Re: Strange K-5 ISO range problem

My usual setting is AV also - never got software updates - camera was refurbished and bought in 2013 from KEH... no wonder I wasnt any helpt to you Rick ann On 1/27/2023 11:21 AM, Henk Terhell wrote: Ah, I see now that menu C1.3 gives me ISO 80. In C1.1 I had 1/3 stop and in Sv mode this now

Re: Strange K-5 ISO range problem

Ah, I see now that menu C1.3 gives me ISO 80. In C1.1 I had 1/3 stop and in Sv mode this now gives ISO 80, 100, 125, 160 etc. However in Av-mode, which is my usual setting, the extended ISO range shows ISO 80, 100, 200 etc. Still learning on my old camera. Henk Op vr 27 jan. 2023 om 16:43

Re: Strange K-5 ISO range problem

On 1/27/2023 7:22 AM, Henk Terhell wrote: Strange, my K5 doesn't have ISO 80 at all. The lowest I get is 100. Turning the back wheel with ISO button pressed the next step from 100 is 200. I'm on firmware 1.16 which is the latest. Henk Do you have your ISO resolution set to 1/2 stop or 1/3 stop

Re: Strange K-5 ISO range problem

Strange, my K5 doesn't have ISO 80 at all. The lowest I get is 100. Turning the back wheel with ISO button pressed the next step from 100 is 200. I'm on firmware 1.16 which is the latest. Henk Op do 26 jan. 2023 om 23:14 schreef Rick Womer : > Ding Ding Ding!!! > > Pete, that did it! Thank you!

Re: Strange K-5 ISO range problem

Ding Ding Ding!!! Pete, that did it! Thank you! I don’t know how the highlight correction got turned on, but anyway… Rick > On Jan 26, 2023, at 5:00 PM, Pete McIntosh wrote: > > Exploring on my K5... > > Having highlight correction (under D-Range setting) turned on lifts the > minimum ISO

Re: Strange K-5 ISO range problem

Exploring on my K5... Having highlight correction (under D-Range setting) turned on lifts the minimum ISO from 80 to 160. With ISO set to 160, and turning highlight correction OFF, ISO automagically set itself to 200. Hope this helps. Ciao, Pete Mac in Melbourne -- Original Message

Re: Strange K-5 ISO range problem

Rick _ I had not seen bill's response..   I'm just reporting what happened to me and what I did to correct it.. I just shoot on  AV  settting ann On 1/26/2023 2:57 PM, Rick Womer wrote: On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 14:12 ann sanfedele wrote: what do you have the mode set to? maybe you

Re: Strange K-5 ISO range problem

On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 14:12 ann sanfedele wrote: > what do you have the mode set to? maybe you accidentaly turned the > mode dial ? not every setting will let you go down to 80 - > > ann > > On 1/26/2023 1:50 PM, Rick Womer wrote: > > Thanks, Bill. That got the minimum ISO to 160. It should

Re: Strange K-5 ISO range problem

what do you have the mode set to?   maybe you accidentaly turned the mode dial ?  not every setting will let you go down to 80 - ann On 1/26/2023 1:50 PM, Rick Womer wrote: Thanks, Bill. That got the minimum ISO to 160. It should be 80. Rick On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 13:20 Bill wrote: On

Re: Strange K-5 ISO range problem

Thanks, Bill. That got the minimum ISO to 160. It should be 80. Rick On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 13:20 Bill wrote: > On 1/26/2023 11:38 AM, Rick Womer wrote: > > Good afternoon (in Philly, anyway), > > > > During a shoot this morning, my K-5 suddenly wouldn’t let me set the ISO > to 100, which is

Re: Strange K-5 ISO range problem

On 1/26/2023 11:38 AM, Rick Womer wrote: Good afternoon (in Philly, anyway), During a shoot this morning, my K-5 suddenly wouldn’t let me set the ISO to 100, which is my usual setting The lowest it will go is 200. Different lenses, freshly charged battery, and lots of fiddling and owner’s

Re: Strange thing

I didn't even know about that one. What I remember affected manual focus lenses & bodies. But it may have been more or less the same problem, an extra part that caused the lens to get stuck. On 9/7/2022 5:46 PM, Richard Dell wrote: Ricoh added an extra contact pin, which would get "caught"

