frank theriault wrote:
Maybe it's just my screen (which is on my work computer, and therefore
AFAIK not calibrated), but they seem a bit flat to me. It would be
nice if they were a bit snappier.
Could be. Unfortunately, I lack a tool to properly calibrate my LCD
display on my laptop. I'll
On 5/9/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://homepage.mac.com/godders/custom-focus-screen-DS.jpg
Cool. I'd love to hear how it works for you. I have an MX screen in my
istD, and while it works well, it could be brighter...
Have you installed it yet?
j
--
Juan Buhler
Check
Gabriel Cain wrote:
frank theriault wrote:
Maybe it's just my screen (which is on my work computer, and therefore
AFAIK not calibrated), but they seem a bit flat to me. It would be
nice if they were a bit snappier.
I've re-edited a few of them, and I think they're better. Thanks for
the
How so, Aaron?
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Aaron Reynolds
On May 9, 2006, at 10:42 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
He's asking polite, intelligent questions. He deserves civil,
informative answers.
I guess some of us are rubbed the wrong way by the nature of most of
his posts.
Thanks Marnie and Boris!
j
On 5/9/06, Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi!
Just sharing:
My photoblog was selected finalist for the 2006 Photobloggies, both in
the best BW and best street photography categories.
Look here, for links to all the finalists:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2006/05/09 Tue PM 08:32:35 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net, frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: PESO - Grumpy Man With Lunch
Quoting frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 5/9/06, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Op Tue, 09 May 2006 09:40:52 +0200 schreef Lucas Rijnders
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Op Tue, 09 May 2006 09:28:42 +0200 schreef Dario Bonazza
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
I think Dario had mentioned something about a canned project, the
Pentax MZ-1.
It was Paal, not me.
Hi Marnie
I would also print no. 1 and 2 and maybe 10 to show a picture with more than
two fish.
greetings
Markus
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 4:51 AM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: GESO - Jelly Fish Waltz
Shot
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2006/05/10 Wed AM 12:14:46 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: OT: Anti-Panda?
I was hoping for something wittier.
Like a Duke of Hazards truck.
You're in trouble now.
Not that is witty, of course.
Marnie aka Doe ;-)
In a message
From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2006/05/10 Wed AM 12:18:45 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: PESO GESO - Four Pics of the Eco Motorcycle
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff
Subject: PESO GESO - Four Pics of the Eco Motorcycle
These pics
I suspect the bokeh here is more a function of the background than the lens.
From: Tim Øsleby [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2006/05/10 Wed AM 12:24:59 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: RE: PESO: Common Redshank minding it's own business (new enablement)
Blaaah
Tim
Mostly harmless
On 9/5/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed:
Shot at Monterey Bay Aquarium about two weeks ago. Usual disclaimers: shot
through glass, through water, moving subjects, dark room, using high ISO and
large f stop.
These are either the best or the ones I thought were the most
On 9/5/06, graywolf, discombobulated, unleashed:
A panda is a large black on white bear-like herbivore. So an anti-panda
would be a small white on black carnivore, correct?
Nope, a panda's mother's sister.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|
But the light is passing through the AF1.7X _after_ the Tamron, so it's the
converter's fault, no?
I suppose I'd better 8-)
From: Tim Øsleby [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2006/05/10 Wed AM 01:03:54 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: RE: PESO: Common Redshank minding it's own business (new
From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2006/05/10 Wed AM 07:43:44 GMT
To: pentax list pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: GESO - Jelly Fish Waltz
On 9/5/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed:
Shot at Monterey Bay Aquarium about two weeks ago. Usual disclaimers: shot
I haven't been photographing much lately (although enablement is another
pleasure altogether). So here's some pics of my nephew. Taken with a mix
of newly enabled lenses, Mostly Rob Studdert's lovely A-50/1.2 - many
thanks Rob. I must do a comparison test with the K50/1.2 soon.
