate, I like the grouping of two guys and one guy separate. I find that intriguing. This is a deceptively simple photo, because when I look beyond the this is just a snapshot of some guys at a party thing, there are just so many subtle things going on! Three different facial expressions, three bald guys, three big guys. I notice that the doors behind them are grouped almost the same as the fellows: two closed doors together, and one open one separate (on the right). Interesting. I'm glad you posted it. What was the nature of the gathering? Just curious... cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: PESO -- Characters (For something completely different.)
On 5/7/05, frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Love it! For some reason that I'm not able to articulate, I like the grouping of two guys and one guy separate. I find that intriguing. snip Oh yeah. It would, of course, look much better in bw... vbg cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Price question for A 20/2,8
I'm not personally familiar with the Tokina. For the difference in price it's worth looking at. However the Pentax will almost certainly have superior flair handling due to the SMC. Johannes Schwab wrote: P. J. Alling schrieb: Yes this is a good price if it's in good condition. I spent a long time trying to find one in good condition at that low a price. It's even a very good lens. Hi Peter, so you would prefer it instead of taking a Tokina 17/3,5 for around 200.-¤? If yes, I would assume the Pentax lens is far better in any optical respect? I mean, the Tokina is attractice because of the wider angle... though I'm no WA specialist, so I probably wouldn't be able to handle the 17 in a proper way... -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Re: Enablement
Every time I saw it in a store it was an after market upgrade. David Oswald wrote: It was, with the ZX-5n. As a buyer I bought the ZX-5n QD kits with the 28-70mm f/4 as the kit lens. P. J. Alling wrote: I don't think it was ever sold as in a kit. David Oswald wrote: Francis Alviar wrote: Just grabbed a FA 28-70mm f/4 off of that auction site. It belonged to a former list member (I think) Gary Murphy. I've been reading comments for this lens from Stan's site and it's been getting good reviews. Any other comments you guys want to add? Can't wait to try it out. I think you'll love the lens. I really liked mine, until I eventually decided I needed a little more reach, eventually buying a 28-105 in its place. Of course that was back in film days. But even with digital the 28-70 f/4 ought to be a pretty good lens. If you put a filter on it, make sure it's a good one. I had a cheap UV on mine and noticed some blooming in bright light. I switched to a nicer Hoya Multi Coated UV, and the blooming issue went away. It's a very sharp lens, especially considering that it's not one of the more expensive ones out there. It's definately the best AF kit zoom Pentax ever made. Dave -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Re: PESO -- Characters (For something completely different.)
It was an awards night for a semi-civic organization. The dress code as you can see was eclectic. frank theriault wrote: On 5/6/05, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Photographed at an event I attended. Posted the URL earlier to the LONDON PDML thread. http://www.mindspring.com/~webster26/PESO_--_characters.html Pentax *ist-D 43ltd. ISO 800 As usual comments are welcome but may be totally ignored. Love it! For some reason that I'm not able to articulate, I like the grouping of two guys and one guy separate. I find that intriguing. This is a deceptively simple photo, because when I look beyond the this is just a snapshot of some guys at a party thing, there are just so many subtle things going on! Three different facial expressions, three bald guys, three big guys. I notice that the doors behind them are grouped almost the same as the fellows: two closed doors together, and one open one separate (on the right). Interesting. I'm glad you posted it. What was the nature of the gathering? Just curious... cheers, frank -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Re: Salgado on wheels!
SB I've seen Salgado's prints. I don't know off hand what the dimensions are SB for A1, although iirc, they are quite large. His prints that measure 24 x SB 36 or so are outstanding in terms of quality and tonality, even when viewed SB close up. A4 is similar to legal size, and A1 is eight times legal size. So it would be around 24x36 print, yes. The tonality was indeed exquisite. Especially the highlights, with a subtle glow but still holding many details. Especially in metal or glistening human skin. He has some damn good printers :) Of course his photographs would IMO stand out even if not so well printed, but seeing such good BW work is great. And even my non photographic friends I took to the exhibition (I was there today once more g) noticed the prints to be good, which says a lot. SB The format of the show is most interesting. Bring the photos to the people! Yes, I liked that a lot. And it brought some people who wouldn't go to a gallery otherwise. Of course there was a tight selection to pack the workers into just few wagons, so some of my most favourite photographs from this series (I have the book) weren't there, but it was very strong nevertheless. SB Perhaps some day you'll get to meet the man and hear him speak. I was SB lucky enough to see him twice ... he's a very commanding presence for SB someone so small and soft spoken in his physicality. I was quite sad that I missed the vernisage. Friends who were there told me it was great. But I was documenting a very interesting event, so it wasn't so bad :) SB Thanks for posting this! SB BTW, I've seen some of his Genesis work - effin' amazing! Definitely. Do you know if more of his work from Genesis series is available to view at least on the web somewhere? I think some of it was printed in Guardian, so in their archives? Thanks Frantisek