Re: Strange thing

> On Sep 7, 2022, at 2:38 PM, John Sessoms wrote: > > I vaguely remember there was a problem either with Ricoh cameras or Ricoh > lenses back in film days. They used the K-mount bayonet, but there was > something they did different and either Ricoh lenses would get stuck if you > mounted

Re: Strange thing

I vaguely remember there was a problem either with Ricoh cameras or Ricoh lenses back in film days. They used the K-mount bayonet, but there was something they did different and either Ricoh lenses would get stuck if you mounted them on a Pentax camera or Pentax lenses would get stuck on Ricoh

Re: Strange thing

Hi Godfrey, I hope this gets through to PDML. I’ll send you a picture separately, but I found some photos online of other examples of the M 120/2.8 and they all have the same rear end as mine, so it must be the way it was designed, and the Novoflex adapter hasn’t taken it into account. The

Re: Strange PS Issue

It's more likely that happened in LR. When I open a DNG image in PS, the image first is sent to LR, where I make some adjustments, before "Opening" it in PS. I have to check the options in LR. Thanks for the hint. Dan Matyola *https://tinyurl.com/DJM-Pentax-Gallery

Re: Strange PS Issue

> On May 24, 2020, at 12:46 PM, Daniel J. Matyola wrote: > > For some reason, I wanted to upload my Mini Iris image to my gallery on the > Pentax Photo Gallery. > > When I tried to upload it from my MAC laptop, I got an error message: "Not > a Pentax Camera." WTF? That's all I use, except

RE: Strange request from Windoze

That may be a post-update message, but I'd perform a malware scan before rebooting to be sure. John in Brisbane -Original Message- From: PDML On Behalf Of John Sent: Monday, 24 June 2019 5:09 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Strange request from Windoze I was trying to copy

Re: Strange way to hold/stabilize the camera/camera lens

Thank you, Rick, Jostein, Alan, John, Larry, and Stan for your responses. I guess I should try it at some point... Stan: I was not referring to bracing, rather to the fact how it is done. What I usually do in this situations is to have the left hand under/over the lens (which allows me

Re: Strange way to hold/stabilize the camera/camera lens

John Francis wrote: On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 03:33:56PM -0400, Igor PDML-StR wrote: I noticed this TV commercial from Marriott rewards: https://youtu.be/XMEIq3Y8N2A?t=11s At 11 s, the photographer is shown with his hand holding to a patio frame, with the long zoom holding on top of his

Re: Strange way to hold/stabilize the camera/camera lens

On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 03:33:56PM -0400, Igor PDML-StR wrote: > > I noticed this TV commercial from Marriott rewards: > https://youtu.be/XMEIq3Y8N2A?t=11s > At 11 s, the photographer is shown with his hand holding to a patio frame, > with the long zoom holding on top of his forearm. > > I can

Re: Strange way to hold/stabilize the camera/camera lens

an C -Original Message- From: Jostein Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2017 11:00 PM To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Strange way to hold/stabilize the camera/camera lens Nothing strange about that trick, Igor. It is particularly reasonable when shooting from a safari car that may even be in motion. F

Re: Strange way to hold/stabilize the camera/camera lens

Assuming you even have your tripod handy and have time to set it up before the critter or person of interest leaves the vicinity, there are many situations where a tripod is contraindicated. Jostein’s zodiac or safari vehicle for example. Trains. Ships. Boats. Subway cars. City sidewalks above

Re: Strange way to hold/stabilize the camera/camera lens

Nothing strange about that trick, Igor. It is particularly reasonable when shooting from a safari car that may even be in motion. Focus: AF. Zoom: Max tele. You want to zoom in anyway. If the animal comes closer, the car will stop, you will have time to zoom out and recompose. If you get only

Re: Strange way to hold/stabilize the camera/camera lens

I did that years ago. with a 2x teleconverter on a Tamron 70-210. It worked. Rick > On Jul 16, 2017, at 3:33 PM, Igor PDML-StR wrote: > > > I noticed this TV commercial from Marriott rewards: > https://youtu.be/XMEIq3Y8N2A?t=11s > At 11 s, the photographer is shown with