Sorry Mike,
I completely missed your post, and found this in the archives. Thanks
for the link. He was one of my fave erophotogs.
D
Mike Wilson wrote:
Word document of the eulogy for BCC.
In turn horrific, amusing and poignant. A disturbing read.
From: Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2006/05/10 Wed AM 03:20:02 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Portraits
On May 9, 2006, at 10:42 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
He's asking polite, intelligent questions. He deserves civil,
informative answers.
I guess some of
From: Derby Chang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2006/05/10 Wed AM 08:45:36 GMT
To: Pentax Discuss pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: OT Bob Carlos-Clarke eulogy
Sorry Mike,
I completely missed your post, and found this in the archives. Thanks
for the link. He was one of my fave
LX MX screens in the *ist bodies?
Juan put one in his *ist D.
Anyone try the DS.
Sincerely,
Collin Brendemuehl
http://www.brendemuehl.net
He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose
-- Jim Elliott
On May 10, 2006, at 2:40 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
How so, Aaron?
Repeated attempts to get people to join his Google group, cross-posts,
unexplained tips that are poor advice left undefended when questioned,
that BH advertisment...
Dunno, I didn't think he got off to a great start on the
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 9 May 2006 at 16:57, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I guess I wasn't very clear - I know how to put text on an image and how to
adjust the opacity. What I want is something other, or in addition, that's
not visible and that cannot be stripped away easily or at all.
Like
They require modification, but anything that will fit in a D will fit in
a DS or DS2.
-Adam
Collin R Brendemuehl wrote:
LX MX screens in the *ist bodies?
Juan put one in his *ist D.
Anyone try the DS.
Sincerely,
Collin Brendemuehl
http://www.brendemuehl.net
He is no fool who gives what
On May 9, 2006, at 11:26 PM, Juan Buhler wrote:
http://homepage.mac.com/godders/custom-focus-screen-DS.jpg
Cool. I'd love to hear how it works for you. I have an MX screen in my
istD, and while it works well, it could be brighter...
Have you installed it yet?
I ordered it yesterday so I
I think what Adam meant:
- LX MX screens need to be cut down to the format size of the DSLR
screens.
- The *ist D, DS and DS2 all take the same screens. What works well
in a D also works well in a DS/DS2.
Godfrey
On May 10, 2006, at 4:37 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
They require modification,
Agreed... Bob S.
On 5/10/06, Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 10, 2006, at 2:40 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
How so, Aaron?
Repeated attempts to get people to join his Google group, cross-posts,
unexplained tips that are poor advice left undefended when questioned,
that BH
I had too many wonderful emotional moments during the last 3 days to
blame equipment. There's always 3-4 pictures out of a hundred that are
good and worth the effort. Today was amazing and I love to share this
with you.
http://roman.blakout.net/?blog=20060510145807
Street Musicians (Lühike
Not a lens that I will use often, but it certainly is fun. First roll
with the Sigma 8mm fisheye. A new set of instincts have to be trained
to use this lens. Keeping arms and legs out of shot is one of them.
Keeping a blower is another - dust on the lens surface shows in the shot.
Derby Chang wrote:
Not a lens that I will use often, but it certainly is fun. First roll
with the Sigma 8mm fisheye. A new set of instincts have to be trained
to use this lens. Keeping arms and legs out of shot is one of them.
Keeping a blower is another - dust on the lens surface shows in
Gonz is onto something when he points at the harsh bokeh. So now I wonder:
Is there anything I can do to make it less harsh in Phootoshop (Elements 3)?
Gaussian Blur is one obvious answer. It helps, but it does not take it right
where I want.
Does anybody have some input on this?
The picture is
My guess would be they would have to be cut down. On the D the mirror
box and mirror are over sized, (same size as the MZ/ZX cameras, by my
measurements), for the APS size sensor, but the screen is, by
comparison, tiny. The Ds has been re-engineered for the mirror box to
be just right.
