No ideas, but a thought and a suggestion. What changes were made on your
system between the last time you printed OK and this problem arose?
Check MS's Articles at
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/324757
and http://support.microsoft.com/kb/810894
If that doesn't help, do a Google search for
Upgrade to Windows 2000?
Dario Bonazza wrote:
This is a help question for the XP geeks out there. I can no longer print by
any printer since the Spooler SubSystem App. closes down as soon as I switch
a printer on. Even manual starting the spooler in Services doesn't help, as
the Spooler
No I don't remember the name, but I remember seeing them, wanting to buy
one, and somehow never actually making the purchase.
Jens Bladt wrote:
I once had a trigger like this:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/444663052/?reuploaded=1
Called the cube. Very good - it could trigger any flash in
Interesting, looks OK one of my system: Mac OSX 10.4, Firefox 3.0
Alfa, but on my XP box running Firefox 2 I can see what you are
talking about. I think Frontpage is creating a web page that is
resizing of the image, i.e., displaying it at a percent of the full
size. The browser is then doing
Perry Pellechia wrote:
Interesting, looks OK one of my system: Mac OSX 10.4, Firefox 3.0
Alfa, but on my XP box running Firefox 2 I can see what you are
talking about. I think Frontpage is creating a web page that is
resizing of the image,
I thought it was doing that slightly by putting in
Always a danger of using software like Frontpage or Golive to create
a web page. Images resized in a browser never give appealing results.
On 1/24/07, ann sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perry Pellechia wrote:
Interesting, looks OK one of my system: Mac OSX 10.4, Firefox 3.0
Alfa, but
The rendering engine in you browser is resizing the Jpeg for display and
not doing a very good job of it. Resize the image to the display size
in a good editing program like Photoshop, etc. to fit the size required
rather than have the HTML determine the size in the img tag.
ann sanfedele
At 05:14 AM 25/01/2007, Perry Pellechia wrote:
Always a danger of using software like Frontpage or Golive to create
a web page. Images resized in a browser never give appealing results.
Not only that, but if there are a lot of images on the page they can take
forever to load.
Here is an
On 1/24/07, David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 05:14 AM 25/01/2007, Perry Pellechia wrote:
Always a danger of using software like Frontpage or Golive to create
a web page. Images resized in a browser never give appealing results.
Not only that, but if there are a lot of images on the
P. J. Alling wrote:
The rendering engine in you browser is resizing the Jpeg for display and
not doing a very good job of it. Resize the image to the display size
in a good editing program like Photoshop, etc. to fit the size required
rather than have the HTML determine the size in the img
Paul Stenquist wrote:
I've checked all the variables numerous times, and to the best of my
knowledge, they're correct. The color space of both the file and the
working space is correct. I reinstalled the Epson print drivers. Still
no luck. Here are my settings (PhotoShop CS):
You might
On 1/21/07, Rick Womer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's no accident that equipment failures occur when
the equipment is needed most. Most modern devices
incorporate a USD (User Stress Detector) chip. These
sophisticated devices use the day of the week, hour,
and secret biometric measurements
Hi Mark,
Thanks for the suggestion. I'm going to get back to work on the
printer tomorrow, and I'll try that. Finished putting together the
wedding book tonight. Now I remember why I don't want to do weddings:-).
Paul
On Jan 22, 2007, at 6:55 PM, Mark Cassino wrote:
Paul Stenquist wrote:
Paul,
Your Photoshop color settings look fine.
I don't have CS on my system anymore so I can't check the print
settings in Print with Preview precisely, I don't remember all the
differences between CS and CS2. This page shows how I make the
settings for the Epson R2400 with CS2 ... note
Something I always un-check is the High Speed box found on the
Advanced printing panel. (R1800)
Didn't do so once and the results were disappointing.
This is free!!
Jack
--- Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've checked all the variables numerous times, and to the best of my
I haven't found this to make much difference on the R2400. I've run
tests on the same print and the difference is only noticeable with
very high frequency, A3 Super sized prints.
