Re: Hp scanner, printers whatever, they're all bad!
I only use mine about once per month, and lately alot less due to frequent clogs. Perhaps if I used it more it would be reliable, but with my usage pattern it's not so hot. -R Paul Stenquist wrote: I use the 1200 as well and remain quite pleased. I've also found that quite a few big ticket pros continue to use a 1200 for their portfolio prints. While the 1200 prints don't have the endurance of 1270 or 1280 prints, they display uniquely brilliant color. Paul
Re: Hp scanner, printers whatever, they're all bad!
I use the 1200 as well and remain quite pleased. I've also found that quite a few big ticket pros continue to use a 1200 for their portfolio prints. While the 1200 prints don't have the endurance of 1270 or 1280 prints, they display uniquely brilliant color. Paul Len Paris wrote: > > I guess the Epson Photo 1200 could be an exceptionably reliable printer. > I've owned mine since the first year it became available and have had no > clogging, or other printing problems with it at all. I worry about how > much longer ink cartridges will be available for it, though. I suppose > that, at the first sign of availability problems, I will have to spring > for a new printer. I guess we can't expect Epson to support all of > their printers forever. > > Len > --- > > > -Original Message- > > From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2002 12:04 PM > > To: David Brooks > > Subject: Re[3]: Hp scanner, printers whatever, they're all bad! > > > > > > David, > > > > I have to say, that in the US, that is not the case and in my > > own experience - yes I have owned, Espsons, Canons and HP's - > > that HP's are reliable. The worst reliability that I have > > experienced is the cheap Epsons. They print beautifully when > > they work. But head clogs and paper feeding really are poor > > (785 and 820). I had an 870 model (cost much more) that > > always worked great. I have had 4 or 5 Canons - all printed > > pretty good - no real problems. The HP's I have owned have > > performed reliably. They are not the best photo printers. > > If your intention is home printing of photos, I would get an > > expensive Epson. But for everyday printing (non-photo) I > > would not hesitate to get an HP. > > > > > > Bruce
Re: Turkey Test
> Hi, frank, > > I guess it's just a slow night! Why don't you get a life, anyway? > > -frank > > frank theriault wrote: Frank, Don't talk to our friend Frank that way! --Mike
Re: Why I won't be buying an MZ-S
> Thanks for wading through. Thank YOU, Lon, That was fascinating. --Another besotten Pentaxian in need of a 12-step program
Re: Happy Thanksgiving-was: Pentax Moribund? Methinks Not
> I was > able to trace my family to Canada's first permanent settlement, Port Royal in > what's now Nova Scotia, and it seems we arrived here around 1630. Mover-inners! (Just kidding Frank!) > Being able to trace your roots to the Mayflower is wonderful. More than "traced," and as you probably know firsthand, it was a great and guarded badge of honor to certain preceding generations, who imagined that it conferred upon them some sort of specialness for some reason. (Evidently during the Revolution and for a time thereafter it meant you were a sort of American aristocrat, almost.) Now I think it has receded to its proper importance...namely, not much. Still, you're right, it *is* kind of nice to be connected to history personally. At least on Thanksgiving it is. Actually my _last_ immigrant ancestor that we can trace came over in 1750. I still have some of his silver. That fellow came over with the contingent dispatched by Lord Baltimore and helped found the city of that name in Maryland. I think there must have been later immigrant ancestors, but of course the nice thing about genealogy is that you can choose the tributaries you wish to follow backwards, and overlook the ones that tweedle back to nothing. We lay claim to a variety of distinguished ancestors back in Ye Olde England as well, some of whom are commemorated by those peculiar lying-down-dead sculptures our British cousins seem fond of. Enough that my Great-Grandfather felt obliged to go on a tour and see them all. If anyone can think of a way to link this topic back up to anything having to do with Pentax, let me know. I'm coming up blank. --Mike
Re: MX review; WAS: Why I won't be buying an MZ-S
Well naturally enough this is one of the black ones, which is why I have persevered. Paul >. No other MX I have owned > over the years (3) have had this. In the end I sold it (it was a silver > top) in favour of a black beauty > > Cotty
Tiny Cars and PUG
> Rejoice Frank. The little urban car you seek is now being marketed in > North America Saw one of the new minis in the car park at Canadian Tire today. Bigger than I remember. Told hubby he could buy me one for Christmas. He said "yes, dear", so I guess that's sorted then! Once we got inside Canadian Tire however, he changed his mind and said he'd buy me a mini dremel grinder instead. Interestingly, at an outdoor classic car show in Ottawa earlier this year the department of transport had a Smart car on display. Now I doubt very much that that would be approved for the roads here! Ditto the mercedes A class. I mean it couldn't even pass a European Moose test. Not to mention the fact that any passengers in that hideously pretentious car would be throwing up at the first corner. You don't want to be driving one of those things in the Alps, trust me. Anyway, enough off topicedness from me for this evening. Wendy p.s. Not quite. My dog got her Advanced Agility title this evening. I had the LX with me, but didn't have the presence of mind to have anyone take a photo. p.p.s. I'll try and make some time to submit something for the next months PUG. Wendy Beard, Ottawa, Canada http://www.beard-redfern.com
