Re: Shutter Speed when not using Camera...
Len, I wasn't being facetious or sarcastic. 99 percent of the time that I put my SLR away, it still has film in it. I virtually never keep a body empty; as soon as I finish a roll, another roll goes in, just in case. I assumed that everyone follows this pattern. Paul Franklin Stregevsky 13 Selby Court Poolesville, Maryland 20837-2410 [EMAIL PROTECTED] H (301) 349-5243 - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
More Viewfinder Opinions
Chris, Among the models you've named, my experience is limited to Super Programs. But I can tell you the magnification of certain models: MZ-M: 0.77X MZ-5: 0.78X (I think) PZ-1P: 0.8X Super Program: 0.82X Program Plus: 0.82X KX: 0.88X LX with FA-1 finder: 0.9X ME Super: 0.95X MX: 0.95X (0.97X?) ME: 0.97X LX/FF-1 finder: 1.05X LX/FE-1 Magni-Finder: 1.35X PDMLer Mark McMaster has written: "The view through the FE-1 is so huge, you'd almost think you were looking at a medium-format screen." I assume the Magni-Finder is the same as the Sports Finder, which reportedly offers the largest viewfinder in the Pentax line. There are other considerations, of course, such as screen brightness, matte texture, and what not. For nonbright lenses like f/5.6 telephotos, you may be better served by a viewfinder that has no rangefinder patch. The ME Super is available in two versions; horizontally split rangefinder and 45-degree split RF. One site says that the ME has perhaps the best viewfinder of any manual-focus SLR ever made. Yoshi has written (Feb. 2, 2000): "Considering easiness of focus, I rate the viewfinders of K-mount bodies I have ever tried as below: KX, MX, PZ1-P, ME Super, MZ-10 KM, ME, Ricoh XR-8 Super, MZ-3, LX, MZ-M K1000, MV-1 (KR-III), ZX-5n, MG I have never tried A-series nor SF series bodies. I feel very easy to focus even 50mm f/1.2 lens with K series bodies. I feel slightly hard to focus 50/1.2 lens with LX." Paul Franklin Stregevsky 13 Selby Court Poolesville, Maryland 20837-2410 [EMAIL PROTECTED] H (301) 349-5243 - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Irregular frame spacing
At 10:37 26-2-2002 -0500, you wrote: >From: Aaron Reynolds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: Irregular frame spacing > >Wasn't that an issue with the first MZ-Ses off of the line? That they >needed a software upgrade because of irregular frame spacing? I recall >something about this. > >Wendy, get on the horn to Pentax Canada. What province are you in? If >it's Ontario, I can give you the number for their service department. > >- -Aaron That's what I thought I'd remembered hearing too but couldn't find any mention of it. Then I decided I'd just got muddled up. Yes, I'm in Ontario so the service dept number would be great, thanks. They don't seem to be very fast at answering e-mail. Wendy --- Wendy Beard Ottawa, Canada mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] home page http://www.beard-redfern.com - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Shutter Speed when not using Camera...
OK, so I guess it's *always* wrong to leave a mechanical shutter uncocked. I can't see where my advice would have hurt anyone, but I've been wrong before. Len --- - Original Message - From: "T Rittenhouse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 7:50 PM Subject: Re: Shutter Speed when not using Camera... > Actually, the keep the shutter uncocked is left over from the day when steel > springs didn't how such good temper like before WWI. Old advice never dies > it just becomes redundant. > > Ciao, > Graywolf - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s) (Thanks to all)
Bojidar Dimitrov wrote: > Thank you all for your comments and suggestions. Sadly, I have had to > "watermark" all KMP images that I own, and now you all have to pay the > price of seing the lower-quality images. > > If anyone needs a good image that I own, drop me a line. > > I am going to pursue the issue a bit more with the commercial firm that > stole my image(s). I have to find them first because the eBay seller > says he has no records of the exact URL. But I'll try it. Forgot the URL? Sounds suspicious to me. Are you *sure* he didn't steal the images himself and then invent the story about getting them form someone else's web site? Notify eBay either way. -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Where's Pentax?
Yep, me too. It's superb. It positively *makes* me want to go out and take photographs it's so easy and gratifying to use. "Bill Owens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Same here, extremely pleased with mine. > >Bill > >- Original Message - >From: "Mick Maguire" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 4:18 PM >Subject: RE: Where's Pentax? > > >> Bruce sniped: Out of curiosity, just how many folks here thought enough of >> the MZ-S to go and >> buy one? >> >> if you take a look on the bodies roll call you'll find out. I did and I'm >> very happy with it >> >> Regards, >> /\/\ick... -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Shutter Speed when not using Camera...
Actually, the keep the shutter uncocked is left over from the day when steel springs didn't how such good temper like before WWI. Old advice never dies it just becomes redundant. Ciao, Graywolf - Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 8:22 PM Subject: Re: Shutter Speed when not using Camera... > "Paul F. Stregevsky" wrote: > > > I respect, but don't understand, the advice to "store your camera > > uncocked." Aren't we also told, "When going out to shoot, keep your camera > > cocked at all times?" What are we to do if (as usually happens) we don't > > take that final hoped-for shot: blow a shot just to extend the life of the > > spring? > > Yes, if you want your shutter to remain accurate. > Paul > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Foveon Fotos
If in fact Foveon did give Sigma a 5 year exclusive digital camera rights to the chip, they probably shot themselves in the foot. The market for prosumer digital SLR's is for a long time going to be dominated by Nikon and Canon shooters looking to add a digital body to their kit. Also, in reading some early reviews in DP review, lens quality will be much more important as the pixels, or quality of the pixels, goes up. I don't know that Sigma has that many outstanding pro oriented lenses available, or that consumers will want to spend that kind of money on pro level Sigma lenses. Sigma will definitely sell some digicams, but I doubt that they will out do the big three. BUTCH "Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself" Hermann Hesse (Demian) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Where's Pentax?
On 26 Feb 2002 at 15:59, Len Paris wrote: > > The next question is: What do you think? Was the move worth > the price? I've only had mine a very short time, so I can't really say definitively at this point, but there are 2 things that made the camera extremely desirable for me: the grip takes AA batteries and has a vertical shutter release. I really think the vertical release is going to have an impact on the way I shoot... Other things I like: - better low light AF - I prefer the interface over the pz-1p, especially exp. compensation - I like the finder better Things I don't like: - the back door is flimsier than I would like - can't use the vertical release with my Stroboframes. I might be able to jury rig this, but I'm not sure at this point. - 1/2 step exposure compensation. One more commentI never really loved my PZ-1p's. They're very capable, and gave great bang for the buck, but they just weren't, um, loyalty-inspiring. They're big plastic robo-blobs. I think the MZ-S is different in that respect. We'll see. tv - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: MZ-S extended warranty(?)
In case anyone is interested, I did call B&H and Cameraworld. Neither had the 2 year Pentax ext. warranty for the MZ-S yet. B&H had it in their computer and said they will get it around the end of March. Cameraworld also has it in their computer and will have it for sale sometime soon for $50. Guess I'll just wait until then. Thanks all for the friendly responses. Nancy Tom wrote: tv - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Where's Pentax?
In a message dated Tue, 26 Feb 2002 7:02:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, John Coyle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Ya gotta hold it - anyone else remember the Pentax ads from the 1960's, when > the slogan was "Just hold a Pentax", with a picture of a Spotmatic or SV? I don't remember much of anything before about 1969 ... And if my local dealer had the MZ-S in his store, I would have held it by now. But my husband is probably just as happy that said dealer hasn't had the opportunity to place this camera in my hands. (Although I managed to resist the 645n and the 67 that I handled in that store ... sorry to disappoint the gentlemen of the Brotherhood.) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Where's Pentax?
On 26 Feb 2002 at 12:36, Bruce Rubenstein wrote: > > Out of curiosity, just how many folks here thought enough of the MZ-S > to go and buy one? I bought 2 w/ grips. tv - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Shutter Speed when not using Camera...
"Paul F. Stregevsky" wrote: > I respect, but don't understand, the advice to "store your camera > uncocked." Aren't we also told, "When going out to shoot, keep your camera > cocked at all times?" What are we to do if (as usually happens) we don't > take that final hoped-for shot: blow a shot just to extend the life of the > spring? Yes, if you want your shutter to remain accurate. Paul - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Where's Pentax?
I traded a PZ-1p and ZX-5n for the MZ-S and don't regret it for a second. To me, the MZ-S feels better and has a much more intuitive interface. Add the BG-10 grip and the AF360FGZ flash and it's an amazing combination. Bill - Original Message - From: "Len Paris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 4:59 PM Subject: Re: Where's Pentax? > As a point of curiosity, how many folks moved from the PZ-1p to > the MZ-S? I don't think I can tell from the body count. > > The next question is: What do you think? Was the move worth > the price? > > I ask because I am a PZ-1p owner and am considering the MZ-S. > > Len > --- > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Where's Pentax?