G
On Jan 21, 2007, at 9:10 AM, Jack Davis wrote:
Something I always un-check is the High Speed box found on the
I will try the test print. I'm also going to try printing with
colorsynch. But I'm beginning to suspect it's a printer problem. Good
thing I still have the box. I've finished printing my wedding pics
and was assembling the book yesterday. I want to reprint one or two
shots. I was trying to
Seems like it frequently happens that way. I was in the middle of
printing Christmas gifts the morning of Friday, Dec. 22 when my R800
refused to feed paper. Fortunately, there's an Epson service center
about 15 minutes from home. They had it repaired and back in my hands
by 3:00 PM.
-P
On 1/21/07, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I will try the test print. I'm also going to try printing with
colorsynch. But I'm beginning to suspect it's a printer problem. Good
Paul,
Have you printed a nozzle pattern check?
I've had similar symptoms when a particular color got
Yes, my experience is in synch with yours. So I did print a nozzle
check. It looked great. I also changed all the ink cartridges. Still
no good. Will try some other things tomorrow.
Paul
On Jan 21, 2007, at 8:28 PM, Mat Maessen wrote:
On 1/21/07, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I
Good to hear. Thanks.
Paul
On Jan 21, 2007, at 7:33 PM, Paul Sorenson wrote:
Seems like it frequently happens that way. I was in the middle of
printing Christmas gifts the morning of Friday, Dec. 22 when my R800
refused to feed paper. Fortunately, there's an Epson service center
about 15
It's no accident that equipment failures occur when
the equipment is needed most. Most modern devices
incorporate a USD (User Stress Detector) chip. These
sophisticated devices use the day of the week, hour,
and secret biometric measurements (such as how hard
one hits the buttons) to detect the
HAR! No doubt.
Paul
On Jan 21, 2007, at 8:38 PM, Rick Womer wrote:
It's no accident that equipment failures occur when
the equipment is needed most. Most modern devices
incorporate a USD (User Stress Detector) chip. These
sophisticated devices use the day of the week, hour,
and secret
I have no idea what the problem could be, but I'll throw this out there anyway.
Do you have the correct black ink installed for the paper/profile your using?
I don't even know if this would cause dark prints.
Cheers,
Dave
At 10:37 AM 22/01/2007, you wrote:
Yes, my experience is in synch with
Thanks for the reply David. Yes, I checked that. I even replaced all
of the inks. Something is wrong. I appreciate any suggestions.
Paul
On Jan 21, 2007, at 9:01 PM, David Savage wrote:
I have no idea what the problem could be, but I'll throw this out
there anyway.
Do you have the correct
ann sanfedele wrote:
Eureka! - you muse correctly ---
who would have though a - sign would indicate you can see the folders
and a + not...
what is most likely is that I clicked on a keyboard equivalent of those
tags as I stumble over
the keys unless, of course, there is not keyboard
I don't know how - but the sidebar came back up
actually - all I did was read a message in the ohter list I'm on,
and hit next it then presented me with the subject lines for
everything in that list and the sidebar for everything else...
curiouser and curiouser
now I hope I dont mess
ann sanfedele wrote:
Oh great, now I was futzing around trying to set up a sub filter under
PDML folder for GFM on this new
computer and suddenly all the mail in all the folders except my main
inbox folder disappeared.
I'm using Netscape 7.0
also,
The inbox is under my annsan on
MIke - Oddly - It actually came back - but I'm not sure how - however,
the problem
wasn't quite what you described -- my Inbox had sub folders under it
but not the ones I created
for filtering my list mail and I have slid the bar of which you
speak back and forth intentionally
many times.
On Sat, Dec 23, 2006 at 12:58:04PM -0500, ann sanfedele wrote:
Next time I ask around for solutions I'll do a screen shot of what
it looks like (not that I know how to do that :) )
That's easy(-ish). Somewhere on your keyboard is a key labelled
prt sc, or prt scr, or something like that.
Print screen, the key John mentions copies the entire screen to the
clipboard, alt + print screen copies just the open window.
-P
John Francis wrote:
On Sat, Dec 23, 2006 at 12:58:04PM -0500, ann sanfedele wrote:
Next time I ask around for solutions I'll do a screen shot of what
it looks
ah -
ALT print screen with shift on looks like what i want
back in my dos days I used print screen a lot :)
thanks, guys
ann
Paul Sorenson wrote:
Print screen, the key John mentions copies the entire screen to the
clipboard, alt + print screen copies just the open window.