Re: Strange thing

That's true but at least I've mitigated the headache for the time being. I'm sending this via newly installed Seamonkey mail client - we'll see how it works. Mark P. J. Alling wrote: Along with bug fixes, a lot of the Thunderbird updates are to fix security issues. No one wants to

Re: Strange thing

I have almost the same excuses for misspelling "grammar". > On 04 July 2017 at 13:40 "P. J. Alling" wrote: > > > It was late at night, I was tired, (I seem to post a lot like that), at > least I wasn't drunk. At least, I don't think I was. > > > On 7/4/2017 2:44

Re: Strange thing

That works! thanks PJ - although it doesn't say "smart reply" it just says "reply list" now.. when I get mail from PDML THANKS much! I feel as you do that the upgrades are probably necessary for safety ann On 7/4/2017 2:22 AM, P. J. Alling wrote: It must be a sign of old age, and I cannot

Re: Strange thing

Along with bug fixes, a lot of the Thunderbird updates are to fix security issues. No one wants to acknowledge security holes in their software, so unless it's one that's become an actual problem with a documented exploit, it probably won't be mentioned in the release notes. I hate to bow

Re: Strange thing

Yea! Uninstalling and re-installing 45.8.0 was super fast and easy and solved the problem. Prior releases are archived by Mozilla here: https://archive.mozilla.org/pub/thunderbird/releases/ On 7/2/2017 1:36 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: Or you can just go back to the previous version of

Re: Strange thing

It was late at night, I was tired, (I seem to post a lot like that), at least I wasn't drunk. At least, I don't think I was. On 7/4/2017 2:44 AM, mike wilson wrote: On 04 July 2017 at 07:22 "P. J. Alling" wrote: It must be a sign of old age, and I cannot

Re: Strange thing

> On 04 July 2017 at 07:22 "P. J. Alling" wrote: > > > It must be a sign of old age, and I cannot remember who on the list put > me on to this, I suppose I could look it up but that's not important now. > > Ann, on the header of an email to the right of the reply

Re: Strange thing

It must be a sign of old age, and I cannot remember who on the list put me on to this, I suppose I could look it up but that's not important now. Ann, on the header of an email to the right of the reply button, right click and choose customize, it should be the only choice you get. That will

Re: Strange thing

Thanks, john - I haven't gotten to reinstalling but will try this version when I do. APpreciate knowing that his version does not show the bug, since part of what I wanted to do was to see how far back to go. Mark On 7/3/2017 6:29 PM, John wrote: On 7/2/2017 13:36, Mark Roberts wrote: Mark

Re: Strange thing

On 7/3/2017 6:50 PM, John wrote: If you drag the "Smart Reply" button to the left in "Customize", it swap the location of the "Reply" and "Reply List" buttons when you click "Done". That might help if you're used to clicking the first button to reply to PDML. I don't think it

Re: Strange thing - and another thing

Right click under the buttons on the message pane & select "Customize" and you can drag the "Smart Reply" button that says "Reply List" when it's not in customization mode to swap places with the "Reply" button and it will stay there when you click [Done]. On 7/3/2017 12:47, John Francis wrote:

Re: Strange thing - Test #3 "Reply All"

Test #3 - "Reply All" goes To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List ... same as "Reply" did. Again, this works with ver. 45.8.0 On 7/3/2017 12:47, John Francis wrote: On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 08:55:53AM +0200, Alan C wrote: Correct me if I am wrong. If an email is sent to a list (such as the PDML), &

Re: Strange thing - Test #2 "Reply"

Second Test - ver 45.8.0 "Reply goes To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List On 7/3/2017 12:47, John Francis wrote: On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 08:55:53AM +0200, Alan C wrote: Correct me if I am wrong. If an email is sent to a list (such as the PDML), & you use "Reply List" or "Reply All", then you reply

Re: Strange thing - TEST #1 "Reply List"

First Test - I'm still on 45.8.0 so this may not hold for 52.2.1 Reply List goes To: pdml-at-pdml.net On 7/3/2017 12:47, John Francis wrote: On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 08:55:53AM +0200, Alan C wrote: Correct me if I am wrong. If an email is sent to a list (such as the PDML), & you use "Reply

