Exactly, Mr. Harley.
My boss's father, the former CEO of his family of companies, often
says that he would rather have $1 from 1 million people, than he would
$1 million dollars from one person. It doesn't take a lot of deep
reflection to figure out which is the better business model. Add to
that
On 2015-04-24 23:45 , Bob W-PDML wrote:
A better analogy is photocopying a book rather than buying it, and photocopying
it is a lesser crime than stealing it. But still a crime.
right, it's a license violation, not a theft
i proposed a theory many years ago that Adobe purposely tolerated the
Quoting Darren Addy pixelsmi...@gmail.com:
The thing I think we all worry about is how high the monthly
subscription rate will go, particularly with a product that has
virtually no competition like Photoshop.
I'm not sure that there's no competition. For the Mac platform
Serif's recent
On Apr 25, 2015, at 1:15 am, Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote:
I don't blame Adome for trying to stop piracy. But 99% of their
responses make it a pain in the arse for us *legal* users and have NO
EFFECT AT ALL on the pirates! In fact, the pirated versions of
Photoshop, etc. are
On 24/04/2015 11:45 PM, Bob W-PDML wrote:
On 25 Apr 2015, at 01:03, Bill anotherdrunken...@gmail.com wrote:
The thing is that the people who were using pirated copies of
Photoshop, etc. were, for the most part, people who would never have
bought it if they couldn't get it free –
On 2015-04-23 22:56 , Brian Walters wrote:
I snaffled one of the preset macro Takumar's a few years ago. I've been
trying it on my Q recently but it's too long for hand-holding on that format.
i've got one that lives on my partner's micro-four thirds camera; it was her
only lens for a while
Bill anotherdrunken...@gmail.com wrote:
If 85% or more of what you made was stolen from you, you'd be looking at
ways to plug the leaks too.
I don't blame Adome for trying to stop piracy. But 99% of their
responses make it a pain in the arse for us *legal* users and have NO
EFFECT AT ALL on the
On 23/04/2015 11:58 PM, Brian Walters wrote:
Quoting John sesso...@earthlink.net:
Adobe are starting to be real ASSHOLES!
Starting??
If 85% or more of what you made was stolen from you, you'd be looking at
ways to plug the leaks too.
I don't have any special love for Adobe, but we are where
If their pricing structure for the previous non-cloud applications
were reasonable over the years then they would likely have had far
lower piracy rates and a significantly higher purchase volume.
On 24 April 2015 at 23:15, Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote:
Bill
Brian Walters wrote:
Quoting Rob Studdert distudio.p...@gmail.com:
If their pricing structure for the previous non-cloud applications
were reasonable over the years then they would likely have had far
lower piracy rates and a significantly higher purchase volume.
Agreed. At least the CC
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Hat's off to you: You folks are so much better complainers than I am.
Don't be so hard on yourself. You're quite good at complaining about
people complaining. :)
--
Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia
www.robertstech.com
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
On 24/04/2015 4:08 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
Brian Walters wrote:
Quoting Rob Studdert distudio.p...@gmail.com:
If their pricing structure for the previous non-cloud applications
were reasonable over the years then they would likely have had far
lower piracy rates and a significantly higher
What I find on so many photography lists and forums is that whenever the
manufacturers announce something new, people go out of their way to whine,
bitch, and moan about the manufacturer, the new product, the old products, the
prices, the policies, … whatever.
Hat's off to you: You folks are
Bill wrote:
On 24/04/2015 4:08 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
The thing is that the people who were using pirated copies of
Photoshop, etc. were, for the most part, people who would never have
bought it if they couldn't get it free professionals overwhelmingly
buy their software legally. So no
Here's another, and ironic, side effect: The typical person who gets a
pirated version of Photoshop is someone who, if he couldn't have
acquired an illegal copy of Photoshop, would probably have bought a
cheaper image editor. Perhaps Photoshop Elements, but possibly Paint
Shop Pro, Photo Paint or
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 7:21 PM, Mark Roberts
postmas...@robertstech.com wrote:
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Hat's off to you: You folks are so much better complainers than I am.
Don't be so hard on yourself. You're quite good at complaining about
people complaining. :)
I've never met a
On 25 Apr 2015, at 01:03, Bill anotherdrunken...@gmail.com wrote:
The thing is that the people who were using pirated copies of
Photoshop, etc. were, for the most part, people who would never have
bought it if they couldn't get it free – professionals overwhelmingly
buy their software
On 4/24/2015 6:08 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
Brian Walters wrote:
Quoting Rob Studdert distudio.p...@gmail.com:
If their pricing structure for the previous non-cloud applications
were reasonable over the years then they would likely have had far
lower piracy rates and a significantly higher
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 2:05 AM, Malcolm Smith rrve...@virginmedia.com wrote:
Brian Walters wrote:
Actually this is nothing new - I'm surprised they're even offering new
camera support etc for CS6. They're really trying to move users to the
CC world. I wouldn't be surprised if LR 6 is the
Brian Walters wrote:
Actually this is nothing new - I'm surprised they're even offering new
camera support etc for CS6. They're really trying to move users to the
CC world. I wouldn't be surprised if LR 6 is the last stand-alone
version.
