x27;ve bridged the credibility gap finally. :-)
> >
> >
> >
> > Tom C.
> >
> >
> >
> > >From: Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> > >To: "pentax list"
> > >Subject: Re: Hello! (introduct
Tom C.
>
>
>
> >From: Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> >To: "pentax list"
> >Subject: Re: Hello! (introduction)
> >Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 19:27:02 +
> >
> >On 18/1/07, Mike Dausin (PDML
Hi Mike,
Welcome to the list. I'm sure you have already figured out that we are
a bunch of crazy, global warming obsessed, wallet challenged (due to
frequent enablements) pixel peepers, except for those even crazier film
guys. :)
And dont ever let Cotty touch your lenses. He fondles them and
Mike Dausin (PDML) wrote:
> I've seen 2,000 e-mails on this list in just over a week!
so, it's been a slow week. give it time, people will post more. :-)
Welcome to the list!
--
Christian
http://photography.skofteland.net
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mail
Ah, I see I've bridged the credibility gap finally. :-)
Tom C.
>From: Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: "pentax list"
>Subject: Re: Hello! (introduction)
>Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 19:27:02 +
>
>On 18/1/07, Mike
On 18/1/07, Mike Dausin (PDML), discombobulated, unleashed:
>Hello, I've been lurking on the list for a week or two and thought it
>was about time I introduce myself. (I actually sent a message once
>already, but it doesn't look like it made it. So forgive me if you get
>this message twice)
H
On 1/18/07 1:38 PM, "Mike Dausin (PDML)", <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In any case, I look forward to talking with you all soon!
Hi Mike,
Welcome to one of the most entertaining lists of the world!
Now, who's going to give him the usual welcoming routine with a "list" ? :-)
Ken
--
PDML Pent
Welcome aboard, Mike.
Yes, there are still some of us who shoot Pentax. Some
of us even shoot film from time to time.
Imagine.
;-]
-Brendan
--- "Mike Dausin (PDML)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello, I've been lurking on the list for a week or
> two and thought it
> was about time I introduc
Hi Mike,
Welcome to the list. Now that you're here you'll soon find that your expensive
hobby has become even more expensive. We're known for enablement. We'll help
you talk yourself into buying all manner of Pentax toys. It's a free (in one
sense of the word) perk that comes with list membershi
Hello, I've been lurking on the list for a week or two and thought it
was about time I introduce myself. (I actually sent a message once
already, but it doesn't look like it made it. So forgive me if you get
this message twice)
My name is Mike Dausin and I am a computer security engineer from
On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 08:50:42PM +, Cotty wrote:
> On 11/1/07, Tim ?sleby, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
> >Correct me if I'm wrong. I've only been here a year and a half.
>
> Wow, seems more like ten.
Only if you count in dog years ...
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
htt
> Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of
> graywolf
> Sent: 11. januar 2007 16:24
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Subject: Re: Introduction (Raw work flow)
>
> Let&#
On Jan 11, 2007, at 12:50 PM, Cotty wrote:
>> Correct me if I'm wrong. I've only been here a year and a half.
> Wow, seems more like ten. ... [ka ching!]
I've been here two years but I think it's aged me ten. Those who have
been here for 8 years are probably over one hundred now, it's an e^x
On 11/1/07, Tim Øsleby, discombobulated, unleashed:
>Correct me if I'm wrong. I've only been here a year and a half.
Wow, seems more like ten.
> ;-)
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
re a year and a half.
Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
graywolf
Sent: 11. januar 2007 16:24
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Introduction (Raw work flow)
Let's put it more bluntly
I thought this was a Pentax and all things photo related list. (I'm
going to take out an insurance policy on my camera before I take a
picture of my gun wrapped in a Canadian flag)
Norm
graywolf wrote:
> Let's put it more bluntly, this is a Pentax Camera list. The photography
> techniques a
Where and when was that suggested, and by whom?
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: graywolf
> Let's put it more bluntly, this is a Pentax Camera list. The photography
> techniques are somewhat off-topic, and the photo-aesthetic stuff is
> completely off topic and actually belongs on some oth
Let's put it more bluntly, this is a Pentax Camera list. The photography
techniques are somewhat off-topic, and the photo-aesthetic stuff is
completely off topic and actually belongs on some other list. The PDML
has always been very tolerant of off-topic posts, but the suggestion
that the on-to
On 10/1/07, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed:
>This looks set fair to be another lot of nonsense about definitions.
