On Jan 25, 2010, at 2:37 AM, mike wrote:
*Neither is better on an absolute basis. The choice depends on your
application. Once you know your application the debate goes away.
The debate
only exists when people presume erroneously that someone else's
needs mirror
their own.*
That was
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 11:08 AM, tjpa t...@tjpa.com wrote:
We know better now. Today Kodak is not making Kodachrome any more.
Right. So Kodak dropped a venerable film from their product line.
A large part of the reason was because of competition from Fuji. An
awful lot of photographers
Fuji, Kodak and I believe Ilford are all still producing film.
One of the other reasons Kodachrome was dropped was it required
special processing. Could not be done in, in store labs etc.
Stewart
At 08:54 PM 1/26/2010, you wrote:
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 11:08 AM, tjpa t...@tjpa.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 10:01 PM, Rev. Stewart Marshall
revsamarsh...@earthlink.net wrote:
One of the other reasons Kodachrome was dropped was it required special
processing. Could not be done in, in store labs etc.
Quite so. A nice film, but over time, other formulations achieved
On Jan 26, 2010, at 10:01 PM, Rev. Stewart Marshall wrote:
Fuji, Kodak and I believe Ilford are all still producing film.
... and delivering it to customers via horse-drawn carriage.
Here is a thoughtful post...
In a recent conversation with one of the scientists/archivists at the
Getty
To: COMPUTERGUYS-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2010 10:57 PM
Subject: Re: [CGUYS] digital camera shutter lag
On Jan 26, 2010, at 10:01 PM, Rev. Stewart Marshall wrote:
Fuji, Kodak and I believe Ilford are all still producing film.
... and delivering it to customers via horse
?
--- On Tue, 1/26/10, phartz...@gmail.com phartz...@gmail.com wrote:
From: phartz...@gmail.com phartz...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [CGUYS] digital camera shutter lag
To: COMPUTERGUYS-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Date: Tuesday, January 26, 2010, 9:54 PM
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 11:08 AM, tjpa t...@tjpa.com wrote
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 10:57 PM, t.piwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote:
On Jan 26, 2010, at 10:01 PM, Rev. Stewart Marshall wrote:
Fuji, Kodak and I believe Ilford are all still producing film.
... and delivering it to customers via horse-drawn carriage.
That is a totally silly and childish and
I would have said so Keith Olbermannish but other than that, this is wholly
Tom P'ish.
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 9:47 PM, phartz...@gmail.com phartz...@gmail.comwrote:
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 10:57 PM, t.piwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote:
On Jan 26, 2010, at 10:01 PM, Rev. Stewart Marshall wrote:
On Jan 26, 2010, at 11:13 PM, Ellen Rains Harris wrote:
Your Government also is the world's largest user of vacuum tubes.
Smart move. Vacuum tube circuits are resistant to EMP.
*
** List info, subscription management,
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 11:16 PM, t.piwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote:
On Jan 24, 2010, at 11:01 PM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote:
Completely useless? How so? How does he feel about the experience?
No I'm not going there. If you think learning to load film into a
developing tank is a useful
I like IrfanView as a free app to do basic functions, like rotating,
re-sizing, basic contrast/brightness, adding text, etc. www.irfanview.com
Mike
Fred Holmes wrote:
At 09:19 AM 1/24/2010, Tony B wrote:
none of them even know how to resize a digital photo for posting,
much less how to adjust
This isn't quite correct. I've been a professional photographer for
almost 30 years. I retired from it professionally full time a few years back.
Anyway, unless you lock up the mirror on your SLR you've got lag time. Many
cheaper SLRs didn't have this capability. But the photographer
Wow, bringing back memories now. My first SLR was (I think it was
called) a Practica. It had the screw mount interchangeable lenses. Talk about
impractical. But damn near indestructible. Much like my Nikon F3 was. You could
throw those cameras across the room, pick them up and they'd
I started with the Argus C3. Anyone remember?
Marcio
-Original Message-
From: Jeff Miles jmile...@charter.net
Sent: Jan 24, 2010 9:44 AM
To: COMPUTERGUYS-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: [CGUYS] digital camera shutter lag
Wow, bringing back memories now. My first SLR was (I think
Yes, back in the '50s, I ran a lot of BW pan film through a C3 and
developed it myself (I still have the negatives and prints
somewhere...). Then I went to a Kodak Retina, which was advanced by
comparison. The next was Pentax K1000 with a large bag full of lenses
and accessories. When I
Is THAT what burst mode is good for? I read about it when I got my
camera but it seemed useless.
Agreed on the ridiculous number of people getting DSLRs these days.
This past christmas we had several more local housewives get them as
gifts, and of course none of them even know how to resize a
The Argus was my dad's good camera. I shot and developed a little bit in
High School with it.