-P
John Francis
ann sanfedele wrote:
MIke - Oddly - It actually came back - but I'm not sure how - however,
the problem
wasn't quite what you described -- my Inbox had sub folders under it
but not the ones I created
for filtering my list mail and I have slid the bar of which you
speak back and
Eureka! - you muse correctly ---
who would have though a - sign would indicate you can see the folders
and a + not...
what is most likely is that I clicked on a keyboard equivalent of those
tags as I stumble over
the keys unless, of course, there is not keyboard equivalent.
Merry
Think of them meaning more, and less
ann sanfedele wrote:
Eureka! - you muse correctly ---
who would have though a - sign would indicate you can see the folders
and a + not...
what is most likely is that I clicked on a keyboard equivalent of those
tags as I stumble over
the keys
Oh great, now I was futzing around trying to set up a sub filter
under PDML folder for GFM on this new computer and suddenly all the
mail in all the folders except my main inbox folder disappeared.
I'm using Netscape 7.0
also,
The inbox is under my annsan on nyc.rr.com folder
and I
On Fri, Dec 22, 2006 at 08:29:05PM +0100, John Whittingham wrote:
Oh great, now I was futzing around trying to set up a sub filter
under PDML folder for GFM on this new computer and suddenly all the
mail in all the folders except my main inbox folder disappeared.
I'm using Netscape
I'd assume so, since she says she is using Netscape 7.0 :-)
Just checking, you could use any client with Netscape Navigator, not
necessarily communicator.
With 7.0 and later, Netscape got a lot more aggressive in their mail
handling. It used to be the case that you could open up a mail
Ok - (1)
I was in Communicator when I fiddled
(2) I do have show all checked
(3) the way I got to see THIS mail was by doing a search within
communicator.
(searching on to: PDML)
weirdness abounds
I went out and did some fun shopping for what I'm making on Christmas
night (Monday)
A muscovy
Hmmm...an interesting variation on Turducken. The melding of different
flavors sounds good.
-P
ann sanfedele wrote:
I went out and did some fun shopping for what I'm making on Christmas
night (Monday)
A muscovy duck - and stuffing partridge inside... bought fresh in
Chinatown for a
to me too,
and I'm making wild rice dressing - but that will be cooked outside the bird
ann
Paul Sorenson wrote:
Hmmm...an interesting variation on Turducken. The melding of different
flavors sounds good.
-P
ann sanfedele wrote:
I went out and did some fun shopping for what I'm making
I don't know how - but the sidebar came back up
actually - all I did was read a message in the ohter list I'm on, and
hit next
it then presented me with the subject lines for everything in that list
and the sidebar for everything else...
curiouser and curiouser
now I hope I dont mess it up
Hi Ann
Ok - (1)
I was in Communicator when I fiddled
(2) I do have show all checked
(3) the way I got to see THIS mail was by doing a search within
communicator.
(searching on to: PDML)
weirdness abounds
Well everything is still there, it's a bug in Netscape I reckon. I'll ask
some
On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 09:32:42 +1000, Ann Sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What is the safe site for downloading Mozilla Firefox?
I thought I had it in an email but can't find it --
also -
I tried to go to mail2web and long in (on the NEW computer)
no luck.
Hi Ann,
Try
YAYAYAY! Im in :)
and I got to Mail2web
phew
thanks , Pete
Peter McIntosh wrote:
On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 09:32:42 +1000, Ann Sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What is the safe site for downloading Mozilla Firefox?
I thought I had it in an email but can't find it --
also -
I
That is the official web site. I was going to send it again but I see
that I've been beaten to the punch.
Peter McIntosh wrote:
On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 09:32:42 +1000, Ann Sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What is the safe site for downloading Mozilla Firefox?
I thought I had it in an email
I got it - I'm all set --
EXCEPT -
my monitor is too damn bright
I know I started fiddling with some calibration stuff and I
can't find where it is now
That I would REALLY like help with my eyes are a mess
Ann
P. J. Alling wrote:
That is the official web site. I was going to send it again
If you've installed Adobe Photoshop, (not elements), Adobe gamma is in
windows control panel. Later versions of Elements may have it but
earlier versions do not.
Ann Sanfedele wrote:
I got it - I'm all set --
EXCEPT -
my monitor is too damn bright
I know I started fiddling with some
P. J. Alling wrote:
If you've installed Adobe Photoshop, (not elements), Adobe gamma is in
windows control panel. Later versions of Elements may have it but
earlier versions do not.
