John Yates?
I'm trying to get in touch with John Yates. I believe he may be a PDML subscriber. John, if you're reading this, please contact me off list. Thanks! Shel -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Indepemdence Day
Dusting off an oldie ... http://home.earthlink.net/~shel-pix/independenceday.html Shel -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: OT: The earth moves for Mrs. Smye-Rumsby
4.3 ... you guys sure make a big fuss over something that, here, we just sleep through. We had a 4.3 a few weeks ago and not even the cats were concerned. I guess it's what you're used to. Shel [Original Message] From: Bob W http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6602677.stm Paul Smye-Rumsby, who lives in Dover, said: It was about 08.15 when suddenly the bed shook violently. I thought my wife had got cramp or something -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: PAW 2007 - 21 - GDG
Hi Godders ... quite a nice scene. you were working with good light, too. About what time was it when you were up on Twin Peaks? The lower left corner seems overly dark and lacking detail on my screen. Have you ever been to Mt. Davidson early in the AM or just before dusk when the cross was lit up? That's always struck me as an overlooked photo opportunity. Shel [Original Message] From: Godfrey DiGiorgi Was in San Francisco early this morning, climbed the hill to Twin Peaks and captured this view ... http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW7/21.htm -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: M85mm f2.0 bokeh
Shoot! I got some JCO leakage with this message ;-(( Can't imagine what I've missed. Please don't fill me in ;-)) Shel [Original Message] From: Tom C So? He's arguing a moot point and talking in circles. We all *already know* that the mathematically calculated DOF for a given lens at at a given aperture is constant, regardless of whether the camera/lens is moved 10 feet forward or 10 feet backwards. The DOF is not reliant on the position of the camera. Moving the camera/lens will merely change whether certain elements in the composition fall within or outside of the DOF. That's not news to me and certainly not news to Mr. Robb. Similar is an imprecise term. Therefore saying something is *SIMILAR*, when it is indeed similar, is a true statement. John is attempting to refute that. His statement that DOF **changes*** with focal length is *true*. BUT, that does not mean, that the DOF of two lenses at like apertures, of close but different focal lengths, are not similar. The DOF *is* similar, albeit *different*. I'm 5'10 tall. Someone else is 5' 11 tall. It can be said that are heights are similar, though of course they are not exactly the same. Similar: 1. having a likeness or resemblance, esp. in a general way: two similar houses. 2. Related in appearance or nature; alike though not identical. 3. marked by correspondence or resemblance; similar food at similar prices; problems similar to mine; they wore similar coats 4. having the same or similar characteristics; all politicians are alike; they looked utterly alike; friends are generally alike in background and taste I don't know why he wants to argue that something is not similar when it is. Nobody said it was exactly the same. From: Paul Stenquist J C O is correct. J C O wrote: Secondly, whether hes making a scientific statement or dogmatic whatever, or just generalizing, its still WRONG, because the DOF isnt kept same OR similar by changing focal lengths if you keep the same camara postion, it **changes*** with focal length if you do that. -Original Message- On Behalf Of Tom C Certainly what you state regarding DOF is true. I believe though the writer was not making a dogmatic absolute statement of scientific fact. He was generalizing. As the camera: subject/background .ratio wasn't altered, DOF should be SIMILAR for all four lenses. I'm pretty sure he knows that actual DOF is not changed by altering the subjects distance from the focal plane. That's only moving subjects in to, out of, or within the range referred to as DOF. as DOF. I think he means that the *perceived* DOF will be *similar*, which is true for lenses close to the same focal length used at close to the same aperture. Not the same, but similar. Tom C. From: Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' pdml@pdml.net Subject: RE: M85mm f2.0 bokeh Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2007 10:26:25 -0400 No,this assumption is wrong, DOF is constant only for same fstop and MAGIFICATION (in camera ). If he used same camera position and fstop and only changed lenses, the shorter lenses will have same perspective in the shots but with MORE Depth of field than the longer lenses. DOF is a function of magnification, NOT the subject/background ratio. Mr. J. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of William Robb Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2007 9:10 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: M85mm f2.0 bokeh - Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist Subject: Re: M85mm f2.0 bokeh Of course the 70 gives you more DOF. Thus, a bit crisper. I left the camera position static and cropped the 70mm and 77mm images to be similar to the 85mm images. As the camera: subject/background ratio wasn't altered, DOF should be similar for all four lenses. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: DA* postponed to early july it seems
Any reason given for the delay? Previously, was there an actual release date specified? Is there a link to the DPReview comments and to Ned Bunnel's coments? Shel [Original Message] From: Jaume Lahuerta Well, let's hope it is only to July...in a Spanish website they say that the zooms are postponed to the end of the year !! - Mensaje original De: Thibouille Seems 'cos taken from DPReview forum where guys babelfished some Japanese webpage. But Ned Bunnel confirmed it, so it seems legitimate. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: M85mm f2.0 bokeh
Hi Bill, I'm glad you chimed in with those pics. On thing that a lot of people fail to realize is that the bokeh you see on a small web image tends to smooth out as the photo gets larger. So, if, for example, the bokeh looks marginally smooth and acceptable on an 800 x 600 pixel web image, it's going to look a lot better on a full-size print that's about 18-inches or so on the long side. Shel [Original Message] From: William Robb A few days ago, Thibouille was asking about the bokeh of the M85 f2 lens. My recollection was that it was as smooth as silk, but I hadn't really used it recently, favouring the 77mm lens instead. I decided to pull the 85 off the shelf to remind myself of how much I enjoyed it's rendering abilities. Here then is a couple of shots taken with the M85/2, one shot wide open, and a similar shot taken at f/4. http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/temp/m852bokeh/852bokeh.html It is as smooth as I remember. Camera info: K10, ISO100. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: WAY OT, but not inflamatory: Roast Beef Sandwich
Well, MIke, that's not quite correct. Some of it is, and many of us here won't eat it either. But there is a lot of beef that is not treated with antibiotics, hormones, steroids, and which is not produced by being raised in crowded feedlots in stinking conditions. One just has to know where to buy their beef ... Personally, I won't touch regular supermarket beef, and will even go so far as to avoid organic beef produced by large corporate ranching operations. Hell, I don't even feed a lot of American meat or poultry to my cats. And remember, it was you Brits who helped start the American beef industry .. LOL Shel [Original Message] From: mike wilson Better still, feed it to someone you don't like. American beef is so full of hormones and antibiotics it can't be imported to the EU and as for British beef -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: WAY OT, but not inflamatory: Roast Beef Sandwich
Thanks to everyone who offered suggestions for my roast beef sandwich. Most appreciated! Shel -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: WAY OT, but not inflamatory: Roast Beef Sandwich
Unfortunately, a lot of our standards are essentially created by
corporate interests and lobbying. There was a time when an Organic label
here really meant something, but a few years ago the standards were reduced
and, for many items, there's not much difference between organic and
regular food items, be they produce, dairy, or meat. What one must do is
look for more than the USDA organic label on their food. In California,
for example, we have CCOF - California Certified Organic Farmers or some
such similar, or do some research and find out who the good guys are and
which companies are, literally and figuratively, full of crap.
Many of the smaller, independent companies have been purchased by larger
companies, and this, plus the reduction of USDA Organic standards, has left
the consumer to be ripped off. Here's but one example of what I mean:
http://www.organicconsumers.org/organic/feedlots060905.cfm
Today the consumer must carefully read labels and become better informed.
The USDA is worthless in many situations.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Date: 4/26/2007 10:24:53 AM
Subject: RE: WAY OT, but not inflamatory: Roast Beef Sandwich
so much for not inflammatory!
There are, as usual, several agendas going on. The USA tries to use
the WTO to force Europeans to take all their crap. Europe is about
standards, including stuff like food contents, and the standards for
Europe do not include a lot of the crap that the US food conglomerates
feed to you unfortunates. Perhaps there is some protectionism going
on, but the USA is really not in any position to point the finger at
others in that regard.