Same here, extremely pleased with mine. Bill - Original Message - From: "Mick Maguire" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 4:18 PM Subject: RE: Where's Pentax? > Bruce sniped: Out of curiosity, just how many folks here thought enough of > the MZ-S to go and > buy one? > > if you take a look on the bodies roll call you'll find out. I did and I'm > very happy with it > > Regards, > /\/\ick... > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: OT, but taken w/ a pentax - My first paid gig
Aaron asked: > This site takes you to my first "paid" photography gig. > > Essentially, I got to eat everything I shot. You lucky bastard. ;) Looks good! How was it lit? It was late afternoon, only skylight above. My wife and I essentially ate from 3pm till 9 that night. You may notice a half-drunk tankard of beer. The three of us finished 4 rolls of film, 3 bottles of wine (2 white) and 2 sixes of Yingling Lager. It's a wonder the pics are in focus! - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: phallic phungus
Simon King wrote, regarding Richard Seaman's phabulous phallic phungus picture: >I do have to ask though - what were you doing in the "Great Swamp >Wildlife >Refuge"? Did you check out his web site? http://www.richard-seaman.com/index.html Richard survived the hurricane of a double century, the water didn't recede for a month. The Great Swamp was the driest place around. Regards, and a special "how ya doin" to my Jersey neighbors. Chris - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: KMP Copyright Infringement(s)
Hey, I wish I could "let go" when it comes to this stuff. But we all know how much time we spend learning our craft, how much time we spend making the images and putting them up, how much money we spend on our ISP, and never mind the cost of mint SMCT's and cameras! And then there is the principle... Thanks for your comment! ppro > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 1:36 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: KMP Copyright Infringement(s) > > > > Paul, > > I had not thought thru the ramifications of what I suggested, especially the >commercial opportunities. I think you are > very right with the suggestion to agressively defend your content. > > Regards, Bob S. > > I wrote: >> In any case, I would complain to the offender and then let it go. << > > Paul added: > >>That is probably the easiest path, and certainly the least stressful. But if one >truely wishes to protect their > intellectual property, it is a fatal mistake. This leads to more widespread abuse >and dilutes the value of that which > you are trying to protect. If Dimitrov sells or wishes to sell his work, he will >find it difficult to command a proper > value for it when it has been freely used far and wide. I admit this to be a >somewhat philosophical argument but it > comes down to personal value systems. > > For me, even though my web site images are not particularly stunning, and the >subjects are far from "socially redeeming" > (I feature mainly toy cars and Jeeps in the woods), there are several markets for >this type of work. By agressively > protecting it, I have been able to expect and receive decent compensation any time >my images are used. This has led to > contracts to illustrate toy books, the ongoing responsibility to write several >magazine articles per month, and > compensation for the use of images on my site and made for hire, in related >publications. > > If I ignore what is at times widespread abuse of my site content, I will not have >had the same bargaining power when > negotiating the price of my work. This is a basic principle of doing this stuff for >a living. If you are just dabbling, > don't ever want to be getting paid, or don't really care where your work shows up, >then a brief complaint and letting it > go is OK. But it does not convey how much you value your own work, and >substantially diminishes your value in the market. > > Dimitrov, your site is a sparkling example of how to dispense information on a >topic. No matter what your professional > aspirations may be, I encourage you to protect your content if for no other reason >that to make a statement of what your > work is worth to you. > > ppro > © 2002 Paul M. Provencher All Rights Reserved. May not be used without Permission >( smiling ) << > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: KMP Copyright Infringement(s)
You pretty much have to list your rates in advance so that there is a something to point to. You could post it on your site, use the java script to notify people when they right-click, or something like that. If you have paid invoices from people who have used your work, that can also support your claim. But really if it isn't about the money, then all you are trying to do is get them to cease and desist. ppro > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 12:10 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s) > > > Aaron suggested: > > > It seems that the current eBay seller is not the person who manipulated > > > the image, rather it was a "professional" photo dealer with a store in > > > Berlin. > > > > Send them a bill. Call the store and demand payment. Ask them so > > explain their actions. Ask them if their store allows shoplifting. > > Anyone know offhand what typical current stock-photography fees > are for web use these days? Boz, can you find out how long they've > been using your image? Could be a tidy profit, though I'm not sure > which country's courts would have to be used to sue them. > > -- Glenn > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: KMP Copyright Infringement(s)
It's not expensive - I have done it successfully numerous times. Several sites were removed from servers in response to my properly formatted notice to ISPs' Copyright Agent. Very satisfying. It took 1/2 hour to prepare my stock warning and follow-up notices and a few minutes to fill in the instance-specific info. It matches the copyright law and Terms of Use for just about every ISP, and gets just about instant response in 9 out of 10 cases. Nothing is absolute. I guess Boz needs to decide if it is worth it to him to protect his work this way. ppro > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Len Paris > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 11:25 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s) > > > > Boz, it's very expensive to go after folks that copy web > pictures. If you try legal action, the defending lawyer has a > right to ask you to prove that the images are actually yours. > You'd have to produce negatives or slides to prove it. If you > acquired the images from friends that sent them to you, you'd > have to prove that too. Of course, if you could produce the > object itself, with the same serial number as the image, that > would probably work, too. You could also send e-mails to eBay > and the folks bidding on the lens and explain to them that the > advertised lens does not belong to the seller, it belongs to you > and it is not for sale. > > Just a few ramblings from snowy, southern Illinois. > > Len > --- > - Original Message - > From: "Bojidar Dimitrov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 7:27 AM > Subject: Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s) > > > > I wrote: > > > > > What can I do against this: > > > > http://cgi.ebay.de/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1334153963 > > > > I have gotten in touch with the "seller", and he assures me > that he took > > the image from the web page of a professional photo dealer > I > > will try to locate the dealer now. > > > > Cheers, > > Boz > > - > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: KMP Copyright Infringement(s)
Two more points - for what it's worth: Terms of Use - post them on your site. There are a number of good ones that you can tailor to your needs. Look at mine. http://whitemetal.com Copyright Notice - put one on every page. I just have a standard page footer that goes on automatically. Go to the web site ISP that hosts the image that was stolen and locate their Terms of Service and Copyright clauses. They all tell how to pursue infractions. In every case I have encountered, the steps to file a complaint were exactly the same. In other words, once you have written the necessary documentation once, the only thing that changes is the image file name, the infringing user, and the renamed image (if applicable). In other words you need to invest some time in protecting your work so that when things happen, you are prepared to respond. ppro > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of T Rittenhouse > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 12:59 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s) > > > > Unfortunately for them ignorance of the law is not a legal excuse. On the > other you are not going to be able to collect damages unless you can show > realistically that there is a money issue involved. If someone stole your > pic and used it for a national billboard campaign where they would normally > expect to pay a hundred thousand dollars for that use of the image. For > something like the Ebay sellers illegal use about all you could expect is a > cease and desist order. > > BTW Boz, since you notified him it is your image and it is still up the user > can not hardly claim ignorance can he? Notify Ebay immediately with a copy > of your e-mail communications to the seller. I will make a guess, he won't > be using Ebay again for awhile. > > Ciao, > Graywolf > > > > - Original Message - > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 10:15 AM > Subject: Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s) > > > > Boz asked: > > > What can I do against this: > > > http://cgi.ebay.de/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1334153963 > > > > > > > > > I don't mean legally, but I would appreciate ideas on how to place the > > > copyright notices so that they are not so easy to remove. Am I dreaming > > > when thinking of images that do not allow themselves to be > > > screencaptured and edited? > > > > Short answer: yes, you're dreaming. Other people have given > > better advice than I can on legal and social approaches to the > > problem; my comments are on the technical side. > > > > There's no really good technical solution. There are techniques > > to make theft of the images a little more difficult (the "my car > > only has to be harder to steal than my neighbour's car, not > > invulnerable" approach). The harder you make it to steal the > > images, the more you interfere with legitimate viewing of them. > > So what you want, as with _any_ computer-security issue, is to > > find a useful and reasonable compromise between the cost (in > > money, effort, and inconvenience) and effectiveness of the > > security measures you choose. > > > > Putting copyright notices along the edges of an image does very > > little to distract from the image and does not reduce the > > quality of it. It's also easy to defeat by cropping the image. > > It _does_ mean that anyone who takes the image directly from > > your site can't claim ignorance of its copyright status, but all > > they have to do is claim that they stole it from someone else > > who'd already filed off the copyright notice (*and* claim to be > > ignorant of copyright law in general!). > > > > Putting an invisible digital watermark in the image allows you > > to prove that the image is yours as long as the thief doesn't > > know how to check for it and remove it, but does little to > > discourage an ignorant thief from using your work. > > > > Putting a visible but faint watermark across the whole image is > > harder to remove (I'm betting that someone with better Photoshop > > skills than I have can undo it -- *if* they decide that it's > > worth that much effort instead of finding someone else to rip > > off) but diminishes the usefulness of the image to legitimate > > users (i.e. viewers of your web site). The question becomes, > > "How *badly* do you feel that compromises the usefulness of your > > site?" If the answer is, "Well that's unfortunate but not a > > show-stopper", and theft of your work is a bigger deal than > > that, then there's your answer. > > > > Cleverly editing the copyright notice in place of the serial > > number is a lot more work on your end, and can be undone by > > anyone who knows Photoshop as well as you do. (Unless, of > > course, they decide it's easier to steal from someone else...) > > It does less to diminish the information-useful
RE: KMP Copyright Infringement(s)