Actually, the machine came with Adobe gamma... dk why.
But my fiddling with it, I think, messed things up -
On 08.09.2006, at 14:31 , Jens Bladt wrote:
Hello list
Is there af list meber in Germany who wants to help getting me a
Manfrotte
334B in Germany, ending September 17th.?
The seller will only sell to people living in Germany. But I want
it very
much
I bet it will go for for less
Pietrzyk
Sendt: 8. september 2006 14:38
Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Emne: Re: OT: Help needed for buying monopod in Germany
On 08.09.2006, at 14:31 , Jens Bladt wrote:
Hello list
Is there af list meber in Germany who wants to help getting me a
Manfrotte
334B in Germany, ending September 17th
On Fri, 8 Sep 2006, Jens Bladt wrote:
At least now you know taht there's a like new
Some people never learn.
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
It's black white. (Middle line) Bottom line says Foto-65. Might be the
brand name and the speed rating. Speed rating might be (almost certainly is)
in the GOST system. Yoou can Google to find comparability to other speed
systems.
Top line says Eksponirovano, which taxes my Russian far too
I can help! It's black white. The 2nd line says cherno-byelaya, which is
black-white!
The first line says Exponirovanya, which presumably is something to do with
exposure, but otherwise, I dunno (nye znayu!).
--
Cheers,
Bob
-Original Message-
From: Glenn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thank you! My guess would be that the first line is a warning that the
film is exposed. The same word appears around the paper backing as
well. The roll was on the take-up spool in the camera, and there were
visible marks from someone trying to pry it out (they apparently
didn't realize the
On Apr 15, 2006, at 2:43 PM, Glenn wrote:
Now I just have to decide
if I want to do some clip tests to come up with a developing time or
just throw the whole roll in a tank and guess.
D-76, eight minutes at 68 degrees F (20 degrees C) works pretty well
for most black and white films.
Bob
Glenn,
Just in case, - to reassure you.
You are correct, the first line, and the same note on the red portion -
at the bottom on the photo, - says exposed.
THen: black-and-white (as Bob has already wrote)
Third line says : photo-65. - I'd say the film speed in ISO.
Igor
Sat, 15 Apr 2006
Glenn napisał(a):
I was wondering if any of the Russian-speaking list members could help
me identify a roll of 120 film that came in a Lubitel 166U I just
purchased. I'd like to at least find out if it's color or BW. Any
help translating or pointing me to a website that might help would be
Unfortunately, I was not able to get any good frames out of the roll.
Not having a better idea, I developed it under the conditions I would
usually use for PanF+. I can clearly see frame marks from a 6x4.5
mask, but the negatives are just kind of grey. I can barely see a blob
in several of them
On Apr 8, 2006, at 12:57 PM, William Robb wrote:
Photography died when the computer geeks got hold of it.
The moment cameras became a computer peripheral, computer geeks
suddenly became photography experts.
Resistance is futile. If it plugs into a computer, it will be
assimilated.
-
On Apr 7, 2006, at 10:54 PM, David Mann wrote:
On Apr 8, 2006, at 12:25 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Trying to read it straight through became a snooze real fast.
I tried that with a Javascript book once. Every lunchtime I'd read
through about half a chapter.
A few chapters in I realised
On Apr 7, 2006, at 7:20 PM, Aaron Reynolds wrote:
Thanks for the real-world timing numbers, Godfrey.
You're welcome. I was surprised at how fast the new G5 is able to
process 100 files. I'm now itching for the next show ... :-)
That said, I bet my iMac G4 20 was about as fast as your
Brisbane, Australia
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Saturday, April 08, 2006 9:46 AM
Subject: Re: OT: help from the RAW file shooters
I'm of a different opinion. The question was about what a photographer
might want, which
On 8/4/06, John Forbes, discombobulated, unleashed:
it's all a storm in a teacup.
The PDML's catch-phrase.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
-Original Message-
From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 08 April 2006 09:24
To: pentax list
Subject: Re: OT: help from the RAW file shooters
On 8/4/06, John Forbes, discombobulated, unleashed:
it's all a storm in a teacup.
