Does she know she'll have to buy a CF card too? If she doesn't want to
spend more than $1K, maybe she'd be better off getting a used Canon D30
used lens.
Greg
- Original Message -
From: William M Kane [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 10:33 PM
Hi William,
on 17 May 04 you wrote in pentax.list:
A friend of mine is looking at digital SLR's, but doesn't want to
spend more than $1000 USD on such a beast. Canon has a model that fits
these specs, but I'd like her to buy a Pentax, so that we can trade
lenses around . . .
I've heard
Hi Ken,
on 16 May 04 you wrote in pentax.list:
Following might be of interest to you. It is statistics published
every month by CIPA (Camera and Imaging Products Ass'n), and goes by
film/digital/domestic/export (by region too) and camera type (even by
pixel #) etc.
Thanks a lot! I will take
Hi Joe,
on 17 May 04 you wrote in pentax.list:
All tests were done at ISO 200.
That should be the problem. I wrote (some months ago):
--
There's a German thread on incorrect flash exposures at
Hi Shaun,
on 18 May 04 you wrote in pentax.list:
Has anybody got/used the new 16-45mm DA F4.0? What do we know about it?
I've used it. It is a really good lens. Very sharp, no CA problems (at
least I didn't notice one) and good built quality. It's plastic, but
feels better than a FA 24-90. The
- Original Message -
From: graywolf
Subject: Bickering (was Re: Antonio please stop it now!)
I would take it as a personal favor if anyone who reads this
particular post
would refrain from making further comments to this thread. Talk
about anything
you like, but let's refrain from
- Original Message -
From: frank theriault
Subject: Re: Different Tastes
Thanks for the nice comment, Bill.
What's a JRT?
Jack Russell Terrier.
William Robb
- Original Message -
From: Shaun Canning
Subject: 16-45mm DA
Has anybody got/used the new 16-45mm DA F4.0? What do we know about
it?
Used it.
It's big, but not heavy. If you have handled the 18-35, it feels very
similar, but is quite a bit larger, but not very heavy. The zoom
feels
Thanks Leon. Glad to hear you are enjoying this lens. Did you buy it with
your *ist D, or later on?
Thanks for the offer too, next time I am down that way I'll look you up.
But it won't be for another 6 months or so!
Maybe we could organise a Melbourne PDML meeting?
Cheers
Shaun
Leon Altoff
What happened, did I run into a room full of Microsoft shareholders or
something? All I said was that Windows was a substandard operating
system and that it was riddled with viruses and spyware and that we the
users deserved better, especially given the money the company makes.
Antonio
On 18
On Mon, 17 May 2004 23:04:33 -0500, Stan Halpin wrote:
Several of us have the X-Drive and none have had any
problems that I have heard of.
I'll second Stan on this, I have an X-Drive and have no problems. Mine
has a 60 gig drive in it and I use it for backups and all sorts of
things.
Leon
Hello Frank,
Tuesday, May 18, 2004, 12:36:07 AM, you wrote:
ft A fun grab in a candy shop:
ft http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2369082
ft Comments are always welcome!
ft cheers,
ft frank
It is indeed very funny! Makes me think if she's gonna buy a candy
for herself or for the dog.
Could it be the contact of the wheel was dirty since it isn't sealed?
Regards,
Alan Chan
http://www.pbase.com/wlachan
My *istD is acting up:
Sometimes, when I turn on the power on the battery grip, the Tv wheel on
the
camera doesn't respond. Neither in P, Tv or M modes. The Tv wheel on the
grip
On Mon, 17 May 2004 21:31:28 -0400, Christian Skofteland wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Has anyone gotten consistently good TTL results with any flash on the
*ist D? I am in the market, but hate to spend money on something that
may not give
Bob, what are you talkiing about?. All of my comments have been well
put. I suggest you direct your anger at others. Quite a nice little
gang you have here.