I had this problem with an eBay seller (VOLVOMAX) in Germany who has a very successful toy Volvo business. He moved to eBay from mailers and thought he could use my site as a source for images. He wrote and asked, I quoted prices, and he said no thanks. Then he used them anyway. I was able to get him to stop, and forced him to do his own photography. So now what does he do? He scans the images from the boxes instead. Not my problem anymore. What really bothered me about him was that he was loading them from my server and I was getting the bill for the bandwidth! That is something that you can get reimbursed for in this kind of situation (commercial web site making unauthorized use of copyrighted materials and server resources without permission). There is plenty of legal precedence and lawyers who will be happy to take the case if the stakes are high enough. ppro > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of T Rittenhouse > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 1:08 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s) > > > > Your need to contact that store and tell them to cease and desist, invoice > them for the use of your photos up to that time too, makes them realize they > are stealing something valuable. Since this is a commercial firm, you are > dealing with a bigger issue here, you should talk to a copyright attorney > if they do not respond immediately and satisfactorily. > > Ciao, > Graywolf > > > > - Original Message - > From: Bojidar Dimitrov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 11:13 AM > Subject: Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s) > > > > Hi Paul, > > > > > If this seller happens to have been so careless as to have loaded > > > the image from your site on the auction listing, rename the image > > > to something else and substitute a 1x1 white pixel image in it's > > > place. > > > > This is, of course, a great idea, but I am stinkin' mad because the > > "original" thief took the image, then _REMOVED_ the copyright notice, > > and finally used/uses the image for commercial advantage, thus violating > > the KMP copyright notice. > > > > It seems that the current eBay seller is not the person who manipulated > > the image, rather it was a "professional" photo dealer with a store in > > Berlin. > > > > Thanks anyway, > > Boz > > - > > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: KMP Copyright Infringement(s) (Thanks to all)
I suspect that the person using your images probably stole them from you directly and is hiding behind the "I can't remember where I got them claim". Sad pathetic little man. ppro > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bojidar Dimitrov > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 2:28 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s) (Thanks to all) > > > > Hi, > > Thank you all for your comments and suggestions. Sadly, I have had to > "watermark" all KMP images that I own, and now you all have to pay the > price of seing the lower-quality images. > > If anyone needs a good image that I own, drop me a line. > > I am going to pursue the issue a bit more with the commercial firm that > stole my image(s). I have to find them first because the eBay seller > says he has no records of the exact URL. But I'll try it. > > Thanks again, > Boz > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
pdml@pdml.net
Thanks, Cotty and Ed, for taking the time to comment. I've been trying to use the PUG as an assignment book, rather than dig up past drivel to post on the Web, but I was displeased with the shots I took for the assignment and went into the way back machine (to September) for something fitting. I was basically burning the end of a roll taken at the beach early in the morning, and these caught my eye after development. Appreciate the kind remarks, Gents! Regards, Chris Cotty said: Trax Chris Niesmertelny Lovely image incorporating good use of DOF, as they all are, but I like the composition on this, when clearly there were 101 alternatives that might have been shot. And Ed K added: "Trax" - Chris Niesmertelny Interesting - I like the way the tracks lead up and then slide over - good composition here. On the other hand, the top left composition of the other tire track bothers me a little. Not much I can do, removing the top left will remove the bend I like of the main track. Overall a nice shot. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Hockey
Steve Yzerman's lips were a fun read for most of the game. Seems he didn't agree with the penalty called on him ;) He didn't allow us to read his lips in the box though. He put a towel over the box-cam :( Cory Waters GO WINGS! - Original Message - From: "Mark Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 9:24 AM Subject: Re: Hockey > Aaron wrote: > > >Yep. Having been at our last win against the US and then a couple of > >pretty bad losses, I was just a little nervous. No work was done at the > >store for those two hours on Thursday and again on Sunday for the men's > > >game. > > I stopped by a friend's house on Sunday and he had the game on. I've never > watched a hockey game before but it looked like a pretty good one to me. > Anyone else able to read Wayne Gretsky's (it was him, right?) lips when > the Canadians scored the goal that put them up 4-2? I can understand > why they didn't have a microphone on him! > > > -- > Mark Roberts > www.robertstech.com > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: as promised, more from the SMCP-67 75mm f2.8
On Tuesday, February 26, 2002, at 06:06 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: > Great shot. Nice grain, sharpness, and contrast. I'm looking forward to > trying a roll of > Delta 3200 in the 6x7. Thanks! I'm quite happy with Delta 3200 in the 67. I have another shot from a while ago from the 67 on the same film, I'll see about posting it. It's very freeing, to be able to shoot in low light without the penalty of having giant grain. -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Where's Pentax?
Absolutely no doubt, I love the camera. I may even trade the MZ-5 for another MZ-S body, so I can shoot with completely compatible bodies when necessary. IMHO, the MZ-S is not over-priced for what you get, with regard to functionality and build quality. John Coyle Brisbane, Australia On Wednesday, February 27, 2002 9:00 AM, Len Paris [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > As a point of curiosity, how many folks moved from the PZ-1p to > the MZ-S? I don't think I can tell from the body count. > > The next question is: What do you think? Was the move worth > the price? > > I ask because I am a PZ-1p owner and am considering the MZ-S. > > Len > --- - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Where's Pentax?
Ya gotta hold it - anyone else remember the Pentax ads from the 1960's, when the slogan was "Just hold a Pentax", with a picture of a Spotmatic or SV? John Coyle Brisbane, Australia On Wednesday, February 27, 2002 10:11 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > > I'm a PZ-1 owner who considered the MZ-S for no more than 5 minutes. > I kind of have my dream 35 kit right now (PZ-1, ZX-5n, LX) and don't see > anything on paper to make me want to ditch any of those for the MZ-s (which, > I must admit, I've never seen in "person".) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: as promised, more from the SMCP-67 75mm f2.8
On Tuesday, February 26, 2002, at 06:03 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: > The url isn't working for me. Are you sure it's correct? Yep. Did you make sure that it wasn't truncated? It's a long URL, you may have to paste it together. Otherwise, if you're still having trouble, go to http://homepage.mac.com/aaronreynolds The thumbnails are pooched, but otherwise it works okay. Their default album uses java, tho', so you have to have it enabled if you check out the images that way. -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Where's Pentax?
>Out of curiosity, just how many folks here thought enough of the MZ-S to >go and >buy one? Lovely looking camera, but I'm not the slightest bit interested in it. I'll have the digital version ASAP. For film, I am very happy with the LX. The only thing I don't have on the LX that I would have on the MZ-S is autofocus, everything else I can live without (even program metering systems). Old habits die hard. Cotty ___ Personal email traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] MacAds traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Check out the UK Macintosh ads http://www.macads.co.uk - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Hockey OT
On Tuesday, February 26, 2002, at 05:29 PM, frank theriault wrote: > You may or may not remember (I don't know how old you are), but they > ~used~ to > put mics near the player benches. HAR! I'm not that old. -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Shutter Speed when not using Camera...
I guess it just depends on how many pictures you are going to take with the camera in the bag. If you store the camera in the "viewfinder-to-eye" position, you'll find it dificult to get a night's rest. ;-) Of course we were NOT talking about "when going out to shoot", we were talking about putting the camera away. Please keep this reasonable, Paul. Of course, I think you knew this all along but just wanted to make a comment. Len --- - Original Message - From: "Paul F. Stregevsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 5:12 PM Subject: Re: Shutter Speed when not using Camera... > I respect, but don't understand, the advice to "store your camera > uncocked." Aren't we also told, "When going out to shoot, keep your camera > cocked at all times?" What are we to do if (as usually happens) we don't > take that final hoped-for shot: blow a shot just to extend the life of the > spring? > > Paul Franklin Stregevsky > 13 Selby Court > Poolesville, Maryland 20837-2410 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > H (301) 349-5243 > - - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: as promised, more from the SMCP-67 75mm f2.8
You'll have to type in the 'jpg' after you paste in the rest of the URL. Len --- - Original Message - From: "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 5:03 PM Subject: Re: as promised, more from the SMCP-67 75mm f2.8 > The url isn't working for me. Are you sure it's correct? > Paul > > Aaron Reynolds wrote: > > > Vanessa's parents were dressing up for a retro costume party last week > > when it was decided that a portrait was needed. Luckily, I had the 67, > > the 75mm and a roll of Delta 3200 in my bag. > > > > Here's my favourite: > > > > http://homepage.mac.com/aaronreynolds/.Pictures/sgt%20%26%20mrs% 20pepper%20at%20home. > > jpg > > > > Here's a closer view of a section of it: > > > > http://homepage.mac.com/aaronreynolds/.Pictures/sgt%20%26%20mrs% 20pepper%20close. > > jpg > > > > These were shot handheld at 1/30 f5.6, lit just by the lamps in the > > living room. The top left corner has been slightly burned in. > > > > -Aaron > > - > > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Where's Pentax?
On Tuesday, February 26, 2002, at 05:09 PM, Brendan wrote: > Want to Chrome plate my MZ-3 and get a snake skin > cover? I'll trade it for the 67. No, but thanks for the offer. ;) -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Pentax 20mm lens wanted
Despite having too much camera gear (see my earlier "for sale" message), I'm in the market for a 20mm (K mount) lens. Anyone have an extra one laying around? Please reply off list --Mark - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: More Viewfinder Opinions
Until recently, the only 35mm slr's I used were Spots. I didn't think of them as dim - until I got the MX! I really noticed it this weekend, taking flash piccies of a daughter's birthday party, in a dim room, with one of my Spotties. It was so dim, it was hard to focus. I wished I had colour film in the MX! I don't know about ME's, but I have a non-working MV, and the MX is a bit brighter than that. Not as noticeable a difference as with the Spot, but it seems to be there. FWIW... regards, frank Alan Chan wrote: > The MX has among the highest magnificant. With a bright screen from the new > LX, there's nothing can compare. > -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: as promised, more from the SMCP-67 75mm f2.8
Now I can see them. Great shot. Nice grain, sharpness, and contrast. I'm looking forward to trying a roll of Delta 3200 in the 6x7. Paul Aaron Reynolds wrote: > On Tuesday, February 26, 2002, at 02:17 PM, Aaron Reynolds wrote: > > > > >http://homepage.mac.com/aaronreynolds/.Pictures/sgt%20%26%20mrs%20pepper%20at%20home. > > jpg > > > > Here's a closer view of a section of it: > > > > http://homepage.mac.com/aaronreynolds/.Pictures/sgt%20%26%20mrs%20pepper%20close. > > jpg > > You may need to paste these long URLs together. Alternately, you can > look at these images by going to http://homepage.mac.com/aaronreynolds , > though they make you look at the images sized down in a silly viewer > window. > > -Aaron > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
pdml@pdml.net
I do this at work all the time. The SLR always wins. - Original Message - From: "Aaron Reynolds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 6:55 AM Subject: Re: Interesting Comment: SLR vs P&S > On Sunday, February 24, 2002, at 01:20 AM, Doug Franklin wrote: > > >> When it comes to scanning at 4000dpi, however, you can see how > >> the lens on the SLR camera gives you cleaner, sharper photos, > >> than those on the point-and-shoot. > > > > I'd be interested to know whether this agrees with the collective > > experience of the PDML. > > I would say that it depends on the point and shoot and the SLR, but > generally, comparing an SLR with a decent lens on it to a zoom point and > shoot, the SLR will kick some p&s butt. > > -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
SMC-A 24-50mm for sale
All, I have a Pentax SMC-A 24-50mm F4 zoom for sale. I haven't been using it at all, and I have too much camera gear. The glass and barrel are really, really clean. The only flaw is a little forward and backward play in the zoom ring (toward and away from the camera). KEH prices on this lens vary from $245 to $275. Make me an offer if you're interested. --Mark - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Where's Pentax?