Re: Strange thing

my problem is overzealous filtering either by my ISP or the Avast Firewall. Alan C -Original Message- From: Paul in MKE Sent: Monday, July 03, 2017 7:49 AM To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Strange thing Hmmm. PDML is the only mailing list coming in to T-Bird for me and I have noticed that

Re: Strange thing

On 7/2/2017 19:59, ann sanfedele wrote: my little boxes have REPLY next to REPLY LIST (and to REPLY ALL I have to open and Scroll to box that says Reply list.. I think those buttons are at the top of the "message pane". Top left is a list of folders; Top right has a list of messages; the

Re: Strange thing

ectly from the poster. I think my problem is overzealous filtering either by my ISP or the Avast Firewall. Alan C -Original Message- From: Paul in MKE Sent: Monday, July 03, 2017 7:49 AM To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Strange thing Hmmm. PDML is the only mailing list coming in

Re: Strange thing

On 7/2/2017 13:36, Mark Roberts wrote: Mark C wrote: I feel your pain, Ann. It seemed that one solution to the "reply to list" issue would be to customize Thunderbird so "reply to list" is on the message toolbar, next to "reply to message". But I've been unable to get that to work - I pull

Re: Strange thing

I'm using Thunderbird, but I'm down-level & haven't "upgraded" to the newer version that's causing all the problems. I'm waiting to see if there's another update that fixes the problems caused by the current update. On 7/2/2017 11:29, ann sanfedele wrote: Will everyone using THunderbird please

Re: Strange thing

Ann, this is not about Thunderbird. ;-) Jostein Den 02.07.2017 17.29, skrev ann sanfedele: Will everyone using THunderbird please raise your hands :-) alan - I still have a problem remembering to hit "REPLY LIST" instead of jsut REPLY - some of the people whose pesos I've commented on , I

Re: Strange thing

That has happened to me for several years already. :-( I looked into routing agreements between providers, but that didn't fit the pattern. An original email from Australia, Russia or the Philippines was just as likely to get lost in space as was the ones from Ohio, Michigan or California.

Re: Strange thing

Maybe. For me there is no difference between Reply and Reply List. As far as I can figure out (and I have double checked). All are going to p...@pdlm.net. My problem is, when I have Thunderbird filter by Threads turned on (may be called something else, forget now I got it turned on), when I

Re: Strange thing

On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 08:55:53AM +0200, Alan C wrote: > Correct me if I am wrong. If an email is sent to a list (such as the PDML), > & you use "Reply List" or "Reply All", then you reply goes individually to > all members of the list as well as the list mailbox. If you use "Reply", > then your

Re: Strange thing

Alan C -Original Message- From: Paul in MKE Sent: Monday, July 03, 2017 7:49 AM To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Strange thing Hmmm. PDML is the only mailing list coming in to T-Bird for me and I have noticed that the Reply to List option is only available for messages from PDML. For othe

Re: Strange thing

Hmmm. PDML is the only mailing list coming in to T-Bird for me and I have noticed that the Reply to List option is only available for messages from PDML. For other messages it's greyed-out. T-Bird seems to know that PDML is a mailing list - -p On 7/2/2017 9:43 PM, Mark C wrote: I tried

Re: Strange thing

Nothing. Super Sparrow was another. Alan C -Original Message- From: Daniel J. Matyola Sent: Sunday, July 02, 2017 9:31 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Strange thing Check your spam or junk folder; they seem to be winding up there. Dan Matyola http

Re: Strange thing

Now that's a plan - I'll give it a try. On 7/2/2017 1:36 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: Mark C wrote: I feel your pain, Ann. It seemed that one solution to the "reply to list" issue would be to customize Thunderbird so "reply to list" is on the message toolbar, next to "reply to message". But I've

Re: Strange thing

I tried doing that but can't get the customization to stick. I drag it from the customize box and put it next to reply, and it appears to work, but as soon as I close the customize box Reply To List disappears. If I open the customize box again, it reappears, but never stays once customize is

Re: Strange thing

Mine DOES say Reply to list on a button next to Reply - but my mouse finger always hits reply unless I really really concentrate. Don't want to go backwards now - I'm on automatic upgrade - and maybe those security patches they say they are making really are that... I'll get used to it

Re: Strange thing

my little boxes have REPLY next to REPLY LIST (and to REPLY ALL I have to open and Scroll to box that says Reply list.. but remembering that I have to do it for my replies to go to PDML and for my replys to show up in my PDML folder in my inbox, which is where I want 'em. But my mouse just

Re: Strange thing

I've had no problem adding "reply to list" to the Menu toolbar. I just dragged it from the Customize box to a position between Reply and Reply All. In addition, if you usually use the Reply located in the message header you can try this: Open the Customize box for the message header.

