They will be in good company. There is a first edition of "The Swiss Family
Robinson" in the trash somewhere. And they did not even wait for me to die first.
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---
frank theriault wrote:
Mind you
When I was shooting transparency film for publication, all of the mags I worked
for asked for unmounted slides. Most of what I shot was 6x7, so that was no
problem, but I requested the lab just process and sleeve the 35mm as well. No
more. All digital now.
Paul
> On 31 Dec 2004 at 19:06, Herb
the prepress place pays for it, not the photographer. that is why it was
doable.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Friday, December 31, 2004 8:19 PM
Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
> Yes, and then the pre-press bureau ha
On 31 Dec 2004 at 19:06, Herb Chong wrote:
> actually, most of them do use only mounted slides. very few will deal with
> strips. no time. oversize mounts are available.
Yes, and then the pre-press bureau has to open the mount in order to wet-mount
the slides for scanning, hence they used to pre
actually, most of them do use only mounted slides. very few will deal with
strips. no time. oversize mounts are available.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: "Nick Clark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Friday, December 31, 2004 6:56 PM
Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
Jens Bladt mused:
>
> So do I, Almost. But I have started deleting. My 40GB Vosonic X's-Drive
> VP300 is almost full, not to mention my computer hard drive... I am trying
> to burn CD's, but that's quite costly and not very durable :-)
Either prices are very different in your part of the world, o
They probably don't get their slides ready mounted either, so the same logic
applies.
Nick
-Original Message-
From: "Herb Chong"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: 30/12/04 01:13:52
To: "pentax-discuss@pdml.net"
Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 09:14:11 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have to admit that I do not edit the way I should. And I often think that
> if I had thrown out all the slides that had small problems with them because,
> I
> would be very disappointed right now. Until digital cam
I have to admit that I do not edit the way I should. And I often think that
if I had thrown out all the slides that had small problems with them because, I
would be very disappointed right now. Until digital came along, a slight flaw
in a slide was enough to relegate it to the wastebasket. Today
Personally I just back everything up to DVD (used to
be CD) and make two copies (one stored in my office
nad one at home). As for longevity... I have the
expectation that I will have to transfer my images in
5 years to the newest disk medium (AKA blue laser
disks in a few years). This is a cheap
;Sylwester Pietrzyk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 11:15 AM
Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
> Wouldn't it be easier to have Raid Level 1 array instead? In case of
failure
> of one of the disks, you just replace faulty one.
> graywolf
> http://www.graywolfphoto.com
> "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
> ---
>
>
> William Robb wrote:
> >
> > ----- Original Message - From: "Kenneth Waller"
> > Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: "Kenneth Waller"
Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
Bill, you're absolutely right but I might add that you've added another
variable into the equation - the subjectivity of the person buying the
portrait. That said tho, the more ex
With all the photographic variations possible at a given subject, I don't
think you can shoot too much.
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 6:51 PM
Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
>
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 17:51:36 -0600, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I wonder how many 4x5s Karsch shot on any given subject?
> I may be murdering my own argument..
>
> William Robb
>
Certainly more than one or two.
I saw a doc on him last year, which showed him in session. His
- Original Message -
From: "Kenneth Waller"
Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
Bill, you're absolutely right but I might add that you've added
another
variable into the equation - the subjectivity of the person buying
the
portrait. That said tho, the more expe
On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 10:34:57 +1000, Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I tend to immediately purge shots with gross errors, such as
focus and motion
> blur
Let me understand: Those are bad things?
-frank the curious
--
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
On 30 Dec 2004 at 0:16, Cotty wrote:
> On 30/12/04, Rob Studdert, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
> >Just like film shooters there are digital shooters who discard the apparent
> >dross and those who keep it, I don't think that you can realistically
> surmise
> >that the rise of digital will ensur
efore.
> The amount of shooting these guys do almost takes the fun out of it
> for me.
>
> Kenneth Waller
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
>
>
> > So, are
will shoot other than what he has success with in the
past.
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 6:44 PM
Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
>
> - Original Message -----
> From: "
shooting these guys do almost takes the fun out of it for me.
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -----
From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
> So, are you saying that these pros either used every shot on a roll of
film
> or that, if
Quoting Graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 'sokay, Bill. There is a lot of that on the list (GRIN).
>
> The point I made, which everyone seemed to miss, was that really good
> photographers don't make a lot of worthless photos, and hardly ever screw
> up
> technically. I guess most of those who an
Oh well... I have another dedicated backup machine. : P
That's another 4x 120GB just sitting there, just in case
-Original Message-
From: David Zaninovic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 31, 2004 12:30 AM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Who has an
> > I hope you have another 4x 120GB hard drives for backup. :)
> > I have two 160GB drives, one for data and another one for backup of the
> > first
> > one.