But it is certainly true that American meat tends to be more stuffed
full of that sort of crap than ours - the figures are in the public
domain. I have personally seen the effects of this on a friend of mine
who came back from a year in the USA considerably hairier ('down
South') than she was before she left!
The important thing though is consumer education and awareness and
forcing the producers and retailers to label things correctly and
openly. Standards have improved enormously over here in recent years,
and more and more crap is being removed from our food all the time.
I've been buying organic food since the early 1980s - you used to have
to struggle to get it, going to out-of-the-way shops run by beardies
and hippies, and paying a real premium price for it. Nowadays it is
readily available on every high street and significantly cheaper than
it used to be (although still more expensive than the crap).
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: WAY OT, but not inflamatory: Roast Beef Sandwich
That's not the issue, but, rather, an issue. Shel [Original Message] From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Date: 4/26/2007 10:41:00 AM Subject: Re: WAY OT, but not inflamatory: Roast Beef Sandwich P. J. Alling wrote: I wonder how much of that is real health concerns and how much is hidden protectionism. The issue is bacterial diseases building resistance to antibiotics because of their overuse in livestock. Antibiotic-resistant diseases are a big problem and getting bigger. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
WAY OT, but not inflamatory: Roast Beef Sandwich
OK gang, this may be one of the strangest questions asked on the PDML in quite a while, and might give the list a few chuckles. Apart from one sandwich in 1957, I've never had a roast beef sandwich. I've eaten a wide variety of food in many different countries, but never a roast beef sandwich. Yesterday I was gifted with a half pound of very nice looking roast beef, nicely sliced, and ready to go between two slices of bread. However, I haven't a clue about a dressing. I recall that roast beef goes well with horseradish, maybe mustard, but beyond that I haven't a clue. What dressings and accompaniments might you suggest for a nice, tasty roast beef sandwich. Thanks for any and all ideas, Shel -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - End
Good morning, Bruce ... First, I like that you're experimenting a little, and this was a good scene to play around with. I like the scene, but am not particularly fond of the rendering. It reminds me of printing a contrasty scene in the darkroom using Agfa Brovira #6 (some people will get that comment). For my taste it's just a little too much of a push - maybe just a little less contrast would work better for me. Still, it's a cool shot, and your eye and ability to find interesting scenes comes through. Good work! Shel I took this shot right at the edge of the continent looking out into the Pacific ocean. I was trying to convey the emptiness that I saw from this withered old tree and the big ocean beyond. As I was playing around, I created this and rather liked it. So before showing the original photo, I thought I would see what you thought of this. Rather arty - big departure for me. Pentax K10D, A 70-210/4, Handheld ISO 100, 1/180 sec @ f/8 http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_4734a.htm -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PAW 2007 - 20 - GDG
Hi Godders Great concept. I looked at the pic before reading your entire post, and though that it was a remarkable situation to capture four planes in such a pattern Nice idea ;-)) Shel On 4/23/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I was out for my Saturday morning walk in Guadalupe River Park, San Jose, this time carrying camera and tripod. The San Jose Airport is very nearby, I was right under the landing flight path for the main strip, and the sensation of being in this park with the rose garden and old orchards with planes coming in overhead every 10 minutes somehow became rather surreal. So I decided to have some fun and produced this four-exposure composite to try to capture that surreality ... http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW7/20.htm -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Making a small DNG or RAW file
I suppose I already know the answer, but I thought I'd ask anyway: Is there any way to generate a small RAW or DNG file either from the camera or through image editing software? I'm thinking it would be nice if one could post such a file that's reasonably-sized for web use Shel -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: WAY OT, but not inflamatory: Roast Beef Sandwich
Wasn't it Pentax that came out with the pancake lens? Shel [Original Message] From: Godfrey DiGiorgi This isn't a camera list, is it? It's a culinary society with a Pentax addiction. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Making a small DNG or RAW file
Perhaps I wasn't clear. What I want(ed) to know was if there is some way to generate a true raw file, in either a format like PEF or DNG either directly from the camera or by resizing the file in some editing software (without changing to TIFF or JPEG or any other such format) to make it physically smaller, both in dimension and size. As I said, I'm pretty sure I know the answer to that question (No), but I had to ask. Adam mentioned it can be done with one of the Canon models. It would be great if there could be a 900 x 600 RAW file could be generated so it could easily be posted to a web page and people could work on it as some here do with JPEGs (often with the comment that there's not much more they can do because it's not a RAW file). Shel [Original Message] From: David Savage Yeah, I agree. But Shel wasn't asking about making high quality .jpg's :-) Boris Liberman wrote: Dave, but what if you downsized the TIFF file before making a DNG out of it? I think this is what Shel is asking about. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Protection glass / filters, especially consumer glass
Rob, A few years ago I did something like that using a damaged SMC filter. I couldn't see any scratches or abrasions, even when using a magnifier. However, I did ruin a 20mm Super Tak by cleaning it with Kodak lens tissue. although I couldn't see the scratches. When I brought the lens in for a CLA, the technician, by knowing where to shine lights, etc., showed me the problem. Shel [Original Message] From: Digital Image Studio Lifted directly from a post I made re lens cleaning Nov 2000: In an except from the Leica Fotographie International magazine 6/99 page 37 the following can be found: The resistance and adhesive power of the outer layer is so good that there is little likelihood of damage by environmental influences or persistent cleaning on the part of the user. Numerous abrasion tests have been carried out. There is one that uses a rubber eraser which contains up to 50% pumice-stone grains. The standard test is to rub backwards and forwards 20 times with a pressure of 1kg. Afterwards, no scratches should be visible on the lens surface. Although this passage refers to Leica coatings and practices I would be quite disappointed if the late Pentax coatings didn't exhibit the same wear resistance. Anyone care to run the above test on a neglected piece of SMC hardware? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: PAW - Different Worlds
Hi Frank, For the most part, I like the idea. The Asian woman in the background adds a lot to the photo. Framing is a little too tight on the right, and the slight tilt bothers me. Not enough to be real interesting, too much not to be annoying. Shel [Original Message] From: frank theriault And, in case there are problems with that, here (it doesn't look so good here, I don't think) on photo.net: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5868797 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: newbie question on aperatures
Often the quality of faster glass is better than that of slower (larger aperture number) lenses, although that's not always the case. Also, you can shoot and focus better in low light situations. IAC, of course you can compensate with longer exposures or slower shutter speeds. Shel [Original Message] From: eric Been looking at some wide angle lenses for my DL, and been noticing that while any truly wide angle lense is awfully expensive (yeah, I know, photography is an expensive hobby), the ones with big aperatures are noticeably cheaper than those with small aperatures, numerically speaking (i.e a 1:2.8 is more than one with 1:3.5). I know the aperature controls how much light enters the lens (along with shutter speed), and a smaller aperature number means more light can enter. Other than making it easier to get an in-focus picture while hand holding the camera, what other reason would I want to get a smaller number aperature? Considering 90%+ of my photography is done of non-moving subjects, and using a tripod, can I compensate with a slower shutter speed, or longer exposures? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: FS: Vivitar Series 1 28mm f/1.9 for Pentax K
I've used this lens and can attest to the good image quality @ $75.00 it's a good deal. Shel [Original Message] From: Joe Wilensky FS: Pentax K version of Vivitar Series 1 28mm f/1.9 VMC lens. Original wide-angle hood by Vivitar is included. Lens is in bargain condition by KEH standards, but still quite nice. Glass is very nice, no nicks/scratches, only a little minor dust between elements. Some definite wear to edges of aperture ring, and a nick here and there is visible on the outer edge of the focusing ring. Hood is also in bargain condition with some wear, but intact and threads are fine. Benefits of the f/1.9 lens, as opposed to the Vivitar 28mm f/2 lens, is that it is an actual Series 1 lens (dating to the late 1970s, I believe) and that it has the floating group of elements that kick in at close focusing distances to improve image rendition, sharpness across the frame. You can feel the floating elements engage at a point on the focusing ring, which is normal. Price: $75 including shipping in the continental U.S. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: a flower for Shel - GDG
Bill, Anecdotal evidence based on experience doesn't mean squat. It's not scientific. Greywolf is absolutely correct in his contention LOL Of course, over the years, in many areas, we've seen the scientific evidence means less than squat. Shel [Original Message] From: William Robb The lab/camera shop at which I worked a couple of years ago tended to support the babies as most popular subject matter theory. The owner said their prime customer was a woman with a baby stroller. In fact, there was a children's clothing store just a few doors down and when it went out of business the lab saw a major decline in volume. I did something like 25 years in the lab industry. Greywolf will say this won't count for anything, since he doesn't believe in knowledge gained by experience over time, but my observation was babies and children as the big volume subject, with pets as a not so close second. Note this is on the amateur side of the business. The pro side is weddings as the big volume subject by a huge margin. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Just for the hell of it!