Antonio
On 18 May 2004, at 01:54, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good advice from Jostein, and we don't need to know your every
G'day,
Another recent photo I've taken in the garden. I'm lucky enough to have
a few sugar gliders in the area, and often get a couple feeding on an
acacia tree in my back yard. I was more-or-less testing to see how I'd
go with flash and my tamron 500/8 mirror at night. But first, the URL (-:
Well put Graywolf, I didn't expect everyone to agree with my evaluation
of Windows OS (which is born from many years of unhappy use), and was
aware that OS choices are often a hotly debated, but what then followed
was completely unnecessary and did not help advance the debate.
Especially as
Hi Jostein,
on 18 May 04 you wrote in pentax.list:
My *istD is acting up:
Sometimes, when I turn on the power on the battery grip, the Tv wheel on the
camera doesn't respond. Neither in P, Tv or M modes. The Tv wheel on the grip
works perfectly.
This may happen, if the wheels on the grip are
Dunno, Alan.
It seems so odd, since the problem only occurs when the release button on the
grip is on. When it's off, the Tv wheel on the camera is just fine...
Jostein
Quoting Alan Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Could it be the contact of the wheel was dirty since it isn't sealed?
Regards,
Alan
Well I certainly support to refrain from dancing. :-)
What's that stuff about romance, btw.
Cheers,
Jostein the Log
Quoting Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
But while there's moonlight, and music and love and romance,
Let's not discuss computers, and dance!
Cheers,
Cotty
I'll try to avoid the general opinion and will limit this to my personal
experience...
I do not photograph for a living - but I do take photographs almost every day.
Over the years I have acquired some ;-) cameras with a variety of film formats
(including a Minox and a Plaubel 4x5).
I use many of
Insect photos in flight are not impossible. Just incredibly bloody hard
to do! The example here is not sharp, but I was pretty happy with it.
Next year my aim is to get a shot like this sharp and well exposed.
http://www.heritageservices.com.au/Insect%20Macros/images/Macro%20Insect
Has anyone seen or heard from Pal? I want to pick his brains...
Cheers
Shaun
Dr. Shaun Canning
Cultural Heritage Services
Lawrence Way, Karratha,
Western Australia,
6714
0414-967644
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.heritageservices.com.au
Out of the list of gear recently discussed, the 80-200mm F2.8 ATX-PRO
has gone to a new home in California where it will be well fed, and
cared for.
All the other gear is still available. This includes the 300mm F2.8,
24mm FA*, 28-80 F2.8, 50mm F1.7, and 1.7x AF converter. Also there is an
I don't think film is quite dead yet - not whilst you have to pay
$1,000s for digital SLRs that will give you comparable results to what
a film SLR can offer for a fraction of the price. Maybe a few years
down the road. Personally I am quite happy to continue with film until
full frame DSLRs
Hi!
If I understand you correctly, you are faced with two options - either
buy Pentax 67II or invest in DSLR. May I suggest another option (for
which suggestion I hope I am not going to be banned from __Pentax__
list).
Perhaps you could invest in another MF system that either already has
a
Insect photos in flight are not impossible. Just incredibly bloody hard
to do!
Seconded!
I spent some time when I first got my macro lens getting shots of a
hoverfly in flight.
http://davidavid.whatsbeef.net/hoverfly.jpg is a good one I got from the
couple of hours I spent with the little guy.
Boris,
It is actually an excellent suggestion!
Andy
-Original Message-
From: Boris Liberman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 4:25 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Future Practicality of Film
Hi!
If I understand you correctly, you are faced with two
Can anyone suggest a realistic price to pay for one of these, in fully
functional condition. Thanks.
Malcolm
frank theriault wrote:
I use photo.net. 100 free photo uploads, no size restriction
that I'm aware of, critique requests available, lots of
forums to participate in (which I don't, 'cause with PDML,
who has time), lots of interesting articles and columns and opinions.
For I think $25
frank theriault photographed:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2369082
I like everything about this picture, from the backdrop to the main
characters.