> Wouldn't it be easier to have Raid Level 1 array instead? In case of failure
> of one of the disks, you just replace faulty one.
That do
David Zaninovic wrote on 30.12.04 17:03:
> I hope you have another 4x 120GB hard drives for backup. :)
> I have two 160GB drives, one for data and another one for backup of the first
> one.
Wouldn't it be easier to have Raid Level 1 array instead? In case of failure
of one of the disks, you just r
I hope you have another 4x 120GB hard drives for backup. :)
I have two 160GB drives, one for data and another one for backup of the first
one.
- Original Message -
From: "Andy Chang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 10:50 AM
Subject: RE: Who has
I actually have 4x 120GB hard disk in my computer
And they are about half full : P
Andy
-Original Message-
From: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 10:20 PM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: RE: Who has an istDS?
So do I, Almost. But I
'sokay, Bill. There is a lot of that on the list (GRIN).
The point I made, which everyone seemed to miss, was that really good
photographers don't make a lot of worthless photos, and hardly ever screw up
technically. I guess most of those who answered do both, but think they are
really good phot
l have
app. 100 40GB hard drives om my shelves :-)
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Andy Chang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 30. december 2004 06:43
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: RE: Who has an istDS?
Well
I have al
> fra: Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> On 30/12/04, Rob Studdert, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
> >Just like film shooters there are digital shooters who discard the apparent
> >dross and those who keep it, I don't think that you can realistically
> surmise
> >that the rise of digital will ensure
Many years ago my cousin was a photographer for the air force, and later
went into commercial photography for a while and made some movies, mostly
documentary. He had a wall of photos in one of his studios, all of which
were mistakes - inadvertent shutter releases, poor exposures, movement of
the
On 30/12/04, Rob Studdert, discombobulated, unleashed:
>Just like film shooters there are digital shooters who discard the apparent
>dross and those who keep it, I don't think that you can realistically
surmise
>that the rise of digital will ensure that everyone behaves the same :-)
Define 'dro
Weddings are the staple of pro-photographers and almost all weddings
before the advent of digital were shot on negative film.
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: "Herb Chong"
Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
they throw away the bad slides. no negatives for most colo
In a message dated 12/29/2004 11:35:59 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So why
mention the number of frames shot? It doesn't seem to reflect any
discernable improvement in many cases, based on the images posted to the
PAW, PESO, and PUG. The good photogs are still good, and th
Andy
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 5:47 AM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
Shel Belinkoff mused:
>
> Shooting to "learn" is sometimes a different situation, but unless t
On 29 Dec 2004 at 23:48, Luigi de Guzman wrote:
> As I can't help but feel this is directed at me, I'm going to answer again.
Don't worry, you are but one of many who have uttered similar words.
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://m
On Wednesday 29 December 2004 14:34, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> The question I have is unrelated to shooting a lot of frames. It would be
> nice to know why the DSLR shooters on this list feel a need to *tell
> everyone* how many hundreds or thousands of frames they've shot. Most
> respond to that
Quoting Herb Chong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> working pros submitting for publication don't shoot negatives.
>
> Herb...
> - Original Message -
> From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 4:14 PM
&g
rt director select a retoucher. I doubt that any of the best working
pros save a lot of culls.
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Herb Chong"
> Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
>
>
> > they throw away the bad slides. no negatives for most color pro
&g
Herb...
HC> - Original Message -
HC> From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
HC> To:
HC> Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 4:14 PM
HC> Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
>> So, are you saying that these pros either used every shot on a roll of
HC> film
>&
es of really, really good
ones. you get that only by shooting lots and developing an instinct for when
the moments are there.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: "Bob W" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 4:49 PM
Subject: Keeping the rejects (was R
working pros submitting for publication don't shoot negatives.
Herb...
- Original Message -
From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 4:14 PM
Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
> So, are you saying that these pros either used
- Original Message -
From: "Herb Chong"
Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
they throw away the bad slides. no negatives for most color pro
work for a
long time now. publications would not accept them.
While publication may be the Holy Grail, the numbers say that most
colour p
they throw away the bad slides. no negatives for most color pro work for a
long time now. publications would not accept them.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 2:34 PM
Subject: RE: Who has
I think people are more likely to quote a number simply because the
number is right there to see. With film, it wasn't being prominently
displayed in front of our faces all the time. I also think some folks
are expressing surprise at how their shooting habits have changed.
Different habits will
- Original Message -
From: "William Robb"
Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
- Original Message -
From: "Graywolf"
Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
Remember, anything that goes into the circular file is a waste of
time, money, and effort.
Gotta disagree with yo
- Original Message -
From: "Jens Bladt"
Subject: RE: Who has an istDS?
