RE: PESO - Others 2005 - 46r - GDG (Shel using his DS)

2005-10-28 Thread Shel Belinkoff
Here's one that I call "Too Much Cheesecake Will Shrink Your Head"

http://home.earthlink.net/~shel-pix/2muchcheesecake.html

The pix that G posted were of my first successful attempt with trap focus. 
A very neat feature!  


Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: Godfrey DiGiorgi 

> Thought y'all might like this...
>
>http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/42r.htm




PESO The land of coke and honey

2005-10-28 Thread Rob Studdert
Another pic from my trip. I shot a whole heap of these but over a very short 
time, I was a bit rushed, now looking back at them there's so much more I could 
have done and I'm having great difficulty editing what I did shoot down. Pity 
it's the other side of the country :-(

http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio/temp/IMGP6304.jpg (~350B)

Tech: *ist D, ISO200, 1/800s FA77/1.8 FE @ f8

Comments, questions and critiques welcome.

Cheers,


Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998



Re: Skills - was Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side

2005-10-28 Thread P. J. Alling

From what I've seen 3. is also optional...

graywolf wrote:

Well, from my experience to be a financially successful professional 
photographer you need three things.


1. A really tough ego.
2. Relentless self promotion.
3. An eye for an image.
All else is optional.

graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Mark Roberts wrote:


"William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

 


From: "Herb Chong"

  

the assumption among many professional photographers is that you 
have the skill or you wouldn't be there.



That is not a safe assumption for them to make.   



That's an understatement.

 

I've run into a lot of pro photographers who are only able to do 
what they do because the automation in the camera has enough skill 
to cover for them.
I suspect that the % of truly skilled pro photographers is now 
hovering at an all time low.
  



I've saw evidence of that at the photo shop. We used to do a lot of
processing for pros. When they started making the transition to digital
you could see who really had a handle on exposure and who didn't. Not
many did.


 







--
When you're worried or in doubt, 
	Run in circles, (scream and shout).




Re: 50mm/F2 lens worth a CLA

2005-10-28 Thread Rob Studdert
On 28 Oct 2005 at 22:31, Patrick Schork wrote:

> Here are some test shots from my modification of a SMC-A 50/2
> 
> http://istds.blogspot.com/2005/10/modified-smc-502.html

Very cool. :-)


Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998



Re: Cleaning Sensors

2005-10-28 Thread Rob Studdert
On 29 Oct 2005 at 1:21, P. J. Alling wrote:

> I expect that the sensor cover is exceedingly thin, while blue tack 
> sounds like it would be wonderful for cleaning relatively thick glass, I 
> may look into it for lenses, I would be afraid of putting too much 
> pressure on the sensor cover and causing it to crack. 

I suspect too that since it's so close to the imaging surface the big greasy 
smudges that the Blu-tack leaves will affect image quality particularly at 
small apertures.


Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998



Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side

2005-10-28 Thread Rob Studdert
On 28 Oct 2005 at 23:32, graywolf wrote:

> I bought my first Pentax in 1961 or 62. Pentax has always seemed behind 
> the times. Yes they actually invented a lot of the neat stuff that made 
> SLR's better for general photography, but they often licensed those 
> inventions to competitors rather than using them themselves. Except for 
> that brief  exciting period from the Spotmatic to the LX, they have 
> never been on the front line of the technology. Why should I expect it 
> to be different now. What they have always managed to do was to make a 
> competent affordable camera, and that does not seem to have changed a 
> bit with digital.

In the days of film capture image quality pivoted around film and lenses. Given 
that the same film was available to all brands absolute image quality between 
brands wasn't a significant issue, the best were all bear equivalent image 
makers, extra cash bought gadgetry. Every DSLRs imposes its own absolute limit 
WRT image quality, this has created a significant change in the philosophy 
camera body purchase.

I guess some people stayed with poor latitude and grainy old films even though 
better films were available but the difference was that if you wanted to 
upgrade then you just bought the new film. The fact that very few of us were 
bitching about wanting a new LX, a 25 year old camera now sort of puts it in 
perspective.


Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998



Re: M 2.8/35 mm - general aperture problem?

2005-10-28 Thread P. J. Alling
They're old.  Lubricants dry out. It's a very good lens, if you can find 
someone to do an inexpensive CLA it's worth it.


Ralf R. Radermacher wrote:


Hello all,

Today, I've received my 'new' M2.8/35 mm and the aperture closes
extremely slow. I had just discarded another lens of this type for
exactly the same reason. Never had such trouble with any of my other
Pentax lenses. 


Is there something about the 2.8/35 mm?

Ralf

 




--
When you're worried or in doubt, 
	Run in circles, (scream and shout).




Re: Skills - was Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side

2005-10-28 Thread Rob Studdert
On 29 Oct 2005 at 0:38, graywolf wrote:

> Back in the 80's when I was trying to make a living with my cameras, I 
> expected to get 1 great shot out of 12 and that all 12 would be salable 
> (Which is why I hated weddings there were always duds that were not the 
> photographer's fault, often of critical shots. However, I think 
> successful wedding photographers were far more controlling than I was 
> comfortable with). I wonder what the ratio out there is now in this 
> digital age.

I guess you should also consider how many shots were expected in an average 
wedding portfolio back then vs what's expected for the average wedding these 
days?


Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998



Re: 50mm/F2 lens worth a CLA

2005-10-28 Thread P. J. Alling


Or perhaps I'm just crazy.




I think you hit the thumb squarely with the hammer there...

Peter Jordan wrote:

There is something strangely satisfying in spending more than the cost 
of a replacement on a CLA.


A psychologist would be able to explain better, but it's something to 
do with the bond that forms between a man and his (delete as 
applicable) LX / MX / K50mm f/1.4 / M85 mm f/2  ...


Or perhaps I'm just crazy.

Peter



- Original Message - From: "Adam Maas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 7:08 PM
Subject: Re: 50mm/F2 lens worth a CLA


Probably not, you should be able to find one that doesn't need a CLA 
for less than the CLA would cost.


-Adam


Barry Rice wrote:


Hey Folks,

I just found an old pentax M 50/2 lens. I've already got a Pentax 
M50/1.4

and an F 50/2.8 macro.
This 50/2 lens is in good shape, but would need a CLA before it 
would be
even sellable. Is there any compelling reason to keep this lens? Any 
secrets
about it, like "oh, man this lens is sweet when reversed" or 
anything like

that?

B

Barry A. Rice, Ph.D.
Invasive Species Specialist
Global Invasive Species Initiative
The Nature Conservancy
V: 530-754-8891
http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu











--
When you're worried or in doubt, 
	Run in circles, (scream and shout).




PESO: Others 2005 - 46r - GDG (Shel using his DS)

2005-10-28 Thread Godfrey DiGiorgi

Thought y'all might like this...

  http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/42r.htm

Godfrey



Re: 50mm/F2 lens worth a CLA

2005-10-28 Thread P. J. Alling

No.

Barry Rice wrote:


Hey Folks,

I just found an old pentax M 50/2 lens. I've already got a Pentax M50/1.4
and an F 50/2.8 macro.
This 50/2 lens is in good shape, but would need a CLA before it would be
even sellable. Is there any compelling reason to keep this lens? Any secrets
about it, like "oh, man this lens is sweet when reversed" or anything like
that?

B

Barry A. Rice, Ph.D.
Invasive Species Specialist
Global Invasive Species Initiative
The Nature Conservancy
V: 530-754-8891
http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu 



 




--
When you're worried or in doubt, 
	Run in circles, (scream and shout).




Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side

2005-10-28 Thread P. J. Alling
I don't know, I think they're still using Sony.  OTOH, Pentax has teamed 
up with Samsung...


William Robb wrote:



- Original Message - From: "graywolf"
Subject: Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side


Which actually seems to be the problem. The istD successor was 
supposed to hit the shelves last spring. I personally think it was 
unavailability of the sensors in production quantities that held that 
up. It is probably behind the Samsung partnership thing too.



Didn't Nikon have to start making their own sensors to get what they 
wanted?


William Robb





--
When you're worried or in doubt, 
	Run in circles, (scream and shout).




Re: Safe voltages for the *stDS flash hotshoe?

2005-10-28 Thread P. J. Alling
I think I paid $14.00 plus tax for the flash, it's major purpose in life 
is to keep me from destroying a more expensive piece of equipment, sort 
of the purpose the ZX-M originally had.  Now that I no longer own the 
ZX-M...


graywolf wrote:

Um...? If the trigger voltage was much too high, and the camera did 
not have overvoltage protection of some sort, your problem would not 
have been flakey flash operation, but rather burned out shutter 
electronics. I suspect it was a polarity problem. Some of the voltage 
isolation electronics are polarity sensitive, older mechanical sync 
were not. You most likely could have fixed the problem by switching 
the sync leads in the hotfoot of the flash.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



P. J. Alling wrote:

My ZX-M behaved very strangely with a cheap Vivitar 2000 flash 
mounted.  I'm sure the trigger voltage was much too high for it.  
Since then I've been careful not to mount high voltage flashes on 
newer camera bodies, (I've since sold the ZX-M).  I haven't used the 
Vivitar on anything other than older mechanical bodys since.


Glen wrote:


At 08:19 AM 10/27/2005, Mark Roberts wrote:


"William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>From: "Glen"
>>
>> So, I still don't know the true voltage and current specs for 
the hotshoe,
>> but at least I know it works with my old higher-voltage Sunpak 
flash. I'm

>> both surprised and delighted.
>
>The entire flash voltage issue is an invented one.

Possibly invented by lawyers with liability concerns.





No, I think there were some cameras made with limited hotshoe 
ratings. Perhaps those were Canon or some other brand? Apparently, 
many people assumed that all the new cameras had this limitation.


It's also a good way for camera store sales people to sell you 
completely new flash equipment, when you might not really need it. I 
suspect that some shops intentionally don't want to know which 
cameras are safe with higher voltages, because they want to sell 
more of their new lower-trigger-voltage flash units. I know that my 
local Pentax dealer claimed the *istDS needed a low trigger voltage.


In fact, the first person I reached at Pentax didn't know the 
answer, but even he seemed to think that perhaps the *istDS might 
need a low trigger voltage. It was only when he transferred me to 
Mark (a higher level of support), that I got an accurate description 
of the truth.



take care,
Glen











--
When you're worried or in doubt, 
	Run in circles, (scream and shout).