In a message dated Tue, 26 Feb 2002 5:13:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, "Len Paris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > As a point of curiosity, how many folks moved from the PZ-1p to > the MZ-S? I don't think I can tell from the body count. I'm a PZ-1 owner who considered the MZ-S for no more than 5 minutes. I kind of have my dream 35 kit right now (PZ-1, ZX-5n, LX) and don't see anything on paper to make me want to ditch any of those for the MZ-s (which, I must admit, I've never seen in "person".) I was eager to see the digital sibling of the MZ-s -- you know, the one they didn't release after all ... - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: as promised, more from the SMCP-67 75mm f2.8
The url isn't working for me. Are you sure it's correct? Paul Aaron Reynolds wrote: > Vanessa's parents were dressing up for a retro costume party last week > when it was decided that a portrait was needed. Luckily, I had the 67, > the 75mm and a roll of Delta 3200 in my bag. > > Here's my favourite: > > http://homepage.mac.com/aaronreynolds/.Pictures/sgt%20%26%20mrs%20pepper%20at%20home. > jpg > > Here's a closer view of a section of it: > > http://homepage.mac.com/aaronreynolds/.Pictures/sgt%20%26%20mrs%20pepper%20close. > jpg > > These were shot handheld at 1/30 f5.6, lit just by the lamps in the > living room. The top left corner has been slightly burned in. > > -Aaron > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Shutter Speed when not using Camera...
I respect, but don't understand, the advice to "store your camera uncocked." Aren't we also told, "When going out to shoot, keep your camera cocked at all times?" What are we to do if (as usually happens) we don't take that final hoped-for shot: blow a shot just to extend the life of the spring? Paul Franklin Stregevsky 13 Selby Court Poolesville, Maryland 20837-2410 [EMAIL PROTECTED] H (301) 349-5243 - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Contax NX vs Pentax MZ-S
Jorgen, You may have confused the price of the Contax NX with the Contax N1. B&H lists the Contax NX for $649.95 and the Pentax MZ-S for $799.95. They are indeed comparable cameras at not quite comparable prices but it is the MZ-S that's overpriced! Alexander Grigolia - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: More Viewfinder Opinions
>Among the later Pentax manual focus bodies, can folks compare the various >viewfinders? I'm looking at the P3, Super Program, Program Plus, ME Super, >and MX. Are all these real pentaprisms? May I assume these are all better >than my MZ-5 (which is practically useless for MF). They all have pentaprisms, and they all have better viewfinders than any MZ/ZX bodies (including the MZ-S's viewfinder which is too damn small). >For comparrisons sake, I own a Spotmatic, K1000, ME, and MZ-5. I have a >motley collection of (mostly MF with a few AF) lenses. > >I picked up a beat up ME on a whim and the VF blew me away for all my >manual focus lenses! The size and handling! I must have MORE! I'm 'gonna >leave the screwmount adapter on that old one. > >Is the MX any better than the ME? Are the program cameras as good as or >worse? The MX has among the highest magnificant. With a bright screen from the new LX, there's nothing can compare. But even with the old screen (that I use), it's still pretty good with fast primes. One thing to remember is, a good quality viewfinder can appear dark due to an old dark screen. Super A/Program is a good example. regards, Alan Chan _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
OT: Cybercrime - Auctions - URL
I don't know how many folks here participate in online auctions, ebay & others, but here's something of interest to read from TechTV/Cybercrime. http://www.techtv.com/cybercrime/internetfraud/story/0,23008,336 1520,00.html Len --- - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Shutter Speed when not using Camera...
Tim Engel wrote: > (Very lucid description of mechanical shutter operations) Many thanks! Can our (now-discontiued) LX's stepless shutter be similarly explained, or is it just plain black magic? :-) Regards, Stephen - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Foveon Fotos
He sent your the portrait of the guy? Your eyes are far better than mine if we are talking about the same photo. Ciao, Graywolf - Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 2:27 PM Subject: Re: Foveon Fotos > And the pics I received from Mike looked like crap, in that it was clear > they were digital, highlights were burnt out, there was color fringing, > and some other problems. Either we received different prints, or you > need new glasses . I'd have to pull out the prints to be very > specific wrt each one. But I was not impressed one whit. > > T Rittenhouse wrote: > > > > Let me warn you, the print from a Canon D30 Mike Johnson sent into the > > Challenge, the one that made me ask if I should use such prints to rate the > > printers, was so good it made my eyes blink. The thing is it showed no > > digital effects whatsoever it may have been run through an image enhancing > > program, or actually been done on film and scanned with a commercial scanner > > for all I could tell. No other picture I have seen from a D30 looked that > > good, no picture I have seen from any mobile digital camera looked that > > good. > > -- > Shel Belinkoff > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ > You can't have everything. Where would you put it? > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Model release?
Here's an interesting quandry: I may be in a position to sell a photo. The prospective user is a local festival and the photo is of the start of a 10k race with all the runners coming toward the camera (it's at http://www.robertstech.com/graphics/pages/7d101407.htm). I originally took the photo for editorial use, so no model releases were necessary then, but they *would* be necessary for commercial use. Except that the prospective buyer is the festival/race organizer whose entry forms (that all the runners signed before being allowed in the race) stipulated that photos taken during the event could be used by the organizers for promotional purposes. So it seems that the race organizers do have the right to use the photo without getting signed releases from everyone recognizable in the picture. (Try to count them!) My feeling is that the race promoters clearly have the right to use the photo and that I'm OK as long as I don't try to sell it to anyone else. Any thoughts? -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Pentax Lenses For Sale or Trade
I have the following For Sale or Trade, (KEH prices are for trade valuation). I am going to call all of them excellent (lightly used) except for noted problems. With the exception of the 50/1.7 none show any sign of abuse. No marks on glass, no fungus, no separation, light to moderate dust. These are for sale or trade, make offers: Pentax Takumar Bayonet 135/2.8, excellent (KEH $35) SMC Pentax-M 50/2.0, excellent (KEH $50) SMC Pentax-M 28.2.8, excellent (KEH $126) SMC Pentax-M 50/1.7, chewed filter ring, can still screw filter on, otherwise excellent (KEH bgn $47, $25 seems fair) SMC Pentax-M 28-50/3.5-4.5 Zoom, excellent. (KEH $94) SMC Pentax-M 40/2.8 Pancake lens, scuffed aperture ring, otherwise excellent (KEH $199, $175 seems fair) Pentax Rectangular Metal clamp-on Lens Hood for 28mm/3.5 (49mm) (asking $15) These are for trade only, I want to keep them unless you make me a great offer: SMC Pentax-A 135/2.8, excellent (KEH $179) SMC Pentax-K 24/2.8, scuffed on aperture ring, otherwise excellent (KEH $299, $275 seems fair) Wanted: Pentax MX (will trade the K24/2.8 even for a minty black body) SMC Pentax-M 100/2.8 Sekonic Studio Meter Offers to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ciao, Graywolf - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Re: Foveon Fotos
Your point is well made. Also, the larger pixels are more sensitiv (higher ISO) and less sensitive to noise (better image). Between those and your comments about lens resolution a 24x36 would be far better than a smaller chip with the same overall pixel count. A 6MP full frame sensor is pretty much the same as what is being used in medium format digital backs right now. Ciao, Graywolf - Original Message - From: Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 2:08 PM Subject: Re: Re: Foveon Fotos > T Rittenhouse wrote: > > > Let me warn you, the print from a Canon D30 Mike Johnson sent into > > the Challenge, the one that made me ask if I should use such prints > > to rate the printers, was so good it made my eyes blink. > > Let that be a lesson to the pixel counters; there's a lot more to image > quality than just the number of pixels a camera records. People who think > the Foveon (or the Philips or the Fuji or whatever) won't equal 35mm film > because it doesn't capture enough pixels are missing this. Of course those > who say it'll be *better* are probably missing it too. The proof or lack > thereof will be in the prints. > > I'm really curious about these particular new sensors but the one I'm most > interested in is actually the oldest: the Philips. A full-frame chip gives > you more than the advantage of being able to use wide angle lenses. It gives > you the full resolution of your lenses. Consider two CCDs, both producing > 6 megapixels, but one being full-frame and the other being smaller. A 35mm > frame has a diagonal dimension of 43mm. If you use a CCD with a diagonal > of, say, 28mm, you gat a "focal length multiplier" factor of about 1.5 with > the smaller chip. Now say your lens has a resolution of a nice round figure > like 50 lpm. That works out to 1400 lines across the frame of the small > sensor. A full-frame sensor, however, with *the same lens* would get 2100 > lines across the full frame. In other words, the smaller CCD not only multiplies > your focal length by 1.5, it *divides* the effective resolution of your > lens by 1.5. The pixel giveth and the pixel taketh away. > > This assumes all things being equal, of course, and all other things are > never equal. There are plenty of other ways to screw up a chip, so rather > than predict great things from the Philips CCD, I'm going to sit back and > wait to see how things shake out. Like I said, I'm really curious to see > images from this latest batch of sensors. > > > -- > Mark Roberts > www.robertstech.com > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
WAY OT! But it may or may not interest you if you're a Macaddict
Apologies if you're reading this by mistake. You may lash me a hundred times with the petrified vomit of a Tasmanian Devil for being so OT. I'm embarking on a typically insane project, namely building a PowerBook G3 (Lombard) from scratch. It will be documented over the coming weeks on the MacAds site home page, first installment is up, if you like that sort of thing (and building PowerBooks). Now back to the lashing - yes - more, please... Cotty ___ Personal email traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] MacAds traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Check out the UK Macintosh ads http://www.macads.co.uk - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Where's Pentax?