Malcolm
On Tue, 18 May 2004 17:37:15 +1000 (EST), Dr. Shaun Canning wrote:
Thanks Leon. Glad to hear you are enjoying this lens. Did you buy it with
your *ist D, or later on?
Thanks for the offer too, next time I am down that way I'll look you up.
But it won't be for another 6 months or so!
Maybe we
After so long time, he appeared with a few messages to the list at the
beginning of April, then no more news.
Dario
- Original Message -
From: Shaun Canning [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 10:54 AM
Subject: Where's Pal?
Has anyone seen or heard from
It's not dirty contact then.
Regards,
Alan Chan
http://www.pbase.com/wlachan
Dunno, Alan.
It seems so odd, since the problem only occurs when the release button on
the
grip is on. When it's off, the Tv wheel on the camera is just fine...
Jostein
Hello!
This is my second PAW, hope you like it.
It was taken on my trip to Japan with my Pentax ME and the newly
aquiered Takumar 35mm/3.5...
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2370473
Thanks for any comments!
bye Katrin
Thanks. I'll definitely let you know when we are over east next...
Cheers
Shaun
Dr. Shaun Canning
Cultural Heritage Services
Lawrence Way, Karratha,
Western Australia,
6714
0414-967644
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.heritageservices.com.au
-Original Message-
From: Leon Altoff
That would depend a lot on the optical appearance. Most of these have been used
extensively, so an example that also looks good, will cost *much* more.
I have bought mine only some months ago in heavily used condition (but working,
except for a sticky exposure correction ring that had to be
Hi!
Boris,
It is actually an excellent suggestion!
Oh well blush g... I am a programmer, so that flexibility is
almost always a name of the game for me.
Boris
Does anyone know if the 16-45 lens is available in Australia. If so where
and the price.
Thanks
Charles
keller.schaefer wrote:
That would depend a lot on the optical appearance. Most of
these have been used extensively, so an example that also
looks good, will cost *much* more.
I have bought mine only some months ago in heavily used
condition (but working, except for a sticky exposure
the only complaints i have are that it has quite noticeable falloff wide
open and that it's not a faster lens. the falloff is gone by the time you
stop down two stops. i sometimes need and i am willing to pay for a f2.8
version.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Dr. Shaun Canning
Hi Frank, really great photograph! I would play a little bit with the
darkroom work, dodging the dog's head a little maybe. I love it
though!
Best regards,
Frantisek Vlcek
frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't want to be the only bw guy there! g
I'll be shooting Pan-F in my 645 :)
--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com
Yeah, I'm a bit concerned about the cranky old bugger...and I still want
to pick his brains!
Cheers
Shaun
Dr. Shaun Canning
Cultural Heritage Services
Lawrence Way, Karratha,
Western Australia,
6714
0414-967644
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.heritageservices.com.au
-Original
Have a good time Frank.
I'm trying for next year.
Taking the Leica aswell??
Dave
Well, much to my surprise, there's actually a
bus from Toronto to Pittsburg.
Who'd a thunk it? But, there is! And, at a price that is way cheaper
than any other
I would think that looking through the viewfinders of both would convice someone
completely. The problem is usually the store does not have both in stock. So go
with her, let her check out the Canon, and yours.
--
William M Kane wrote:
Alex,
You're right about it being the better choice, but
That would depend a lot on the optical appearance. Most of
these have been used extensively, so an example that also
looks good, will cost *much* more.
I have bought mine only some months ago in heavily used
condition (but working, except for a sticky exposure
correction ring that
William M Kane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, does anyone know what the word is on the new digital? Anyone
know when it will be formally anounced or be produced?
There's no official word, but anyone who has their eyes open can predict
that there's going to be a less expensive DSLR coming
Another thing she might prefer about the istD is its size. The 300D is
more chunky than the istD and the grip sticks out more. There are other
differences, like the location of the LCD, the way the controls are
arranged, that sort of thing.