Re: Opinions of KENTMERE fiber based paper wanted

2005-10-28 Thread David Harris
Kentmere Art Classic is a highly regarded paper and
great for toning.

Dave



___ 
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! 
Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com



Re: PDML Map

2005-10-28 Thread P. J. Alling

danilo wrote:


me too, cannot see any map, even if "something" is shown in the place
where the map should be...

it seems some browser related problem, I've tried to look at the
source page, but google is not very keen to let you understand their
code... lol

I mean I've no time to understand all that pseudo obfuscated stuff...
I just gave up very soon...

Those of you that can manage to see it, which browser are you using??

ciao,
Danilo.


 


Firefox 1.0.4

--
When you're worried or in doubt, 
	Run in circles, (scream and shout).




Re: What's wrong with this picture?

2005-10-28 Thread P. J. Alling
It looks light struck to me.  I'd say either in the can or the lab 
screwed up in processing.


Toralf Lund wrote:


Does anyone have any idea about what went wrong here:

http://www.procaptura.com/~toralf/bilde.php?navn=error

?

I mean, where did the horizontal red band come from? This is a scan 
from film, and the band is clearly visible on the negative as well (as 
green rather than red, obviously.) So what may be causing this? Is it 
stray light? Shutter problem? Something wrong with the film or 
development? (Oh no, I'm feeding the digital buffs...) The same effect 
is visible on one more frame on the film. Another is almost completely 
covered in red, to put it that way, but that might be caused by 
something else entirely (filter?). The rest look just fine. Notice 
that the band is *vertical* on the film.


No, I don't think Super Goof was flying by when I took this picture...

- Toralf





--
When you're worried or in doubt, 
	Run in circles, (scream and shout).




Re: PESO

2005-10-28 Thread P. J. Alling
The tokina looks like a pretty good lens.  The only gripe I've got about 
the photo is that the green leaf below the flower looks to be in better 
focus than the flower itself.


Peter McIntosh wrote:


Hi all,

From my mum's garden.  Camera shop scanned negative for me, and the 
resultant jpeg left a bit to be desired. I quite like the end result, 
though.  Gave me a good introduction to Power Shop Pro...


All comments most welcome: I've only just started "improving" images 
electronically, so I'll take all the help I can get!  :-)


http://www.pbase.com/petergly/image/50865686

Ciao,

Peter in Sydney





--
When you're worried or in doubt, 
	Run in circles, (scream and shout).




Re: *ist D without a card

2005-10-28 Thread P. J. Alling
I think the camera should work without a card.  Well, at least allow you 
to change settings and control it from the computer with the remote 
assistant software.  Your *ist-D may have a problem.  For example, I've 
never been able to get the OK button on my *ist-D to fire the flash, (I 
don't know, maybe that function only works with certain flash models, 
but I haven't found/noticed any, documentation on that), I assume that 
it should work with any flash.  On the other hand that seems to be the 
only function that doesn't work, and it's not a big deal to me, so I 
haven't done anything about it.  Your *ist-D should at least let you 
change settings without a card, mine does. If you want to fire the 
shutter tethered without a card you'll have to set "shutter release 
without CF" to Yes.


Don Williams wrote:

I don't *want* to use the camera without a card by the way. After 
spending so much on the damned thing a card is not going to make much 
difference. I simply don't have a card. Its on the way from NJ. I 
thought I'd start using the camera in the meantime -- and found I 
couldn't -- that's all. Its not a big deal simply an observation. The 
camera will work, but not without a lens. This can't be changed.


Don W

skye wrote:


my understanding is that Don was spending much of the time with his
camera hooked up to his computer. In those cases where the photo is
being transferred directly between the PC and camera, you wouldn't, or
shouldn't, need to have a card. Certainly, using a card is one way to
get around that, but the interesting thing is that the camera won't
work without one. And I would like to stress that this is merely
interesting for me, not a huge problem.

On 10/27/05, Jens Bladt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Why is it intersting what the camera may or may not do without a 
memorycard?

Except perhaps for using it with a remote. Just put a card in it :-)
Regards












--
When you're worried or in doubt, 
	Run in circles, (scream and shout).




Re: PESO: Misc Photos

2005-10-28 Thread David

oops, try these

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dvb356/56945493/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dvb356/56945463/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dvb356/56945443/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dvb356/56945426/

Daniel J. Matyola wrote:

I got "You need to be signed in to see this page."




  




Re: Skills

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf

LOL (actually)

graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



William Robb wrote:



- Original Message - From: "graywolf" Subject: Re: Skills





I keep thinking I ought to mount my Oly on top of my Graphic. 
Exposure meter, test shots, shots when I think a sheet of 4x5 is too 
expensive. Only thing is I can not bring myself to drill a 1/4 inch 
hole in the top of the Graphic, it is just too pretty.



Have you thought about using Blu-Tack?
WW







Re: 50mm/F2 lens worth a CLA

2005-10-28 Thread Patrick Schork
Here are some test shots from my modification of a SMC-A 50/2

http://istds.blogspot.com/2005/10/modified-smc-502.html



On 10/28/05, Barry Rice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hey Folks,
>
> OK, I guess I'll probably tear the thing apart just to see what's inside it.
>
>
> B
>
> Barry A. Rice, Ph.D.
> Invasive Species Specialist
> Global Invasive Species Initiative
> The Nature Conservancy
> V: 530-754-8891
> http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu
>
>



Re: Cleaning Sensors

2005-10-28 Thread Godfrey DiGiorgi


On Oct 28, 2005, at 10:21 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:

I expect that the sensor cover is exceedingly thin, while blue tack  
sounds like it would be wonderful for cleaning relatively thick  
glass, I may look into it for lenses, I would be afraid of putting  
too much pressure on the sensor cover and causing it to crack.


I agree. Never stick *anything* to the sensor.

Godfrey



Re: new ebay scam

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf

Golly, Don, I figured you would recognize satire when you saw it.

graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Don Williams wrote:


Small pocket change?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/10/29/nebay29.xml 



graywolf wrote:

Second chance bids are supposed to come as BIN offers. Anything else 
is probably someone trying to pick up a bit of spare pocket change 
without working for it.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Peter Jordan wrote:

I had the same for an 85mm f/ 1.4 . What sort of gave the game away 
was that the e-mail arrived about 5 minutes after the end of the 
auction & I was only the 5th highest bidder.


The other 4 must have dropped out real fast.

Peter



- Original Message - From: "Derby Chang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 10:09 PM
Subject: Re: new ebay scam



dave g wrote:

Just want to mention a scam I haven't seen before. I bid on an 
item and

lost. I was contacted via ebay by a member who has 100% feedback over
about 5 years, in this case. The member offered me a second chance on
the item, saying the winner of the bid didn't come through. In this
particular case I had in fact already spoken with the real seller 
of the
item, and he lives in England. I noticed the other member who 
contacted
me is in the US, has nothing to do with cameras and asked me to 
reply to

the one I'd already written to to reach the real seller directly.
However, the whole thing looked quite legitimate as it went through
ebay's mail system. In any event, I sent a generic reply from an 
email
address that can't be traced to me (can't be too careful) and said 
"yes,

i'd love to buy the item" without mentioning item number or name. The
scammer in the first instance was interested in obtaining my name,
address, phone number, now asking for the item # and my member ID
(because he must be running this on quite a few people he couldn't 
know

which one I was from the email). I'll post any more info received.
Meanwhile I think ebay has closed that account.
Anyway, just another warning amidst the many out there.
dave



This happened to me too. I lost my bid on a K15mm. Then _two_ 
emails came in from different addresses, none of which were the 
seller's, offering a second chance bid. As someone said on this 
list, how dumb do they think we are?


I notified ebay, and got this response.

--

eBay Australia Customer Support wrote:

Hello,

Thank you for taking the time to write to eBay. My name is Cherie, 
and I

would be happy to assist you.

Please be aware that the second chance offer you have received is 
not from eBay. The offer would be from the original seller of the 
item. If it came from sfdst1 and canyon456, it is not real. For a 
second chance offer for item number 7542263736 to be legit, it 
would need to be sent by online_auction_broker. I can most 
certainly understand your concern regarding this "Second Chance 
Offer". I would like to take a moment to explain what a real one 
looks like, so that you are prepared for future transactions. When 
a seller offers a second chance offer to the next highest bidder, 
it is normally because the winner backed out, the next highest 
bidder would receive an email. A second chance offer will have a
link but it will clearly state the item number at the end of the 
link and you can pull that up by searching for that same number on 
the eBay site. (You do not have to click on the link, just search 
for the item number stated in the link) This part of the offer will 
look like the following:
This offer expires Thursday, Dec 19, 2002 20:02:26 PST.  To 
purchase this item, click the "Buy It Now" button located at the 
bottom of the following page:



http://cgi3.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewPersonalOffer&item=2900703 


504.

If they accept the second chance offer, a new fixed price listing 
will be automatically generated by the system. It will be the same 
listing that you bid on before only it will have a buy it now 
option with the price you bid on the item. (This would be your 
maximum bid that you placed in the original auction) eBay does not 
suggest that you complete transactions off-site and if your seller 
does want to follow through with the second chance offer, you can 
explain to them that you wish for it to be through eBay so that you 
are covered by eBay's Standard Purchase Protection Program.


If you have already received a second chance offer and it seems a 
bit off from the information that I have entered above, I suggest 
that you copy the email along with the headers into an email and 
sent it to us so
that we can investigate. At that time we will advise you if the 
email you received is legitimate or not.
The full header is extremely important, as we cannot take any kind 
of action without it. A header will look like a string of 
"nonsense

my day in SF with Shel...

2005-10-28 Thread Godfrey DiGiorgi
Shel missed the Norcal PDML gathering a couple of weeks ago. Since he  
owed me a cup of moka johina espresso rapide for something or other,  
I suggested we get together at his convenience and talk photography,  
shoot pictures, etc. Today was the day.


We met in Union Square, yakked and had a great lunch at Max's. Then  
wandered about the area for a while, visited the Fraenkel and Koch  
galleries. The day drew late, I had to leave.


I got a chance to play with his FA77 for a while. Damn him, I knew I  
wanted one already !!!


He had the chance to play with my DA14 and FA20-35...

A good day: fine conversation, decent weather, and hopefully a few  
interesting photos when the DNG Converter finishes crunching them for  
me to sort through.