The PDML's catch-phrase.
storm
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2006/04/07 Fri PM 11:52:58 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: OT: help from the RAW file shooters
Somehow I knew about Aaron's shooting situation early on. Maybe from
reading an earlier message, or from reading a message
it's all a storm in a teacup.
The PDML's catch-phrase.
storm in an eyecup, really.
Bob
LOL
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
mike
guilty as anyone
Are you a Catholic?
Bob
it's all a storm in a teacup.
The PDML's catch-phrase.
Hell, that's the slogan that should be on Dave Brook's GFM hats!
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: OT: help from the RAW file shooters
On 8/4/06, John Forbes, discombobulated
From: Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2006/04/08 Sat AM 11:25:41 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: RE: Re: OT: help from the RAW file shooters
mike
guilty as anyone
Are you a Catholic?
Bob
Depends whether it's a sin or not. Anyway, we are all Catholics. We just
On 7 Apr 2006 at 16:21, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I can't believe the comments Aaron is getting in this thread. The
original
question (which was not posed by Aaron and which has yet to be
acknowledged
or answered as far as I can see), was:
What are some typical things you'd want to
do if you
On Apr 7, 2006, at 4:46 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
... The question was about what a photographer
might want, which may be different in many ways from what the
program(s)
may offer. ...
The question
What are some typical things you'd want to
do if you had a RAW file and you wanted to
It will still be dozens of times faster than processing, scanning, and
printing 6x7 film. A good, automated RAW workflow makes it barely any more
work to get standard JPEGs out of the process than capturing in JPEG format
to begin with, but nets you the ability to go further when scene
On Apr 7, 2006, at 1:36 AM, Rob Studdert wrote:
It simply sounds like you may have picked the wrong camera for the
job, the hot
pixel management implemented in the Pentax bodies obviously isn't
working in
your shooting scenario.
Works fine in mine. Had mine performed as poorly as Dave
On Apr 7, 2006, at 1:54 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
You asked why/when one should use RAW
Actually, no, I never did. I said that I wasn't shooting RAW, someone
asked me why, and then a bunch of people told me I was wrong in my
decision.
I actually do want to know the answer to my
On Apr 7, 2006, at 6:43 AM, Cory Papenfuss wrote:
Well-said. I really don't understand the credibility of the anti-RAW
argument that it adds a tremendous amount of work to the workflow.
Even in my linux-land, I've got an automated script to dump RAW files
from the card, apply auto
On Apr 7, 2006, at 1:54 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
You asked why/when one should use RAW
By the way, the original post was asking for help for a friend taking a
technical writing course who wanted to know what are the most common
things you'd do to a RAW file in conversion.
-Aaron
Cory, did you read my post? I said NOTHING about anti-RAW, I said that FOR
MY USE of the camera it was not the correct choice.
Yes I did... my comment was more rhetorical to the large number of
comments with that sentiment. Yours just happened to be the latest... :)
I don't think anyone
On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 13:19:32 +0100, Aaron Reynolds
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Apr 7, 2006, at 6:43 AM, Cory Papenfuss wrote:
Well-said. I really don't understand the credibility of the anti-RAW
argument that it adds a tremendous amount of work to the workflow.
Even in my linux-land,
On 7/4/06, John Forbes, discombobulated, unleashed:
Or do you REALLY never make an error with exposure?
I never do :-)
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
On Apr 7, 2006, at 5:16 AM, Aaron Reynolds wrote:
You asked why/when one should use RAW
Actually, no, I never did. I said that I wasn't shooting RAW,
someone asked me why, and then a bunch of people told me I was
wrong in my decision.
I still haven't seen the original post. I saw a
- Original Message -
From: Aaron Reynolds
Subject: Re: OT: help from the RAW file shooters
Cory, did you read my post? I said NOTHING about anti-RAW, I said that
FOR MY USE of the camera it was not the correct choice.
Aaron, you are discussing a topic with zealots, every bit
Hi Aaron,
First off, I understand your position, and feel that your choice of
shooting JPEG is a good choice for you, in the situation that you're
shooting.
To answer your question:
I don't think it would be very time consuming. Last night I just started
to read the chapter in Bruce Fraser's
://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
Idiot Proof == Expert Proof
---
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: Aaron Reynolds
Subject: Re: OT: help from the RAW file shooters
Cory, did you read my post? I said NOTHING about anti-RAW, I said
On Apr 7, 2006, at 8:54 AM, Cory Papenfuss wrote:
The original theme was something like getting the most out of your
DSLR. That's contrary to your suggested mode of operation.