I would think that looking through the viewfinders
This is a real possibility if you have the grip. It happened to me once
and it's a maddening problem. It's easy to just rub the wheels on the
grips and get them in between settings, and it's also easy (in the same
way) to click them back into position). Next time is happens,
immediately look at
I used the 360FGZ with the *istD outside on a dark(ish) rainy evening
taking my daughter's prom pictures. I also took some indoor shots. I
had the *ist D on 400 and was using a sigma 24-70 zoom. I was very
pleased with he shots, and I normally hate flash. I just set it on
P-TTL and didn't
Tom,
I think there will always be a future for film. 35mm will outlast medium format, but
medium format will still be around for those eliteists like us.
Frankly, you are talking here to a bunch of eliteists who still think 40 year old
Spotmatics with SMC Takumars are great cameras! Me
1. As someone pointed out, the *ist D is only really a bit more than the
300D.
2. The old lenses work fine with firmware 1.1. I use mine all the
time, despite the crippled K mount. This means there are a lot of old
lenses available for the *ist D.
3. I'll defer to others as to the timing of
Sid,
I have a repairman for you - Eric at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
He is a former Pentax repairman who lived in Chicago until a couple of years
ago.
He's now in Tennessee, sort of retired, but doing business by mail.
He's done a number of CLA's for me, but most impressive, he has revived a
number of
Hi all.
Just had this pop into my head,sorry for the loud noise.g
In moving up from my D1 i have noticed a distinct time difference in how long i have to
work on a
picture after its on the computer. With the D1 i had colour cast problems
SLRs won't keep film alive. The PS user is the real consumer, and at the
moment, their trend is to digital.
Them and the one time use cameras
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Antonio Aparicio Subject: Re: Anyone still using windows ME
What happened, did I run into a room full of Microsoft shareholders or
something? All I said was that Windows was a substandard operating
system and that it was riddled with viruses and
Using your same logic then if resolution wasn't important we would all
be using APS.
Antonio
On 18 May 2004, at 16:56, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Antonio Aparicio S
ubject: Re: Future Practicality of Film
I have found Norman Korens site most illuminating on this
Well why did you contribute to it then? I ignore threads I am not
interested in - it is quite easy.
Antonio
On 18 May 2004, at 17:02, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Antonio Aparicio Subject: Re: Anyone still using windows ME
What happened, did I run into a room full of
I don't need to. I also use Mac OSX, which is virus free and works like
a dream come true. But that doesnt mean that I should not be
dissatisfied with shoddy workmanship. I guess if Windows were a small
bit player I would give them some more slack - but the market leading
de facto world
For the record, I have never had good, predictable results from any
Pentax TTL flash control.
I have also not used TTL from any other manufacturer, so I can't say
if Pentax is particularly bad in this area, or if TTL flash in
general is problematic.
William Robb
Do you mean that unpredictable
Antonio Aparicio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Using your same logic then if resolution wasn't important we would all
be using APS.
His statement was that If resolution was all that important, not that
resolution is entirely UNimportant. You're being deliberately obtuse
now.
--
Mark Roberts
APS was never anything more than a gimic...
Tom C.
From: Antonio Aparicio [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Future Practicality of Film
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 17:17:23 +0200
Using your same logic then if resolution wasn't important we would all be
Try telling that tom my mom!
On 18 May 2004, at 17:39, Tom C wrote:
APS was never anything more than a gimic...
Tom C.
From: Antonio Aparicio [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Future Practicality of Film
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 17:17:23 +0200
Using
In a message dated 5/17/2004 3:12:18 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Sounds interesting but it's almost a hundred dollars more than the Image
Tank:
http://www.mydigitaldiscount.com/s.nl/c.ACCT139057/category.33/it.A/id.441/.f
--
Mark Roberts
Mark, I bought the
Too much color saturation, ugly bokeh. Both can be
fixed...