Oh yeah: Shel *still* owes me that cuppa joe. ;-)

Godfrey



Re: Skills - was Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side

2005-10-28 Thread William Robb


- Original Message - 
From: "graywolf"

Subject: Re: Skills - was Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side


Usually, if someone has particularly consistent exposure he also has 
correct exposure unless there is an equipment failure. Consistent exposure 
requires quite a lot of skill.  However this thread is coming perilously 
close to the one which I was told not to post about anymore.



One of the guys I worked for when I was a kid was consistently about two 
stops overexposed.


William Robb



Tom C wrote:


Is consistent exposure the same as correct exposure?









Re: Skills

2005-10-28 Thread William Robb


- Original Message - 
From: "graywolf" 
Subject: Re: Skills






I keep thinking I ought to mount my Oly on top of my Graphic. Exposure 
meter, test shots, shots when I think a sheet of 4x5 is too expensive. 
Only thing is I can not bring myself to drill a 1/4 inch hole in the top 
of the Graphic, it is just too pretty.


Have you thought about using Blu-Tack?
WW




FA: Pentax SMCP-FA 50mm f:1.4 Auto-focus Lens

2005-10-28 Thread Gary Sibio

I'm selling the above on Ebay.

http://cm.ebay.com/cm/ck/1065-29296-2357-0?uid=16202250&site=0&ver=LCA080805&item=7558349951&lk=URL



Gary J Sibio
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://home.earthlink.net/~garysibio

There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand 
binary numbers and those who do not. 



--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.12.5/150 - Release Date: 10/27/2005




Re: Views on HP Photosmart S-20 film/slide scanner?

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf
I like mine ok, but I paid $69 for it when they were discontinued. I 
think that for $150 used you could get something a little more upscale.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Gaurav Aggarwal wrote:


Does anyone have any views on an HP Photosmart S20 film/slide scanner?
I am looking
to buy a film scanner since I do not shoot digital as yet. I have a
limited budget of $150
for a used scanner.

A guy on craigslist is selling this particular model so was wondering
if it is any good?
I intend to scan negatives for sharing pictures on the web and scan some slides
occasionally to get prints made from the digital files (family, travel etc).

Thanks,
Gaurav


 





Re: new ebay scam

2005-10-28 Thread Don Williams

Small pocket change?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/10/29/nebay29.xml

graywolf wrote:
Second chance bids are supposed to come as BIN offers. Anything else is 
probably someone trying to pick up a bit of spare pocket change without 
working for it.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Peter Jordan wrote:

I had the same for an 85mm f/ 1.4 . What sort of gave the game away 
was that the e-mail arrived about 5 minutes after the end of the 
auction & I was only the 5th highest bidder.


The other 4 must have dropped out real fast.

Peter



- Original Message - From: "Derby Chang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 10:09 PM
Subject: Re: new ebay scam



dave g wrote:


Just want to mention a scam I haven't seen before. I bid on an item and
lost. I was contacted via ebay by a member who has 100% feedback over
about 5 years, in this case. The member offered me a second chance on
the item, saying the winner of the bid didn't come through. In this
particular case I had in fact already spoken with the real seller of 
the

item, and he lives in England. I noticed the other member who contacted
me is in the US, has nothing to do with cameras and asked me to 
reply to

the one I'd already written to to reach the real seller directly.
However, the whole thing looked quite legitimate as it went through
ebay's mail system. In any event, I sent a generic reply from an email
address that can't be traced to me (can't be too careful) and said 
"yes,

i'd love to buy the item" without mentioning item number or name. The
scammer in the first instance was interested in obtaining my name,
address, phone number, now asking for the item # and my member ID
(because he must be running this on quite a few people he couldn't know
which one I was from the email). I'll post any more info received.
Meanwhile I think ebay has closed that account.
Anyway, just another warning amidst the many out there.
dave



This happened to me too. I lost my bid on a K15mm. Then _two_ emails 
came in from different addresses, none of which were the seller's, 
offering a second chance bid. As someone said on this list, how dumb 
do they think we are?


I notified ebay, and got this response.

--

eBay Australia Customer Support wrote:

Hello,

Thank you for taking the time to write to eBay. My name is Cherie, and I
would be happy to assist you.

Please be aware that the second chance offer you have received is not 
from eBay. The offer would be from the original seller of the item. 
If it came from sfdst1 and canyon456, it is not real. For a second 
chance offer for item number 7542263736 to be legit, it would need to 
be sent by online_auction_broker. I can most certainly understand 
your concern regarding this "Second Chance Offer". I would like to 
take a moment to explain what a real one looks like, so that you are 
prepared for future transactions. When a seller offers a second 
chance offer to the next highest bidder, it is normally because the 
winner backed out, the next highest bidder would receive an email. A 
second chance offer will have a
link but it will clearly state the item number at the end of the link 
and you can pull that up by searching for that same number on the 
eBay site. (You do not have to click on the link, just search for the 
item number stated in the link) This part of the offer will look like 
the following:
This offer expires Thursday, Dec 19, 2002 20:02:26 PST.  To purchase 
this item, click the "Buy It Now" button located at the bottom of the 
following page:



http://cgi3.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewPersonalOffer&item=2900703
504.

If they accept the second chance offer, a new fixed price listing 
will be automatically generated by the system. It will be the same 
listing that you bid on before only it will have a buy it now option 
with the price you bid on the item. (This would be your maximum bid 
that you placed in the original auction) eBay does not suggest that 
you complete transactions off-site and if your seller does want to 
follow through with the second chance offer, you can explain to them 
that you wish for it to be through eBay so that you are covered by 
eBay's Standard Purchase Protection Program.


If you have already received a second chance offer and it seems a bit 
off from the information that I have entered above, I suggest that 
you copy the email along with the headers into an email and sent it 
to us so
that we can investigate. At that time we will advise you if the email 
you received is legitimate or not.
The full header is extremely important, as we cannot take any kind of 
action without it. A header will look like a string of "nonsense" 
characters, similar to the example I have pasted for you below. You 
can find this by using the "properties" function of your email program.



--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc











Re: The Big Curve

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf
I kind of like it. The image on my screen however has no differentation 
between the sky and the screen. I would like to see the sky burnt in 
just a smidge. I if the sky is not paper white on the print disreguard 
this comment.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Christian wrote:



- Original Message - From: "frank theriault" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



everyone who's been to gfm will remember this favourite switchback 
curve:


http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3831059&size=lg

i dunno about this one, so be brutal as you please 



Brutal: I like it  Great composition, love the grain.  Reminds me 
of a hairpin curve in WRC and I'm waiting for the cars to come by 
doing the hand brake trick.


Christian





Re: Cleaning Sensors

2005-10-28 Thread P. J. Alling
I expect that the sensor cover is exceedingly thin, while blue tack 
sounds like it would be wonderful for cleaning relatively thick glass, I 
may look into it for lenses, I would be afraid of putting too much 
pressure on the sensor cover and causing it to crack. 


Don Williams wrote:

Although the *ist D is the first 'undedicated' digital camera I have 
it is not the first digital device with CCD sensors, or the first 
fussy optical device I've needed to clean. The work I do is fussy and 
dust blobs not only mess up the interpretation of photomicrographs 
they are terribly annoying as well.


I've tried all kind of cleaning methods. Methanol on Ross tissue. 
Brushes cleaned and prepared in different ways. Now I use 'Blue Tack'. 
Not only on sensors, but on microscope objectives, camera lenses, 
eyepieces and other optical components. Although Blue Tack *must* 
leave something behind after it is peeled off, this trace amount of 
plasticizer, or solvent, or whatever, is invisible, undetectable and 
does not effect the optical properties in any way. In my laboratory, 
in days of yore, we used collodion. A solution (in chloroform) was 
poured over the surface of the (very expensive) lens or flat and when 
it had dried was peeled off leaving a pristine surface. There are very 
expensive lens cleaning solutions available now that are used the same 
way. However, I clean microscope objectives that cost thousands of 
dollars with blue tack without the slightest qualm.


Cut a piece a little larger than the sensor, press it firmly to the 
surface making sure it makes contact everywhere. Then get hold of one 
end (I use forceps) and peel it off. The surface of the window will be 
as clean as you'll ever get it considering where it is inside the 
camera. I use the stuff over and over again keeping it in a dust free 
flat screw top container. I cleaned a lens five inches in diameter the 
other day. For economical reasons did it in sections. I used a piece 
of blue tack about an inch square and moved it about. To clean a very 
tiny lens -- 2mm or less in diameter (the end of a microscope 
objective) I make a sharp point and press in firmly again the mount 
including the metal.


If this worries you, or if the 'blue tack' you have is suspect, get 
hold of a dusty lens that doesn't matter too much and try it. Do it a 
dozen times with the same piece of 'tack' and you'll see how effective 
this method can be. You can find Blue Tack at Glubie Glue in Indiana 
-- I think.


Don

P. J. Alling wrote:

As long as you don't have any particularly recalcitrant dust it 
should be sufficient.


Shel Belinkoff wrote:


Time to clean the sensor in the DS ... locked up the mirror and saw the
sensor thingy.  It looks like there's a plastic layer over the 
actual pixel
things.  Correct?  Is that particularly delicate or is it for 
protection,

and, therefore, of a durable nature?

I was thinking of using a blower brush with the brush bristles 
removed.  Is

that OK?  Any other suggestions?


Shel

 









--
When you're worried or in doubt, 
	Run in circles, (scream and shout).




Re: Underwater cameras

2005-10-28 Thread Daniel J. Matyola
That figures!



Re: OT: Website software

2005-10-28 Thread David Mann

On Oct 29, 2005, at 11:35 AM, Kevin Waterson wrote:


vi


Aaarrghh :)

Java script does this nicely. I use it now and again for real  
estate clients.
Flash is the devils spawn and the only thing worse than flash is a  
flash coder ;)


I have seen at least two Flash sites that I thought were done well.   
One was something Kodak did to showcase something historic, and the  
other is a local pizza shop who have a very good web-based ordering  
system.


From what I've seen of the new Flash 8 it looks like a big  
improvement both in features and client-side performance.  But just  
like any other technology, good tools can still be used to create  
rubbish applications.  And annoying ads :(


FWIW I do have a copy of Flash here - the price of Studio MX  
(contains 4 apps) was exactly the same price as buying the two apps I  
wanted separately.  I must get around to learning it sometime.


- Dave



Re: Skills - was Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf
Usually, if someone has particularly consistent exposure he also has 
correct exposure unless there is an equipment failure. Consistent 
exposure requires quite a lot of skill.  However this thread is coming 
perilously close to the one which I was told not to post about anymore.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Tom C wrote:


Is consistent exposure the same as correct exposure?