On Tuesday, February 26, 2002, at 01:57 PM, Bruce Rubenstein wrote: > Nikon and Canon aren't. Kodak is barely hanging in there with competive > products, let alone leading. Have you looked at the DCS720x and DCS760 > (both > based on the F5)? Class leading technology is fueled with cubic > dollars; Nikon > and Canon are willing and able to do so. How can Pentax be behind when we haven't seen the product, then, Bruce? You just posted that Pentax are three generations behind because Nikon have revised their digital SLR three times. But Nikon is ahead of Kodak despite Kodak having more revisions and being on the market longer because Nikon's offering is better. Pick your argument and then support it. -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s)
On Tuesday, February 26, 2002, at 02:17 PM, Patrick White wrote: > As for copyright notice location, just paste it over a nondescript > part of > the barrel. There is still no guarantee that they can't retouch it > out, but > all you are really after is making it so much work that they go steal > somebody else's image or take their own. If you have a KMP logo of some kind, putting it in a corner of the image, overlapping the lens slightly, that would look good and be a bit of a deterrent. -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: [FS] SMC-A 50/1.4
On Tue, 26 Feb 2002, [iso-8859-1] Mark Roberts wrote: > Pentax SMC-A 50/1.4 in excellent condition. $80.00 to the list before it > goes on eBay. This is a *great* lens :-) Sign me up! Contact me off list, please, to follow up. -- http://www.infotainment.org "The destructive character is cheerful." - Walter Benjamin - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: TuTu - Who-Who?
Unless there's another, he's probably referring to Archbishop Desmond Tutu, the South African churchman who campaigned for years to release Nelson Mandela from prison. (Hey, two posts, and both off topic...) -- Kristian On Monday, February 25, 2002, at 07:02 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > In a message dated 25/02/02 18:42:14 GMT Standard Time, Brandon writes: > > << So I butchered the poor man's name... > > I was refering to Desmond TuTu... >> > > Sorry - still none the wiser. > > Kind regards > > Peter > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Foveon Fotos
And the pics I received from Mike looked like crap, in that it was clear they were digital, highlights were burnt out, there was color fringing, and some other problems. Either we received different prints, or you need new glasses . I'd have to pull out the prints to be very specific wrt each one. But I was not impressed one whit. T Rittenhouse wrote: > > Let me warn you, the print from a Canon D30 Mike Johnson sent into the > Challenge, the one that made me ask if I should use such prints to rate the > printers, was so good it made my eyes blink. The thing is it showed no > digital effects whatsoever it may have been run through an image enhancing > program, or actually been done on film and scanned with a commercial scanner > for all I could tell. No other picture I have seen from a D30 looked that > good, no picture I have seen from any mobile digital camera looked that > good. -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ You can't have everything. Where would you put it? - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Sigma SD9 w/Foveon Chip
The Contax camera is only arriving now, in March. It was supposed to be on the market last November, and now it's also going to be a really tough sell (even for Zeiss fans with deep pockets) when compared to 6Mp cameras from the Japanese (Pentax excluded, naturally :-( ). Personally, I think Pentax were right not to proceed with the MZ-D as specified. Sure, it would have been nice to have the camera, but wouldn't we be here complaining that it cost four times as much as the Canon D-60 if Pentax had gone ahead with it...? That said, I won't be looking at digital until I can get a full-frame one, and that's always going to be expensive (in IC production, the physical size of the device is the biggest cost, not the number of transistors or sensors or whatever on it). Okay, I might be tempted to settle for a 1.2x multiplier if the price was right, but that's still a way off.. When's Photokina? -- Kristian On Tuesday, February 26, 2002, at 06:53 am, Shel Belinkoff wrote: > And your point is? > > ryan brooks wrote: >> >> And the 6mp Contax full-frame is real: >> >> http://www.dpreview.com/news/0202/02022505contaxndigitalinhand.asp > >>> The Pentax ad above the Sigma photos is kinda cute ... >>> >>> http://www.dpreview.com/news/0202/02022503sigmasd9shots.asp > > -- > Shel Belinkoff > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ > You can't have everything. Where would you put it? > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s) (Thanks to all)
Hi, Thank you all for your comments and suggestions. Sadly, I have had to "watermark" all KMP images that I own, and now you all have to pay the price of seing the lower-quality images. If anyone needs a good image that I own, drop me a line. I am going to pursue the issue a bit more with the commercial firm that stole my image(s). I have to find them first because the eBay seller says he has no records of the exact URL. But I'll try it. Thanks again, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
as promised, more from the SMCP-67 75mm f2.8
Vanessa's parents were dressing up for a retro costume party last week when it was decided that a portrait was needed. Luckily, I had the 67, the 75mm and a roll of Delta 3200 in my bag. Here's my favourite: http://homepage.mac.com/aaronreynolds/.Pictures/sgt%20%26%20mrs%20pepper%20at%20home. jpg Here's a closer view of a section of it: http://homepage.mac.com/aaronreynolds/.Pictures/sgt%20%26%20mrs%20pepper%20close. jpg These were shot handheld at 1/30 f5.6, lit just by the lamps in the living room. The top left corner has been slightly burned in. -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Sigma SD9 w/Foveon Chip
No I don't .. I have no memory. That coupled with paying very little attention to the discussions of the MZ-D, leaves me essentially ignorant of circumstances surrounding the camera. Len Paris wrote: > > The full-frame MZ-D could have been real too. > You have a short memory, Shel. -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ You can't have everything. Where would you put it? - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s)
Yep, that is why I said Boz should contact a copyright attorney in that case. Ciao, Graywolf - Original Message - From: Aaron Reynolds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 1:35 PM Subject: Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s) > On Tuesday, February 26, 2002, at 12:58 PM, T Rittenhouse wrote: > > > Unfortunately for them ignorance of the law is not a legal excuse. On > > the > > other you are not going to be able to collect damages unless you can > > show > > realistically that there is a money issue involved. If someone stole > > your > > pic and used it for a national billboard campaign where they would > > normally > > expect to pay a hundred thousand dollars for that use of the image. For > > something like the Ebay sellers illegal use about all you could expect > > is a > > cease and desist order. > > Except that the eBay fella stole it from a retail store that had stolen > it. So, the retail store is using it to sell product on the internet. > Commercial use, big money. > > -Aaron > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: as promised, more from the SMCP-67 75mm f2.8
Can't handhold the 6x7, shutter vibration, etc. etc. HAR!! Norm Aaron Reynolds wrote: > These were shot handheld at 1/30 f5.6, lit just by the lamps in the > living room. The top left corner has been slightly burned in. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
[FS] SMC-A 50/1.4
The closet cleaning continues: Pentax SMC-A 50/1.4 in excellent condition. $80.00 to the list before it goes on eBay. This is a *great* lens :-) The SMC-F 70-210 is also still available. -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Re: Foveon Fotos
T Rittenhouse wrote: > Let me warn you, the print from a Canon D30 Mike Johnson sent into > the Challenge, the one that made me ask if I should use such prints > to rate the printers, was so good it made my eyes blink. Let that be a lesson to the pixel counters; there's a lot more to image quality than just the number of pixels a camera records. People who think the Foveon (or the Philips or the Fuji or whatever) won't equal 35mm film because it doesn't capture enough pixels are missing this. Of course those who say it'll be *better* are probably missing it too. The proof or lack thereof will be in the prints. I'm really curious about these particular new sensors but the one I'm most interested in is actually the oldest: the Philips. A full-frame chip gives you more than the advantage of being able to use wide angle lenses. It gives you the full resolution of your lenses. Consider two CCDs, both producing 6 megapixels, but one being full-frame and the other being smaller. A 35mm frame has a diagonal dimension of 43mm. If you use a CCD with a diagonal of, say, 28mm, you gat a "focal length multiplier" factor of about 1.5 with the smaller chip. Now say your lens has a resolution of a nice round figure like 50 lpm. That works out to 1400 lines across the frame of the small sensor. A full-frame sensor, however, with *the same lens* would get 2100 lines across the full frame. In other words, the smaller CCD not only multiplies your focal length by 1.5, it *divides* the effective resolution of your lens by 1.5. The pixel giveth and the pixel taketh away. This assumes all things being equal, of course, and all other things are never equal. There are plenty of other ways to screw up a chip, so rather than predict great things from the Philips CCD, I'm going to sit back and wait to see how things shake out. Like I said, I'm really curious to see images from this latest batch of sensors. -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s)
"Bojidar Dimitrov" writes: >What can I do against this: >http://cgi.ebay.de/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1334153963 >I don't mean legally, but I would appreciate ideas on how to place the >copyright notices so that they are not so easy to remove. Am I dreaming >when thinking of images that do not allow themselves to be >screencaptured and edited? The serial number of the lens doesn't show in the picture. If it did, then it might be more obvious that it isn't a picture of their actual lens, which is what they are trying to pass it off as. Not that I'm recommending that you publish the serial number of the lens in that way. As for copyright notice location, just paste it over a nondescript part of the barrel. There is still no guarantee that they can't retouch it out, but all you are really after is making it so much work that they go steal somebody else's image or take their own. hope that helps, patbob ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: February 2002 PUG Comments
Thanks for your effort. Your critique is great... since you picked my picture. ;-) Seriously, I used to participate in Chris' organized comments, but now that it is not working, I became lazy. I have to figure out how to comment offline having all the images stored previously (or suscribe to an ADSL service, not in my plans though). Keep with this exercice, I found that it was also a learning tool. Jaume --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I am following Cotty's lead...better late than > never. Here is my first attempt at critiquing the > PUG (or anything else). Since I've never done this > before, you are free to critique my critique! > > "Cadaques" - Jaume Lahuerta > The multi-angle step lines draw me right down the > stairway. Nice! Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games http://sports.yahoo.com - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s)
I like all the petty little get even tricks I have seen in this thread. But, as has been said, if Boz has commercial possibilities with his images, allowing copyright infringements degrades the value. If someone feels it is easier to copy a photo than to take one themselves they are admitting to the commercial value of that photo so have no defense whatsoever. If the images have no commercial value to Boz, then probably a copyright attorney would suggest not litigating. But in any case he should notify all parties of his ownership of the copyright and ask them to cease using it without payment. This is necessary to protect his rights and to protect others copyrights as well. It is a common good issue. This presupposes that Boz owns the copyrights to the images, I don't suppose he doesn't, but you would be surprised how many thieves get upset when someone steals their ill gotten gains. Reminds me of the story about the guy that called the cops to report that someone had robbed him of the ten grand that he had robbed a bank for. Ciao, Graywolf - Original Message - From: Nitin Garg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 11:56 AM Subject: Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s) > > > If this seller happens to have been so careless as to have loaded > > > the image from your site on the auction listing, rename the image > > > to something else and substitute a 1x1 white pixel image in it's > > > place. > > > > should one decide to ever do this, for maximum impact, make sure there > is a bid on the auction already. If their isnt any, place one if the > starting bid is low enough or there is a reserve :) > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Where's Pentax?