Define 'definitions' ;-)
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
--
PDML
>
> On 11/01/07, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > And how did you, or do you, deal with B&W?
> >
> > Youir comments suggest that you're not a photographer but
> some kind of
> > technician.
>
> I'm a bit confused and surprised at some of the comments relating to
> Cory's posts. Whet
On 11/01/07, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, let me then amend my post: I think he's more a technician than a
> photographer concerned with the aesthetics and creativity involved in
> photographing a subject. I believe Mr.Papanfuss has stated that as well,
> at least to some degr
This could certainly be an interesting discussion.
I'm sure we could categorize types of photos and the skills needed for
them. Also, we could go so far as to say that the more technical
skill you have, the better off you are. However, without some
artistic skill, photos can be less interesting.
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Tom C
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 4:09 PM
To: pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Introduction (Raw work flow)
My turn to say "Interesting".
Ever since I really got seriously interested in photography, in the late
80's, I've felt it was a great melding
ROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
>Subject: Re: Introduction (Raw work flow)
>Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 15:16:59 -0500
>
>Interesting.
>
>I consider myself a photographer - period. Although I tend to enjoy nature
>
; inquired if
they were for sale! These were highly abstract images of fracture surfaces
of some automotive components.
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: "Cory Papenfuss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Introduction (Raw work flow)
> Watch out here as
Watch out here as an elitist snob... I have been very careful to
qualify any of my potentially denigrating comments WRT "photographer" vs.
"technician." I personally think of it as the difference between a
"technical photographer" and an "artsy photographer." I am very much the
former
Well, let me then amend my post: I think he's more a technician than a
photographer concerned with the aesthetics and creativity involved in
photographing a subject. I believe Mr.Papanfuss has stated that as well,
at least to some degree.
Further - and this just may be me - I don't recall ever se
On Jan 10, 2007, at 6:23 AM, William Robb wrote:
>> I'm a bit confused and surprised at some of the comments relating to
>> Cory's posts. Whether somebody is making photographs to create art or
>> records surely they are still a photographer if they control how or
>> what is being photographed?
>
On Jan 10, 2007, at 5:56 AM, Cory Papenfuss wrote:
> I may have overstated my position somewhat, but I personally find
> endless tweaking on the computer irritating and circuitous. My
> "photography" style ends as it did when shot film... once the
> shutter is
> pressed. All of the technical (
- Original Message -
From: "Digital Image Studio" Subject: Re: Introduction (Raw work flow)
> On 11/01/07, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> And how did you, or do you, deal with B&W?
>>
>> Youir comments suggest that you're not
On 11/01/07, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And how did you, or do you, deal with B&W?
>
> Youir comments suggest that you're not a photographer but some kind of
> technician.
I'm a bit confused and surprised at some of the comments relating to
Cory's posts. Whether somebody is making
> And how did you, or do you, deal with B&W?
>
Occasionally.
> Youir comments suggest that you're not a photographer but some kind of
> technician.
>
> Shel
I may have overstated my position somewhat, but I personally find
endless tweaking on the computer irritating and circuitou
And how did you, or do you, deal with B&W?
Youir comments suggest that you're not a photographer but some kind of
technician.
Shel
>
> Cory Papenfuss wrote:
>... I am quite in the minority as a
> "technical photographer" as
> opposed to an "artsy photographer."
> Most are the latter and
William Robb wrote:
>You need to look at more good pictures then.
>Not necessarily photographs either.
Great advice! I'm very fortunate to live within walking distance of a
good art museum (the Carnegie) and I find looking at paintings to be
quite instructive. They had an exhibit of Hudson Rive
On 10/01/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's not photography, that's creating a recording of a subject. You
> have to learn to trust your eyes and aesthetics, and develop the
> ability to see, to do photography.
Wow, I didn't realize that this was the case.
--
Rob Studdert
Agreed. For example, I find it useless in most situations to try to
reproduce the exact temperature of the light. For some shots, I want a
warm look, for others, something colder. What the finished photographs
communicates is the important element. To me, what was really there is
insignificant.