Re: 50mm/F2 lens worth a CLA

2005-10-28 Thread Godfrey DiGiorgi
50mm focal length *is* a near perfect portrait lens field of view for  
the DSLRs.


An M50/2 is most likely not worth the CLA charge ... new Pentax A50/2  
lenses are available from B&H Photo for less than $70, and go used on  
Ebay for as low as $30 or so in good condition.


Godfrey


On Oct 28, 2005, at 8:05 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:


I sometimes like it as a portrait lens on the Pentax DSLR cameras 

Shel




[Original Message]
From: Barry Rice




This 50/2 lens is in good shape, but would need a CLA before it  
would be

even sellable. Is there any compelling reason to keep this lens? Any


secrets

about it, like "oh, man this lens is sweet when reversed" or  
anything like

that?









Re: Skills - was Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf

Cor, he paints with light!

Beat you to it, Cotty. HAR!

graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Frank said> 
 


draw your own conclusions...
 


-frank
   



Great, now i have to learn to paint.:-)

Dave



 





Re: OT: Website software

2005-10-28 Thread Boris Liberman

Hi!


So, which website editor do you guys use?
I can't do any HTML myself and I want to publish 3D panoramas made with e.i.
Iseemedia/PhotoVista (flash or java).
Good ideas are most welcome.


Jens, I am using ppwizard. But I am a programmer, so it comes natural to me.

You can read more about ppwizard here:

http://users.cyberone.com.au/dbareis/ppwizard.htm

But generally it requires that you write your own HTML by hand.

Boris



Re: Skills - was Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf
I do not think it is better. What we think is good changes with time. 
Many old photos look stilted and simple, but that is because we have 
different tastses today than people had back then. The interesting thing 
is the best photos from yesteryear are timeless. That will apply to 
today's images in the future as well.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Paul Stenquist wrote:

I have to come down on the side of overall improved quality. Magazine 
editors who don't pay a lot and are used to uneven contributions tell 
me that the work is noticeably better than it was five years ago. I 
see it in the web galleries as well.

On Oct 27, 2005, at 9:03 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:


On 27 Oct 2005 at 17:50, Shel Belinkoff wrote:

I disagree.  I think the quality bar has been lowered and that, 
while there are
many good images out there, they are good relative to most of the 
crap we see,

and there are fewer very good photographs.



I tend to agree with Herb, even the overall quality of the images 
posted to the
PDML has risen significantly since the widespread adoption of DSLRs. 
Content is
often of comparable quality though obviously individuals attraction 
to certain
subject matter varies. There are a lot of images that I've seen 
posted here in
the last few years that I'd happily hang on my wall. Of the other 
non-photo
centric lists that I subscribe to I've also seen a marked improvement 
in the

general quality of images presented too.


Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998








PESO: Others 2005 - 46q - GDG

2005-10-28 Thread Godfrey DiGiorgi
Don't know what moved me, but I decided to work with an exposure I  
made last fall when I returned home from San Francisco this evening.


  http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/42q.htm

Comments, critique, always appreciated.

best,
Godfrey



Re: Skills

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf
Back when I was in the Air Force (60-63) I had a friend that did a lot 
of weddings on the side. He had a stereo camera mounted on top of his 
Graphic. He used the stereo shots as a dollar builder, back in those 
days everyone sold 12 B&W 8x10's in an album, and no one bought extra 
shots.


I keep thinking I ought to mount my Oly on top of my Graphic. Exposure 
meter, test shots, shots when I think a sheet of 4x5 is too expensive. 
Only thing is I can not bring myself to drill a 1/4 inch hole in the top 
of the Graphic, it is just too pretty.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Scott Loveless wrote:


I've started doing this with the meter function in the Optio 750z when
I shoot with my C220 and Crown Graphic.  Plus, having a second (small)
camera is nice for the same reasons you stated in a later post.  So
far, I'm getting much more consistent results than with my old Minolta
Autometer (which isn't really saying all that much).

On 10/27/05, Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 


It just depends how you look at it, if you are walking in with your DSLR you
could well argue that you're taking in one of the most advanced light meters to
date. I now often use my DSLR to meter my MF exposures, I get far more
predictable results on film particularly in low light, I still have my Gossen
Luna Pro digital F but it's only a good tool for some jobs.


Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998


   




--
Scott Loveless
http://www.twosixteen.com

--
"You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman


 





Re: Cleaning Sensors

2005-10-28 Thread William Robb


- Original Message - 
From: "graywolf" 
Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors



I think I have mentioned the Wal-Mart tech who came across the lab to 
see what I wanted dragging a customers film on the floor behind him. 
Say, Wheatfield, did he learn his lab techniques from you ?


If he was stepping on them to, the yes.

William Robb



Re: Skills - was Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf
Back in the 80's when I was trying to make a living with my cameras, I 
expected to get 1 great shot out of 12 and that all 12 would be salable 
(Which is why I hated weddings there were always duds that were not the 
photographer's fault, often of critical shots. However, I think 
successful wedding photographers were far more controlling than I was 
comfortable with). I wonder what the ratio out there is now in this 
digital age.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Tom C wrote:

And you base that on what % of the total number of photographs taken 
worldwide that you actually see?


And of that total number, on how many was the person behind the lens 
actually *trying* to create a 'very good photograph' versus just 
taking a photo?


Tom C.





From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Skills - was  Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 17:50:06 -0700

I disagree.  I think the quality bar has been lowered and that, while 
there
are many good images out there, they are good relative to most of the 
crap

we see, and there are fewer very good photographs.

Shel


> [Original Message]
> From: Herb Chong <

> that may be the case, but nonetheless, there are more really good 
images

out
> there now than there ever were before, if only because the total is so
much
> higher.

> From: "William Robb" <

> > I suspect that the % of truly skilled pro photographers is now 
hovering

at
> > an all time low.










Re: Skills - was Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf
PPA is the Professional Photographers of America. An organization for 
portrait studio owners and wedding photographers. It has the same 
relation to photography that your National Cheese Council does to 
cheese. It is a sales aid for members.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Shel Belinkoff wrote:


I bet it's the lab's work that's saving his ass.  Does he process the film?
Does he make the prints?  It doesn't matter, really.  If he, and others,
want to skirt by and rely on the labs and computers to get good prints,
that's their business.  That's the new way to do things.  I'm just an old
fart who believes that getting it right in the camera means better results
over all.

I don't know what PP of A is, and that he sometimes wins awards is
irrelevant.  The national Cheese Council once gave an award to Velveeta.
Velveeta is a "good enough" cheese 

Shel 

 


[Original Message]
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   



 


His work is so good it's stunning. He frequently wins PP of A
   


competitions.
 

   


What a depressing attitude.  "Good enough most of the time" seems to be
 


the
 


prevailing attitude these past few years.  Would you buy a product that
 


was
 


advertised as "Good enough most of the time?"I just had this
thought about birth control devices that were good enough most of the
 

time. 
 

Shel 



 


[Original Message]
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   


I have a friend who's been making his living as a wedding and portrait
   


photographer for the last 20 years and did it part time for the previous
20. He never takes an exposure reading. I know there's a lot of skill
involved but the film latitude still saves his butt on occasion.
 


The old bright sun, cloudy bright, heavy overcast settings are good
   


enough for color negative film most of the time.
 


Tom Reese


   

 





 





Re: Cleaning Sensors

2005-10-28 Thread David Mann

On Oct 28, 2005, at 11:44 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:

Nothing is worse than having to clean film. My sensor gets nowhere  
near as dirty as do those negatives in the lab. I used to figure at  
least thirty minutes cleaning every scan. UGH.


That's why I started using dICE with my scanner.  It takes a bit  
longer to scan but it saves me lots of time later.


Dust wasn't too much of a problem at 2400ppi but at 4800 it picks up  
so much microscopic muck that you just don't want to bother :)


- Dave



Re: Skills - was Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf

I think I have to agree with that, Shel.

graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Shel Belinkoff wrote:


It's just that attitude that has contributed to the lowering of the quality
bar.  Usable results - maybe.  But high quality results - maybe not.

Shel 



 


[Original Message]
From: Tom Reese 
   



 


They don't need to worry about exposure with color negative film. There's
enough latitude that a three stop miss will still give usable results.

   


I've saw evidence of that at the photo shop. We used to do a lot of
processing for pros. When they started making the transition to digital
you could see who really had a handle on exposure and who didn't. Not
many did.
 





 





Re: What's wrong with this picture?

2005-10-28 Thread Rick Womer
Was this roll of film in checked luggage on an
airplane?  It looks like the work of one of the
high-dose Xray machines that scans checked luggage.

Rick

--- Toralf Lund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Does anyone have any idea about what went wrong
> here:
> 
>
http://www.procaptura.com/~toralf/bilde.php?navn=error
> 
> ?
> 
> I mean, where did the horizontal red band come from?
> This is a scan from 
> film, and the band is clearly visible on the
> negative as well (as green 
> rather than red, obviously.) So what may be causing
> this? Is it stray 
> light? Shutter problem? Something wrong with the
> film or development? 
> (Oh no, I'm feeding the digital buffs...) The same
> effect is visible on 
> one more frame on the film. Another is almost
> completely covered in red, 
> to put it that way, but that might be caused by
> something else entirely 
> (filter?). The rest look just fine. Notice that the
> band is *vertical* 
> on the film.
> 
> No, I don't think Super Goof was flying by when I
> took this picture...
> 
> - Toralf
> 
> 





__ 
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 
http://mail.yahoo.com



Re: Skills - was Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf
Wow, thanks, Frank. I have been saying that almost since my first day on 
the list. But then I am a guy who had been told by lab owners' that my 
exposures were the most consistant they had ever seen. Too bad my 
clients did not think that was real important. While I was make a 
midnight snack, I was thinking that nitpickers do not make very 
successful business people.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



frank theriault wrote:


On 10/27/05, Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 


That's an understatement.

   


I've run into a lot of pro photographers who are only able to do what they do
because the automation in the camera has enough skill to cover for them.
I suspect that the % of truly skilled pro photographers is now hovering at
an all time low.
 


I've saw evidence of that at the photo shop. We used to do a lot of
processing for pros. When they started making the transition to digital
you could see who really had a handle on exposure and who didn't. Not
many did.