Nikon and Canon aren't. Kodak is barely hanging in there with competive products, let alone leading. Have you looked at the DCS720x and DCS760 (both based on the F5)? Class leading technology is fueled with cubic dollars; Nikon and Canon are willing and able to do so. --- Aaron Reynolds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tuesday, February 26, 2002, at 12:52 PM, Bruce Rubenstein wrote: > > > Nikon: D1 original, D1X/D1H, D100. > > ...but you're not slagging Nikon for being 5 or 6 generations behind > Kodak? > > Come on, be serious. > > -Aaron Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games http://sports.yahoo.com - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: (even later) of Feb PUG review from Cotty (I am also one of those)
Cotty, Yes, I admit that I am one of those that, like you, scan all PUG comments looking for his/her name. An this time I found it: - >>Cadaques Juame Lahuerta It's the shot we all want to take one day, just that most of us don't quite make it to these quaint Mediterranean villages built on hillsides. Juame has, and did. And it's a great pic. Interesting contrast with the olde-worlde steps and the modern jumble of wires - I am happy and honoured to have accomplished a 'general' dream, If I had known in that moment that I had such responsibility over my shoulders, maybe the result would have been quite worst... ;-) Now seriously, I am glad you liked it. BTW I also liked your contribution. It made me laugh. OT: during a period in the US I realised that my name was difficult to pronounce for English speakers. The PUG is showing me that it is also difficult to write... ;-) JAUme (no problem, of course) Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games http://sports.yahoo.com - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Adorama
At 10:26 PM 2/25/02 -0800, you wrote: >I guess it depends on where you live, or perhaps some other factor or >factors, but I've found that sometimes Adorama gets delivered to me >faster than items from B&H. That may be. I live in Chicago so that may be a major factor. I recently ordered a lens from B&H. I ordered it after business hours. The next day I got an email saying it had been shipped and it arrived the following day. That's pretty much been my experience with them. Adorama seems to take a day or two longer. Not really a big deal. Gary J. Sibio - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s)
On Tuesday, February 26, 2002, at 12:58 PM, T Rittenhouse wrote: > Unfortunately for them ignorance of the law is not a legal excuse. On > the > other you are not going to be able to collect damages unless you can > show > realistically that there is a money issue involved. If someone stole > your > pic and used it for a national billboard campaign where they would > normally > expect to pay a hundred thousand dollars for that use of the image. For > something like the Ebay sellers illegal use about all you could expect > is a > cease and desist order. Except that the eBay fella stole it from a retail store that had stolen it. So, the retail store is using it to sell product on the internet. Commercial use, big money. -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: KMP Copyright Infringement(s)
Paul, I had not thought thru the ramifications of what I suggested, especially the commercial opportunities. I think you are very right with the suggestion to agressively defend your content. Regards, Bob S. I wrote: >> In any case, I would complain to the offender and then let it go. << Paul added: >>That is probably the easiest path, and certainly the least stressful. But if one >truely wishes to protect their intellectual property, it is a fatal mistake. This >leads to more widespread abuse and dilutes the value of that which you are trying to >protect. If Dimitrov sells or wishes to sell his work, he will find it difficult to >command a proper value for it when it has been freely used far and wide. I admit >this to be a somewhat philosophical argument but it comes down to personal value >systems. For me, even though my web site images are not particularly stunning, and the subjects are far from "socially redeeming" (I feature mainly toy cars and Jeeps in the woods), there are several markets for this type of work. By agressively protecting it, I have been able to expect and receive decent compensation any time my images are used. This has led to contracts to illustrate toy books, the ongoing responsibility to write several magazine articles per month, and compensation for the use of images on my site and made for hire, in related publications. If I ignore what is at times widespread abuse of my site content, I will not have had the same bargaining power when negotiating the price of my work. This is a basic principle of doing this stuff for a living. If you are just dabbling, don't ever want to be getting paid, or don't really care where your work shows up, then a brief complaint and letting it go is OK. But it does not convey how much you value your own work, and substantially diminishes your value in the market. Dimitrov, your site is a sparkling example of how to dispense information on a topic. No matter what your professional aspirations may be, I encourage you to protect your content if for no other reason that to make a statement of what your work is worth to you. ppro © 2002 Paul M. Provencher All Rights Reserved. May not be used without Permission ( smiling ) << - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Where's Pentax?
On Tuesday, February 26, 2002, at 12:52 PM, Bruce Rubenstein wrote: > Nikon: D1 original, D1X/D1H, D100. ...but you're not slagging Nikon for being 5 or 6 generations behind Kodak? Come on, be serious. -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: OT Hockey - Women's Gold
--- frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks, Debra, > > That was a great game, and just as much of a > nail-biter, too. And > terrific hockey, I must say. In some ways I feel > better about that one > than the men's gold. There's the adversity of being > underdogs, but > also, they are true amateurs. Anyone out there > remember back when the > Olympics were supposed to be for amateurs? Not that > they were all > "really" amateurs, especially from those countries > that used "amateur" > sports for propaganda purposes, but I digress... Yep, them was the days. The old Evil Empire ain't what it used to be. But the Russians still know how to skate - in any sport. The amateur flavor will probably stay with women's hockey for a long time yet. Somehow I can't see the sport ever going pro. For one thing, no body-checking. A less physical (or barbaric) version of hockey just won't sell as much. Not to say that women's hockey is less interesting. I think we saw how good the teams can be. I don't play hockey, so I don't really know, but it seems that taking away the body-check makes it harder. How do you strip the puck from your opponent if you can't jam her off her skates and into the boards? It's a money thing. Just about the only women's sport that draws more attention in the US than its male counterpart is figure skating. And maybe soccer, er, football. > Now that hockey is a true international sport, it's > hard to imagine that > any one country will easily sweep both men's and > women's golds again. Remember, the US was favored to win in both. There will be another Olympics. :) > Truly a proud day for our country... Y'all deserve it. > regards, > frank howdy, Deb in TX > Debra Wilborn wrote: > > > Let's not forget the women's match. Now THAT was > a > > game! I was cheering for the home team (USA! USA! > > USA!), but apparently nobody knows ice like the > > Canucks. :) And all that after being 0-8 against > the > > US! > > > > So I guess that makes it a pretty amazing sweep in > > hockey medals. Come to think of it, y'all didn't > do > > too bad in curling either. > > > > Salute the leaf with pride. > > > > -- Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games http://sports.yahoo.com - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
FS: Vivitar Series One 1354/2.3 screwmount, $80
I posted this lens last week for $100. Maybe at $80 someone will bite. Glass is clean, all functions are smooth. No wear on focusing ring. Includes generic rear cap, Vivitar Series One front cap, which falls right off. Add $6 for a snap-in Tamron 72mm cap that stays on. This lens close focuses to 3 feet (0.9 m) at 1:4.5X magnification. I'll include a Hoya 72mm 1B skylight filter. Add $9 for the HMC (Hoya Multicoated) version. I'm selling it because I just bought the multicoated K-mount version. $5 shipping to U.S. or Canada, $12 elsewhere. PayPal, BidPay, or money order. Paul Franklin Stregevsky 13 Selby Court Poolesville, Maryland 20837-2410 [EMAIL PROTECTED] H (301) 349-5243 - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: SMC Takumar 1:1.8/55