JCO
Fix bokeh? Afterwards?
Andre
*Shakes head* This is the hootenany I was speaking of. You know a couple
years ago people were claiming 30-40 Mega pixels to outdo 35mm film, that
number keeps dropping, but people still claim you need such and such
ludicrous amount of pixels to out do the resolution of film. well, I have
been
Mark, there is no need to get abusive. I was only pointing out the
effect of sensor size on image quality, and in particular how this
correlates with 35mm quality, not making a statement about individual
preferences regarding image resolution.
Antonio
On 18 May 2004, at 17:29, Mark Roberts
Conversely, using your logic, if resolution was so important we would all be
using large format! GET A GRIP MAN.
-Shawn
-Original Message-
From: Antonio Aparicio [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 11:17 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Future Practicality of Film
OSX flaws... For one thing OSX is hugely processor hungry. For another,
I'm sorry to say, but it isn't 64 bit either, thats just some BS the
Macintosh marketing department fed you. So before you go ranting on
Microsoft, I think you should pause and think about how Mac's are largely
way more
Shel I understand your point of view, but probably disagree a bit. I can't
see film going through a slump and then returning to some appreciable level
like the stock market. I think it will just slump and slump until it's off
the radar of all but the most diehard users.
If fun was the only
Ah but in this test: http://www.sphoto.com/techinfo/ocesideharbor2.htm
there is clearly more detail in the film scan - I can see a bird in the
sky which just gets lost in the digital image!
-Original Message-
From: Shawn K. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 18 May 2004 15:34
To: [EMAIL
What's her number? :)
Tom C.
From: Antonio Aparicio [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Future Practicality of Film
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 17:43:46 +0200
Try telling that tom my mom!
On 18 May 2004, at 17:39, Tom C wrote:
APS was never anything more
Read my message shawn, I was not saying that resolution was the be an
and end all of image quality but rather that Norman on his site
(follow the link I posted) made the point that for digital to match
35mm image resolution you would be looking at a full frame sensors at 8
megapixels. Why do
And you sir are being abusive.
Antonio
On 18 May 2004, at 17:29, Mark Roberts wrote:
Antonio Aparicio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Using your same logic then if resolution wasn't important we would all
be using APS.
His statement was that If resolution was all that important, not that
resolution is
Maybe by blurring??? That's what I thought he meant. Seems kind of
difficult.
-Shawn
-Original Message-
From: Andre Langevin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 11:51 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: photo opinion wanted
Too much color saturation, ugly bokeh.
I've seen lots of old folks getting their digital pictures developed at
Wal-Mart already. So it's not like the technology is too technical for the
older generation, which is the generation I would call most likely to
continue using film as you also seemed to imply.
-Shawn
-Original
Cotty, you've gotta make this ...
Models to the D-Day rescue as Spitfire shortage hits Churchil
home
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=storycid=1516e=2u=/afp/20040518
/od_afp/dday_britain_churchill_offbeat_040518100655
TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Antonio Aparicio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Read my message shawn, I was not saying that resolution was the be an
and end all of image quality but rather that Norman on his site
(follow the link I posted) made the point that for digital to match
35mm image resolution you would be looking at a
Well OSX runs just fine on my G4 1 gig. Do you own a Mac? Nobody said
OSX was 64 bit either. As far as I am aware the new G5 chips are 64 bit
but OSX isn't yet. As to price I think you are wrong, a similarly
specced Wintel machine will cost the same or more than a Mac. Did you
not hear about
HAR HAR HAR!! Hahahaha! Actually, thats pretty funny. I'm a fan of chincy
humor though.
-Shawn
-Original Message-
From: Rob Brigham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 11:57 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Future Practicality of Film
Ah but in this test:
And your contribution is? Antonio
On 18 May 2004, at 18:10, Mark Roberts wrote:
Antonio Aparicio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Read my message shawn, I was not saying that resolution was the be an
and end all of image quality but rather that Norman on his site
(follow the link I posted) made the point
As far as I am aware there is no spy-ware nor viruses on OSX. I believe
that is by design.