> The real test is how they appear in prints.
Yes absolutely. My Epson 1290S is in for service at the moment though.
> How do you compare the sharpening in ACR to C1?
I never seem to be able to get a truly sharp image using the controls in
ACR, no big deal if I'm going to open the image in PS a
On Jan 9, 2007, at 5:44 PM, Cory Papenfuss wrote:
> ... I am quite in the minority as a "technical photographer" as
> opposed to an "artsy photographer." Most are the latter and whatever
> looks good is acceptable. I find it difficult to trust my own
> sense of
> quality, so I resort to objec
- Original Message -
From: "Cory Papenfuss" Subject: Re: Introduction (Raw work flow)
>
> I am cursed by the fact that I do not trust my own preference for
> "pleasing/accurate,"
You need to look at more good pictures then.
Not necessarily phot
> The problem, Cory, is that the question I was responding to, and
> subsequent discussion, was a bona fide question by a new user on how
> best to work with his K10D RAW image files. Not all of us are
> interested in theoretical pedantry.
>
My bad... I don't recall the original inquiry. I
Hello John,
I have used C1 for quite a long time. What I found was that it was
very good for doing batches of images. If you were only going to do
one or two, then some of the batch capabilities didn't really help
much. It shines best when adjust the first image of a group of
similar (WB, expos
The real test is how they appear in prints.
How do you compare the sharpening in ACR to C1?
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: John Whittingham
> Thanks Wendy, I seem to be able to get sharper images with C1 than with
ACR,
> at least that's how they appear on the monitor.
--
PDML Pent
> I love using Capture One. I used to use BreezeBrowser for batch
> conversions, now I tend to use C1.
> It doesn't support the K10D pef and DNG yet, unfortunately.
> I have the LE version.
>
> Wendy
Thanks Wendy, I seem to be able to get sharper images with C1 than with ACR,
at least that's how
I love using Capture One. I used to use BreezeBrowser for batch
conversions, now I tend to use C1.
It doesn't support the K10D pef and DNG yet, unfortunately.
I have the LE version.
Wendy
On 1/8/07, John Whittingham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Has anybody tried Capture One Pro? There's a demo av
On 10/01/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Not all of us are interested in theoretical pedantry.
Mark!
Two quotes out of the one post, impressive.
--
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distud
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> Pedantry does not produce photographs.
MARK! ;-)
--
Christian
http://photography.skofteland.net
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On Jan 9, 2007, at 12:52 PM, Cory Papenfuss wrote:
> I don't thing Photoshop deals with RAW images anyway, does it? A
> RAW image doesn't even make sense until it's been interpolated into
> RGB.
> Anyway, as usual I care little... just having a good ol' fashioned
> pedantic discussion...
- Original Message -
From: "Cory Papenfuss" Subject: Re: Introduction (Raw work flow)
>>
> I don't thing Photoshop deals with RAW images anyway, does it? A
> RAW image doesn't even make sense until it's been interpolated into RGB.
> Anyway,
> I bought a 2GB Sandisk extreme III card and with it came a cd with
> RescuePro and a license for registrering CaptureOne LE. As it
> doesn't support the pef of the K10D yet, I didn't look further into
> it. I am entitled to one upgrade, so I hope the next upgrade
> includes the support of the
I bought a 2GB Sandisk extreme III card and with it came a cd with RescuePro
and a license for registrering CaptureOne LE. As it doesn't support the pef
of the K10D yet, I didn't look further into it. I am entitled to one upgrade,
so I hope the next upgrade includes the support of the K10D for P
>> If you haven't already, you might want to take a read of this
>> guy's rantings on linear vs. gamma errors. The color management
>> part of
>> it is different from "gamma errors."
>> http://www.aim-dtp.net/aim/evaluation/gie/index.htm
>
> This guy is using Photoshop 6. Which means he's not
On Jan 8, 2007, at 6:59 AM, Cory Papenfuss wrote:
> If you haven't already, you might want to take a read of this
> guy's rantings on linear vs. gamma errors. The color management
> part of
> it is different from "gamma errors."
> http://www.aim-dtp.net/aim/evaluation/gie/index.htm
This
Yes, but I think the first edition is more applicable to Elements.