Better in what way? I'm not sure that the general opinion is that digital is better than film. There are any number of people here who, even though they use digital, believe otherwise, at least for certain situations. Further, what has better got to do with making a pic that could not or would not have been done with film? In my case I know there are quite a few shots I would not have done with film, but that doesn't mean I could not have made those shots. And that brings up the question of why I'd not have made the pics: maybe it was because of certain camera features, perhaps because I had a certain lens, or maybe because I felt freer experimenting more with digital. In fact, I can more readily see things I can do on film that would/could not be possible with digital, or, more specifically, the current state of the DSLR cameras offered by Pentax and some others. Shel [Original Message] From: graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ok, just for the hell of it. The general opinion here is that digital is better than film, so how about everyone posting a photo that they took with digital that they feel they could not, or would not, have done with film. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Protection glass / filters, especially consumer glass
In my case it was more than dust, but something more akin to a haze or a film. Yeah, there was a little dust in there as well. Apart from the dust, my theory about the haze is that there may be something in the lens, like lubricants, that emit some gas or evaporate slightly (we've all experienced the lubricant getting dry at one time or another), and that the filter over the lens element prevents the evaporation from just dissipating into the atmosphere. Dust, like rust, never sleeps! Shel [Original Message] From: William Robb - Original Message - From: Godfrey DiGiorgi Subject: Re: Protection glass / filters, especially consumer glass On Apr 23, 2007, at 11:42 AM, Jack Davis wrote: BTW, in my world dust cannot migrate to the area between the filter and the lens unless the filter is removed. :) lol ... Do you have them sealed somehow? ;-) I always thought that too, which is why I found the consistent build up of dusty film between the two quite curious. I could never figure that out either. I had a filter on my Nikkor 50/1.4 from the time I bought it. I was pretty good about cleaning the front surface, but ignored the inside surfaces. It was quite amazing how much dust was in there after a year or so. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: More 85mm f2.0 smc-M bokeh
Looks like I'm going to need tighter filtering, but, as long as I saw this ... JCO, the thread has moved from your specific comment through the general rendering of the 85mm lens bokeh to some general comments about bokeh. It's no longer about YOUR specific comments. Threads and discussions on the PDML, as well as other mail lists, tend to wander. Further, you are now making a personal attack by calling a contributor to the thread clueless. True, it's only a mild attack, but one that's going to leave you open to some negative comments and possibly start another flame war, more than likely causing you to, once again, use abusive language and post your messages using lots of upper case letters, and get any number of people here to the point where they'll start responding in kind, as which already seems to be the case. I just don't understand you. A couple of days ago Norm and I apologized for contributing to the last outburst, and Tim strongly took your side of that issue, and your response was fuck you in three separate posts, one to Norm, one directed at me, and least understandable, one to Tim. Relax, chill out, enjoy your camera, or your DVD player, or your HDTV ... vent your anger in other ways - go out and take a walk, get some exercise, cut back on the sugar intake. LIGHTEN UP - not every comment is about you or directed to you. Kind regards, Shel -- Original message -- From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Secondly, this WR guy's posts, really show he is completely clueless. His deductions make no sense because he either doesnt understand or never noticed how unsharp mask works or he doesnt read the posts in entirety because I clearly stated that this bokeh problem is easily visible in the viewfinder. Either or both ways its just plain bad to be posting completely wrong stuff like that based on lack of knowledge in the manner in which he posts it. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: a flower for Shel - GDG
I tend doubt that - can you substantiate your claim. In talking with people at a couple of labs here, they say the most popular subject they get are babies and - believe it or not - cats. Shel [Original Message] From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] The mos popular subjects of all (for photography) are women and sunsets. Perhps flowers are number three! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: MSNBC Poll: Is JCO really an asshole?
Norm, There was a time when you came on the list and discussed photography, posted and shared pics, and participated in some general discussions. Now, it seems, most of your posts are childish (woof woof), which, compared to posts by other people, seem to fit in pretty well with some of the silliness on the list. However, this post, especially the subject, is truly mean-spirited and vulgar. While many here have had fun and frustration arguing with JCO, this is truly uncalled for. I'd like to think you're a bigger and better person than this post seems to indicate. Shel [Original Message] From: Norm Baugher To: pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Date: 4/21/2007 9:21:29 AM Subject: MSNBC Poll: Is JCO really an asshole? Now I'm signing off for awhile, I'm shipping my HDTV to Bangladesh and selling my gear that contains an aperture simulator. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: a flower for Shel - GDG
LOL Indeed - I got lotsa cat pics Shel [Original Message] From: Digital Image Studio Shel Belinkoff wrote: ... In talking with people at a couple of labs here, they say the most popular subject they get are babies and - believe it or not - cats. Available captive targets, been there. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: MSNBC Poll: Is JCO really an asshole?
Norm, believe me, I know that scenario, especially wrt our friend. I've certainly made my contributions to this business as well, especially in earlier threads. Filtering his messages has helped tremendously. You'd think we'd have learned by now, and we probably have, but the temptation to argue with JCO is great and sometimes the only way we can reduce our frustration is to join in Anyway, you've done your penance and it's time to move on. Shel [Original Message] From: Norm Baugher [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Date: 4/22/2007 8:57:03 AM Subject: Re: MSNBC Poll: Is JCO really an asshole? Shel, you are correct, please accept my public apology. Sometimes wisdom is drowned out by frustration. Norm Shel Belinkoff wrote: Norm, There was a time when you came on the list and discussed photography, posted and shared pics, and participated in some general discussions. Now, it seems, most of your posts are childish (woof woof), which, compared to posts by other people, seem to fit in pretty well with some of the silliness on the list. However, this post, especially the subject, is truly mean-spirited and vulgar. While many here have had fun and frustration arguing with JCO, this is truly uncalled for. I'd like to think you're a bigger and better person than this post seems to indicate. Shel [Original Message] From: Norm Baugher To: pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Date: 4/21/2007 9:21:29 AM Subject: MSNBC Poll: Is JCO really an asshole? Now I'm signing off for awhile, I'm shipping my HDTV to Bangladesh and selling my gear that contains an aperture simulator. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: a flower for Shel - GDG
Hi John - it's great that you were able to save these kittens. IIRC, you and Wendy have about seven cats of your own ... I sent the pi and some and info about them to a couple of friends who also foster cats and have associations with adoption agencies, just to spread the word. Thanks for sharing ... Shel [Original Message] From: John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Date: 4/22/2007 2:53:21 PM Subject: Re: a flower for Shel - GDG You can even combine the two, and take pictures of baby cats :-) http://www.jfwaf.com/FosterCats/images/IMGP1324.jpg We just rescued these, and their mother, from Death Row at the local shelter; they were due to be euthanized yesterday evening. We're working with a local rescue organization, who will deal with the adoption fairs, etc. But we get to foster the kitties until they are arge enough to be adopted - that will not be for another one or two months. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Lens purchases... DA40/FA50....FA43?