Hi Tim
congratulations on your progresses and enablement's first :-)
What helps is excluding the background from any sharpening by selecting only
the bird for that step.
greetings
Markus
-Original Message-
From: Tim Øsleby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 3:24 PM
Nice work. Excellent compositions for the fisheye circle. I like the one in the
center -- the dome -- best of all. The second from left looks like you got the
thumbnail instead of the image. It shows up with mammoth pixels on my browser.
Paul
-- Original message
No need for your disclaimers ;-)
The disclaimers make it sound like you are ashamed by showing the pictures.
I know thats not the case, but why give us this impression?
I enjoyed every one.
I'd suggest watching them while listening to Keith Jarret, Belonging, the
whole album. Perfect match. If
From: Derby Chang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2006/05/10 Wed AM 10:53:02 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: OT Bob Carlos-Clarke eulogy
mike wilson wrote:
From: Derby Chang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2006/05/10 Wed AM 08:45:36 GMT
To: Pentax Discuss pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To answer the question - use a lens that produces good bokeh?
Norm
From: Tim Øsleby [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gonz is onto something when he points at the harsh bokeh. So now I wonder:
Is there anything I can do to make it less harsh in Phootoshop (Elements
3)?
Gaussian Blur is one obvious answer. It
To answer the question - use a lens
that
produces good bokeh?
Norm
This from a guy who puts gravy on everything.
vbg
Dave
A series of five, maybe - 1,10,12,11,2
-P
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shot at Monterey Bay Aquarium about two weeks ago. Usual disclaimers: shot
through glass, through water, moving subjects, dark room, using high ISO and
large f stop.
These are either the best or the ones I thought
Ok. I'll buy a similar Pentax lens, on your expense ;-)
Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds
(Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)
-Original Message-
From: Norman Baugher [mailto:[EMAIL
My youngest daughter dresses her niece -- in napkins. *istD with FA 50/1.4,
f1.4
@ 1/45th, ISO 800. I love this lens wide open.
Paul
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4437232
After I wrote that I thought, Actually and anti panda is probably
called a tiger. Or, come to think of it, a human.
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
Idiot Proof == Expert Proof
---
Cotty wrote:
On 9/5/06, graywolf,
I've tried some smoothing techniques in PS to achieve a more pleasant
background. Usually you have to mask out the main subject and copy the
resultant image in several layers, making each layer have a different
level of blur. Then you control the opacity to achieve the look you
want. Its
Aw, you are just prejudiced, Aaron. You don't like trolls.
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
Idiot Proof == Expert Proof
---
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
On May 10, 2006, at 2:40 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
How so, Aaron?
Some enablement this afternoon. Going to pick up my Slik Pro 700 DX tripod and
short
column.
NOW, thats definetly it for buy stuff for this year. I Promise.
Dave
My youngest daughter dresses her niece -- in napkins. *istD with FA 50/1.4,
f1.4 @ 1/45th, ISO 800. I love this lens wide open.
Paul
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4437232
In a message dated 5/10/2006 12:45:41 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well done Marnie, really really nice. I know you shot them the right way
up, but not being Marine Boy, I always see jellyfish with legs dangling
down. Try rotating a couple through 180 :-)
Cheers,
Love the deep blue as a backdrop.
Nice
Dave
Shot at Monterey Bay Aquarium about two
weeks ago. Usual disclaimers: shot
through glass, through water, moving subjects, dark room, using high ISO and
large f stop.
These are either the best or the
It's always about U, isn't it?
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
Idiot Proof == Expert Proof
---
Cotty wrote:
On 9/5/06, graywolf, discombobulated, unleashed:
A panda is a large black on white bear-like herbivore. So an
Some nice pictures there. I love the fish eye shot. Very welll done
Dave
I haven't been photographing much lately (although enablement is another
pleasure altogether). So here's some pics of my nephew. Taken with a mix
of newly enabled lenses, Mostly
All good angles there. Really like the roller coaster to.