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 8:53 AM, Mike Sloane mikeslo...@verizon.net wrote:
Yes, back in the '50s, I ran a lot of BW pan film through a C3 and
developed it myself (I still have the negatives and
: [CGUYS] digital camera shutter lag
Yes, back in the '50s, I ran a lot of BW pan film through a C3 and
developed it myself (I still have the negatives and prints
somewhere...). Then I went to a Kodak Retina, which was advanced by
comparison. The next was Pentax K1000 with a large bag full
, 2010 1:32 PM
To: COMPUTERGUYS-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: [CGUYS] digital camera shutter lag
The Argus was my dad's good camera. I shot and developed a little bit in
High School with it.
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 8:53 AM, Mike Sloane mikeslo...@verizon.net wrote:
Yes, back in the '50s, I ran
Marcio wrote:
I started with the Argus C3. Anyone remember?
Marcio
I remember, although I never owned the C3. I had an Argus C44, and
still do. This was followed by my first SLR, a Topcon RE Super. It had
a removable prism to change the view screen, and was the only camera
that
Marcio wrote:
I used Panasonic X film had smal grains. Then we had Plus X.
Good old days. When color came in I no longer could work in the lab.What a pain.
Marcio
I think the fine-grain BW film was Kodak Panatomic. Speed ASA 25.
Plus X had speed 100, Tri-X speed 400.
I like shooting
At 11:47 AM -0500 1/24/10, Robert Carroll wrote:
[snippage]
I can't remember the name of a Kodak color slide film that rendered
false colors. For example, a blue sky would appear reddish pink,
and nearly every color was replaced by a greatly differing color.
This was way before Photoshop
On Jan 24, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Robert Carroll wrote:
My daughter three years ago took photography in high school. There
they still use BW film in cameras and learn to develop and print in
a darkroom. I loaned her my Pentax Super ME to take the class.
I was quite upset to find that the
You wanted him to learn how to fire howitzers?
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 12:49 PM, tjpa t...@tjpa.com wrote:
On Jan 24, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Robert Carroll wrote:
My daughter three years ago took photography in high school. There they
still use BW film in cameras and learn to develop and print
On Jan 24, 2010, at 6:37 AM, Jeff Miles wrote:
This isn't quite correct. I've been a professional photographer for
almost 30 years. I retired from it professionally full time a few
years back. Anyway, unless you lock up the mirror on your SLR you've
got lag time. Many cheaper SLRs didn't
To: COMPUTERGUYS-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: [CGUYS] digital camera shutter lag
On Jan 24, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Robert Carroll wrote:
My daughter three years ago took photography in high school. There
they still use BW film in cameras and learn to develop and print in
a darkroom. I loaned her my
It's always credible to learn the history and art behind the work you are
doing.
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 3:09 PM, tjpa t...@tjpa.com wrote:
On Jan 24, 2010, at 3:07 PM, mike wrote:
You wanted him to learn how to fire howitzers?
That would have been more useful.
So your son took a class called 'digital photography' and then they made him
learn about developing?
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 12:49 PM, tjpa t...@tjpa.com wrote:
On Jan 24, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Robert Carroll wrote:
My daughter three years ago took photography in high school. There they
still
One can learn to anticipate a lag of a few 1/10s of a second. A lag of 2 or 3 seconds is a completely different matter requiring the photographer to become a fortune teller. I borrowed a Nikon for a vacation that had such a lag and found it completely impossible for candid photos.
I have such a
There is an app for that. Comes from FT. Sill home of Army Field
Artillery. Hoaah! :-)
Stewart
At 02:07 PM 1/24/2010, you wrote:
You wanted him to learn how to fire howitzers?
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 12:49 PM, tjpa t...@tjpa.com wrote:
I was quite upset to find that the photography
On Jan 24, 2010, at 5:25 PM, mike wrote:
So your son took a class called 'digital photography' and then they
made him
learn about developing?
There goes Mike again. Trying to respond to CGUYS posts while
simultaneously in three chat rooms, streaming youtube and hulu videos,
shopping for
Actually I just like making you dance on command.
On Jan 24, 2010 7:44 PM, t.piwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote:
On Jan 24, 2010, at 5:25 PM, mike wrote: So your son took a class called
'digital photography' a...
There goes Mike again. Trying to respond to CGUYS posts while simultaneously
in three
Roger D. Parish wrote:
At 11:47 AM -0500 1/24/10, Robert Carroll wrote:
[snippage]
I can't remember the name of a Kodak color slide film that rendered
false colors. For example, a blue sky would appear reddish pink, and
nearly every color was replaced by a greatly differing color. This
was
I don't know if that was it's original intent, but that's what I use it
for. It's great for shooting things in motion. Such a case was my visit to the
butterfly garden in Victoria Canada. Even while sitting on a leaf they'd keep
moving their wings. This was very annoying, trying to get
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 2:49 PM, tjpa t...@tjpa.com wrote:
I was quite upset to find that the photography class my son was taking
wasted many hours teaching them how to develop film and make prints in the
darkroom. Completely useless skills.