Having owned and used all of these lenses, and given the cost factor, I'd go with the 43mm in a heartbeat. Shel [Original Message] From: AlexG I am going to order a couple of lenses. Having used an M42 50/1.4 it is a lens I cannot live without. Low-light silver bullet. I saw the DA 40mm f/2.8 limited on sale also. I did a search in the archives here. It does not seem to be very liked by this group. For every excellent picture I've seen with this lens, there have also been plenty of crap pictures posted (flickr) and f/2.8 is pretty slow. What are the group's opinion on the lens? Like? Hate? Size is appealing of course but if the pictures will come out looking bad, then why bother? Instead of buying the two lenses, I can also get a 43mm/1.9. About the cost of both lenses put together, same-ish focal length and definitely 'fast'. They say this is THE lens to get, but I don't make purchase decisions based on a random comment posted on a random flickr photo. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: ist D mirror hanging
Regardless, put in a set of known, good, fresh batteries. It's the least expensive and easiest way to start the diagnosis process. Shel [Original Message] From: J [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Date: 4/21/2007 9:15:20 AM Subject: Re: ist D mirror hanging The batteries are fully charged according to the icon on the display. Sounds like bad batteries to me. I've had my D do similar things when the batteries were almost out of juice. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT - for those of you who have DVD equip that can playPAL
I've heard about reading. I saw an ad for it on television. Sounds like phun ;-)) Shel [Original Message] From: Digital Image I bet you have a nice comfy chair too, good for reading in ;-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Ground Cover Question
Check out space blankets which can be found at places like REI. I've used 'em when camping. What's especially nice about them is that they're very light and can be folded into a very small package, They're waterproof too. Plus, they have a reflective side or coating which can be used to fill shadows in some photographic situations. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_blanket Shel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have some pics in mind that I'd like to take close to the ground. Like with me laying flat. I am an old lady with sort of bad knees, so crouching is out. Laying down isn't. So I've been thinking of putting a blanket in the car. Well, yes, its partly a clothing issue -- not get them all messed up. But is also partly a comfort issue -- some places very soon here in California will have dry grass, prickly grass. I want some padding. Has anyone ever made a sort of blanket that can fold up small into a small duffle with a shoulder strap? There must be something like that somewhere, I would think. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: RE: OT - for those of you whohaveDVD equipthatcanplayPALsystemDVD's
JCO wrote: True, but anyone who actually doesnt give a shit about having beautiful music or cinema in their home IS without a doubt UNcultured... === Well, let's get real. YOU were, and are, essentially talking about gear. A lot of people don't give a shit about gear, but that doesn't mean they are UNcultured and lack enthusiasm for good music or cinema. Many prefer to go to concerts, live performances, movies outside their home, for any number of reasons, some of which may be that the sound is better, it's a more personal experience, there's some socialization going on, there are things in theater that you can't find on TV, and so forth. I know several people who are probably a lot more cultured than you who have nothing but a small, 13 or 19 screen TV (in fact, Valerie once misplaced her TV - LOL, but Valerie plays the piano and is an accomplished cellist and photographer, and the other is a pianist as well. They make their own music, and join others in that endeavor as well. Some other friends have the money for systems far better than anything you may have (I guarantee it!), yet they drive a beat up old Volvo, and instead of getting into material things, travel. There is music and theater that they've enjoyed that you haven't even dreamed about - and I can guarantee that as well. They keep their TV in a closet, and pull it out when there's something specific they want to watch. Who needs to watch a show about penguins on HDTV and some kind of high-tech DVD when, in a few days, one can be walking amongst them (as some friends did on their recent trip to the Antarctic). The problem that you have, as I see it, is that you make broad generalizations based on what _your_ preferences are, and just cannot, for whatever reason, see or understand that others have different preferences, priorities, skills, and interests. Shel -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: OT - for those of you who have DVD equip that can playPAL
I can't believe JCO actually posted that! My Gawd! I'll have to read the full content of THAT message in the archives. Hey, JCO, get yourself some crayons and your books can have pretty pictures as well. Shel [Original Message] No, you have full right to stare at a blank wall every eveinng if you choose or if you prefer, to read books all the time. But then again, books dont have the pretty pictures HD home theaters provide do they? jco -Original Message- They say the eyes are the windows to one's soul. GIGO. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: OT - for those of you who have DVD equip that can playPAL
Not always - my niece had a musical coloring book LOL Shel Reading is reading and listing to music is listening to music, and watching films is watching films. JCO Mark! Tom C. (listing to the music) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: OT - for those of you whohaveDVD equipthat canplayPALsystemDVD's
Let's have a contest ;-)) Shel [Original Message] From: David Savage PS I can think of much worse personal attacks than GW's At 09:39 PM 21/04/2007, you wrote: FUCK YOU GRAYWOLF, IF YOU CANT BOTH ARGUE ANY OF MY POINTS IN POSTS AS TO ACTUALLY BEING INCORRECT OR WHY, THEN SHUT THE FUCK UP. THIS KIND OF POST IS THE VERY WORST POSSIBLE AND A TOTALLY PERSONAL ATTACK, IT HAS ABSOLUTELY NO BASIS TO BACK UP THE DUMB STATEMENTS MADE - ZERO REBUTTAL AND IS NO CONTRIBUTION TO THE LIST WHATSOEVER. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of graywolf Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 12:33 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: OT - for those of you whohaveDVD equipthat canplayPALsystemDVD's The only thing dumber than JCO's posts are those that argue with him. Why not go and bang your head against a brick wall? At least you will get some results from that. Actually, you will get the same results, a headache, but at least the rest of us won't. -graywolf -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT: Useless cat
Is that supposed to be funny, or is it your sincere opinion? Shel [Original Message] From: Bob Shell I thought cats were useless by definition. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: a flower for Shel - GDG
Sheesh! Most people usually ignore me, now I'm getting flowers. I'm deeply troubled by this recent turn of events Shel [Original Message] From: David Savage ...and another: http://www.arach.net.au/~savage/Misc/Images/IMGP3390.jpg My, isn't Shel a popular fellow ;-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PAW - Boo!
Frank, I like this one quite a bit. Clearly you didn't use a Pentax ghostless filter for this shot. Shel frank theriault wrote: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5868563 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
PESO - Distortion
For those who care, it's back after I straightened out the problems on the web page. http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/distortion.html So, I'm walkin' along and I see this guy making faces at his reflection in a store window. I strike up a conversation and then get to take a couple of snaps. I decided to enhance his silly face by using the 85mm lens close up and shooting from a low angle. Didn't care much about detail and precise focus as it was something a little more abstract I was looking for. So, there you have it ... Shel -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: a flower for Shel - GDG
Does this stem from your insecurities about posting puns? Shel [Original Message] From: frank theriault So are you going to petal them elsewhere? Nah, I'm just going to leave it for now... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: a flower for Shel - GDG
You really have a prickly attitude. You need a rosier outlook. It seems you're always vining about one thing or another. Anyway, this isn't geranium to the original thread. Shel [Original Message] From: frank theriault On 4/19/07, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Does this stem from your insecurities about posting puns? Shel, You've always been a thorn in my side! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: a flower for Shel - GDG
Is that comment stamen from your insecurities? Shel [Original Message] From: frank theriault Or I could just pistil whip him... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: a flower for Shel - GDG
This thread is the pits! However, Norm, it's good to see you raison to the occasion. Shel [Original Message] From: Norm Baugher Mark, you're such a prune... Norm Mark Roberts wrote: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does this stem from your insecurities about posting puns? You've always been a thorn in my side! Wow Frank. You really rose to the occasion with that one. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT - for those of you who have DVD equip that can playPAL systemDVD's
Ann ... Maybe I missed something here, but Viva Zapata (that is what you were looking for, right?) is available from numerous US sources on DVD. Here's one ... http://tinyurl.com/3bdzq5 I don't quite understand why you decided to buy from a foreign source on eBay. Shel [Original Message] From: ann sanfedele All I wanted to do by posting this is to get it to someone for whom playing it would not be illegal and who would like it I think there must have been a legal copy of the film on tape at some time but I couldn't find one. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: a flower for Shel - GDG
Yes, I feel so ... special ;-)) Shel [Original Message] From: Godfrey DiGiorgi I see my flower for shel has brought about a bouquet of responses. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PAW - Boo!