   



the fellow who runs the lab at which i get all my b&w stuff processed
tells me that he can tell by looking at exposed film who exposes
manually and who sets their body on auto.  those who expose manually
have much more consistent exposures.  those that rely on their cameras
have exposures all over the place.

draw your own conclusions...

-frank


--
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson


 





Re: Skills - was Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf
Well, from my experience to be a financially successful professional 
photographer you need three things.


1. A really tough ego.
2. Relentless self promotion.
3. An eye for an image.
All else is optional.

graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Mark Roberts wrote:


"William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

 


From: "Herb Chong"

   

the assumption among many professional photographers is that you have the 
skill or you wouldn't be there.
 

That is not a safe assumption for them to make. 
   



That's an understatement.

 

I've run into a lot of pro photographers who are only able to do what they do 
because the automation in the camera has enough skill to cover for them.
I suspect that the % of truly skilled pro photographers is now hovering at 
an all time low.
   



I've saw evidence of that at the photo shop. We used to do a lot of
processing for pros. When they started making the transition to digital
you could see who really had a handle on exposure and who didn't. Not
many did.


 





Re: Sharpening

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf
I was looking up whetstones today, I thought, "Wow, a thread about it on 
the PDML". I am somewhat disappointed.


In case anyone is interested, I discovered that black arkansas stones 
are again pretty much available again. And that there is something 
called  translucent arkansas stones that are supposed to be even finer 
grain (However the major supplier of them claims there is no real 
difference between a hard, black, and translucent stone; but does charge 
more for the black and a lot more for the translucent).


How's this for staying on subject while going off topic?

graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Shel Belinkoff wrote:


Interesting and worthwhile article about sharpening digital and scanned
images:

http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/23471.html?cprose=daily


Shel 



 





Re: Sent the Dark Side to My Brother

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf

It has happend already. In the movies.

graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Cotty wrote:


On 27/10/05, Frantisek, discombobulated, unleashed:

 


Back like 30 or more years ago, in the Communist Czechoslovakian
republic, there was a big meeting of the Party brass with journalists
coming to it, including few foreign. And in walked a cameraman with
a Steadycam and began "shooting" (for those who don't know, in
steadycam you might look like a robocop or terminator holding some
rambo-style cannon ). Guess what happened - guards sounded alarm,
the brass ducked under their table, the police jumped at the brass to
bodily protect them and others jumped at the poor cameraman pinning
him to the floor... I am sure the communists officials wetted
themselves when they saw the guy with the big something aiming at
them, "horror it's the latest Wes-Pac weapon here" ;-)
   



Classic.

Actually I'm surprised nobody has ever actually assassinated a political
figure using a video camera as the weapon. Hollowed out, it could provide
plenty of cavity space for high explosives or projectile weaponry. Access
is excellent, and they even stand the target in front of the thing for you.

One day it will happen, and then all stills and TV cameras will be
forever suspect and subjected to stringent tests. Mark my words.




Cheers,
 Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_



 





Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf
35-40 years I guess, but it has improve a bunch in the last 20. The 
costly part is setting up the program. Once that is done it is quite 
cheap (reletively) to run a few parts, or even just one, at a time.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Rob Studdert wrote:


On 28 Oct 2005 at 13:06, graywolf wrote:

 

Apparently you are not aware of how numerical contolled machine tools 
work. It is a matter of loading the correct program, chucking the 
correct piece of metal, and hitting the on button. Once you have the 
program, it takes only  ten minutes or so to set up to produce a 
particular part.
   



How old is NC technology?


Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998


 





Re: Underwater cameras

2005-10-28 Thread Christian


- Original Message - 
From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 10:02 PM
Subject: Re: Underwater cameras



Thanks Herb and Christian for the help with the camera.
I think I can give my friend a bit of direction now.


Your welcome.


Nice Pictures, Christian.


Thanks, Bill!

Christian



Re: Underwater cameras

2005-10-28 Thread Christian


- Original Message - 
From: "Daniel J. Matyola" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 9:51 PM
Subject: Re: Underwater cameras



Wonderful shots!  Thank you very much for sharing them.


Thanks.

I'll have to get a housing for my Optio S before I go to Maui andKauai 
next year!


Unfortunately the S is one camera for which a housing is not made

Christian



Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side

2005-10-28 Thread Christian


- Original Message - 
From: "graywolf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



I deliberately composted it 


I've composted many a film image.. ;-)

Christian



Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf
LOL! Yep, I trashed that photo. My smell checker missed that stinker. 
Meant composed of course.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



graywolf wrote:

Just to put this stuff into perspective. With my first camera I took a 
photo of water flowing over a dam under a bridge. I had to have a 
buddy hold my legs while hanging upside down. I deliberately composted 
it at a 45 degree angle as that is the way I thought it looked best. I 
took the film to my neighborhood drugstore for processing, as we all 
did back in the early '50's. They did not even print the negative!


I raised so much hell about it that my Dad gave me a darkroom outfit 
for my Birthday that year, which is how I happened to get interested 
in serious photography. So, in a way, you guys can blame that 
drugstore for your having to put up with me.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Mark Roberts wrote:


frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

 


On 10/27/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

  

Clerk: Out of 36 shots, 10 were out of focus, 15 were blurry, you 
accidently took three pictures of the floor, you had tilted 
horizons in two others and the other six were mediocre compositions."



geez, that's a pretty good roll by my standards...
  



But you'd have to explain to the clerk why you only wanted prints of the
15 blurry ones! (and maybe the three of the floor...)


 








Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf
I bought my first Pentax in 1961 or 62. Pentax has always seemed behind 
the times. Yes they actually invented a lot of the neat stuff that made 
SLR's better for general photography, but they often licensed those 
inventions to competitors rather than using them themselves. Except for 
that brief  exciting period from the Spotmatic to the LX, they have 
never been on the front line of the technology. Why should I expect it 
to be different now. What they have always managed to do was to make a 
competent affordable camera, and that does not seem to have changed a 
bit with digital.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Tom C wrote:

I never said the *ist D was functionally obsolete.  I wasn't making a 
case for comparing images generated from 6mp vs 8mp sensors.  Actually 
I was going down another line of thinking.


I was saying that many seem to express the attitude of "Oh well, this 
is what we have come to expect from Pentax.  They are a smaller 
company. They don't make their own sensors. This makes them dependent 
on other suppliers.  Therefore they are slow to release new products. 
Therefore they are behind the curve.".  My question was, in view of 
the above, "Is that not a factor to consider when making a purchasing 
decision?".  I think the answer to that can be nothing but 'Yes'.


It won't be the only factor to consider and it will be more heavily 
weighted by some than by others.



Tom C.





From: graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 12:48:09 -0400

Not really, first the current camera is hardly functionally obsolete. 
Second I doubt anyone is going to be able to tell the difference 
between a 6mp and an 8mp image. Linear magnification is the important 
spec and that has to double to be a really meaningful improvement 
(that is 4x megapixels, for the math impaired).


I find it interesting how many people make a decision based upon 
features they never have used, and probably would not use if they had 
them. But they look sooo good on that spec sheet. Me, I don't 
care how much sizzle that ad has, I want the steak to taste good; but 
others seem to like the taste of paper.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Tom C wrote:

There seems to be an ongoing defense of Pentax in regards to them 
being a smaller firm, not being able to get the sensors, etc.  Well 
when comparing camera brands, models available, and deciding on 
purchases, isn't this a relevant factor?




Tom C.





From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: 
Subject: Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 06:28:40 -0600


- Original Message - From: "Rob Studdert"
Subject: Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side




I guess my question is how the heck do other manufacturers manage 
to sell one
camera that's higher spec'd than a *ist D if that's all anyone 
actually needs?




I don't think anyone would argue with you on that one Rob.
I guess my question is who is making APS-C or larger sensors in the 
10-12 mp range that Pentax can buy from?


William Robb
















Re: PESO - Michael's Spoon

2005-10-28 Thread Shel Belinkoff
Hi Bob ...

Why Bob, don't you know the photo was staged and that the razor blade was a
prop 

Thanks for looking and for your comment.  Most appreciate both ;-))

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: Bob Sullivan 

> Like Frank says, a haunting photo.
> It's a simple photo, well executed...
> and just screams DANGER to me.
> Regards,  Bob S.
>


> > http://home.earthlink.net/~shel-pix/mikesspoon.html




Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf
Just to put this stuff into perspective. With my first camera I took a 
photo of water flowing over a dam under a bridge. I had to have a buddy 
hold my legs while hanging upside down. I deliberately composted it at a 
45 degree angle as that is the way I thought it looked best. I took the 
film to my neighborhood drugstore for processing, as we all did back in 
the early '50's. They did not even print the negative!


I raised so much hell about it that my Dad gave me a darkroom outfit for 
my Birthday that year, which is how I happened to get interested in 
serious photography. So, in a way, you guys can blame that drugstore for 
your having to put up with me.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Mark Roberts wrote:


frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

 


On 10/27/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

   


Clerk: Out of 36 shots, 10 were out of focus, 15 were blurry, you accidently took 
three pictures of the floor, you had tilted horizons in two others and the other six 
were mediocre compositions."
 


geez, that's a pretty good roll by my standards...
   



But you'd have to explain to the clerk why you only wanted prints of the
15 blurry ones! (and maybe the three of the floor...)


 





Re: PESO - Michael's Spoon

2005-10-28 Thread Bob Sullivan
Shel,
Like Frank says, a haunting photo.
It's a simple photo, well executed...
and just screams DANGER to me.
Regards,  Bob S.

On 10/27/05, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> An oldie 
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~shel-pix/mikesspoon.html
>
> Spotmatic, ST 50/1.4, Tri-x in Acufine, EI 1200
>
>
> Shel
>
>
>



Re: new ebay scam

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf
Second chance bids are supposed to come as BIN offers. Anything else is 
probably someone trying to pick up a bit of spare pocket change without 
working for it.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Peter Jordan wrote:

I had the same for an 85mm f/ 1.4 . What sort of gave the game away 
was that the e-mail arrived about 5 minutes after the end of the 
auction & I was only the 5th highest bidder.


The other 4 must have dropped out real fast.