Dave
Not a lens that I will use often, but it certainly is
fun. First roll
with the Sigma 8mm fisheye. A new set of instincts have to be trained
to use this lens. Keeping arms and legs out of
If I add PEF files to a folder which has DNG files in it and then run DNG
Converter it creates a second copy of the DNG files.
Any way to stop this annoying redundant behaviour?
Powell
My youngest daughter dresses her niece -- in napkins. *istD with FA 50/1.4,
f1.4
@ 1/45th, ISO 800. I love this lens wide open.
Paul
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4437232
Good bokeh isn't a sure thing, even with the best lenses. Sometimes background
elements just don't blend well, even when the lens performance is optimal. I've
used almost a variety of tools to repair bokeh: cloning, selective blurring,
painting with semi-transparent layers, and gaussian blur.
solution 1: Sort the PEF files into a subfolder. Open DNG Converter,
set source to the subfolder and destination to the same folder as the
other DNG files.
solution 2: Let it do it's thing on all the files, than delete the
redundant files with a properly executed wildcard file parameter
From: Powell Hargrave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If I add PEF files to a folder which has DNG files in it and then run DNG
Converter it creates a second copy of the DNG files.
Any way to stop this annoying redundant behaviour?
Yes, it's quite simple. Grasp the power cord that connects your cpu to
I have only used the converter once, Powell, and when i went to save in the
same folder i
got a are
you sure you want to do that message. I think its best if you make seperate
sub folders.
Thats what i
ended up doing.
Dave
If I add PEF files to a
On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 07:16:36AM -0400, Aaron Reynolds wrote:
On May 10, 2006, at 2:40 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
How so, Aaron?
Repeated attempts to get people to join his Google group, cross-posts,
unexplained tips that are poor advice left undefended when questioned,
that BH
F50/1.7 Ex. $150
SF-1 VGC $25
A50/1.7 +++ $20
--- You'll actually get 2 A50/1.7 lenses. One complete but the aperture
ring is stuck.
The other is a parts lens. Everything is there to make what you need.
Just add elbow grease.
+ shipping. PayPal.
Collin
First it's not really a Picnic, (damn I'm beginning to sound like a
GEICO advert.)
There is no political or ecological comment intended, well not much of
one anyway, and I doubt anyone will see anything they don't want to anyway.
I'm just mainly trying out different methods of producing BW
I'd been having ISP or mail problems this morning. Just want to see if
this makes it to the list.
If you see the msg on the list, can you shoot of a quick, off list reply
Shel
On 5/10/06, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
First it's not really a Picnic, (damn I'm beginning to sound like a
GEICO advert.)
There is no political or ecological comment intended, well not much of
one anyway, and I doubt anyone will see anything they don't want to anyway.
I'm just mainly
Doug Brewer wrote:
Derby Chang wrote:
Not a lens that I will use often, but it certainly is fun. First roll
with the Sigma 8mm fisheye. A new set of instincts have to be
trained to use this lens. Keeping arms and legs out of shot is one of
them. Keeping a blower is another - dust on the lens
Keep the DNG files in a separate folder from the PEF files.
It's been suggested to DL the PEF's to one directory and have the converted
files placed in a second directory.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Powell Hargrave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Date: 5/10/2006 10:27:12
On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 10:28:11AM -0700, Powell Hargrave wrote:
If I add PEF files to a folder which has DNG files in it and then run DNG
Converter it creates a second copy of the DNG files.
Any way to stop this annoying redundant behaviour?
Yes - don't put the DNG files in the same
Well composed group of elements.
You solicited comments, so I'll point out the immediately obvious
featureless blow-out of a portion of the large bolder.
Like the sky tonal balance, but feel the foreground is somewhat flat.
Jack
--- P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
First it's not really
On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 10:28:11AM -0700, Powell Hargrave wrote:
If I add PEF files to a folder which has DNG files in it and then run DNG
Converter it creates a second copy of the DNG files.
Any way to stop this annoying redundant behaviour?