Re: OT: Philosophical health check
Saturday, May 7, 2005, 3:28:48 PM, P. wrote: PJA You have so little stress you're in a coma, or maybe just asleep. No, David is just longing for the Fjords ;-) Good light! fra
Re: OT: Philosophical health check
PJA any complex understanding of the issues. I kept reading their questions PJA and saying, yes, or no with PJA an explanation or caviot, or I want an I don't know option. If I took PJA it seriously the test would have caused more PJA stress than I have normally... Yes. But then most people would select that I don't know option. It's on purpose that it is left out in most questionaries, that's one of the few things I remember from my studies ;-) And it gives you some more info on the supposed controversies once you submit the test. Which I found nice - it was food for thought, and fun, nothing more but interesting. Good light! fra
Re: FA 35/2 status at BH and Adorama
If BH says a lens is backordered, they will almost certainly have some in stock sooner or later. If a lens is unavailable, they take it off their web site. I haven't seen them fail yet when it comes to delivering on their promises. For some, it may be worth the wait. I waited for both my FA 50/1.4 and my FA 35/2, and obtained both for 10 to 20% less than the ebay price. Paul On May 7, 2005, at 2:25 PM, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Powell Hargrave Subject: Re: FA 35/2 status at BH and Adorama Last eBay sale $330.00 plus shipping http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll? ViewItemcategory=48558item=7511527617 rd=1 This makes a point that people who always wait for the best price will sometimes lose. People waiting for BH to get them one at $309.00 may wait for a long while. I picked mine up a few weeks ago from an eBay seller. NIB for $329.00 I paid an extra 20 bucks, but the thing is sitting on my camera right now. William Robb
Gallery Opening
I had a great time at the opening of my little gallery show last night. Because it was timed to coincide with the gallery tour night, the turnout was terrific. Somewhere around 300 people saw the show. Chief among these was Ken Waller, who surprised me (and delighted me) with a visit. I must have answered questions about my work for at least 100 of the attendees. Lots of fun. The show will run for the rest of the month. I wasn't expecting it to hang that long, so that was another nice surprise. It pays to get out there and schmooze vbg. I think I worked on this gallery for close to a year. Paul
Re: Salgado on wheels!
F Definitely. Do you know if more of his work from Genesis series is F available to view at least on the web somewhere? I think some of it F was printed in Guardian, so in their archives? Funny, answering myself... but I just learned that Guardian published a third installment from the work-in-progress Genesis series... http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/salgado/0,15021,1294976,00.html Good light! fra
Re: MZ-S (WAS: Re: Camera prices on Ebay)
on 6.05.2005 14:13, Pål Jensen at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sure, the eyepiece is of plastic but isn't that true for all slr's made today? Eypiece in MZ-S is made of coated glass - I've checked this by knocking at that with metal screwdriver - produced sound couldn't come from plastic part :-) -- Regards Sylwek
Re: MZ-S (WAS: Re: Camera prices on Ebay)
Sylwiusz wrote: on 6.05.2005 14:13, Pål Jensen at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sure, the eyepiece is of plastic but isn't that true for all slr's made today? Eypiece in MZ-S is made of coated glass - I've checked this by knocking at that with metal screwdriver - produced sound couldn't come from plastic part :-) Good way to check.. NOT! Don't you ever do that again! *pulls ear* /Henri
Re: Salgado on wheels!
Beautiful images. Thanks for posting. I think number 8 is my favorite. I wonder what the lensing was on these. Paul On May 7, 2005, at 5:58 PM, Frantisek wrote: F Definitely. Do you know if more of his work from Genesis series is F available to view at least on the web somewhere? I think some of it F was printed in Guardian, so in their archives? Funny, answering myself... but I just learned that Guardian published a third installment from the work-in-progress Genesis series... http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/salgado/0,15021,1294976,00.html Good light! fra
LONDON PDML - First Pic
Hi Listers, Just a quick note - sat here with Rob Brigham, Jostein, and Stan having a late night pint in the hotel. Full report soon, but before then, you may see a pic of us all on the Eye - Paul Stenquist will kindly post a link to it soon (unless he's busy with his show ;-) Long day, lots of faces, it all went to quickly More tomorrow when I get home. We're giving Mark Roberts and his wife a ride to Oxford where they're renting a car for a drive to North Wales where they are visiting. It's been a load of fun, and great to see all the faces - plenty of pics to come - watch this space Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
London PDML, first pic
The big get together at the London Eye took place earlier today. Cotty mailed me a pic of everyone that he shot with his Pismo. (Ignore the title, where it says by Paul Stenquist. I'm not taking the blame for this one g. It's all Cotty's) Cotty tells me the event was a big success. I'm sure we'll see and hear more later. Paul http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3343323size=lg
Re: Digital profligacy
Knarf, my only point was that photos are taken by people. What make of equipment used is irrelevant if the operator doesn't have a clue to the technical aesthetic aspects. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, May 06, 2005 6:28 PM Subject: Re: Digital profligacy I said: which camera has a higher ratio of interesting photos to duds? To which Ken Waller responded: Gee, and I thought it was the photographer that took the image not the camera. Kenneth Waller You don't think that some photographers shoot more digitally because they can without paying a premium? Judging by the number here who proudly trumpeted (within a couple of months of buying their *istD), My shot count is such-and-such!, I'd say that most shoot much more when film price isn't a factor. So yes, I did mean which camera and not which photographer. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: PESO: Trail Ridge Road