Peter



- Original Message - From: "Derby Chang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 10:09 PM
Subject: Re: new ebay scam



dave g wrote:


Just want to mention a scam I haven't seen before. I bid on an item and
lost. I was contacted via ebay by a member who has 100% feedback over
about 5 years, in this case. The member offered me a second chance on
the item, saying the winner of the bid didn't come through. In this
particular case I had in fact already spoken with the real seller of 
the

item, and he lives in England. I noticed the other member who contacted
me is in the US, has nothing to do with cameras and asked me to 
reply to

the one I'd already written to to reach the real seller directly.
However, the whole thing looked quite legitimate as it went through
ebay's mail system. In any event, I sent a generic reply from an email
address that can't be traced to me (can't be too careful) and said 
"yes,

i'd love to buy the item" without mentioning item number or name. The
scammer in the first instance was interested in obtaining my name,
address, phone number, now asking for the item # and my member ID
(because he must be running this on quite a few people he couldn't know
which one I was from the email). I'll post any more info received.
Meanwhile I think ebay has closed that account.
Anyway, just another warning amidst the many out there.
dave



This happened to me too. I lost my bid on a K15mm. Then _two_ emails 
came in from different addresses, none of which were the seller's, 
offering a second chance bid. As someone said on this list, how dumb 
do they think we are?


I notified ebay, and got this response.

--

eBay Australia Customer Support wrote:

Hello,

Thank you for taking the time to write to eBay. My name is Cherie, and I
would be happy to assist you.

Please be aware that the second chance offer you have received is not 
from eBay. The offer would be from the original seller of the item. 
If it came from sfdst1 and canyon456, it is not real. For a second 
chance offer for item number 7542263736 to be legit, it would need to 
be sent by online_auction_broker. I can most certainly understand 
your concern regarding this "Second Chance Offer". I would like to 
take a moment to explain what a real one looks like, so that you are 
prepared for future transactions. When a seller offers a second 
chance offer to the next highest bidder, it is normally because the 
winner backed out, the next highest bidder would receive an email. A 
second chance offer will have a
link but it will clearly state the item number at the end of the link 
and you can pull that up by searching for that same number on the 
eBay site. (You do not have to click on the link, just search for the 
item number stated in the link) This part of the offer will look like 
the following:
This offer expires Thursday, Dec 19, 2002 20:02:26 PST.  To purchase 
this item, click the "Buy It Now" button located at the bottom of the 
following page:



http://cgi3.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewPersonalOffer&item=2900703
504.

If they accept the second chance offer, a new fixed price listing 
will be automatically generated by the system. It will be the same 
listing that you bid on before only it will have a buy it now option 
with the price you bid on the item. (This would be your maximum bid 
that you placed in the original auction) eBay does not suggest that 
you complete transactions off-site and if your seller does want to 
follow through with the second chance offer, you can explain to them 
that you wish for it to be through eBay so that you are covered by 
eBay's Standard Purchase Protection Program.


If you have already received a second chance offer and it seems a bit 
off from the information that I have entered above, I suggest that 
you copy the email along with the headers into an email and sent it 
to us so
that we can investigate. At that time we will advise you if the email 
you received is legitimate or not.
The full header is extremely important, as we cannot take any kind of 
action without it. A header will look like a string of "nonsense" 
characters, similar to the example I have pasted for you below. You 
can find this by using the "properties" function of your email program.



--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc










Re: My new Macro - a lemon.

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf
The is actually a slight change of angle of view with aperture. It is 
more obvious very close distances. However, I was not able to load your 
photos to look at them, and so have no idea how much you are talking about.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Tim Øsleby wrote:


Just did a test with another lens. Now I am a tiny bit ashamed. No I am very
ashamed. The spec is in frame, at same spot with the other lens. Don't
really know if I shall laugh or cry. 

Haven't had dust on sensor until now. 
First I saw the dust in the lens. Didn't think much about it, just did some

test shots. And there it was. The whole situation is kind of funny. In a
week or two I will be able to laugh over it ;-)

Focus still seems a bit odd. Think I'll sleep on it. 


Never the less: I am sorry for rambling about nothing. Hopefully I gave you
a good laugh on my expense. 

Thank you to every body who tried to sort this out. 



Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)

Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds 
(Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)


 


-Original Message-
From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 29. oktober 2005 01:40
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: My new Macro - a lemon.


- Original Message -
From: "Tim Øsleby"
Subject: RE: My new Macro - a lemon.


   


First test shots. Done in a hurry. Roughly converted
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fototim/sets/1234555/
 


I'm surprised that there is enough depth of focus to bring a speck on the
lens into that sharp of focus.

William Robb


   







 





Re: Epson Stylus R1800 Ink Jet printer?

2005-10-28 Thread Godfrey DiGiorgi
I went through the printer selection process just a few weeks ago and  
ended up with the R2400, big brother to the R1800.


If your goal is primarily color prints, and glossy surface, the R1800  
is probably a better choice. If you need to print a lot of B&W and  
particularly prefer matte papers, the R2400 is what you want.


The R2400 differs from the R1800 in having larger ink tanks and not  
having the clear-gloss ink that helps so much with glossy surface  
papers. What it does have is two different inks for black (photo and  
matte black) which allows optimized printing to matte surface for B&W  
prints.


I am extremely pleased with the R2400. Several folks on this list  
were quite helpful in recommending it too.


Godfrey



On Oct 28, 2005, at 9:32 AM, Jack Davis wrote:


I'd appreciate any opinions +/- about the Epson R1800. Whatever your
experience or have heard about it.
Have a tired Epson 820, the product of which has been sort of a
acceptable 'proof', but now feel it's time to get more serious about a
home produced final print.




RE: 50mm/F2 lens worth a CLA

2005-10-28 Thread Shel Belinkoff
I sometimes like it as a portrait lens on the Pentax DSLR cameras 

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: Barry Rice 

> This 50/2 lens is in good shape, but would need a CLA before it would be
> even sellable. Is there any compelling reason to keep this lens? Any
secrets
> about it, like "oh, man this lens is sweet when reversed" or anything like
> that?




Re: Cleaning Sensors

2005-10-28 Thread Shel Belinkoff
I do, Boris ...

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: Boris Liberman 

> Shel, I have a suggestion which is related to your question only 
> indirectly. When you switch lenses I (humbly) suggest you turn off the 
> camera... I started doing it about a month ago. I should say that it 
> does indeed reduce the amount of dust your sensor may be collecting. It 
> did for me... And I change the lenses outdoors at least half of the time.




Re: M 2.8/35 mm - general aperture problem?

2005-10-28 Thread Bob Sullivan
I've had two M28/2.8's cleaned for slow aperture blades.
Regards,  Bob S.

On 10/28/05, Ralf R. Radermacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Today, I've received my 'new' M2.8/35 mm and the aperture closes
> extremely slow. I had just discarded another lens of this type for
> exactly the same reason. Never had such trouble with any of my other
> Pentax lenses.
>
> Is there something about the 2.8/35 mm?
>
> Ralf
>
> --
> Ralf R. Radermacher  -  DL9KCG  -  Köln/Cologne, Germany
> private homepage: http://www.fotoralf.de
> manual cameras and photo galleries - updated Jan. 10, 2005
> Contarex - Kiev 60 - Horizon 202 - P6 mount lenses
>
>



Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side

2005-10-28 Thread Herb Chong
i posted earlier but maybe it didn't get through to everyone - $1699USD list 
price. by being first at that price/spec point, it is setting the benchmark 
by which all successors are judged. the AF and FPS capabilities are much 
higher than other cameras at this price point have been in the past.


Herb
- Original Message - 
From: "Gonz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 2:52 PM
Subject: Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side


I've heard on DPR that details of the d200 have already been leaked, and 
its coming in at about $1700-1800.





Re: My new Macro - a lemon.

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf

and it take quite a bit of dust to affect the image.

graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



William Robb wrote:



- Original Message - From: "Tom C"
Subject: RE: My new Macro - a lemon.


The dust would probably bother me.  Is the dust visible in the 
captured image?  If not, then maybe it's not a big issue.



If it is a used lens, and has actually been used, it is going to have 
dust inside it.

Some things just can't be helped.

William Robb






Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side

2005-10-28 Thread Herb Chong

Nikon designed them. Sony made at least one of them.

Herb
- Original Message - 
From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 12:42 PM
Subject: Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side


Didn't Nikon have to start making their own sensors to get what they 
wanted?





Re: M 2.8/35 mm - general aperture problem?

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf
25 year old lenses often have what we tech types refer to as "Gunk!" in 
them. It does tend to slow down the diaphagm action. A CLA will most 
likely make it work OK for another 20-25 years.




graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Ralf R. Radermacher wrote:


Hello all,

Today, I've received my 'new' M2.8/35 mm and the aperture closes
extremely slow. I had just discarded another lens of this type for
exactly the same reason. Never had such trouble with any of my other
Pentax lenses. 


Is there something about the 2.8/35 mm?

Ralf

 





Re: A* 200 f2.8 ED versus A* 300 f4

2005-10-28 Thread Herb Chong
well, i only have one AF extender. i don't use my 1.4X-L or 2X-L extenders 
except on the A* 400/2.8, and even then very seldom. the 1.7X is AF and that 
is the main reason. i decided that i just didn't like the Sigma AF ones i 
had and got rid of them.


Herb...
- Original Message - 
From: "Kenneth Waller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 12:24 PM
Subject: Re: A* 200 f2.8 ED versus A* 300 f4


I also carry a 1.4 xs extender 100% of the time but only use it sparingly. 
For local wildlife, I'll take the 600 maybe 1 in 4 times and only bother to 
set up about a quarter of the time I take it (locally - out of the car). 
When I've got the 600 in the field I also have a 1.4 xl & 2.0 xl extender 
but very seldom use the 2.0.





Re: Cleaning Sensors

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf
I think I have mentioned the Wal-Mart tech who came across the lab to 
see what I wanted dragging a customers film on the floor behind him. 
Say, Wheatfield, did he learn his lab techniques from you ?


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Tom C wrote:

Could also be the use of minilabs operated by untrained or uncaring 
personnel in a rush to get the stuff out the door.


Hadn't thought about the point source thing.  WR surprises me 
sometimes. :)


Tom C.





From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: 
Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 10:07:34 -0600


- Original Message - From: "graywolf"
Subject: Re: Cleaning Sensors


Howcome so many folks here have/had all these troubles with dust and 
scratches on negatives?



I think the advent of point source scanners showed a lot of scratches 
that were invisible with diffusion printing.
A lot of my negs from one lab were pretty much unusable as scanned 
negs, but just fine if enlarged in a darkroom.