Completely useless? How so? How does he feel
You still have the submarine?
Jeff Miles
jmile...@charter.net
Join my Mafia
http://apps.facebook.com/inthemafia/status_invite.php?from=550968726
On Jan 24, 2010, at 8:29 AM, Robert Carroll wrote:
Marcio wrote:
I started with the Argus C3. Anyone remember?
Marcio
I
On Jan 24, 2010, at 11:01 PM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote:
Completely useless? How so? How does he feel about the experience?
No I'm not going there. If you think learning to load film into a
developing tank is a useful skill, you are going to have to defend it.
Film is not dead. It may have died in the consumer level but it is
still used in commercial production.
If your child is going to make it in the photography field he has to
learn from the ground up.
It is like getting a CIS degree and not know how the stupid machine
works or is built.
By
Tom doesn't understand the art part behind photography, only the mechanics
of taking digital photos.
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 9:16 PM, t.piwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote:
On Jan 24, 2010, at 11:01 PM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote:
Completely useless? How so? How does he feel about the experience?
Had one of those myself. ca. 1950. Marvelous camera. Took lots of good
pictures on Kodachrome, Ektachrome, and B/W. B/W was called Pan-X, Plus-X and
Tri-X IIRC, but I'm having trouble really remembering it.
Fred Holmes
At 08:28 PM 1/20/2010, Marcio wrote:
Back thereI received several
At 09:19 AM 1/24/2010, Tony B wrote:
none of them even know how to resize a digital
photo for posting, much less how to adjust a lens.
What is the best process for resizing a digital photograph? What application
does one use? I presume that the high-end photo-manipulators all do a good
job,
I don't recall its name, but there was an infrared film that was used to
detect camouflage (or items that were being camouflaged). While the camouflage
fooled the naked eye, it didn't fool this film. It could also be used for
special effects.
Fred Holmes
At 11:47 AM 1/24/2010, Robert Carroll
I showed my mom Graphic Converter. It's for the Mac, don't know if they
have a Windows version. And it's cheap. I think it was $25, but might be more
now. She uses it all the time. I finally got her off of using iPhoto.
Jeff Miles
jmile...@charter.net
Join my Mafia
Pretty much the build in stuff in any OS can manage a simple
resizing...AFAIK. I've never had a problem.
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 9:48 PM, Fred Holmes f...@his.com wrote:
At 09:19 AM 1/24/2010, Tony B wrote:
none of them even know how to resize a digital
photo for posting, much less how to
Yah GC is good, no windows version AFAIK...IRFAN view is out there though.
Pretty good for windows.
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 10:00 PM, Jeff Miles jmile...@charter.net wrote:
I showed my mom Graphic Converter. It's for the Mac, don't know if
they have a Windows version. And it's cheap. I
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 11:16 PM, t.piwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote:
On Jan 24, 2010, at 11:01 PM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote:
Completely useless? How so? How does he feel about the experience?
No I'm not going there. If you think learning to load film into a developing
tank is a useful
On Jan 25, 2010, at 12:53 AM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote:
Can't you think of anything about working with film that is of use
in digital photography?
Nope. Nothing.
I learned more about gamma after spending 30 minutes with Digital
Darkroom than I did after spending 3 months dicking around
On Jan 24, 2010, at 11:33 PM, Rev. Stewart Marshall wrote:
Do you know how to dodge a photo? Overexpose to make it look
better, underexpose it to get certain effects. Double expose to get
a different effect.
You don't learn that unless you start off loading film into
canisters!!
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm
A good if not long article on the subject. Some highlights.
*Neither is better on an absolute basis. The choice depends on your
application. Once you know your application the debate goes away. The debate
only exists when people presume erroneously
On 1/20/10, Marcio m...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Back thereI received several prizes in photo contests with the Argus C3.
Marcio
-Original Message-
From: b_s-wilk b1sun...@yahoo.es
Sent: Jan 20, 2010 5:39 PM
To: COMPUTERGUYS-L@listserv.aol.com
Subject: Re: [CGUYS] digital camera shutter
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 12:24 AM, t.piwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote:
Several new cameras are taking their cues from the iPhone, sporting a huge
LCD and a multi-touch interface.Controls are all virtual and much easier to
access.
Yes, but controls located within a menu, even with a touch-screen,
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 12:29 AM, Fred Holmes f...@his.com wrote:
On many cameras, manual focus seems to mean merely not autofocus. I.e.,
no camera sensor determines when the camera is focused. But you still have
to use the motor to move the lens elements. There is no way to just twist
EVIL looks very good, but still a bit expensive.