A useful rule of thumb, for making good photographs, was always
this: Take
a lot of photographs. Then throw away the bad ones.
Like most "Rules of Thumb", there are some flaws in the logic.
William Robb
- Original Message -
From: "Graywolf"
Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
Remember, anything that goes into the circular file is a waste of
time, money, and effort.
Gotta disagree with you on this one.
In my years of mentoring, one of the things I taught is that you will
learn
- Original Message -
From: "Kenneth Waller"
Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
On 12/29, Shel caused the following to appear on my CRT -
"No, pros didn't throw away the bad ones. They were saved on
contact
sheets
and negatives, and became valuable tools in both the
>Remember, anything that goes into the circular file is a waste
>of time, money, and effort.
Not necessarily. If I learn from my mistakes and discard the results it is
not a waste.
Powell
Hi,
> Remember, anything that goes into the circular file is a waste of time, money,
> and effort.
No, no, no, no! There is a saying - the waste basket is the writer's
best friend. It applies to more than just writers though.
There is an old joke about university departments:
"Mathematics is th
On 29 Dec 2004 at 17:23, Graywolf wrote:
> Having seen contact sheets of really good photographers I have to disagree
> with
> you.
>
> Yes, they shoot lots of photos. But they are all very good photos. Not a bad
> one
> in the bunch. They may have shot a hundred frames where I would shoot 2 or
Having seen contact sheets of really good photographers I have to disagree with
you.
Yes, they shoot lots of photos. But they are all very good photos. Not a bad one
in the bunch. They may have shot a hundred frames where I would shoot 2 or 3,
but nothing of theirs was junk. What they are shoot
On 29 Dec 2004 at 11:34, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> No, pros didn't throw away the bad ones. They were saved on contact sheets
> and
> negatives, and became valuable tools in both the editing process and helping
> the
> photographer understand the shooting process. many photogs "shoot to a
> cli
On 29 Dec 2004 at 21:49, Bob W wrote:
> It will be a great shame if the rise of digital photography means that
> we lose this type of material.
Just like film shooters there are digital shooters who discard the apparent
dross and those who keep it, I don't think that you can realistically surmis
Hi,
Wednesday, December 29, 2004, 9:14:36 PM, Shel wrote:
> So, are you saying that these pros either used every shot on a roll of film
> or that, if there were some they'd not use, they were cut out of the
> negative strips, deleted from contact sheets, and tossed, never to be seen
> again? I c
Shel Belinkoff mused:
>
> Shooting to "learn" is sometimes a different situation, but unless the
> results are saved, the learning process is truncated. How can the photog
> go back and compare the result from the photos made this month with the
> ones made a month or two earlier and see where an
frank theriault mused:
>
> On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 11:34:41 -0800, Shel Belinkoff
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It would be
> > nice to know why the DSLR shooters on this list feel a need to *tell
> > everyone* how many hundreds or thousands of frames they've shot.
>
> I think it's already been a
On Wednesday 29 December 2004 14:34, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> The question I have is unrelated to shooting a lot of frames. It would be
> nice to know why the DSLR shooters on this list feel a need to *tell
> everyone* how many hundreds or thousands of frames they've shot. Most
> respond to that
a month or two earlier and see where and how improvement has been
accomplished, if at all.
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: Kenneth Waller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Date: 12/29/2004 12:24:27 PM
> Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
>
> On 12/29, Shel caused the following t
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 11:34:41 -0800, Shel Belinkoff
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It would be
> nice to know why the DSLR shooters on this list feel a need to *tell
> everyone* how many hundreds or thousands of frames they've shot.
I think it's already been answered by someone else:
Because they c
Well the best 10% are still the best 10%, right?
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 29. december 2004 20:35
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: RE: Who has an istDS?
No, pros
current digital pro would most likely be
saving all digital images shot to learn the shooting process.
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 2:34 PM
Subject: RE: Who has an istDS?
> No,
No, pros didn't throw away the bad ones. They were saved on contact sheets
and negatives, and became valuable tools in both the editing process and
helping the photographer understand the shooting process. many photogs
"shoot to a climax" and having all the frames available is most helpful.
And s
t
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 28. december 2004 23:49
Til: pentax list
Emne: Re: Who has an istDS?
On 28/12/04, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed:
>I just don't understand why so
Rob you hit it right on the head with this comment. I was shooting a 4 minute
program of my daughter's synchro team and when the music ended I looked down
at the number of photos taken. I would have guessed 40-50 shots but it was
closer to 200 shots. Surprised the heck out of me...
vic
In a me
> I just don't understand why so many digi users love to mention how
> many hundreds or thousands of exposures they've made.