Re: Quick PUG comments
Thanks for the encouraging comment, Dave. --- David Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Let me say,well done again folks.Some great photos > this month. > Some of the ones that caught my eye are,in no order: > > Hans Imglueck:Spider & Parachute > >Nice macro shot.The weed seed realy makes it > diffrent. > > Frank Theriault:The Flagpole > >I love shots like this with plain buildings,but the > pole adds some > drama to it. > > Christopher Lillja:Bailey's Bridge. > >Good use of DOF.I think the shot would have been > less dramatic if > it had smaller DOF.Looks like a relaxed day in the > country > > Bob Poe:Cobb's Bones > >I often try photos like this and only get a good > one OIAW.This is a > good one.Very somber. > > Facit:Nineteen > >I saved comment on this for the last as i am trying > to fiqure out > what to say.First,great shot/composition.Second,i > felt my body > shiver a bit when the full picture came up on the > screen.Your > description says it all.Lest we forget > > Dave > > > > Pentax User > Stouffville Ontario Canada > http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ > http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses > Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: > http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail > = What boots up must come down. __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Re: Quick PUG comments
Thanks, Dave! Appreciate it. -frank David Brooks wrote: > Frank Theriault:The Flagpole > >I love shots like this with plain buildings,but the pole adds some > drama to it. > -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
Re: Tiny Cars and PUG
Dan, you're not using your imagination. Remember that PUG themes are always liberally interpreted. Personally, I've always thought that many of the more interesting submissions each month are those that "stretch the theme", as it were. I could be the butt of someone's joke. Someone could get a shot of one of my used cigarettes (terrible habit, but I do smoke) A shot of the butt end of my hockey stick (it's federal law that all Canadian males own at least one - kind of like firearms in the US ). When referring to a hockey stick, it's a verb, too, as in "he butt ended me in the face". Someone (like Dave B.) could butt end me in the face, while another (like Dave C-C) can photograph it. There you go, three examples in only a few minutes. See how easy it is, Dan? As far as the logistics, I think it would be easier if I travelled around, and made myself available to PUGsters. That way, (as you said) we wouldn't have to get the guides and dog sled teams for each and every PUGster who treks up here. And think how interesting a PUG that would be: "here's frank's butt in the Alps, here it is in the Outback, here it is along the Ganges, on the Thames, etc..." I think it would be stunning!! So grab a camera, and get out there and shoot my butt - just don't get that one mixed up, please! ciao, frank Dan Scott wrote: > Dave, > > While I'm sure Frank's butt is nice, you have to ask yourself, "Does > Frank's butt have staying power?". "Does Frank's butt have the kind of > visual appeal needed to sustain an entire PUG?" > > Remember, we're talking 50-75 pictures of Frank's butt here. Also, > let's not forget the logistics involved. Frank lives in a fairly remote > country, far from civilization. In addition to travel expenses, don't > forget the ancillary expenses: native guides, translators, permits, > bribes, and what not. I think making an entire PUG devoted to Frank's > butt, while admittedly challenging, might be a bit too much for many of > our members to handle. > > regards, > > Dan Scott -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
RE: DOF in DSLRs - HELP ME PLEASE...
> Lemme get this straight: > > From 36*24mm, you need to enlarge roughly 5 times to get a 5*7. > From 24*16mm - surely you need to enlarge by 7 times to get the same > 5*7? > > What has this to do with pixels? The "size" of a digital sensor isn't strictly dimensional. The number of pixels determines the real "size" of the image. If you "enlarge" BELOW that size, then you have to throw information away. This leads to a property of digital files that really confounds traditional photographers--which is that, in some cases, BIGGER prints have MORE detail than smaller ones. Not more apparent detail--more actual resolution. Here's a good basic reference: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/und_resolut ion.shtml --Mike "The life of an intellectual should be a permanent reproach to the idea that knowledge has to be handed down to us from authority." (unattributed: unidentified TV talk show guest) Find out about Mike Johnston's unique photography newsletter, "The 37th Frame," at http://www.37thframe.com.