Paul
On Jan 8, 2007, at 9:34 PM, George Sinos wrote:
> Ed - There are two versions of the book. It was rewritten when CS2
> was released.
>
> GS
>
> On 1/8/07, Ed Keeney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Thanks for the info - I'm head
Ed - There are two versions of the book. It was rewritten when CS2
was released.
GS
On 1/8/07, Ed Keeney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks for the info - I'm heading out to the library this afternoon to
> check out Fraser's book.
>
> Thanks!
> Ed
>
> On 1/6/07, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED
Has anybody tried Capture One Pro? There's a demo available, I was just
wondering what the general opinions were.
John
The information transmitted is intended only for the person to whom it is
On 1/8/07, David J Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Quoting Ed Keeney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Everyone - I just want to say thanks for the warm welcome. I didn't
> > anticipate such a "heated" conversation about the list ;-)
> >
> > I'm still reviewing the posts and making notes...
> >
> > T
Quoting Ed Keeney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Everyone - I just want to say thanks for the warm welcome. I didn't
> anticipate such a "heated" conversation about the list ;-)
>
> I'm still reviewing the posts and making notes...
>
> Thanks!
> Ed
You ain't heard nothing yet.:-)
Wait till the green bu
Everyone - I just want to say thanks for the warm welcome. I didn't
anticipate such a "heated" conversation about the list ;-)
I'm still reviewing the posts and making notes...
Thanks!
Ed
On 1/6/07, Ed Keeney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello...
>
> Just wanted to introduce myself (again). I
Thanks for the info - I'm heading out to the library this afternoon to
check out Fraser's book.
Thanks!
Ed
On 1/6/07, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You can also purchase Bruce Fraser's Real World Camera RAW. It was
> written with CS1 in mind, but it's quite a close match to Elements
> Sorry, but that's not true. I know the difference between Bayer
> interpolation and gamma-encoding. And gamma-encoding is not "simply
> applying a logrithmic function" to the data before quantizing. It's a
> mite bit more involved than that, although it presents a first order
> approximation.
>
>
And you do this in Photoshop, right? ]'-)
> You're confusing Bayer interpolation with gamma-encoding images.
> They're not the same thing Bayer interpolation takes the monochome
> "image" taken by the sensor with alternating RGBG color filter
> masks and
> tries to recreate an actual 3-col
On 08/01/07, Cory Papenfuss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Likely done in a gamma-corrected 16-bit colorspace, but it doesn't
> *have* to be. With 16-bits/channel, gamma-correction is even more
> processing to the original RAW data than is necessary.
Ah but it does, most commercial RAW con
>> A few ways around that data loss:
>> - Use 16-bit gamma RGB. There's still *some* data manipulation in
>> terms
>>of quantizing (rounding up/down), but 12-bit linear has less
>> gradations
>>in all areas than 16-bit gamma.
>>
>> - Keep all images 16-bit linear and use color-managem
Well, you can trust anything I say.*
*Except when I am lying or wrong...
David Savage wrote:
> Man, that list keeps growing. Are certain people more believable now?
>
>
> Dave :-)
>
> On 1/7/07, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Welcome.
>>
>> BTW, Don't believe anything Paul Stenquist, Wil
lto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Godfrey DiGiorgi
Sent: 7. januar 2007 15:21
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Introduction (Raw work flow)
Remember that in doing RAW conversion you are performing a gamma
correction on a linear dataset. This means compressing (pushing
closer together, setting
IIRC, Bruce Fraser made that point in his books, and I've read it
elsewhere as well. I usually set the black point in Photoshop, not ACR,
but I'll play around with the black point in ACR just to see what the
results might look like.
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: Godfrey DiGiorgi
> You c
On Jan 7, 2007, at 7:09 AM, Cory Papenfuss wrote:
> A few ways around that data loss:
> - Use 16-bit gamma RGB. There's still *some* data manipulation in
> terms
>of quantizing (rounding up/down), but 12-bit linear has less
> gradations
>in all areas than 16-bit gamma.
>
> - Ke
A few ways around that data loss:
- Use 16-bit gamma RGB. There's still *some* data manipulation in terms
of quantizing (rounding up/down), but 12-bit linear has less gradations
in all areas than 16-bit gamma.