I dunno, not being a DSLR owner (yet!), but I've been naively
interpreting that sort of comment as being at least a raw indicator
of reliability (it's certainly better than
All well and good, but I don't recall film users whose cameras recorded the
number of exposures made announcing that number to the list with the fervor
(or the frequency) of the dslr users. Plus, the digi P&S users' cameras
also record the exposure numbers, and there are quite a few such users
her
Many photogs through the process of cataloging their negs are easily able
to know exactly how many frames were shot, and with which camera if they
have more than one. High tech imprinting on the film isn't needed to keep
track of such things. But regardless, why the need to make the
announcement
A worthwhile comment except that those here using a digi have already made
their first thousands of photos with film cameras.
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > I just don't understand why so many digi users love to mention how many
> > hundreds or thousands of exp
Essentially ...
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> yes - I think that Shel is not querying the numbers, but the apparent
> need to quote the numbers. 'Shooting round the subject' has been
commonplace
> for donkeys' years, of course, and has been a source of mystery
- Original Message -
From: "Shel Belinkoff"
Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
Many photogs through the process of cataloging their negs are
easily able
to know exactly how many frames were shot, and with which camera if
they
have more than one. High tech imprinting on the
Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 5:48 PM
Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
> On 28/12/04, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
> >I just don't understand why so many digi users love to mention how many
> >hundreds or thousands of exposures they've made.
On 28 Dec 2004 at 8:36, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> I just don't understand why so many digi users love to mention how many
> hundreds or thousands of exposures they've made. Most are probably
> worthless pap made just to "see what happens" Reminds me of when I got my
> little Sony - I took snaps of
Hi,
> I just don't understand why so many digi users love to mention how many
> hundreds or thousands of exposures they've made. Most are probably
> worthless pap made just to "see what happens" [...]
HCB said "Your first 10,000 photographs are your worst". So I guess
you might as well get them
Hi,
>>I just don't understand why so many digi users love to mention how many
>>hundreds or thousands of exposures they've made. Most are probably
>>worthless pap made just to "see what happens" Reminds me of when I got my
>>little Sony - I took snaps of everything - the heater vent, my foot, fi
Volume can be a good thing. I did a studio shoot today -- a cocktail
for stock. I shot sixty some frames with bracketing and multiple
variations. If I had been shooting 6x7, I probably would have shot only
about 30 or 40 frames, just because that would have worn me out. And of
course the instan
On 28/12/04, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed:
>I just don't understand why so many digi users love to mention how many
>hundreds or thousands of exposures they've made. Most are probably
>worthless pap made just to "see what happens" Reminds me of when I got my
>little Sony - I took s
On Tuesday 28 December 2004 11:36, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> Thanks for your comments, Luigi ...
>
> I just don't understand why so many digi users love to mention how many
> hundreds or thousands of exposures they've made. Most are probably
> worthless pap made just to "see what happens" Reminds m
On Dec 28, 2004, at 11:36 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
What's a Drebel?
It's a small forest animal that survives by eating the fungi from
around tree roots.
Seriously, I frequently use the *istD with one hand while drinking my
Starbucks and wandering around downtown Birmingham. With an autofocus
In a message dated 12/28/2004 8:37:57 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What's a Drebel?
Shel
===
What I have. A Canon Digital Rebel. But I think Drebel is probably a
derogatory term. :-)
I still like it. I see no reason to upgrade to 8mp for sometime.
What I NE
le, easy access to controls is important
to me. But I seem to recall the istD was OK in that regard as well.
What's a Drebel?
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: Luigi de Guzman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Date: 12/28/2004 8:20:07 AM
> Subject: Re: Who has an istDS?
&g
On Monday 27 December 2004 22:24, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> Some questions for those who've got the istDS: How do you like it thus
> far?
4 weeks and 1,200-plus exposures later, I love it.
I don't understand all this "big hands uncomfortable with small equipment"
ballyhoo. The DS is about per
then restart it later on?
Or
do you have to reset it each time it cycles off/on?
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: Andy Chang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Date: 12/27/2004 10:02:47 PM
> Subject: RE: Who has an istDS?
>
> Shel,
> I got my DS for just 4 weeks now, love i
start it later on? Or
do you have to reset it each time it cycles off/on?
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: Andy Chang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Date: 12/27/2004 10:02:47 PM
> Subject: RE: Who has an istDS?
>
> Shel,
> I got my DS for just 4 weeks now, love it to
when I
bought it last year!
I think that's about how I think of my DS...
PS: did I mention that it has lightening fast USB2.0 compared to the
torturing 1.1
Cheers
Andy
-Original Message-
From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 11:25 AM
To:
Some questions for those who've got the istDS: How do you like it thus
far? Was your choice between the D and the DS, or between a higher end
"prosumer" model and the DS? What factors influenced your choice and
decision to go with the DS?
Shel
87 matches
Mail list logo