Sounds like something Yogi Berra would say would say ... Shel [Original Message] From: frank theriault I have yet to hit my stride yet... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: OT - for those of you who have DVD equip that canplayPALsystemDVD's
IIRC, there are numerous stores in San Francisco's Japan Town that sell multi-regional DVD players. Shel [Original Message] From: Tom C Because they don't sell non-region 1 DVD players at retail outlets in a country where 999,999,999 DVD's out of every 1,000,000,000 DVD's sold are region 1, does not make it illegal. In fact it makes perfect sense. My, now defunct, region-free PAL/NTSC DVD player, was purchased from and shipped from a Canadian business address, which last time I looked, was in North America. Tom C. From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' pdml@pdml.net Subject: RE: OT - for those of you who have DVD equip that canplayPAL systemDVD's Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 14:29:44 -0400 It is illegal to buy, sell or own non-region 1 DVD players in or to north america from everything I have ever heard. Ever wonder why you cant just go buy one at Circuit Shitty? jco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Norm Baugher Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 2:08 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: OT - for those of you who have DVD equip that can playPAL systemDVD's Illegal? How? I can do anything I want to my frickin' DVD player. Some Hollywood prick going to show up at my door and tell me I can't play the DVD's I bought in Europe? Norm J. C. O'Connell wrote: Those are out there but they are illegal. jco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Norm Baugher Well, thanks to the internet, I have a region code freebDVD player - looked up the hack to get rid of the region code lock. Norm graywolf wrote: Not only that, Ann, even if a DVD is the right type it may not work. If a DVD is coded for a region your player is not, it will not play. The DVD needs to be coded for North American distribution, unless you bought a DVD player with some other region coded in it as may happen if you ordered it from somewhere else. Buying things on the internet can be fun. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: OT - for those of you who have DVD equip that canplayPALsystemDVD's
S! You'll upset the world economy LOL Shel [Original Message] From: (Scott Loveless) OMG! Someone call the cops! And make sure you tell them about all those illegal gray market lenses at BH, too. -- Original message -- From: Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] FWIW, Here's an Illinois-based online retailer selling multi-region/region free DVD hardware. They have a walk in store as well in the Chicago area. http://www.world-import.com/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT - for those of you who have DVD equip thatcan playPAL systemDVD's
That's odd. I have friends in other parts of the world who have such players, easily purchased in retail establishments in their cities. For example, a couple of friends in Tel Aviv have region free DVD players. And, as I said in an earlier post, they are readily available at numerous outlets in San Francisco Shel J. C. O'Connell wrote: think about it for a second, if region free players or cross regioned players were available legally anywhere, the entire region coding system would make no sense to designa and implement! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PAW - Boo!
http://www.rinkworks.com/said/yogiberra.shtml Shel [Original Message] From: frank theriault I think my favourite (among so many!) Yogi Berraism was (when asked about a certain restaurant): Nobody goes there anymore, it's always too crowded. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT - for those of you who have DVD equip that can playPAL
Hey, Norm, I'm pretty much like Godders and mark. No cable, an old, old set used only for watching DVDs and one PBS station, which is pretty much all the reception I could get from where I was located. 'Twas just fine for 20+ years. Now, because of my new location, I can get several stations, and guess what, for the most part they are of little interest. Shel [Original Message] From: Norm Baugher Do you have running water or did you just shoot your TV one day? Norm Mark Roberts wrote: Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I have time to watch about one-three hour's worth of television a week I have no idea how much time I have to spare for watching TV - we don't have a television. haven't had one since about 1988 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Size Sells?
Bigger is better - even an 8x10 sized image on an 11x14 sized sheet is better. But I've always been of the impression that prints that fill an 11x14 sheet in the long dimension are the minimum way to go. There are always exceptions, of course. Shel [Original Message] From: Mike Hamilton My past experience has told me that 8x10 or smaller prints are easier or more desireable for people to hang on their walls because it does not dominate the whole wall. My prints were mostly 8x10, with 3- 5x7 and one 11x14. What is your experience with regard to this? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT - for those of you who have DVD equip that can playPAL
It seems that JCO does ... sheesh! Sio much noise about watching TV and DVDs. Shel [Original Message] From: Digital Image Studio Does anyone really have to watch TV? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: PESO 2007 - 19b - GDG
Godders, What's with the elliptical shape of the truck's rear wheels? Shel [Original Message] From: Godfrey DiGiorgi http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW7/19b.htm -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: PAW - Coffeehouse Flowers
LMAO Hi Frank, no, it doesn't work, but getting the hang of flash is sometimes difficult with new gear. Why am I laughing? Well, it's not at you or the pic, but for the longest time I've contended that since the advent of the popularity of digital many photogs who were shooting documentary or street photos all of a sudden starting showing flower and macro pics. So many have told me that there's no difference between what subjects they shot with film and the work that they are currently doing with digital, yet looking at their body of work I saw a greater frequency of cute photos and flower pics. Welcome to the club ... you're a real, official digi-head now. Shel [Original Message] From: frank theriault I still don't really know how to do this stuff, but I was experimenting a bit with the on-board flash of the *istD. Work or not? http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5865680 Comments are always appreciated. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PAW - Coffeehouse Flowers
Regardless of the rationale Frank, you've shot and posted a flower pic. I've done it as well since I started shooting digital. I'm not making a critical judgement, just an observation - and people are doing it because it's so easy to do, and because flowers may be nice to photograph, and because they have nice colors, and perhaps because the digi works in color rather than BW. Shel [Original Message] From: frank theriault It's not that I've started shooting flowers, but I was in a coffeeshop, and where I wouldn't have wasted film on those flowers, it cost me nothing to point and shoot at something that I could see from my seat. The real subject of that particular coffeeshop visit is my next PAW, that I'll post in about two minutes. Maybe you'll like that one a bit better? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: PAW - Sipping Tea
It's more up your alley, but I don't care much for it. Not much substance ... others, I'm sure, will find it to be a very fine photo. Regardless of my feelings about a couple of pics, it's good to see you posting and photographing again, and experimenting with the new medium. Shel [Original Message] From: frank theriault Perhaps this is more up my alley than the flowers pic: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5865658 Taken at the same time in the same coffeeshop as the aforementioned photo. I rather like this one. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
PESO - Distortion
http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/distortion.html So, I'm walkin' along and I see this guy making faces at his reflection in a store window. I strike up a conversation and then get to take a couple of snaps. I decided to enhance his silly face by using the 85mm lens close up and shooting from a low angle. Didn't care much about detail and precise focus as it was something a little more abstract I was looking for. So, there you have it ... Shel -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Distortion
Woof! Woof Wuf Arrrf Shel [Original Message] From: Norm Baugher [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Date: 4/18/2007 2:36:01 PM Subject: Re: PESO - Distortion Was he having a 60's flash-back? Norm Shel Belinkoff wrote: http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/distortion.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Distortion
Hi Peter, I'll check on it on my next pass and see if there's some problem. It seems to have come up for others - maybe there's something that corrupted the page somehow. Of course, I'm always surprised that anything to do with computers works LOL Shel [Original Message] From: P. J. Alling I can't seem to load the page, which is interesting since I seem to be able to load my own earthlink pages. Shel Belinkoff wrote: http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/distortion.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Distortion
Hmmm ... how could that have happened? I wonder if while mucking around I may have inadvertently changed something. BTW, how'd you discover that? Shel [Original Message] From: Paul Sorenson Change the page name to *distort.html* and it'll work. -P Shel Belinkoff wrote: Hi Peter, I'll check on it on my next pass and see if there's some problem. It seems to have come up for others - maybe there's something that corrupted the page somehow. Of course, I'm always surprised that anything to do with computers works LOL Shel [Original Message] From: P. J. Alling I can't seem to load the page, which is interesting since I seem to be able to load my own earthlink pages. Shel Belinkoff wrote: http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/distortion.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Distortion
Yes, I figured how Sorenson did it, and decided that I didn't want people to have free access to my web pages. This'll at least slow such things down a bit. I suppose I've been too lax with even the most rudimentary security and privacy measures. No more ... Thanks, Paul. Shel [Original Message] From: Digital Image Studio Shel Belinkoff wrote: Hmmm ... how could that have happened? I wonder if while mucking around I may have inadvertently changed something. BTW, how'd you discover that? I used the following URL which allowed a free browsing of the web site directories however now there is appears to be a rudimentary index page in place so browsing is no longer possible. http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Distortion