Re: Strange thing

Check your spam or junk folder; they seem to be winding up there. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Sun, Jul 2, 2017 at 12:44 AM, Alan C wrote: > I'm not receiving the original posts some PDMLers (Jack & Marnie at least) > & have to pick them up

Re: Strange thing

Don't know Thunderbird. Presumably "REPLY LIST" & "REPLY" would be the same if there is only 1 address in the original mail? I use Windows Live Mail. Alan C -Original Message- From: ann sanfedele Sent: Sunday, July 02, 2017 5:29 PM To: pdml@pdml.net Su

Re: Strange thing

Mark C wrote: >I feel your pain, Ann. > >It seemed that one solution to the "reply to list" issue would be to >customize Thunderbird so "reply to list" is on the message toolbar, next >to "reply to message". But I've been unable to get that to work - I pull >the reply to list button onto the

Re: Strange thing

Okay, trying it (hitting reply list). Sometimes I am hitting reply which buries my new PESO post in someone else's thread. IE what Ann said. So they are hard to find, sometimes, plus being annoying too. Marnie aka Doe :-O On 7/2/2017 8:29 AM, ann sanfedele wrote: Will everyone using

Re: Strange thing

I feel your pain, Ann. It seemed that one solution to the "reply to list" issue would be to customize Thunderbird so "reply to list" is on the message toolbar, next to "reply to message". But I've been unable to get that to work - I pull the reply to list button onto the tool bar and it looks

Re: Strange thing

Will everyone using THunderbird please raise your hands :-) alan - I still have a problem remembering to hit "REPLY LIST" instead of jsut REPLY - some of the people whose pesos I've commented on , I think, see what i said and reply to me and to list for sake of discussion At the moment I

Re: Strange color output behavior in LR - totally puzzled

Paul and P.J., - thank you for some helpful ideas! P.J., That's an interesting idea. I see how this might happen in some cases. Looking at this comparison of gamuts for R2880 and aRGB, I can see that indeed, orange might be in the region that is covered by aRGB but not by R2880.

Re: Strange color output behavior in LR - totally puzzled

Why are you not using application color management instead of printer color management? It seems that would produce more accurate color representation. Also...what does the image look like if you enable soft proofing in LR? Do you note the same problem? Are you using Epson paper or some

Re: Strange color output behavior in LR - totally puzzled

Sounds like you have a gamut problem, one or both of the colors are out of gamut for your printer's inkset, and the direct print is at some point in the image processing train pushing them further apart. Converting the image to 8 bits first by saving as a jpeg is pushing them closer together.

Re: Strange problem at Flickr

On Aug 19, 2014, at 1:32 AM, P.J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote: At the risk of being flip, my recommendation is to not use Flickr. I might consider that sometime. At one point I was experimenting with Picassa. I still have a couple Picassa pages, but it never caught on for me. i

Re: Strange problem at Flickr

On Aug 18, 2014, at 1:42 PM, Eric Weir eew...@bellsouth.net wrote: I just published four images from LR to Flickr. The images show in the photostream. When I go to organize the images, Flickr tells me I dot have anything to organize, that I need up upload images. But the reference of the

Re: Strange problem at Flickr

At the risk of being flip, my recommendation is to not use Flickr. On 8/18/2014 1:42 PM, Eric Weir wrote: I just published four images from LR to Flickr. The images show in the photostream. When I go to organize the images, Flickr tells me I dot have anything to organize, that I need up

Re: Strange problem at Flickr

You're welcome, not that I was very helpful. On 8/18/2014 1:47 PM, Eric Weir wrote: On Aug 18, 2014, at 1:42 PM, Eric Weir eew...@bellsouth.net wrote: I just published four images from LR to Flickr. The images show in the photostream. When I go to organize the images, Flickr tells me I dot

Re: Strange K-5II issue (Longish).