John Francis wrote:
Yes - don't put the DNG
Just a quick question about DNG.
I use CS, and I can't find any reference to the DNG format. Is this a CS2
feature only? Also, how much space is saved with using DNG?
Thanks.
Strange, I didn't know of any religion or culture that celebrates
new-year on may 11th?
Groeten,
Vic
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Some enablement this afternoon. Going to pick up my Slik Pro 700 DX tripod and
short
column.
NOW, thats definetly it for buy stuff for this
To me it looks like you are hooked on eyes. I can see why, your nephews eyes
are beautiful.
Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds
(Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)
-Original Message-
From:
Out of focus rendering is a fundamental property of a particular
lens... It's quite difficult to change a harsh rendering to a
pleasing one. Mixtures of different kinds of blurring and filtering
sometimes can help, but depending upon the particular image, they all
fall apart ultimately.
I have an interesting situation and I want to try to get a shot.
I keep a suet feeder on a tree near the bathroom window. The feeder brings in
woodpeckers, catbirds and several other species that I shoot pictures of. The
suet feeder has recently drawn the attention of a raccoon. It shows up
Nice pictures. I would be happier with a fade that was twice as fast. Bob S.
On 5/10/06, Derby Chang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I haven't been photographing much lately (although enablement is another
pleasure altogether). So here's some pics of my nephew. Taken with a mix
of newly enabled
It is the equipment, that is why we old timers always get superior
photos. Those new fangled cameras just ain't no good atall.
As proof or this, with the old cameras, you wind up saying, I can't
figure out how to use this camera. With the new ones, you wind up
saying, This camera is stupid.
Thanks! I am glad you enjoyed them.
(BTW, I am discovering about twice the number of comments on my GESO in the
archive than those coming into my inbox. So this is a reply to a post in the
archive.)
It's just that I often feel that my shots are often softer than others,
because of: mainly
There are numerous factors that effect the bokeh, including the type of
background, the distance between you and the subject and the distance
between the background and the subject, aperture, shape of diaphragm
blades, number of blades, as well as the design of the lens. The size of
the image or
For those of you who take time to look, I wouldn't mind knowing which #
numbers you like best. I am thinking of printing up 4-5 and hanging them
side by
side. I know my favorites are #1 and #2, so I'd like input on any others
you
think might be print worthy.
Throw some slow classical
In a message dated 5/10/2006 1:05:09 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm just mainly trying out different methods of producing BW
conversion. This one seems to have given me the best results, and them
most flexibility so far. But without further a-do here it is:
In a message dated 5/10/2006 1:44:41 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I haven't been photographing much lately (although enablement is another
pleasure altogether). So here's some pics of my nephew. Taken with a mix
of newly enabled lenses, Mostly Rob Studdert's lovely
My youngest daughter dresses her niece -- in napkins
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?
topic_id=1481msg_id=00GMp6photo_id=4437232photo_sel_index=0
In a message dated 5/8/2006 4:10:34 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I've enabled myself with another crappy lens. A Tamron 300/2,8 adaptall. Ok,
it is not crappy, but it is old, and has a lot off what the seller called
patina. What's really nice is that it balances perfectly
It was a beautiful sunny day here so I spent my lunchtime wandering around
the UW campus capturing infrared images. I got several very nice shots
- here's a couple of them.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fwwidall/144268956/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fwwidall/144268905/
Both shot with *istDS,
Very cute!
(I've received three original posts of this... ! )
Godfrey
On May 10, 2006, at 4:46 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
My youngest daughter dresses her niece -- in napkins
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?
topic_id=1481msg_id=00GMp6photo_id=4437232photo_sel_index=0
And I've received none ... nor have I received any mail that I sent to the
list today.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi
Very cute!