William Robb










Re: Paw: My first Cover Photo

2005-10-28 Thread Ann Sanfedele
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
>   Hi Gang.
> 
> Its not the cover of the Rolling Stone, yet, but this shot made the the cover 
> of: Local
> paper called
> Farm and Rural Life.
> 
>   
> http://photobucket.com/albums/v408/divad_b/?action=view¤t=KVA_PRS_8389.jpg
> 
> Hey, its a start.LOL
> 
> Now i have to start shooting cows & sheep, as well as horses. LOL
> 
> Comments welcome.
> 
> Dave


Nice one, Dave! you sharing tech info?

ann horsie fan
>



Re: 50mm/F2 lens worth a CLA

2005-10-28 Thread graywolf

If you have to ask, then the answer is probably, no.

graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Barry Rice wrote:


Hey Folks,

I just found an old pentax M 50/2 lens. I've already got a Pentax M50/1.4
and an F 50/2.8 macro.
This 50/2 lens is in good shape, but would need a CLA before it would be
even sellable. Is there any compelling reason to keep this lens? Any secrets
about it, like "oh, man this lens is sweet when reversed" or anything like
that?

B

Barry A. Rice, Ph.D.
Invasive Species Specialist
Global Invasive Species Initiative
The Nature Conservancy
V: 530-754-8891
http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu 



 





Re: OT: Opinions of KENTMERE fiber based paper wanted

2005-10-28 Thread Ann Sanfedele
Scott Loveless wrote:
> 
> Ann,
> 
> Check the processing forums at photodotnet.  You might also search
> through the large format forums.  Kentmere is mentioned frequently.

Thanks Scott -
I was hoping for a quick nod or nay from one of
"us"  - 
this is for a friend, not me. I was going to
suggest he look
at photo.net forums but he isn't on photo.net

I'm sure he did a bit of looking on the web but
often there is
an awful lot to weed through that is all praise
and not personal
experience. 

I guess if it is mentioned frequently that may be
a good sign.

ann


> 
> On 10/28/05, Ann Sanfedele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Anyone use this stuff?
> > I have a friend who asked me to ask.
> > He is going to be taking an advanced printing
> > independent study class. I never heard of this
> > paper myself
> >
> > T I A
> >
> > annsan
> >
> >
> 
> --
> Scott Loveless
> http://www.twosixteen.com
> 
> --
> "You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman



Re: Roadkill as Art

2005-10-28 Thread Herb Chong

http://www.thejournalnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051028/NEWS02/510280384/1017

Herb...
- Original Message - 
From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 10:35 PM
Subject: Re: Skills - was Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side



I don't know but I can add to the thread (surprise). A local and notable
photographer here was pushing a series a couple of years back. All the 
pics
were of road-kill, squashed, spattered, dried, flattened, sun bleached, 
all

wonderful stuff.

I just think of how many missed photo-opportunities I've blissfully rolled 
over
through the years and frankly it doesn't worry me one bit. If the pics 
were
used to push the plight of some particular furry creature that had a habit 
of
becoming ground into the asphalt at a certain traditional crossing point 
I'd
understand but really who really wants to view pic after pic of squashed 
wild

life?





Re: M 2.8/35 mm - general aperture problem?

2005-10-28 Thread Collin Brendemuehl

At 18:58 2005.10.28, you wrote:

Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 23:38:05 +0200
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ralf R. Radermacher)
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: M 2.8/35 mm - general aperture problem?
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> It happens to all lenses, LF, MF, and Miniature.

Fine, Colin. You may sit down again.

But we all know that there are lenses which are more prone to this kind
of failure than others.

Meanwhile, more helpful comments from other sources suggest that there
is indeed a general problem with the 2.8/35 mm.

Ralf


My point was that it's not a particular problem to any specific lens.
(Though it may be so for some cheap designs with bad lubrication.)

Col(l)in
KC8TKA

p.s. Interestingly, your "smiley" didn't make it to the digest.
Rather, Eudora Pro 6.2 converted it to a smiley icon, sort of the way 
MS Word does it.

And your sig was eliminated from the digest as well.  But it's in the archive.





Re: Underwater cameras

2005-10-28 Thread William Robb

Thanks Herb and Christian for the help with the camera.
I think I can give my friend a bit of direction now.
Nice Pictures, Christian.

William Robb





Re: Underwater cameras

2005-10-28 Thread Daniel J. Matyola
Wonderful shots!  Thank you very much for sharing them.
I'll have to get a housing for my Optio S before I go to Maui andKauai next 
year!



Re: PDML Map

2005-10-28 Thread Daniel J. Matyola
I have no trouble using the map with Firefox.  Check your settings.



Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side

2005-10-28 Thread Paul Stenquist
I remember seeing it the first time at a machine shop in Chicago in the 
late seventies. So it's been around quite a while.

Paul
On Oct 28, 2005, at 6:57 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:


On 28 Oct 2005 at 13:06, graywolf wrote:


Apparently you are not aware of how numerical contolled machine tools
work. It is a matter of loading the correct program, chucking the
correct piece of metal, and hitting the on button. Once you have the
program, it takes only  ten minutes or so to set up to produce a
particular part.


How old is NC technology?


Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998





Re: OT: Opinions of KENTMERE fiber based paper wanted

2005-10-28 Thread Scott Loveless
Ann,

Check the processing forums at photodotnet.  You might also search
through the large format forums.  Kentmere is mentioned frequently.

On 10/28/05, Ann Sanfedele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anyone use this stuff?
> I have a friend who asked me to ask.
> He is going to be taking an advanced printing
> independent study class. I never heard of this
> paper myself
>
> T I A
>
> annsan
>
>


--
Scott Loveless
http://www.twosixteen.com

--
"You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman



Re: PESO: Misc Photos

2005-10-28 Thread Daniel J. Matyola
I got "You need to be signed in to see this page."



Re: M 2.8/35 mm - general aperture problem?

2005-10-28 Thread Gonz
Had the same problem with one I bought from ebay, the seller sent me an 
A version to replace the bad M version.



Ralf R. Radermacher wrote:

Hello all,

Today, I've received my 'new' M2.8/35 mm and the aperture closes
extremely slow. I had just discarded another lens of this type for
exactly the same reason. Never had such trouble with any of my other
Pentax lenses. 


Is there something about the 2.8/35 mm?

Ralf
 




Re: What's wrong with this picture?

2005-10-28 Thread Powell Hargrave
Looks to me like the following shot was so over exposed that light went
through the film, bounced around, and effected that frame on the take-up reel.

Powell


>In any case, I've now also done a quick scan of the entire negative 
>strip. Not a very good one as I used a plain A4 document scanner, but I 
>think it illustrates the problem well enough. You'll find it here:
>
>http://www.procaptura.com/~toralf/bilde.php?navn=neg
>
>- Toralf
>



Re: 50mm/F2 lens worth a CLA

2005-10-28 Thread Jim Colwell
Barry, don't tear it apart yet - it will make a fine loupe for viewing
slides on a light table or other stuff where you want to get up close and
personal.




RE: My new Macro - a lemon.

2005-10-28 Thread Tim Øsleby
Just did a test with another lens. Now I am a tiny bit ashamed. No I am very
ashamed. The spec is in frame, at same spot with the other lens. Don't
really know if I shall laugh or cry. 

Haven't had dust on sensor until now. 
First I saw the dust in the lens. Didn't think much about it, just did some
test shots. And there it was. The whole situation is kind of funny. In a
week or two I will be able to laugh over it ;-)

Focus still seems a bit odd. Think I'll sleep on it. 

Never the less: I am sorry for rambling about nothing. Hopefully I gave you
a good laugh on my expense. 

Thank you to every body who tried to sort this out. 


Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
 
Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds 
(Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)

> -Original Message-
> From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 29. oktober 2005 01:40
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: My new Macro - a lemon.
> 
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: "Tim Øsleby"
> Subject: RE: My new Macro - a lemon.
> 
> 
> > First test shots. Done in a hurry. Roughly converted
> > http://www.flickr.com/photos/fototim/sets/1234555/
> 
> I'm surprised that there is enough depth of focus to bring a speck on the
> lens into that sharp of focus.
> 
> William Robb
> 
> 






Re: Peso - Another view of Frank's curve?

2005-10-28 Thread Rob Studdert
On 28 Oct 2005 at 21:06, Boris Liberman wrote:

> Hi!
> 
> > Check out http://mypeoplepc.com/members/kwaller/offwallphoto/id2.html
> > 
> > Yeah, nay, and/or comments
> > what would you do differently?
> 
> Ken, this is very interesting. I cannot notice any fish eye effects here...

Boris the fisheye distortion becomes less apparent as the image is cropped, the 
effect of a 28mm fisheye on an APS sized frame looks like no more than a case 
of bad barrel distortion.


Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998



Re: My new Macro - a lemon.

2005-10-28 Thread William Robb


- Original Message - 
From: "Tim Øsleby"

Subject: RE: My new Macro - a lemon.



First test shots. Done in a hurry. Roughly converted
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fototim/sets/1234555/


I'm surprised that there is enough depth of focus to bring a speck on the 
lens into that sharp of focus.


William Robb




Re: PESO: Misc Photos

2005-10-28 Thread skye
I like the sky in Wildcat -- it's very interesting looking, and I love
Workin' Hard (what a cute bear).

On 10/28/05, David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here's a few photos from this summer that I've meant to post but never
> got around to it...
>
> "Rear Deck"
> http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=56945493&size=m
>
> "Wildcat"
> http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=56945463&size=m
>
> "Workin' Hard"
> http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=56945443&size=m
>
> "Ferris Wheel"
> http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=56945426&size=m
>



Re: Cleaning Sensors

2005-10-28 Thread Rob Studdert
On 28 Oct 2005 at 11:32, graywolf wrote:

> Howcome so many folks here have/had all these troubles with dust and 
> scratches on negatives? I have only had much of a problem when I did 
> something stupid, which was often enough but aviodable with a little 
> effort on my part. Wear those disposable white cotton gloves, blow off 
> the negative before putting it in the enlarger and after removing it, 
> then put it back into the negative sleeve, and never never leave an 
> unprotected negative laying around (this was always my biggest problem).

I have never had problems with my negs but anything that comes from an outside 
lab inevitably sports scratches for some reason. I don't even let labs cut and 
sleeve my films these days. Also as Bill mentioned certain light sources make 
scratches more apparent. 