- Keep all images 16-bit linear and use color-management during any
pr
Remember that in doing RAW conversion you are performing a gamma
correction on a linear dataset. This means compressing (pushing
closer together, setting the white point on...) the high values)
while expanding (stretching apart, setting the black point on...) the
low values to fit the range
I sometimes set the black point first as well. I'm not really conscious
of a specific ordering of steps in regard to exposure, brightness and
shadows. I think I vary my sequence in respect to the specific needs of
the shot I'm working with.
Paul
On Jan 7, 2007, at 7:03 AM, Jan van Wijk wrote:
>
On Sun, 7 Jan 2007 02:15:12 +0100, Tim sleby wrote:
>
>But unlike you, I think it is better setting the darks before brightness. If
>I set darkness before brightness, it seems I always need to go back again.
I agree with Tim on this one.
Otherwise, I must say Paul's description is
pretty clos
Man, that list keeps growing. Are certain people more believable now?
Dave :-)
On 1/7/07, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Welcome.
>
> BTW, Don't believe anything Paul Stenquist, William Robb, Mark Roberts,
> Frank Theriault, or Jostein say. :-)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.ne
I know what part I believe...
Brian Walters wrote:
> Now which part of that do we believe?
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Brian
>
> ++
> Brian Walters
> Western Sydney Australia
>
>
> Quoting Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
>
>> I don't know WHAT YOU ARE SAYING YOU MORON Ca
: Re: Introduction
On 6/1/07, P. J. Alling, discombobulated, unleashed:
>Maybe it's been decided that Cotty's problems will quickly become
>evident ...
I don't know WHAT YOU ARE SAYING YOU MORON Cant you see your WRONG WRONG
WRONG and I will rise out of the mist and become
You can also purchase Bruce Fraser's Real World Camera RAW. It was
written with CS1 in mind, but it's quite a close match to Elements.
Paul
On Jan 6, 2007, at 8:19 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> Hello Ed,
>
> If you're using Camera Raw with Photoshop Elements, most of the
> information from Bruce
Now which part of that do we believe?
Cheers
Brian
++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
Quoting Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I don't know WHAT YOU ARE SAYING YOU MORON Cant you see your WRONG
> WRONG
> WRONG and I will rise out of the mist and become
Hello Ed,
If you're using Camera Raw with Photoshop Elements, most of the
information from Bruce Fraser's excellent book, "Real World Camera
Raw with Photoshop CS2", as pertains to RAW data theory and Camera
Raw basic functions, and suggested operational use, will be very
helpful to you. T
Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Introduction (Raw work flow)
I'm probably a bit too tired and inebriated to do this, but I'll
rough it out.
I shoot only RAW. I open them in Camera RAW converter. I have CS1 on
my main computer and CS2 on my laptop. I use both. CS2 is only an
advan
On 6/1/07, P. J. Alling, discombobulated, unleashed:
>Maybe it's been decided that Cotty's problems will quickly become
>evident ...
I don't know WHAT YOU ARE SAYING YOU MORON Cant you see your WRONG WRONG
WRONG and I will rise out of the mist and become THE GREAT GOD of the
aperture simulator a
On 6/1/07, Tom C, discombobulated, unleashed:
>BTW, Don't believe anything Paul Stenquist, William Robb, Mark Roberts,
>Frank Theriault, or Jostein say. :-)
Freedom at last!!!
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
___
hlights.
> Paul
> On Jan 6, 2007, at 5:43 PM, Tim Øsleby wrote:
>
>> As you might know, I'm no expert. So why don't others chime in
>> correcting
>> me?
>>
>>
>> Tim
>> Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
>>
>>
>> -Original M
>>From: Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>Subject: Re: Introduction
>>Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 10:03:52 -0500
>>
>>Welcome back, Ed. You're off to a good start with your gallery
Ed,
Welcome back aboard. Have lot's of fun with that new DSLR and post
some PESO's now and then. Join in the conversation when you can.
--
Best regards,
Bruce
Saturday, January 6, 2007, 6:38:35 AM, you wrote:
EK> Hello...