I have won a second Ebay auction, for an Pentax SP and SMC Takumar 1:1.8/55 for US $71.16 + $7 shipping. I did not expect to win both. http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1334082883&ed=1014696 884 This takes my list of cameras to: 1 x SP(plus one given to my son) 2 x SPFs 1 x ME 1 x MES and 18 lenses (SM/KM) (Plus non-Pentax) 1 x Ricoh KR-10 1 x Nikon Photomic FTn (Nikkor 50mm/f2 and Soligor 105/f2.8) James - Original Message - From: "jmadams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2002 12:09 PM Subject: Re: SMC Takumar 1:1.8/55 > I have just successfully bid on an SP500 Outfit for $91.00 US. plus > shipping. > http://cgi.ebay.ca/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1333462535 - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s)
Aaron suggested: > > It seems that the current eBay seller is not the person who manipulated > > the image, rather it was a "professional" photo dealer with a store in > > Berlin. > > Send them a bill. Call the store and demand payment. Ask them so > explain their actions. Ask them if their store allows shoplifting. Anyone know offhand what typical current stock-photography fees are for web use these days? Boz, can you find out how long they've been using your image? Could be a tidy profit, though I'm not sure which country's courts would have to be used to sue them. -- Glenn - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: 2: KMP Copyright Infringement(s)
I went back to the link a few minutes ago and the main picture is now blank.The second one is still there. Maybe Boz's on a roll. Dave Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s)
Your need to contact that store and tell them to cease and desist, invoice them for the use of your photos up to that time too, makes them realize they are stealing something valuable. Since this is a commercial firm, you are dealing with a bigger issue here, you should talk to a copyright attorney if they do not respond immediately and satisfactorily. Ciao, Graywolf - Original Message - From: Bojidar Dimitrov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 11:13 AM Subject: Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s) > Hi Paul, > > > If this seller happens to have been so careless as to have loaded > > the image from your site on the auction listing, rename the image > > to something else and substitute a 1x1 white pixel image in it's > > place. > > This is, of course, a great idea, but I am stinkin' mad because the > "original" thief took the image, then _REMOVED_ the copyright notice, > and finally used/uses the image for commercial advantage, thus violating > the KMP copyright notice. > > It seems that the current eBay seller is not the person who manipulated > the image, rather it was a "professional" photo dealer with a store in > Berlin. > > Thanks anyway, > Boz > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Better Late Than Never - Feb PUG review from Cotty
Cheers Kath. Does this mean we'll have to get married now? ;-) >Cotty, you made my day! Thank you so much for the kind and encouraging >comments. I am trying very hard to become a really good photographer, >because anything worth doing is worth doing well. Your comments really >help. > I may have said it before, but I think you take really wonderful photos, >but >you also have a very artistic, creative way with words. With those two >traits combined, no doubt you will someday have a book published out there >for all of us to purchase! Thanks again for taking the time to comment on >our photos. >Kathy L. ___ Personal email traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] MacAds traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Check out the UK Macintosh ads http://www.macads.co.uk - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Hockey OT
The US men's coach, Herb Brooks, made the comment that the Canadian team played a terrific game and that the US team didn't have any legs left after their tough semi final game against the Russians while the Canadians had a relatively easy walk through to the finals. You could tell that the US didn't have the "jump" against Canada that they had Friday night against Russia. That doesn't detract from the fantastic performance of the Canadians in the gold medal game. They gave us a lesson in how the game should be played. DG At 11:10 AM 2/26/02 -0500, you wrote: >On Tuesday, February 26, 2002, at 09:24 AM, Mark Roberts wrote: > >>Anyone else able to read Wayne Gretsky's (it was him, right?) lips when >>the Canadians scored the goal that put them up 4-2? I can understand >>why they didn't have a microphone on him! > >HAR! Yeah, Wayne has this reputation for being very nice and soft spoken >and polite, to the point where in his press conference after the Czech >game he said, "Like they say, payback's a...well, we all know what they >say about payback." I actually checked the tape later to see if I had >seen what I thought I had seen...yup, I did. > >You become good at lip reading when watching hockey, because they NEVER >put microphones down near the players or coaches. Often, the >conversations between them and referees or linesmen can be very entertaining. > >I'm still wondering what the US coach was talking about at the end of the >third period when he was shaking his head and saying "That's what really >pisses me off." > >-Aaron > >p.s. Lindros, scoring his first goal of the tournament against Belarus: >"It's about time!" >- >This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, >go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to >visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Where's Pentax?
Nikon: D1 original, D1X/D1H, D100. These don't include the older Kodak/Nikon DSLR's. Canon was late with a Pro level DSLR, but ahead of Nikon at the lower end with the D30, and now on par. There's also the years of experience with fixed lens, non SLRs and film scanners that these companies have. Until Pentax got together with HP they didn't have any sucessful digital imaging products. If Pentax could come out with a 6 MP, DSLR that sold for under $1000 they might have something. --- Brendan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 3 generations behind? how? Don't go into IS and VR or > eye control but how is Pentax really behind in > Technology? Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games http://sports.yahoo.com - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s)
And if javascript is turned off? Ciao, Graywolf - Original Message - From: tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 8:59 AM Subject: Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s) > On 26 Feb 2002 at 12:41, Bojidar Dimitrov wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > What can I do against this: > > http://cgi.ebay.de/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1334153963 > > > > > > I don't mean legally, but I would appreciate ideas on how to place the > > copyright notices so that they are not so easy to remove. Am I > > dreaming when thinking of images that do not allow themselves to be > > screencaptured and edited? > > If you're feeling industrious you can place some code on your pages to the right mouse button menu: > > http://www.aspfree.com/authors/MVadivel/disablerightbutton.asp > > There are other versions of this that might be better. > > In any event, it's pretty easy to get around, and the copyright notice that Paul recommended is a good idea. > > tv > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Another dumb-ass darkroom question
Thanks for the advice Shel! I don't think I would have ever thought about the color of what I was wearing, but it's a damn good point. I'll do some fogging tests around the same time as the safelight tests to be sure. Hopefully I should be fully up and running with this project by the end of the week. Regards, /\/\ick... - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Hockey OT
On Tuesday, February 26, 2002, at 09:24 AM, Mark Roberts wrote: > Anyone else able to read Wayne Gretsky's (it was him, right?) lips when > the Canadians scored the goal that put them up 4-2? I can understand > why they didn't have a microphone on him! HAR! Yeah, Wayne has this reputation for being very nice and soft spoken and polite, to the point where in his press conference after the Czech game he said, "Like they say, payback's a...well, we all know what they say about payback." I actually checked the tape later to see if I had seen what I thought I had seen...yup, I did. You become good at lip reading when watching hockey, because they NEVER put microphones down near the players or coaches. Often, the conversations between them and referees or linesmen can be very entertaining. I'm still wondering what the US coach was talking about at the end of the third period when he was shaking his head and saying "That's what really pisses me off." -Aaron p.s. Lindros, scoring his first goal of the tournament against Belarus: "It's about time!" - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Enabled!
