RE: PESO - Others 2005 - 46r - GDG (Shel using his DS)
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
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
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
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
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
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?
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
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
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)
Thought y'all might like this... http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/42r.htm Godfrey
Re: 50mm/F2 lens worth a CLA
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
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?
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
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
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?
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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...
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
- 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
- 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
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?
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
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
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
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
That figures!
Re: OT: Website software
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
- 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
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
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
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
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?
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
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
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
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
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
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
- 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
- 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
- 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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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?
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
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
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?
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
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.
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
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?
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
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
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
[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
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
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
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?
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
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
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
I have no trouble using the map with Firefox. Check your settings.
Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side
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
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
I got "You need to be signed in to see this page."
Re: M 2.8/35 mm - general aperture problem?
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?
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
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.
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?
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.
- 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
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
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?
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.
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?
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
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
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
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
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?
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.
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
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