Thanks for the comments, guys. Gives me incentive to keep going. Shel, the shot was on Fuji S-400. So I thought I could wring out more detail in the clouds. Started again from scratch, with two scans, one exposed for the sky, one for the land. Separate curve adjustments for each. Next, I think I'll see if I can bring out more detail in the cloud shadows on the trees. Could spend days doing this, it is very enjoyable. http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc/PDML_misc/trail_ridge.htm (original blah colour pic when you mouse-over the image) Man, that was a cold afternoon. On the other hand, the oxygen deprivation up there makes you slow down and take your time getting the shot. D -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc
Re: London PDML, first pic
Thanks, Paul, and a major thank you to Cotty for organising another really excellent event. Pics to follow. John On Sat, 07 May 2005 23:20:29 +0100, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The big get together at the London Eye took place earlier today. Cotty mailed me a pic of everyone that he shot with his Pismo. (Ignore the title, where it says by Paul Stenquist. I'm not taking the blame for this one g. It's all Cotty's) Cotty tells me the event was a big success. I'm sure we'll see and hear more later. Paul http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3343323size=lg -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.6 - Release Date: 06/05/2005
Re: LONDON PDML - First Pic
Cotty wrote: Hi Listers, Just a quick note - sat here with Rob Brigham, Jostein, and Stan having a late night pint in the hotel. Full report soon, but before then, you may see a pic of us all on the Eye - Paul Stenquist will kindly post a link to it soon (unless he's busy with his show ;-) Long day, lots of faces, it all went to quickly More tomorrow when I get home. We're giving Mark Roberts and his wife a ride to Oxford where they're renting a car for a drive to North Wales where they are visiting. Tell 'em to wave vigorously when they go thru Chester and pass Wrexham! I've a mate there, one Bill Basey, a Big Band musician... ;-) keith whaley It's been a load of fun, and great to see all the faces - plenty of pics to come - watch this space Cheers, Cotty
RE: London PDML, first pic
Wow, just look at that barrel distortion... ;o) -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 07 May 2005 23:20 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: London PDML, first pic The big get together at the London Eye took place earlier today. Cotty mailed me a pic of everyone that he shot with his Pismo. (Ignore the title, where it says by Paul Stenquist. I'm not taking the blame for this one g. It's all Cotty's) Cotty tells me the event was a big success. I'm sure we'll see and hear more later. Paul http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3343323size=lg
RE: Salgado on wheels!
Superb. Can't wait to see them in an exhibition. Thanks for posting. -- Cheers, Bob Funny, answering myself... but I just learned that Guardian published a third installment from the work-in-progress Genesis series... http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/salgado/0,15021,1294976,00.html
Re: London PDML, first pic
On 7/5/05, Paul Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed: The big get together at the London Eye took place earlier today. Cotty mailed me a pic of everyone that he shot with his Pismo The true meaning of that line cannot be divulged now as more info will be released in due course ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
RE: Gallery Opening
Great news, Paul. I'm sorry that I didn't make it, I had planned on it, but I had a meeting in Fremont Friday, and after 7 1/2 hours of driving and a four hour meeting, all I could think of was getting home. I'm glad to see it'll hang for a few more weeks, I'm going to get over there so I can tell the gallery owners that I know the artist!! Perhaps you can share some of your schmooze tips with us some time... And we're proud of you!! Bill Sawyer Livonia, MI -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 5:45 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Gallery Opening I had a great time at the opening of my little gallery show last night. Because it was timed to coincide with the gallery tour night, the turnout was terrific. Somewhere around 300 people saw the show. Chief among these was Ken Waller, who surprised me (and delighted me) with a visit. I must have answered questions about my work for at least 100 of the attendees. Lots of fun. The show will run for the rest of the month. I wasn't expecting it to hang that long, so that was another nice surprise. It pays to get out there and schmooze vbg. I think I worked on this gallery for close to a year. Paul
Re: Gallery Opening
On 7/5/05, Paul Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed: I had a great time at the opening of my little gallery show last night. Because it was timed to coincide with the gallery tour night, the turnout was terrific. Somewhere around 300 people saw the show. Chief among these was Ken Waller, who surprised me (and delighted me) with a visit. I must have answered questions about my work for at least 100 of the attendees. Lots of fun. The show will run for the rest of the month. I wasn't expecting it to hang that long, so that was another nice surprise. It pays to get out there and schmooze vbg. I think I worked on this gallery for close to a year. Paul Sounds great Paul, congratulations again. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