Uh, the original theme was 'can you help my technical writer friend by
telling him what you do most often while
On Apr 7, 2006, at 8:56 AM, John Forbes wrote:
Or do you REALLY never make an error with exposure?
The exposure has not changed inside the domed stadium in recent memory.
Perhaps one day they will change the lights. But in the meantime,
yes, I am pretty sure that I will not make an
On Apr 7, 2006, at 10:07 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
I've not timed the task specifically, but I know I've done case of
200-300 RAW files, set to output to a half-rez JPEG (1000x1500 pixels)
8bit sRGB file, on an iMac G4 20 with 1.25Ghz processor and a fast
disk, and walked out of the room
This is what I do regarding RAW conversion in Capture One (C1) when
there's a batch I want to pay attention to:
1) Create a new folder
2) Inside that folder create a new RAW folder
3) Move files to the folder
4) In C1 set root as destination folder
5) Select portrait style files and rotate 90
Hello Aaron,
Even as a RAW shooter myself, I can fully understand why you would
shoot jpg. In your situation, you can dial in the exposure you want,
along with WB and be on your way. I think some venues can benefit by
shooting jpg.
--
Bruce
Friday, April 7, 2006, 5:19:32 AM, you wrote:
AR
On Apr 7, 2006, at 11:21 AM, Fernando Terrazzino wrote:
You stupid Aaron, you don't shoot raw.
PS: sorry just kidding ;o)
Hah!
-Aaron
Aaron,
This was the question to which I was responding:
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 15:13:23 -0700
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: OT: help from the RAW file shooters
On Apr 6, 2006, at 12:10 PM, Aaron Reynolds wrote:
He's new. He will find
On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 16:08:42 +0100, Aaron Reynolds
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Apr 7, 2006, at 8:56 AM, John Forbes wrote:
Or do you REALLY never make an error with exposure?
The exposure has not changed inside the domed stadium in recent memory.
Perhaps one day they will change the
On Apr 7, 2006, at 8:15 AM, Aaron Reynolds wrote:
I've not timed the task specifically, but I know I've done case
of 200-300 RAW files, set to output to a half-rez JPEG (1000x1500
pixels) 8bit sRGB file, on an iMac G4 20 with 1.25Ghz processor
and a fast disk, and walked out of the room
On Apr 7, 2006, at 2:38 PM, John Forbes wrote:
The question was: Do you REALLY never make an error with exposure?
If the answer is yes, then go on shootig JPEG. If, on the other hand,
you are human, you might be better off with RAW. :-)
In 22 games last season I did not change the
Why don't you recommend that your friend buy a copy of Real World Camera
Raw and crib his paper from there. It is the book most of the folks on
the list learned from and it is only $25 from amazon.com.
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
Idiot Proof ==
Aaron,
This was the question to which I was responding:
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 15:13:23 -0700
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: OT: help from the RAW file shooters
On Apr 6, 2006, at 12:10 PM, Aaron Reynolds wrote:
He's new. He will find
On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 19:54:07 +0100, Aaron Reynolds
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Apr 7, 2006, at 2:38 PM, John Forbes wrote:
The question was: Do you REALLY never make an error with exposure?
If the answer is yes, then go on shootig JPEG. If, on the other hand,
you are human, you might
It's not at all hard to accept. And I would shoot jpeg in your situation as
well, given the serious time constraints. We didn't initially know that you
use digital only for high volume shooting in stadium lighting. Some who are
picking up this thread in the early posts, still don't know. So
For those of us who are running Elements with ACR or RSE, is there any
real value in the Real World Camera Raw book for Photoshop?
dk
On 4/7/06, graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why don't you recommend that your friend buy a copy of Real World Camera
Raw and crib his paper from there. It is
There is some value to it with Elements, as it does cover a lot of what
Elements offers, but the real value to it is with CS2+ACR.
Needless to say, apart from theoretical discussions, little applies to RSE.
-Adam
Dave Kennedy wrote:
For those of us who are running Elements with ACR or RSE,
301 - 400 of 483 matches
Mail list logo