Nothing happened at earthlink. A few people were mucking around the pdml-pics site so I made some security changes. I'll have things running smoothly later today ... Shel [Original Message] From: Maris V. Lidaka Sr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Date: 4/18/2007 5:59:29 PM Subject: Re: PESO - Distortion Something appears to have happened at EarthLink.net - I accessed the image fine earlier today, but at present it reports Page Not Found Maris Shel Belinkoff wrote: Hi Peter, I'll check on it on my next pass and see if there's some problem. It seems to have come up for others - maybe there's something that corrupted the page somehow. Of course, I'm always surprised that anything to do with computers works LOL Shel [Original Message] From: P. J. Alling I can't seem to load the page, which is interesting since I seem to be able to load my own earthlink pages. Shel Belinkoff wrote: http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/distortion.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Distortion
OK, all my pages are now reasonably secure. The next step, I think, is to link the pics on the separate pages to one page, and that'll integrate all the pics Shel [Original Message] From: Paul Sorenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Date: 4/18/2007 7:28:42 PM Subject: Re: PESO - Distortion You're welcome...I have an Earthlink account similar to yours, so I knew how to show the folder contents, although without the password, of course, everything remains read-only. Your solution was a good one...you might want to do it with your other account, too. ;} -P Shel Belinkoff wrote: Yes, I figured how Sorenson did it, and decided that I didn't want people to have free access to my web pages. This'll at least slow such things down a bit. I suppose I've been too lax with even the most rudimentary security and privacy measures. No more ... Thanks, Paul. Shel [Original Message] From: Digital Image Studio Shel Belinkoff wrote: Hmmm ... how could that have happened? I wonder if while mucking around I may have inadvertently changed something. BTW, how'd you discover that? I used the following URL which allowed a free browsing of the web site directories however now there is appears to be a rudimentary index page in place so browsing is no longer possible. http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: a flower for Shel - GDG
Awww, shucks ... Shel [Original Message] From: Godfrey DiGiorgi Something about people shooting more flowers now with digital than they did with film? I dunno. Flowers are easy game... and it costs nothing to shoot a bunch of them ... http://homepage.mac.com/godders/flower-for-shel.jpg -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: PAW 2007 - 19 - GDG
Hi Godders, I'm going to have to look at this one a few more times. My first reaction is quite positive. The pic has a haunting quality to it, something dreamlike or surreal. Unlike Maris, I think the woman on the right adds quite a bit to the feel of the photo. Her presence adds something to the pic. Having her may or may not improve the photo for me - I'll take another look at a later time. Speaking of tomatoes, I made a really great roasted tomato sauce last night - Yum-O! Shel [Original Message] From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] The behinder I go, the aheader I get. Continuing my exploration through photos I made in London, September 2001, this one appealed to me a lot. http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW7/19.htm Comments, critique, and the unavoidable flung tomatoes always appreciated. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PAW 2007 - 19 - GDG
Hi Godders, To be honest, I didn't really notice that black circle, but now that akaDoe has mentioned it, I'd agree. I thought about the pic during the day and realized that what I like about is that it very much reminds me of that great portrait of James Dean, Boulevard of Broken Dreams. For those unfamiliar with the photo, you can see it here: http://www.allposters.com/-sp/James-Dean-Posters_i1254577_.htm Shel [Original Message] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Same here, I saw it as a pic about the woman on the left. Personally, I'd clone out that black circle in the back http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW7/19.htm -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Lens cleaning - to do or not to do?
No, not at all. Remember, people were hung up on dust before there were digital cameras. And, having taken apart a few lenses because I saw huge dust globs, I was surprised to find how tiny the globs were. At least on the K 135/2.5, what appears big when you lock thru the front element, can be very, very small. For the most part worrying about dust is a real waste of time. However, I like fussy people who do worry about such things - I've gotten some real deals because the lens was dusty and needed a CLA LOL. All this talk about dust reminds me of Michael J. Pollard's famous line in Bonnie and Clyde: Dirt in the fuel line. Just blowed it away. BTW Marnie, your A35-105 is filthy ;-)) Shel [Original Message] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Question -- Dust in a lens does NOT show up like dust on a sensor? Hmmm. I thought that's why people got all hung up on dust in lenses. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - High on a Hill
TMI = Too Much Information Shel [Original Message] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 4/14/2007 9:58:16 PM Subject: Re: PESO - High on a Hill In a message dated 4/14/2007 9:48:39 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: TMI, Marnie Shel == I know. I am procrastinating. Tax time and all that. Marnie aka Doe I think that makes it forgivable. ;-) ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Pixel peeping and looking for defects (wasRe:Fullframelensesandthe K10D, CA anyone?)
Then you've not seen Aaron Reynolds' baseball photos. Quite exceptionally well done, actually. He only shoots JPEG at the ball park. Shel [Original Message] From: J. C. O'Connell Oh come on, you know as well as I that to get the same results exposure wise with jpeg as doing RAW capture/RAW processing it's nowhere near as easy or forgiving because you dont get the extended recording range with jpeg captures as you do with raw captures. When I say good results, I mean as good as a processed RAW capture which is what the thead is all about. Processing the RAW files is time consuming, and shooting jpeg to the same quality level as processeed RAW exposure wise is definately more difficult than shooting RAW and correcting in post processing. Its not easy no matter which way you choose to do it to acheive best possible quality. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Please unenable me!
No, that's not Leitz - that's Leica. Read the history of the camera and the company. Leitz hasn't been involved with Leica for a l-o-n-g time. Shel [Original Message] From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 4/14/2007 4:33:07 PM Subject: RE: Please unenable me! My photo dealer had his M8 repaired recently. The rangefinder needed adjustment. The M8 was returned in a wooden box, filled with foam, cut out to fit the camera! The box was sealed with a wax seal. And it came with a 1 year warranty (or was that 2 years ?). Ths warranty did not only cover the repair - but ANYTHING that might go wrong with the camera! The adjustment of the M8 rangefinder (focus adjustment) came at a price of 500 USD. That's pricey - that's Leitz! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - High on a Hill
Marnie, What's to the left of the gazebo? To the left and slightly down hill? Shel [Original Message] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 4/14/2007 2:10:04 PM Subject: Re: PESO - High on a Hill In a message dated 4/14/2007 11:53:11 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The gazebo is lost with the trees behind it. I think you're gonna need a crane to get what you want. -- Bob = That's the trouble, and you may be right. Drat. Because how often does one see a gazebo on a hill by itself? Hehehehe. Thanks for looking, Bob. Marnie aka Doe :-) ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - High on a Hill
TMI, Marnie Shel [Original Message] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In a message dated 4/14/2007 7:11:02 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's to the left of the gazebo? To the left and slightly down hill? Shel == More hill to the left down to almost the bottom and below that houses. I drove to the other side of the hill and saw no way to walk up to the gazebo that way without walking through someone's backyard. Right below it in front at the bottom is a senior condo complex (not Rossmoor). The only way to walk up to it is up that hill from the front and it's been rather wet so I won't attempt it until it is dry. It could be slippery if at all wet. I couldn't tell but the gazebo might possibly be in someone's backyard. I did find a mansion on top of the hill with a private drive. But I was not going to go up it, people like that are not nice to trespassers. But on the other side of the hill it doesn't look like a yard does it? Right around the gazebo area? It seems to be outside everyone's property line. Someone built it sometime though. I strongly suspect whoever built it once owned the land the condo complex is now on. The rest of the hill to the right and down is undeveloped. Probably somebody will throw something up there someday. I got some rather nice mustard shots that way, but nothing great enough to show on list. I've just been rather daunted about climbing the hill. With a camera around my neck. Not a great hiker these days and it is rather steep. And I will need shoes I don't mind grossing out. But if combo of dry and great sky and camera in car occur, then I will. Also maybe if I buy a hat. Sometimes one really wants to get a shot and it ain't easy, huh? LOL. Later, Marnie ;-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: PESO - Tree Screen
Cool shot, aka. Your artistic sensibilities are starting to merge nicely with photographic technology. Pretty soon Bill Robb will suggest that you get a camera better suited to your vision ;-)) Shel [Original Message] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] A different way to look at Big Rocks. http://members.aol.com/eactivist/PAWS/pages/treescreen.htm -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: See ya later
Norm, it never ceases to amaze me how articulate you can be. Shel [Original Message] From: Norm Baugher Woof, woo woo woof! Woof -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Protection glass / filters
Cool idea - although you may get some strange-sounding responses from me LOL Shel [Original Message] From: Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Date: 4/10/2007 5:36:40 AM Subject: Re: Protection glass / filters Hey, folks, While reading this thread, it occurred to me that there have been some messages over the years about which hoods fit which lenses, even using the wrong hood on the wrong lens or using some other manufacturer's hood on a lens. If the group thinks there is utility in doing so, I could host a hood cross reference page on our web site to provide that information to other folks. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Web Hosting: PBase or Photo.net?