I'm surprised that LR 6 was offered as a stand-alone
Quoting Rob Studdert distudio.p...@gmail.com:
If their pricing structure for the previous non-cloud applications
were reasonable over the years then they would likely have had far
lower piracy rates and a significantly higher purchase volume.
Agreed. At least the CC Subscription price is
Interesting images. A few years ago I experimented with the DFA100 and
the 1.7x TC and also found it to be a very good combination. The Kiron
MC7 2x that I also tried was not as good.
The 2:1 macro is very tempting but for me it falls between niches.
I would like to use it in the field where
On 2015-04-22 19:42 , Mark Roberts wrote:
All the 100mm f/2.8 macro lenses (A, F, FA and D-FA) did 1:1
magnification. As did the A 200/4.0 macro and the FA 200/4.0 Macro.
and DA 35/2.8 Macro is also spec'd as 1:1
now i'm wondering which Pentax macro primes *aren't* 1:1 ?
--
PDML
steve harley wrote:
On 2015-04-22 19:42 , Mark Roberts wrote:
All the 100mm f/2.8 macro lenses (A, F, FA and D-FA) did 1:1
magnification. As did the A 200/4.0 macro and the FA 200/4.0 Macro.
and DA 35/2.8 Macro is also spec'd as 1:1
now i'm wondering which Pentax macro primes *aren't* 1:1 ?
All 50mm f/4 ones, except the preset Macro Takumar.
Also Pentax-M 100mm macro and earlier Pentax 100mm f/4 macros (M, K, Takumar).
Most of your other brand 90mm f2.5 macros will also only do 1:2. Some
had a separate 1:1 matched extender that would get you there. The
famous Vivitar Series 1 Bokina
Adobe are starting to be real ASSHOLES!
: As mentioned here, updates to Camera Raw for Photoshop CS6 only include
: new camera support, lens profile support, and bug fixes. The new
: features listed in the release notes are only available in Photoshop CC.
On 4/22/2015 6:00 PM, Darren Addy
Quoting John sesso...@earthlink.net:
Adobe are starting to be real ASSHOLES!
Starting??
Actually this is nothing new - I'm surprised they're even offering new
camera support etc for CS6. They're really trying to move users to
the CC world. I wouldn't be surprised if LR 6 is the last
Quoting Darren Addy pixelsmi...@gmail.com:
All 50mm f/4 ones, except the preset Macro Takumar.
Also Pentax-M 100mm macro and earlier Pentax 100mm f/4 macros (M, K,
Takumar).
Most of your other brand 90mm f2.5 macros will also only do 1:2. Some
had a separate 1:1 matched extender that would
Yep - those two plus the FA 100 f3.5 macro, though I think it had an
optional converter (maybe ust an extension tube) that would allow it to
go to 1:1. (Not sure if infinity focus was sacrificed when the converter
was used.)
Mark
On 4/23/2015 6:29 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
All 50mm f/4 ones,
Thank Marks. I stand corrected.
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 8:42 PM, Mark Roberts
postmas...@robertstech.com wrote:
Mark C wrote:
Not quite following you on the ratios... I've long thought that 1:1
means the image on the sensor is the same size as in real life, 2:1
means 2x lifesized. Did the
It is indeed a rather interesting lens.
Thanks for posting the info.
As for 2:1, I am thinking about how often it gets practical (for me).
I've used the D-FA 100/2.8 with 1.7x for a few things like a fruit-fly
caught by a spider, etc.
I know that when I tried to stack 2x on top of that it was
oops. i think i've been corrected on that before forgot about that
one. No you are correct, the Macro Takumar would be the same as that
one. But the Venus is twice life size.
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Mark C pdml-m...@charter.net wrote:
Not quite following you on the ratios... I've long
Mark C wrote:
Not quite following you on the ratios... I've long thought that 1:1
means the image on the sensor is the same size as in real life, 2:1
means 2x lifesized. Did the Macro Takumar achieve greater magnification
that say, the DFA 50mm macro (which Pentax specs as a 1:1 lens)?
All
Not quite following you on the ratios... I've long thought that 1:1
means the image on the sensor is the same size as in real life, 2:1
means 2x lifesized. Did the Macro Takumar achieve greater magnification
that say, the DFA 50mm macro (which Pentax specs as a 1:1 lens)?
On 4/22/2015 6:54
Tempting indeed. I think that all PK users should get one before the
realize that the cool kids don't make their lenses in a PK mount.
Reading about it, it is also funny how many people think that 1:2 is
the same as 2:1. Pentax made only one macro lens that does 1:1 and
that was the old preset
There is a Flickr group for this lens with 179 images:
https://www.flickr.com/groups/venus_macro/
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 5:00 PM, Darren Addy pixelsmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Thought this might be of interest on multiple counts...
I saw that a new ACR was released and scanned the new lenses
I recall reading about that lens here on the PDML a few weeks ago. It is
indeed tempting.
Mark
On 4/22/2015 6:00 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
Thought this might be of interest on multiple counts...
I saw that a new ACR was released and scanned the new lenses supported
looking for Pentax:
37 matches
Mail list logo