By coincidence, I just received a review for The Best Camera Is The One
That’s With You™ by Chase Jarvis.
http://www.thebestcamera.com/book.html
Excellent advice. The Best Camera Is The One That’s With You. That
includes Brownie, box camera,
Back thereI received several prizes in photo contests with the Argus C3.
Marcio
-Original Message-
From: b_s-wilk b1sun...@yahoo.es
Sent: Jan 20, 2010 5:39 PM
To: COMPUTERGUYS-L@listserv.aol.com
Subject: Re: [CGUYS] digital camera shutter lag
EVIL looks very good, but still a bit
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Sue Cubic scu...@earthlink.net wrote:
Shutter lag is a problem with my Nikon Coolpix. But I bought it in 2001, so
I can't complain too much. I've had much fun with it over the years.
Shutter lag can be compensated for in many instances by switching to
phartz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Sue Cubic scu...@earthlink.net wrote:
Shutter lag is a problem with my Nikon Coolpix. But I bought it in 2001, so
I can't complain too much. I've had much fun with it over the years.
Shutter lag can be compensated for in
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 6:59 PM, Robert Carroll
carrollcompu...@gmail.com wrote
Small point-and-shoot cameras, those the size of a deck of cards, do not
have the ability to focus manually nor do they have aperture-priority mode.
You are, at a minimum, mostly correct. There are a number of
But manual focus, etc., is a matter of using menus to get to the function, and
then using some control to run the lens motor that focuses the lens, etc. Not
a quick process if you are trying to take extemporaneous photographs. My ideal
camera would focus and zoom using old-fashioned
What are they called? How does one determine if a particular camera is one of
them. Spec sheets seem to be short on such information.
Fred Holmes
At 07:20 PM 1/19/2010, phartz...@gmail.com wrote:
You are, at a minimum, mostly correct. There are a number of other
cameras, those that are in
On Jan 19, 2010, at 6:59 PM, Robert Carroll wrote:
Small point-and-shoot cameras, those the size of a deck of cards, do
not have the ability to focus manually nor do they have aperture-
priority mode.
New camera type that some are calling EVIL (Electronic Viewfinder
Interchangeable Lens)
Good article, looks like some good choices for cameras...but for the GF1 for
example you are looking at almost a grand again. Not exactly a good choice
against a 200-500 dollar point and shoot no matter the advantages.
Hopefully the prices will drop.
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 7:30 PM, tjpa
: Fred Holmes f...@his.com
Subject: Re: [CGUYS] digital camera shutter lag
To: COMPUTERGUYS-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Date: Tuesday, January 19, 2010, 8:22 PM
What are they called? How does one determine if a particular camera is one of
them. Spec sheets seem to be short on such information.
Fred Holmes
What are they called? How does one determine if a particular camera is one
of them. Spec sheets seem to be short on such information.
That's the reason it's a good idea to browse sites like DPReview
(www.dpreview.com) and Steve's Digicam
(www.steves-digicams.com/camera-reviews). They do
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Fred Holmes f...@his.com wrote:
But manual focus, etc., is a matter of using menus to get to the function,
and then using some control to run the lens motor that focuses the lens,
etc. Not a quick process if you are trying to take extemporaneous
- and use! - film cameras, that display no shutter lag at
all. Count me among them.
--- On Tue, 1/19/10, phartz...@gmail.com phartz...@gmail.com wrote:
From: phartz...@gmail.com phartz...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [CGUYS] digital camera shutter lag
To: COMPUTERGUYS-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Date: Tuesday
On Jan 19, 2010, at 11:19 PM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote:
As you point out, plodding through menus or trying to remember where
functions are to be found within menus is a pain in the ass and also
quite slow. Small cameras typically have a lot of stuff in menus
because the tiny body of the camera
At 11:19 PM 1/19/2010, phartz...@gmail.com wrote:
While I haven't actually tried it, I presume that manual focus is like
manual zoom -- overshoot, overshoot, overshoot, or if there is a speed
control on the motor, approach the setting very slowly.
Manual focus can be achieved through, as
Excellent link! It shows my Panasonic as having a .45 second shutter
lag. This is the same camera I just posted *has no shutter lag*. Why
the discrepancy?
As the article states, it's measuring the delay between pressing the
shutter button and the camera recording the picture. It is NOT
measuring
At 04:45 PM 1/18/2010, you wrote:
I'll argue it. I've only owned two cheap (~$100) digital cameras - a
Kodak and a Panasonic and neither had any shutter lag at all. The few
earlier cameras that had this problem got a lot of press.
Shutter lag is a problem with my Nikon Coolpix. But I bought
70 matches
Mail list logo