Many, if not most, ISPs offer free or very inexpensive, space on their systems for subscribers. I put my pics up on the Earthlink servers and it works just fine for me. Earthlink allows me to have eight mailboxes, and each mailbox comes with a certain amount of free space which I use for hosting pics and galleries. The total is not a huge amount of space, but since it's only used for posting pics, it's been adequate for my needs for years. Total cost = $0.00 All I needed to know how to access the space and a few simple lines of HTML code that allows me to post the pics in the manner I prefer, essentially using the same code for every pic. While I can write the code for my own galleries - it's really simple and easy to do, there are many free programs out there that can do it for you, such as Porta, the program Godders uses (I think he said it's free) and several of the image editing programs, like Photoshop, will create galleries with a variety of features and designs. Unless your ISP doesn't allow you any free space, I see no reason to used Photonet or other such hosts. Shel [Original Message] From: Godfrey DiGiorgi I've had an account on Photo.net forever, but I generally dislike their album/display tools. Same goes for most of the picture hosting commercial websites. That's why I build my own pages and lease my own web server, or use .Mac ... G On Apr 10, 2007, at 8:12 AM, Jay Taylor wrote: My annual subscription is coming up on PBase and I'm considering a possible change of service. For those of you who have used Photo.net, how do you like it ? I'm overall somewhat satisfied with PBase, but sometimes find it gets bogged down with slow uploading . and some folks don't seem to be able to view links back to my photos. The upload feature of selecting a single .zip files of multiple pictures is nice as well as the Style Sheets and galleries functions. I'd like to find out more about Photo.net though. I have a limited account already, but wonder how the paid service compares to PBase and some of the others. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Web Hosting: PBase or Photo.net?
Hi Tom, I can certainly understand your POV, and far be it from me to dissuade you. I'd like to point out one other thing: Once the three or four lines of code were written, there was no need to write any more code for subsequent pics, and, had I chosen to do so, I could have set things up just to post the pics without any code whatsoever. Boris, I find your picture posting site just too busy, which, IMO, takes away from a good, simple presentation which focuses on the photograph. Your pics - and the pics of many others on the PDML - can benefit from better, simpler presentations. I mentioned Godders setup for his gallery as being a good one. While his setup for single pics is also good in many ways, there are some other presentations I like quite a bit. Bruce Dayton's pics are nicely and simply presented with a consistent format, and I can always count on being able to concentrate on his photos rather than being distracted by peripheral things in the presentation. There are some other presentations that I like as well. Bill Robb seems to have simple and direct presentations. As an aside, it was Bill who showed me how easy it was to put pics up the way I wanted them to appear, quite a few years ago ;-)) Shel [Original Message] From: Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] I am mostly like you, Tom. So I chose not.contaxg.com. It is free of charge. It allows multiple downloads and very convenient system of folders. But since recently I am leaning towards buying my own domain and making there my own very simple web page. Boris Tom C wrote: Because I work all day in the IT field and I'm loathe to write one single line of HTML code. I like photography, not more programming when I'm not working. Or call me lazy. Someday I will likely have my own gallery, but until then photo.net works fine for easily and quickly displaying images. It's not ideal, but it's close enough for the time being. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Web Hosting: PBase or Photo.net?
Hi, You posted two galleries before the cheapskate thread, both of which used a horizontal format. One was the window mannequins, the other was mostly (or completely) of trees, iirc. I thought those were with some template that you used. In any case, those presentations were simple, direct, easy to maneuver through Shel [Original Message] From: Godfrey DiGiorgi I think you're mistaking the way I wrote simple HTML using the Mac OS X included TextEdit application for the cheapskates thread as what I normally use to write HTML. Editors with HTML tools and HTML generators pose a significant advantage over writing from scratch with a simple text editor or word processor. Normally I use a pro-quality source code editor (BBEdit, for those who would like a good one on Mac OS X...): it includes a lot of excellent HTML constructs and is language-context sensitive so it helps keep me from making gross mistakes in syntax. I use Photoshop, Lightroom and iView MediaPro to generate HTML templates for more complex presentation layouts. I don't use them very much. iView's HTML code is simpler, generally, and easier to edit. Unlike some, I enjoy writing HTML occasionally. It's so much nicer to do it with good tools... ;-) G -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Protection glass / filters
Why would a DSLR require different filters than used on a film camera? Personally, I think the use of DSLR filters is hype and just a marketing ploy. I stopped using protective filters a long time ago, and have stuck with using good, deep lens hoods. In fact, I've sold most of my protective filters, keeping only a few for those times when I may be working in extremely poor conditions, i.e., sand storms in the Sahara, covering wild fires and active volcanic eruptions, photographing tsunamis from the beach. I do still have color correction and contrast filters that are sometimes used with lenses on film cameras. Boris has commented that he wants to protect his expensive glass, and I can certainly understand that. If you're nervous about you limited lenses, or any expensive lens, get very high quality filters and don't diddle around with filters of various brands and quality ... Shel [Original Message] From: Bong Manayon Thanks for posting your question, Roman. It is helping me a lot too...am in this debate with myself to filter or not to filter...? My hunch is to take off all the filters in shooting digital, but have not gotten over the protection issue. Somehow wanting to be ready in case Murphy strikes. My lenses have a UV of various brands and quality on them (I forget now which is which, I should take inventory...). Bong On 4/9/07, Roman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What protecting glass / UV filter brands do you use on DSLR. I've good experience with Sigma UV EX DG (for digital). Hoya UV Pro1 Digital I recently purchased had hard dirt stuck to the glass from the inner side that has been contacting with porolone in the filter case, so cleaned it with ethanol first, but the image passing through the glass is good. You? -- new photos ever so often... http://roman.blakout.net/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- Bong Manayon http://www.bong.uni.cc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Protection glass / filters
Why use a filter if you prefer not to? Just get an old filter, smash out the glass, and use the ring. Using a filter with a pol my not be advantageous. Shel [Original Message] From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Date: 4/9/2007 6:39:37 AM Subject: Re: Protection glass / filters None of my lenses has a protective filter on it except the FA*80-200/2.8, and that's mainly because the lens's own filter threads are damaged to the extent that it's really difficult to put a filter on it (and particularly so with a polarizer, which is my most-used filter). So the SMC Pentax UV filter I have on this lens provides surrogate filter threads. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO: Funny Dog Picture
Is he wearing an e-collar - oh, never mind, I see from the url that he (probably) is. Shel William Robb wrote: Jester had a bit of surgery a couple of weeks ago. I thought the disembodied head look to be a bit surreal. http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/pictures/peso/elizabethan_bug.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Bird in Tree
No offense taken. Aren't the jays with the crest called Stellar (Steller?) Jays? The scrub jays around here seem to be our standard run-of-the-mill jay LOL Shel doing the backpeddle LOL [Original Message] From: Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED] Shel Belinkoff wrote: Yes, it's a standard blue jay. Shel Sorry, Shel. There is no standard jay. You might think of a Blue Jay as standard because they are so common. This bird however is a Scrub Jay. Notice it has no crest as Blue jays do and also it has the brownish colored back. Really, I don't like correcting people (please don't be offended), but biology, especially ornithology, are passions for me (and my formal training). http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_4674a.htm Quite nice. A jay? Godfrey It's not a bad shot either, Bruce, but maybe the bird is a little soft for me. -- Christian http://photography.skofteland.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Bird in Tree