(I've received three original posts of this... ! )
Godfrey
On May 10, 2006, at 4:46 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
My youngest daughter
In a message dated 5/10/2006 4:47:46 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My youngest daughter dresses her niece -- in napkins
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?
topic_id=1481msg_id=00GMp6photo_id=4437232photo_sel_index=0
Okay, I won't apologize for future resends on my
Sorry for the flood. This is the first one that showed up in my mail. I
assumed we all got the same thing, and that the earlier sends never
made it through. I guess one can't assume anything about the list these
days:-).
Paul
On May 10, 2006, at 7:54 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Very
In a message dated 5/7/2006 10:32:11 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Finally pulled together a gallery of some 26 pix to post. Not expecting
comments on all, but if you see something you like or dislike, I'll
accept kudos and/or brickbats. Except as noted in the comments,
I tried to ignore this honest... but I just couldn't VBG
On my calibrated screen I do notice some color (other than B+W) in the
background hills the foreground bushes - don't know if that was your
intent - but its not B+W on my monitor, not that its bad.
I didn't want to see the
Very nice. The deep blue and the earthy colors of the jellyfish make
for some pretty pictures.
Paul
On May 10, 2006, at 7:27 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For those of you who take time to look, I wouldn't mind knowing
which #
numbers you like best. I am thinking of printing up 4-5 and hanging
I needed to shoot some bird photos for a job I'm working on so I
thought I'd get a few grabs from the bird feeders in our garden. I
don't really like doing this because it somehow bothers me having the
bird feeder in the photo (especially if it's a tacky, plastic one).
Still, I needed some bird
How convenient to have one of the birds doing pull ups!
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: First PESO in a long while...
I needed to shoot some bird photos for a job I'm working on so I
thought I'd get a few grabs from the bird feeders
Well composed and quite sharp, but far too green on my monitor.
Paul
On May 10, 2006, at 9:01 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
I needed to shoot some bird photos for a job I'm working on so I
thought I'd get a few grabs from the bird feeders in our garden. I
don't really like doing this because it
Peter,
I don't care for the BW conversion on this one. The
table, rock, and sky are too bright, and the water is
too dark, giving the pic a surreal IR-like look.
Rick
--- P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
First it's not really a Picnic, (damn I'm beginning
to sound like a
GEICO
The list is gasping for breath. It seems that very few messages are
getting through. I sent about five today. Only one made it to my
mailbox. And I've received only about a dozen overall.
On May 10, 2006, at 10:03 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
The list is gasping for breath. It seems that very few messages are
getting through. I sent about five today. Only one made it to my
mailbox. And I've received only about a dozen overall.
Strange -- I've seen quite a bit of list traffic
I've receiving messages OK.
JimA.
The list is gasping for breath. It seems that very few messages are
getting through. I sent about five today. Only one made it to my
mailbox. And I've received only about a dozen overall.
I agree. Very few have made it to my folder today. I believe most of
mine show up in the archives, but rarely on the list.
I've come to depend, almost entirely, on the archives. A little
tedious.
Jack
--- Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The list is gasping for breath. It seems that
I've seen three or five messages, almost all late in the afternoon and
early this evening. Never saw anything I posted, and have supplemented
reading the list by reading the archives, which also seem to be spotty.
I'm sure Doug is doing what he can ... I suppose we can thank the spammers
and the
Other than the occassional out of sequence thread, I don't seem to be having
any problems with recieving messages.
You might want to query your ISP regarding where in their chain the messages
are getting dropped.
William Robb
- Original Message -
From: Paul Stenquist
Subject: worst
William Robb wrote:
Other than the occassional out of sequence thread, I don't seem to be
having any problems with recieving messages.
You might want to query your ISP regarding where in their chain the
messages are getting dropped.
Yep. Everything seems fine here in Atlanta.
--
Thanks,
I'm on comcast. I'm getting all my normal mail. But my outgoing and
incoming list messages are disappearing. I would imagine many other
people on the list are comcast.
Paul
On May 10, 2006, at 11:25 PM, William Robb wrote:
Other than the occassional out of sequence thread, I don't seem to be
1 - 100 of 113 matches
Mail list logo