I rarely use P, but I'm pretty sure I was playing with it the other day on my K-5 IIs (which I just bought this week! woohoo!). Lemme check Mine is working as it should and I have my dials configured exactly like yours. Play with it some more. Do the dials work in other modes? I would

Re: Strange K-5II issue (Longish).

Everything was exactly as I'd originally programmed it, except P mode. I find P mode to be incredibly useful most of the time it's pretty much the Swiss Army Knife of Pentax camera modes. Adjust the aperture dial and aperture priority, ditto for the shutter dial. Press the ISO button and

Re: Strange old colour film

On 28/02/2014, David Mann dmann...@gmail.com wrote: On Mar 1, 2014, at 2:14 am, Mark C pdml-m...@charter.net wrote: It looks like a 3 or 4 color separation offset print so my guess would be with Paul that it is a photo of an image printed in a magazine. Is the same pattern visible if you

Re: Strange old colour film

On 28/02/2014, David Mann dmann...@gmail.com wrote: Under a 10x loupe I can only barely make out that there are separated primary colours so this detail is is incredibly fine. If it is a photo of a print then it's a really very seriously bloody sharp one. Or I'll read Steve's post next and

Re: Strange old colour film

See if anyone here can help: www.rps.org/special-interest-groups/historical B On 28 Feb 2014, at 02:43, David Mann dmann...@gmail.com wrote: I had a reply from the camera shop: --- Our in-store committee thinks it might be a copy-neg/slide from a litho original, hence seeing all the

Re: Strange old colour film

It looks like a 3 or 4 color separation offset print so my guess would be with Paul that it is a photo of an image printed in a magazine. Is the same pattern visible if you look at the print directly under a loup? I assume it is there. If not it would probably be a scanning artifact. Sounds

Re: Strange old colour film

On Mar 1, 2014, at 2:14 am, Mark C pdml-m...@charter.net wrote: It looks like a 3 or 4 color separation offset print so my guess would be with Paul that it is a photo of an image printed in a magazine. Is the same pattern visible if you look at the print directly under a loup? I assume it

Re: Strange old colour film

Might it be a photo of an old picture post card? For what it's worth, plug this number into Google Maps: -43.606235,172.645487 ... and go to street view, looking SE. On 2/27/2014 4:57 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: I suspect that someone photographed magazine pages. I don’t think the dot pattern

Re: Strange old colour film

on 2014-02-28 11:37 David Mann wrote I took the opportunity to bring the slide along so we could look at it under the microscope and we managed to get a photo by holding her iPhone up to the eyepiece. I was skeptical but it came out rather well. This is a crop of the full-size photo to

Re: Strange old colour film

On Mar 1, 2014, at 9:18 am, steve harley p...@paper-ape.com wrote: on 2014-02-28 11:37 David Mann wrote I took the opportunity to bring the slide along so we could look at it under the microscope and we managed to get a photo by holding her iPhone up to the eyepiece. I was skeptical but it

Re: Strange old colour film

on 2014-02-28 14:03 David Mann wrote I might be getting somewhere... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paget_process yes, that is close; i found some samples of the Paget pattern, and it appears somewhat different from your slide, e.g.:

Re: Strange old colour film

On Sat, Mar 01, 2014 at 10:03:06AM +1300, David Mann wrote: On Mar 1, 2014, at 9:18 am, steve harley p...@paper-ape.com wrote: on 2014-02-28 11:37 David Mann wrote I might be getting somewhere... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paget_process ...but 1951 seems awfully late for such a

Re: Strange old colour film

On Mar 1, 2014, at 10:46 am, steve harley p...@paper-ape.com wrote: on 2014-02-28 14:03 David Mann wrote I might be getting somewhere... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paget_process yes, that is close; i found some samples of the Paget pattern, and it appears somewhat different from your

Re: Strange old colour film

Great sleuthing and an interesting printing process! Mark On 2/28/2014 4:46 PM, steve harley wrote: on 2014-02-28 14:03 David Mann wrote I might be getting somewhere... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paget_process yes, that is close; i found some samples of the Paget pattern, and it appears

Re: Strange old colour film

David Mann wrote: On Mar 1, 2014, at 10:46 am, steve harley p...@paper-ape.com wrote: on 2014-02-28 14:03 David Mann wrote I might be getting somewhere... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paget_process yes, that is close; i found some samples of the Paget pattern, and it appears somewhat