I don't recall ever seeing one of these, especially in the areas where Bruce and I live. Shel [Original Message] From: Christian A Blue Jay: http://www.science.smith.edu/stopoverbirds/birdpixs/images/Blue%20Jay.jpg -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO: Funny Dog Picture
That's the only name I know them by. We use the term e-collar as a shorthand. While e-collar may be used in training, I've not heard it used here to any degree. Shel [Original Message] From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Date: 4/9/2007 7:48:49 AM Subject: Re: PESO: Funny Dog Picture - Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff Subject: Re: PESO: Funny Dog Picture Is he wearing an e-collar - oh, never mind, I see from the url that he (probably) is. I'm not sure if Elizabethan is the proper name for them, I've seen them referred to by that name. The term e-collar is generally reserved for the ones that use an electric charge to get the dog's attention. Thanks for looking William Robb http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/pictures/peso/elizabethan_bug.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Bird in Tree
Yes, I know - they are more of an eastern species. Did a little research after your first post. Curious that Marnie's seen them here Shel [Original Message] From: Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Date: 4/9/2007 8:31:37 AM Subject: Re: PESO - Bird in Tree Shel Belinkoff wrote: I don't recall ever seeing one of these, especially in the areas where Bruce and I live. A Blue Jay: http://www.science.smith.edu/stopoverbirds/birdpixs/images/Blue%20Jay.jpg :-) That's because they don't live in California! Hahahahaha What's common to one person is not to another. I forgot that Blue Jays are more of an Eastern species. Here is a decent site for bird IDs (the pictures blow but the maps and descriptions are ok) http://www.mbr-pwrc.usgs.gov/id/framlst/infocenter.html#Corvidae -- Christian http://photography.skofteland.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: GESO (again) - Local Auto Motor Show]
Same here. Even if I look at a gallery, it's usually only a few pics. Nice sized thumbnails help me to get a good impression of what's posted. But it's not so much my connection speed that limits my interest. Some galleries have no theme, others are just to much to digest - too many pics - and others have poor navigation routines. Godders' galleries are pretty much OK - not to many pics, usually themed and organized, and quick to get into and easy to navigate. Shel [Original Message] From: Kenneth Waller Boris, I saw your first post of this gallery, took a very quick spin thru wasn't sufficiently interested to comment. - Sorry. Personally I'm more likely to comment on a single image than an entire gallery - I'm on dial up. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Try a hood (was: Protection glass / filters)
Bingo! But not just any hood. It really helps to get one that's truly appropriate for the lens/camera combination, and don't be afraid to experiment with lenses from different brand cameras or sources other than Pentax. Shel [Original Message] From: Mark Erickson I think it's been said before, but you might try using lens hoods for protection. They create no optical degradation and sometimes even reduce lens flare! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Poppy
I like what that lens does ... ;-)) Shel Pentax K10D, Tokina AT-X SD 400/5.6, Handheld ISO 400, 1/1000 sec @ f/6.7 http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_4692a.htm -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Every K-Mount Ever Made, NIB
This morning, while cleaning out the back of a closet that had been unused for a few years, I found a large box on the top shelf. Curious, and needing the space, I took the box down and upon opening it I found boxes of K-mount lenses. Every focal length and iteration from the 15mm through a 400mm, all NIB. I also discovered a couple of NIB, black K-bodied cameras. Holy F-stop, Batman! Amazing - I can't believe I'd forgotten about this treasure trove for so many years. Imagine my joy. Then I woke up. I just wanted to share my dream with you. Shel -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Every K-Mount Ever Made, NIB
Have those a lot, do you? Shel [Original Message] From: J. C. O'Connell At least they are better than those damn everything's been stolen dreams jco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Savage Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2007 1:05 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Every K-Mount Ever Made, NIB I hate those types of dreams. They generally put me in a foul mood for the first half of the day. Cheers, Dave On 4/9/07, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This morning, while cleaning out the back of a closet that had been unused for a few years, I found a large box on the top shelf. Curious, and needing the space, I took the box down and upon opening it I found boxes of K-mount lenses. Every focal length and iteration from the 15mm through a 400mm, all NIB. I also discovered a couple of NIB, black K-bodied cameras. Holy F-stop, Batman! Amazing - I can't believe I'd forgotten about this treasure trove for so many years. Imagine my joy. Then I woke up. I just wanted to share my dream with you. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: K10D Comes down in price
While not as cheap as Amazon, Buydig (a known good source with free shipping) is offering the K10D for $847 and change. Shel [Original Message] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pdml@pdml.net Date: 4/8/2007 8:41:37 AM Subject: K10D Comes down in price At Amazon that is. It is now down to $809 (camera body only). That is a price drop from last month. Marnie aka Doe :-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Bird in Tree
Yes, it's a standard blue jay. Shel [Original Message] From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Date: 4/8/2007 3:09:53 PM Subject: Re: PESO - Bird in Tree On Apr 8, 2007, at 11:45 AM, Bruce Dayton wrote: Ok, ok, it had been quite a while since I had last posted any PESO's so I got a few all at once. This is the last one. http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_4674a.htm Quite nice. A jay? Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: PESO - Bird in Tree
Hi Bruce - I like this one because it shows a little of the leaves and habitat. The jay looks as though it could be a little sharper but it's still pretty good and certainly more than acceptable for many situations. Shel [Original Message] From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Date: 4/8/2007 11:51:26 AM Subject: PESO - Bird in Tree Ok, ok, it had been quite a while since I had last posted any PESO's so I got a few all at once. This is the last one. http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_4674a.htm Comments welcome -- Bruce -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: K10D Comes down in price
What was it last month? Shel [Original Message] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pdml@pdml.net Date: 4/8/2007 8:41:37 AM Subject: K10D Comes down in price At Amazon that is. It is now down to $809 (camera body only). That is a price drop from last month. Marnie aka Doe :-) ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Problem with A* 200 macro
COUNTRY: USA LOCATION: Torrance, CA NAME: Dean`s Camera Repair ADDRESS: 1055 West Carson Street PHONE: 310-782-8619 COMMENTS: Dean is as sharp as some of my lenses. He has fixed a Super Program, and he is working on one (two, cannibalizing one) of my lenses now. As soon as my LX comes back from Colorado it is going straight to Dean to have him check it out. He knows a little about Pentax because he used to work for them. He has a lens collimator at his house which he uses for his own lenses, so I think he knows a little about lenses. He also checked out my Spotmatic II, but it was so close in tolerance it didn't need any work. He's also good with slide-projectors, as he gave me some tips on fixing mine. SUBMITTED BY: Steve Larson; [EMAIL PROTECTED] DATE: June 17, 2000 Dean's done some work on some of my lenses. He's a good choice. Shel [Original Message] From: Mark Cassino I looks like I can work around the problem by setting exposure comp to -1 stop and the aperture one stop smaller than I really want. but then I can't stop down beyond f22 (not that I want but someday I might) and, well, I just want it to work properly... Any advice would be appreciated... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: peso: evening light on 1st ave
Great colors, but the pic could be better framed, and the copyright notice is huge and distracting. Shel [Original Message] From: ann sanfedele http://annsan.smugmug.com/gallery/2564371#138380377-L-LB -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