GAHHH Sorry, Antonio, but you are completely and utterly wrong on this
account.
-Shawn
-Original Message-
From: Antonio Aparicio [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 12:07
Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Cotty, you've gotta make this ...
Cotty's going to be about three thousand miles from there on 6 June ;-)
Models to the D-Day rescue as Spitfire shortage hits Churchil
home
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=storycid=1516e=2u=/afp/20040518
/od_afp
://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=storycid=1516e=2u=/afp/20040518
/od_afp/dday_britain_churchill_offbeat_040518100655
Sounds cool, though!
AGGH! Hopefully at least one of our colleagues in Jolly Olde
Blighty will be available.
TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
if you shoot super fine grain and super sharp BW film
like tech pan, you are going to need way more MP
to equal that. I think most of the equiv MP comparisons
are to color film , not fine grain BW.
JCO
J.C. O'Connell
Hi, Tom ...
My comment about film slumping and having a resurgence is based, in part,
on how vinyl records and turntables disappeared but have recently come
back. IOWA, after the newness of digital wears off, a number of people
will come back to film for any number of reasons. Of course,
Looks like we have another one.
You can always tell a troll by the constant gush of messages. Whenever anybody else
responds to his thread, the troll must answer. He must have the last word.
This reminds me of my kids. Well, he poked me first. I just poked him back. Poke,
poke, poke, poke,
Would everyone please just ignore him until he calms down or goes away
Antonio Aparicio wrote:
And your contribution is? Antonio
I can see it in that light.
Tom C.
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Future Practicality of Film
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 09:30:09 -0700
Hi, Tom ...
My comment about film slumping and having a resurgence is based, in part,
on how
gaussian blur.
jco
J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com
-Original Message-
From: Andre Langevin
I have just finished printing the last enlargements (on 8-1/2/A4 paper) of the photos
I took in California two weeks ago. I don't have the words to describe how impressed I
am with the consistent image quality I have gotten with the DA 16-45 lens. It is one
of Pentax's best zooms of all time,
I can't believe that the sensor reflectivity is a function of the set ISO???
Sven
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Dr. Heiko Hamann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 18. Mai 2004 08:08
An: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Betreff: Re: Further Adventures with *ist D Flash
...
But it seemes,
Daniel J. Matyola wrote:
Would everyone please just ignore him until he calms down or goes away
Did that a while ago. Trolls are a part of the net, nothing you can do
except ignore them. ;-)
/Henri
Mornin' Shel
You may have a point when it comes to enthusiasts like many on the list.
However, for the average consumer digital is becoming easier and easier.
For example, a couple of weeks ago I shot some wedding candids. I was able
to take my CF card to Wal-Mart, insert it in the Aladdin
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 12:30 PM
Subject: Re: Future Practicality of Film
Hi, Tom ...
My comment about film slumping and having a resurgence is based, in part,
on how vinyl records and turntables
IOW, what does IOWA mean, other than a place for hog farmers and big corn fields?
Hi, Tom ...
snip IOWA, snip
Shel Belinkoff
Collin (of course Badgers take precedence) Brendemuehl
---
'Tautology is'
Well, part of the reason for that is continued advancements have been made
in the capability of record players such that a record could be perceived as
superior to a cd. The question is, will film also advance in such a way and
eventually be perceived as superior to digital? I contend it won't.
From: Shawn K.
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 08:53:51 -0700
Conversely, using your logic, if resolution was so important we would all be
using large format! GET A GRIP MAN.
-Shawn
These are words only expressable by
For those who participate in the list through the archive -- it currently has zero
latency. The message I just posted on the DA 16-45 showed up right away in the
archive. This probably won't last, but enjoy it while you can.
Joe
1 - 100 of 289 matches
Mail list logo