Re: Strange old colour film

On Mar 1, 2014, at 1:22 pm, Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote: This is a really fascinating investigation! Would you like me to call my friend at the George Eastman House and see if they have any more information on this? That'd be great if you could. I thought about sending an

Re: Strange old colour film

David Mann wrote: On Mar 1, 2014, at 1:22 pm, Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote: This is a really fascinating investigation! Would you like me to call my friend at the George Eastman House and see if they have any more information on this? That'd be great if you could. I thought

Re: Strange old colour film

I suspect that someone photographed magazine pages. I don’t think the dot pattern is in the film. Paul On Feb 27, 2014, at 4:32 PM, David Mann dmann...@gmail.com wrote: Here's something the more experienced photographers might be able to help me with... Among these old slides I've been

Re: Strange old colour film

Unless it is Polachrome: http://blog.timesunion.com/chuckmiller/playing-with-polaroids-polachrome-instant-slide-film/5835/ Dario -Messaggio originale- From: Paul Stenquist Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2014 10:57 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Strange old colour film I

Re: Strange old colour film

However, Polachrome was 1983 (I shot a couple rolls back then), not 1951. Dario -Messaggio originale- From: Paul Stenquist Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2014 10:57 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Strange old colour film I suspect that someone photographed magazine pages. I

Re: Strange old colour film

on 2014-02-27 14:32 David Mann wrote Here's something the more experienced photographers might be able to help me with... Among these old slides I've been scanning are a handful of colour ones which are not part of the Australian stuff. A few of these colour ones (but not all) appear to

Re: Strange old colour film

On Feb 28, 2014, at 12:27 pm, steve harley p...@paper-ape.com wrote: can you post a snip at 100%? OK since it's started raining and I have nothing better to do I've rescanned a section at 4800ppi. It just gets weirder. http://gallery.multi.net.nz/photo/777/ It's definitely RGB but in a

Re: Strange old colour film

At first glance I wonder if they were created with some early type of film recorder. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.

Re: Strange old colour film

I had a reply from the camera shop: --- Our in-store committee thinks it might be a copy-neg/slide from a litho original, hence seeing all the lines from the pre-press screens used in the print process. If not that, then we’re in the dark too. --- I'm interested to know what others think.

RE: Strange old colour film

I wonder whether the image is the result of an early scanning process, perhaps a wirephoto? I don't think it could be the result of one of the late 19th. early 20th.century colour film processes, as the colour bands suggest some sort of mechanical scan, rather than the random arrangement of

Re: Strange FA50/1,7

From: Larry Colen On Apr 14, 2013, at 7:47 PM, Rick Womer wrote: Yeah. It's the business end for an endoscope used on elephants and hippopotami. I see a new marketing slogan: Pentax, for big assholes. Like Hoya? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net

Re: Strange FA50/1,7

A strange lens indeed. Focus limiter? No macro? Hmmm. Might be rare, though the box and packaging would indicate mass production. Maybe an aftermarket mod? That would be my guess SV Hovland pdml...@heime.org wrote:

Re: Strange FA50/1,7

Why not e-mail Boz, about it, he might be interested to know about it, heck it might get hm interested in updating his web page. I'd do it but it's your find, so... http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/authors.html On 4/14/2013 12:52 PM, SV Hovland wrote:

Re: Strange FA50/1,7

1. Note that the item pictured in the listing is not the item described in the writeup. The write-up seems to describe an M or possibly A 50/1.7, so who knows what he is really selling. 2. The Lock screw looks to me like it is on the ring of some sort of aftermarket rotating tripod mount,

Re: Strange FA50/1,7

Not aftermarket. It clearly shows in the paperwork accompanying the piece. However, I'm mystified. On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Stan Halpin s...@stans-photography.info wrote: 1. Note that the item pictured in the listing is not the item described in the writeup. The write-up seems to

Re: Strange FA50/1,7

On Apr 14, 2013, at 11:20 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: Why not e-mail Boz, about it, he might be interested to know about it, heck it might get hm interested in updating his web page. Why not email the guy selling the lens? -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML

  1   2   3   4   >