EK> Just wanted to introduce myself (again). I was once a subscribe
TECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of
> Brian Walters
> Sent: 6. januar 2007 23:11
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Subject: RE: Introduction (Raw work flow)
>
> Thanks for that Tim. Very useful to know how others approach raw
> processing.
>
> Oh, and welcome
Maybe it's been decided that Cotty's problems will quickly become
evident ...
Brian Walters wrote:
> Am I imaging it or is this list getting longer with each new introduction?
> And what about Cotty? Is he now to be trusted?
>
&
Hah! I knew it!
Paul Stenquist wrote:
> In my secret second ( or maybe third?) life, I'm Ken Rockwell, and
> I'm damn well tired of you Pentaxians making fun of me. Nikon rules!
> Paul
> On Jan 6, 2007, at 3:18 PM, David J Brooks wrote:
>
>
>> Quoting Tim Øsleby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>>
: Introduction
Am I imaging it or is this list getting longer with each new introduction?
And what about Cotty? Is he now to be trusted?
Cheers
Brian
++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
Quoting Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Welcome.
>
> BTW
The list is getting longer because Pentax is producing more viable
products. One goes with the other.
Paul
On Jan 6, 2007, at 5:14 PM, Brian Walters wrote:
>
> Am I imaging it or is this list getting longer with each new
> introduction? And what about Cotty? Is he now to b
ubject: RE: Introduction (Raw work flow)
Thanks for that Tim. Very useful to know how others approach raw
processing.
Oh, and welcome Ed!
Cheers
Brian
++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
Quoting Tim Øsleby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Welcome Ed.
t;> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject: Re: Introduction
>> Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 10:03:52 -0500
>>
>> Welcome back, Ed. You're off to a good start with your gallery. Keep
>> working at it. The dog
Am I imaging it or is this list getting longer with each new introduction?
And what about Cotty? Is he now to be trusted?
Cheers
Brian
++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
Quoting Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Welcome.
>
> BTW
Thanks for that Tim. Very useful to know how others approach raw processing.
Oh, and welcome Ed!
Cheers
Brian
++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
Quoting Tim Øsleby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Welcome Ed.
>
> About raw word flow. I wrote an "article" des
In my secret second ( or maybe third?) life, I'm Ken Rockwell, and
I'm damn well tired of you Pentaxians making fun of me. Nikon rules!
Paul
On Jan 6, 2007, at 3:18 PM, David J Brooks wrote:
> Quoting Tim Øsleby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> If you are Ken Rockwell, you like strong colours.
>
> I'm
I have replaced Cotty in the unreliable list:-).
Paul
On Jan 6, 2007, at 3:10 PM, K.Takeshita wrote:
> On Jan 6, 2007, at 2:18 PM, Tom C wrote:
>
>> Welcome.
>>
>> BTW, Don't believe anything Paul Stenquist, William Robb, Mark
>> Roberts,
>> Frank Theriault, or Jostein say. :-)
>
> Seems like on
Quoting Tim Øsleby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> If you are Ken Rockwell, you like strong colours.
I'm not, thank God
Dave
Equine Photography in York Region
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Pentax Mental Syndrom?
Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul
Stenquist
Sent: 6. januar 2007 20:45
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Introduction
And keep in mind that Tom suffers from
On Jan 6, 2007, at 2:18 PM, Tom C wrote:
> Welcome.
>
> BTW, Don't believe anything Paul Stenquist, William Robb, Mark Roberts,
> Frank Theriault, or Jostein say. :-)
Seems like one usual suspect is missing. Can't remember who :-).
Ken
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://p
gt;
>> From: Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject: Re: Introduction
>> Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 10:03:52 -0500
>>
>> Welcome back, Ed. You're off to a good start with your galler
Ed,
Welcome back.
I started digital with a Sony S75-85 in tandem with film. About 18
months ago, I went for a *ist Ds and NO MORE Shutter Lag. I'm sure
you'll be happy with it.
I took Picasa up on their offer and haven't looked back. The
uploading is so much easier than AOL. I post the less
Welcome.
BTW, Don't believe anything Paul Stenquist, William Robb, Mark Roberts,
Frank Theriault, or Jostein say. :-)
Tom C.
>From: Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: Introduction
>D
401 - 500 of 760 matches
Mail list logo