On Monday, February 25, 2002, at 12:06 AM, David A. Mann wrote: > > And I still haven't sold the RB kit, so no 75mm f/2.8 for me yet :( Keep trying, Dave, it'll happen. :) Just to spur you along, I may post a new image from the 75mm this afternoon. Shot a spur of the moment portrait of Vanessa's parents, who had dressed up for a retro costume party. God bless Ilford Delta 3200 in medium format. -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s)
Boz, it's very expensive to go after folks that copy web pictures. If you try legal action, the defending lawyer has a right to ask you to prove that the images are actually yours. You'd have to produce negatives or slides to prove it. If you acquired the images from friends that sent them to you, you'd have to prove that too. Of course, if you could produce the object itself, with the same serial number as the image, that would probably work, too. You could also send e-mails to eBay and the folks bidding on the lens and explain to them that the advertised lens does not belong to the seller, it belongs to you and it is not for sale. Just a few ramblings from snowy, southern Illinois. Len --- - Original Message - From: "Bojidar Dimitrov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 7:27 AM Subject: Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s) > I wrote: > > > What can I do against this: > > http://cgi.ebay.de/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1334153963 > > I have gotten in touch with the "seller", and he assures me that he took > the image from the web page of a professional photo dealer I > will try to locate the dealer now. > > Cheers, > Boz > - - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
pdml@pdml.net
Doug Franklin wrote: > I was really wondering if any of the P&S cameras had optics that > approached (or surpassed) SLR optics. On average, or something, I > guess. Well, the results I get from my Pentax Zoom90WR show no sign of the "Hoover Effect"; and the slides, especially, seem extremely good w/ little loss of quality against my m42 SuperTaks, etc. Relevant may be that I tend not to use it for distant scenics & such, but rather closer-in subjects. This keeps assorted potential optical aberations from showing up, such as horizon bending and various edge distortions. Sharpness, color rendition & such seem quite satisfactory. Metering seems "tuned" to slide film as opposed to print/neg, where I'd like to kick it 1/3rd stop if I could. Of course, this fine device has been discontinued Bill - Bill D. Casselberry ; Photography on the Oregon Coast http://www.orednet.org/~bcasselb [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s)
Boz asked: > What can I do against this: > http://cgi.ebay.de/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1334153963 > > > I don't mean legally, but I would appreciate ideas on how to place the > copyright notices so that they are not so easy to remove. Am I dreaming > when thinking of images that do not allow themselves to be > screencaptured and edited? Short answer: yes, you're dreaming. Other people have given better advice than I can on legal and social approaches to the problem; my comments are on the technical side. There's no really good technical solution. There are techniques to make theft of the images a little more difficult (the "my car only has to be harder to steal than my neighbour's car, not invulnerable" approach). The harder you make it to steal the images, the more you interfere with legitimate viewing of them. So what you want, as with _any_ computer-security issue, is to find a useful and reasonable compromise between the cost (in money, effort, and inconvenience) and effectiveness of the security measures you choose. Putting copyright notices along the edges of an image does very little to distract from the image and does not reduce the quality of it. It's also easy to defeat by cropping the image. It _does_ mean that anyone who takes the image directly from your site can't claim ignorance of its copyright status, but all they have to do is claim that they stole it from someone else who'd already filed off the copyright notice (*and* claim to be ignorant of copyright law in general!). Putting an invisible digital watermark in the image allows you to prove that the image is yours as long as the thief doesn't know how to check for it and remove it, but does little to discourage an ignorant thief from using your work. Putting a visible but faint watermark across the whole image is harder to remove (I'm betting that someone with better Photoshop skills than I have can undo it -- *if* they decide that it's worth that much effort instead of finding someone else to rip off) but diminishes the usefulness of the image to legitimate users (i.e. viewers of your web site). The question becomes, "How *badly* do you feel that compromises the usefulness of your site?" If the answer is, "Well that's unfortunate but not a show-stopper", and theft of your work is a bigger deal than that, then there's your answer. Cleverly editing the copyright notice in place of the serial number is a lot more work on your end, and can be undone by anyone who knows Photoshop as well as you do. (Unless, of course, they decide it's easier to steal from someone else...) It does less to diminish the information-usefulness of the image than the visible watermark. (If most of the theft is for eBay listings, putting "Not For Sale!" in the watermark might also be a nice touch...) I suggest not trying Javascript code to stop folks from downloading images. First, for them to _see_ the image, it _has_ been transmitted to their computer; they just need to know a little more to be able to save it, but it's already in memory (and possibly on disk in the cache) on their system. If nothing else, a screen-capture program will get it. Second, such little gain is probably not worth the cost to legitimate users: anyone using a non-Javascript-capable browser or who turns off Javascript for performance or security reasons can no longer use your site. (FWIW, I'm in the latter category.) Those cover people copying your images. My recommendation is to go with a simple copyright notice and rely on social and legal measures to deal with theft as you discover it. Now as for people linking directly to your images instead of copying them, there are some tricks ... it comes down to a question of how much effort it's worth. Someone else suggested renaming images and replacing them with a blank image (or, what I'd be inclined to do, an image of a sign saying, "The picture that was supposed to be here was stolen from...", or maybe a photo of a camera that has been smashed to bits). Well that's an after-the-fact, _reactive_ approach (which is also true of legal solutions, notifying eBay of offenses, etc.). To do this proactively, you could perhaps use a server-side script which concocts a new filename each time the page is loaded (or one which changes based on the date/time), and configure the server so that any requests for an expired filename return the "this image was stolen" picture. It has to be server-side so that the actual filename of the permanent image is not exposed. If the big problem you run into is folks linking in to your images, this ought to discourage that (at the expense of more coding on your end, and more load on your web server (though if your pages are already coming out of a database, this probably isn't a huge increase percentagewise)). It doesn't stop them from _copying_ the images, of course, and I'm pretty sure I could come up with a chunk of Java or Javascript code to snarf the filename-of-the-m
Re: Re: Using tamron lenses with ME super
It has been bookmarked for emergencies as thus Dave Begin Original Message From: mike wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 15:27:16 + To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Using tamron lenses with ME super David Brooks wrote: > > Are you referring to this link? > > http://www.pentax.com/docstore/index.cfm?show=6 > That's the rascal. MES manual in PDF format, in case Alisair is without. Thanks, mike - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . End Original Message Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
FS: Pentax SMC 135/2.K, CLA'd, original hood, $125
I posted this Feb. 21 at $150; I've just dropped the price $25: Bought it in September 1999 from Ritz Online, which had rated it a 9 after a just-completed CLA. It's in great shape optically, mechanically, and aesthetically. Original rear cap and SMC Pentax spring-loaded hood. For front cap, a spring-loaded 58mm Tamron. Also available to the buyer: Heliopan 58mm UV 010 slim multicoated filter, $25 B+W 58mm UV 010 multicoated filter, $22 Shipping $5 insured with confirmation to U.S. and Canada, $18 + optional insurance everywhere else. PayPal, BidPay, money order. I'm selling it because I just bought a Vivitar 135/2.3PK and can't justify keeping both 135s. Paul Franklin Stregevsky 13 Selby Court Poolesville, Maryland 20837-2410 [EMAIL PROTECTED] H (301) 349-5243 - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Where's Pentax?
Shel wrote: >Seemingly not ... although an announcement saying that they are working >on something would be nice, but that's only from the perspective of an >interested consumer. But they already did say so. The press release for the shelved 6mp MZ-D state that they will be working on a more competitive digital slr instead. Pål - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s)
On Tuesday, February 26, 2002, at 07:56 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > In any case, I would complain to the offender and then let it go. I would suggest putting fine print on the site about what you charge for use of your images, including an outrageous fee for commercial use (i.e. to sell a product, like this fellow is doing). Then contact e-Bay, tell them of the infringement and ask them to assist you in collecting your bill. ;) -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s)
> What can I do against this: > http://cgi.ebay.de/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1334153963 > > > I don't mean legally, but I would appreciate ideas on how to place the > copyright notices so that they are not so easy to remove. Place a large copyright notice across the image making it visible but not totally opaque. Do not place it in a corner or on an evenly colored part of the image or it will be just too easy to remove. > Am I dreaming > when thinking of images that do not allow themselves to be > screencaptured and edited? > > ... Yes. :-(((. Once the image is downloaded you can't tell what it will be used for, viewing, saving or anything else. Ciao, Flavio - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Shutter Speed when not using Camera...
Wow! Rough question. There will probably be as many answers as there are people. My opinion, and it's just that, *my opinion*, is that it is never wrong to leave a mechanical shutter un-cocked. And, if it's left un-cocked, there is no better or worse shutterspeed. Un-cocked is un-cocked. Len --- > Is there a correct shutter speed to adjust a mechanical > camera to when you are not using it 1/60, 1/125 or whatever. > > I thought I once read a long time ago that there are speeds you > should not leave it on, on account of the tension on a mechanical > shutter spring. > I use Pentax MX and KX mechanical cameras. > > thanks in advance > Denny B - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Sigma SD9 w/Foveon Chip
On Tuesday, February 26, 2002, at 01:53 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: > And your point is? That perhaps it isn't vaporware, that perhaps there will actually be a camera produced using the full frame 6MP Phillips chip that Pentax was supposed to be using in their D-SLR before they canned it. From the site: > PMA 2002: We got our hands on Contax's long awaited N Digital D-SLR > today. This camera has been on the books now since July 2000. For those > who don't know or don't remember the N Digital is based around the full > frame (36 x 24 mm) Philips 6 megapixel chip. At last years PMA Contax > had a plastic mock-up, this year we find real working pre-production > models which shoot, review and have working menu systems. Contax seem > confident that the camera isn't too far away. My concern is that > they'll be bringing an expensive six megapixel to market at least a > year too late. I think he's hit the nail on the head, and that was Pentax's concern, too. -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Foveon Fotos
unless the big name players use their muscles and keep sigma out. In which case fovean could die too. On Tue, Feb 26, 2002 at 08:43:11AM -0500, Bill Owens wrote: > If, as I've read here earlier, Sigma has exclusive rights to the Fovean chip > for 5 years, they will become a major player in the digital field. > > Bill > > - Original Message - > From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 1:50 AM > Subject: Re: Foveon Fotos > > > > Here's a comparison with a "standard" digital camera. > > http://www.foveon.net/X3_comparison.html > > > > Bear in mind they are publicity photos, but also bear in mind what you > > saw on Stephen's site. I recall seeing some full-sized images. I'll > > try to find them again and post the url here. > > > > Antti-Pekka Virjonen wrote: > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Foveon Fotos
On Tuesday, February 26, 2002, at 01:10 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: > http://www.sjphoto.com/web-special/index.htm Can't tell a thing from these... http://www.sjphoto.com/web-special/pages/0022matt.htm shows evidence of either a heavy hand on the unsharp mask tool or an overzealous sharpening algorithm in the camera -- check out the halo between the kid's shirt collar and his skin. Let us know how the prints look. -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: 6x7 Question
On Monday, February 25, 2002, at 11:57 PM, ryan brooks wrote: > What is the difference between the "Late" (modern) lenses and the older > 6x7 > lenses that seem to always be floating around used? > Is there a limitation related to the AE of the 67II? Better coatings? > Different designs in some cases? All of the above? All of the above except for the AE. Even my brand new 75mm f2.8 has no electrical contacts on the mount, so that does not appear to be changing. In terms of coatings, the newer the better, BUT Pentax has always had kickass coatings. Some lenses have been overhauled, some have not. You'll notice a real difference in minimum focus distance with the newer lens designs. Some new designs are reputed to be sharper. I haven't yet met a lens for the 67 that I haven't found sharp. In fact, the only thing I've ever found to dislike about any of the lenses I've used has been their minimum focus distance. Brother Wheatfield dislikes his old-old 75mm. The new one is stunning, and the one in-between is also supposed to be excellent. I've heard nothing about body upgrades, but then I'm not listening for them, either...heck, I went out and bought an original 67 new when the 67II had just come out. -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: KMP Copyright Infringement(s)
Paul, My Russian-born wife would say that "dumb Yank" is a tautology. "Paul M. Provencher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Sorry if I got your first and last names switched. I'm just a dumb Yank! Paul Franklin Stregevsky 13 Selby Court Poolesville, Maryland 20837-2410 [EMAIL PROTECTED] H (301) 349-5243 - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