My previous scanner used cold cathode illumination which was condensed but 
still relatively soft whereas my current nikon scanner uses LED for 
illumination. The light is mixed by firing the LEDs into both ends of a glass 
rod which has a white reflective area along one edge so it remains somewhat 
directional. The long and short of it is that the LED system really tends to 
make the smallest of scratches very visible in the scan, the cold cathode 
illumination wasn't near as bad.

Cheers,


Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998



Re: Epson Stylus R1800 Ink Jet printer?

2005-10-28 Thread Jack Davis
Mark,
I have no problem with what I read about the features and capability of
the R800, except the 8.5" limit.
Happy it's serving you well.
Thanks for your help.

Jack

--- Mark Erickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> Jack Davis writeL
> >I'd appreciate any opinions +/- about the Epson R1800. Whatever your
> >experience or have heard about it.
> >Have a tired Epson 820, the product of which has been sort of a
> >acceptable 'proof', but now feel it's time to get more serious about
> a
> >home produced final print.
> >If you'd care to taut your own preference, please do so.
> >
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> >Jack 
> 
> I have an R800, the 8.5" (A4) little brother to the R1800.  I think
> that my
> printer is wonderful.  I really like the results that I get from it.
> Assuming the print engine in the R1800 is the same as the R800, I
> think
> you'll like it very much.
> 
> --Mark
> 
> 




__ 
Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page! 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs



Re: PESO: Ripples old, foliage new.

2005-10-28 Thread skye
Beautiful photo of the hills, but all the leaves look so uniformly brown.

On 10/28/05, Cory Papenfuss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Southwest Virginia appalachia at sunset.  Took a quick flight in
> my plane this week at sunset to try to capture some color.  Haven't had
> time to try to get any better adjustments out of it, but figured I'd share
> anyway.
>
> http://www.ee.vt.edu/~mythtv/PESO/
>
> -Cory
>
> --
>
> *
> * Cory Papenfuss*
> * Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student   *
> * Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University   *
> *
>
>



PDML'er visiting Oslo. Anybody want to join me?

2005-10-28 Thread Tim Øsleby
We have talked about a Fiddly Bits PDML in Oslo next weekend. I had a look
in my almanac, and realized I had run out of time. I have been rather busy
talking shit here, fixing my car (the brakes was no good), deciding what to
do with my roof falling down on me and my beloved in my house, etc. Panic. 
Now I am leaving tomorrow. The idea of going away is wonderful ;-)

So, now it is no time to make proper plans for PDML meetings. Jostein, DagT,
Toralf, and lurkers in the area: Shall we just skip this opportunity? Or
shall we try to make it, despite the chaos in my life? I'm talking mostly
about next weekend, but I am available most of the rest of the week (except
Monday).

Think I'll just have to leave my cell phone number and see what happenes: 
45 42 91 96 
Surprise me. Call me if you want to have a shoot in Vigeland parken or any
other suggestion. Jostein: you said something about not having shot at
concerts before. Any other PDML'ers are more than welcome to join me too.
Concert shooting is fun. Just make arrangements in good time. Some of the
concerts are nearly sold out.


Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
 
Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds 
(Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)

> -Original Message-
> From: Raimo K [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 28. oktober 2005 17:21
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: PDML Map
> 
> This is great! Thank you for the initiative.
> All the best!
> Raimo K
> Personal photography homepage at:
> http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
> 
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: "Juan Buhler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 12:47 AM
> Subject: PDML Map
> 
> 
> > Hi list,
> >
> > I found Frappr, a site that uses Google maps to let people place
> > themselves in the world. It is organized in groups, so people from
> > various internet communities can map where they are.
> >
> > I started a PDML map there. Go to
> >
> > http://www.frappr.com/pdml
> >
> > And map yourself, if you care to do so. No need (or possibility) to
> > add an exact address, so privacy should not be a problem.
> >
> > Let's see where we all are!
> >
> > j
> >
> > --
> > Juan Buhler
> > http://www.jbuhler.com
> > photoblog at http://photoblog.jbuhler.com
> >
> 






Re: Cleaning Sensors

2005-10-28 Thread Rob Studdert
On 28 Oct 2005 at 6:44, Paul Stenquist wrote:

> Nothing is worse than having to clean film. My sensor gets nowhere near 
> as dirty as do those negatives in the lab. I used to figure at least 
> thirty minutes cleaning every scan. UGH.

I've had some pretty bad sensor dust problems that I've only found out about 
well after the shooting session, some have required extensive cloning on all 
usable images from the session. Dust on film I've never found to be a real 
problem but I did invest in good dust management too, scratches on film is what 
kills me.


Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998



Re: Cleaning Sensors

2005-10-28 Thread Rob Studdert
On 28 Oct 2005 at 20:03, Boris Liberman wrote:

> Shel, I have a suggestion which is related to your question only 
> indirectly. When you switch lenses I (humbly) suggest you turn off the 
> camera... I started doing it about a month ago. I should say that it 
> does indeed reduce the amount of dust your sensor may be collecting. It 
> did for me... And I change the lenses outdoors at least half of the time.

But of course it will if you don't use your camera Boris. Put it in a dark 
corner some place , never turn it on and you will have zero dust problems :-)

The inference that the sensor somehow attracts dust whilst it is on I think you 
will find is flawed. You have been the recipient of good luck I'd suggest.

Cheers,


Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998



Re: 50mm/F2 lens worth a CLA

2005-10-28 Thread John Forbes
If it's in good shape, it doesn't need a CLA.  If it does need a CLA, it's  
not in good shape.


John

On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 19:08:21 +0100, Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Probably not, you should be able to find one that doesn't need a CLA for  
less than the CLA would cost.


-Adam


Barry Rice wrote:

Hey Folks,
 I just found an old pentax M 50/2 lens. I've already got a Pentax  
M50/1.4

and an F 50/2.8 macro.
This 50/2 lens is in good shape, but would need a CLA before it would be
even sellable. Is there any compelling reason to keep this lens? Any  
secrets
about it, like "oh, man this lens is sweet when reversed" or anything  
like

that?
 B
 Barry A. Rice, Ph.D.
Invasive Species Specialist
Global Invasive Species Initiative
The Nature Conservancy
V: 530-754-8891
http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu










--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/



Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side

2005-10-28 Thread Rob Studdert
On 28 Oct 2005 at 13:06, graywolf wrote:

> Apparently you are not aware of how numerical contolled machine tools 
> work. It is a matter of loading the correct program, chucking the 
> correct piece of metal, and hitting the on button. Once you have the 
> program, it takes only  ten minutes or so to set up to produce a 
> particular part.

How old is NC technology?


Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998



Re: Epson Stylus R1800 Ink Jet printer?

2005-10-28 Thread Mark Erickson



Jack Davis writeL
>I'd appreciate any opinions +/- about the Epson R1800. Whatever your
>experience or have heard about it.
>Have a tired Epson 820, the product of which has been sort of a
>acceptable 'proof', but now feel it's time to get more serious about a
>home produced final print.
>If you'd care to taut your own preference, please do so.
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>Jack 

I have an R800, the 8.5" (A4) little brother to the R1800.  I think that my
printer is wonderful.  I really like the results that I get from it.
Assuming the print engine in the R1800 is the same as the R800, I think
you'll like it very much.

--Mark



RE: My new Macro - a lemon.

2005-10-28 Thread Tim Øsleby
It is a spec, on f5,6. If you look closer at the same spot you will see it.
At f8 it is clearly visible, take my word for it ;-)
And it is more visible for every step up to f32 :-(

I have located it in the glass. It seems to be in one of lenses closest to
the camera body. It's there. And it frustrates me. 

And there is this with the focal length changing. That too is visible in the
test shots. It's just a couple of degrees change in angle of view, but this
to makes me sceptic. 

If the seller had told me about it before the transaction, it would have
been completely different issue. He didn't.

Am I just being an arse on this? Think of myself as "Mostly harmless" ;-)


Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
 
Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds 
(Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)

> -Original Message-
> From: Raimo K [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 29. oktober 2005 00:33
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: My new Macro - a lemon.
> 
> OK - there was a speck in one image but not on the others. Maybe it is a
> subject failure?
> All the best!
> Raimo K
> Personal photography homepage at:
> http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
> 
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: "Tim Øsleby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2005 1:19 AM
> Subject: RE: My new Macro - a lemon.
> 
> 
> > First test shots. Done in a hurry. Roughly converted
> > http://www.flickr.com/photos/fototim/sets/1234555/
> >
> >
> > Tim
> > Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
> >
> > Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds
> > (Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Sent: 28. oktober 2005 23:33
> >> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> >> Subject: Re: My new Macro - a lemon.
> >>
> >>
> >> - Original Message -
> >> From: "Tim Øsleby"
> >> Subject: RE: My new Macro - a lemon.
> >>
> >>
> >> > As I say in a reply to WB:
> >> > I haven't noticed change of focal length when focusing. It is when
> >> > changing
> >> > aperture. Is that normal too?
> >> >
> >> > My observation on the dust is simply based on what I see in my raw
> >> > converter. I have no idea of the magnification ratio. On screen the
> >> image
> >> > is
> >> > about 8 x 5 inches. The test shot was shot at about 20cm. It is
> visible
> >> > from
> >> > f5,6, really disturbing from f8, horrifying at f16. I assume that it
> >> fades
> >> > out when opening aperture proves that it isn't sensor dust.
> >>
> >> I think you might consider showing us a picture of the glass, and dust
> >> blob
> >> in question.
> >> And perhaps a few web images of how the dust spec is afecting things.
> >>
> >> Focal length should not change with aperture.
> >>
> >> William Robb
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 






RE: OT: Website software

2005-10-28 Thread Jens Bladt
Thanks Kevin. I may give it a try.
The Namo has in fact both - HTML and Wizards. This means I can review in one
way what I did in the other :-).
Regards
Jens Bladt
Arkitekt MAA
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt


-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Kevin Waterson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 29. oktober 2005 00:36
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Re: OT: Website software


Jens Bladt wrote:

>So, which website editor do you guys use?
>
>
vi

>I can't do any HTML myself and I want to publish 3D panoramas made with
e.i.
>Iseemedia/PhotoVista (flash or java).
>
>
>
Java script does this nicely. I use it now and again for real estate
clients.
Flash is the devils spawn and the only thing worse than flash is a flash
coder ;)

Have you considered learning a little HTML? It is very simple and there
are many
sites offering tutorials with w3c.org the best of the bunch. You can be
up and running
in a matter of minutes.



My photo page


Some good news here



Its that simple :) The tags become rather intuitive in a short time.

Kind regards
Kevin




  1   2   3   >