Re: Re: Tiny Cars and PUG
Butt Dan. What better way to break in the new SMC M 150 f3.5 :) We can break it into colour/B&W and tranny (Sorry Frank):) I can handle the translations from here Dave Begin Original Message From: Dan Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Dave, While I'm sure Frank's butt is nice, you have to ask yourself, "Does Frank's butt have staying power?". "Does Frank's butt have the kind of visual appeal needed to sustain an entire PUG?" Remember, we're talking 50-75 pictures of Frank's butt here. Also, let's not forget the logistics involved. Frank lives in a fairly remote country, far from civilization. In addition to travel expenses, don't forget the ancillary expenses: native guides, translators, permits, bribes, and what not. I think making an entire PUG devoted to Frank's butt, while admittedly challenging, might be a bit too much for many of our members to handle. regards, Dan Scott End Original Message Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
Quick PUG comments
Let me say,well done again folks.Some great photos this month. Some of the ones that caught my eye are,in no order: Hans Imglueck:Spider & Parachute >Nice macro shot.The weed seed realy makes it diffrent. Frank Theriault:The Flagpole >I love shots like this with plain buildings,but the pole adds some drama to it. Christopher Lillja:Bailey's Bridge. >Good use of DOF.I think the shot would have been less dramatic if it had smaller DOF.Looks like a relaxed day in the country Bob Poe:Cobb's Bones >I often try photos like this and only get a good one OIAW.This is a good one.Very somber. Facit:Nineteen >I saved comment on this for the last as i am trying to fiqure out what to say.First,great shot/composition.Second,i felt my body shiver a bit when the full picture came up on the screen.Your description says it all.Lest we forget Dave Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
RE: Re[4]: electra studio flash/ring flash
Looks like the ideal low cost setup to shoot pictures to use on auctions. Thanks for posting the link. Len --- > -Original Message- > From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2002 2:52 PM > To: Feroze Kistan > Subject: Re[4]: electra studio flash/ring flash > > > Feroze, > > Here is another example of the tent concept: > http://www.rgetter.com/pages/lite_tent/ > > > Bruce
Re: Tiny Cars and PUG
On Saturday, November 30, 2002, at 07:53 AM, frank theriault wrote: Just going through the first couple of PUG pics this month makes me wish that we in North America had the brains to market little urban cars. God, those things are cute! cheers, frank Rejoice Frank. The little urban car you seek is now being marketed in North America. http://www.mini.ca/ Dan Scott
Re: Re[3]: 2450 Excitement
> Jeff, > > Guess I'm going to have to time one. I don't recall getting anything > remotely close to 15 minutes. I'll try one at max optical resolution > on 67 neg and let you know the actual time. > > > Bruce > The best scan time I heard of was 6 minutes, using a loaded Mac with Firewire. All the other posters (MF newsgroup), claimed 10 to 15 minutes for a maximum optical res. scan.. Jeff.
Re: PUG Theme Idea
Geez, I have enough trouble getting the "good" ones to turn out good, let alone having the accidents look good, too!! ciao, frank Amita Guha wrote: > Or, along similar lines, "Happy accidents", which would be photos that > went very bad but still came out looking kind of cool...or maybe that's > the same thing anyway. :) I've been planning on making a section like > that on my own site. > > > -Original Message- > > From: CBWaters [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2002 7:51 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: PUG Theme Idea > > > > > > How about: > > "The worst photo you have that's still great" > > > > I think it would be funny to have a month's web page be > > filled with terrible looking shots. They would each have > > some redeeming quality that makes them either intrinsically > > or sentimentally worth displaying, of course. > > > > Just an idea. > > > > Cory Waters > > -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
Re: Tiny Cars and PUG
Ah, Bob, my words were chosen verry carefully. In fact, we agree... I said that micro-cars wouldn't pass our "crash requirements", I didn't say that they were any more or less safe than larger, heavier vehicles. I tend to think that "active safety" (ei, the ability to avoid a crash due to a more aware driver and more manoeverable vehicle) is far more important than whether a vehicle can withstand an arbitrarily designed crash test. A good driver in a Yugo (okay Glen? ) is ~far~ safer than an idiot on a cellphone (there's another issue ) in a Volvo, anyday!! And, I agree wholeheartedly that SUV's are the loophole that allows the automakers to avoid CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) and crashworthiness requirements. They make one ~feel~ safer, because one is in a large, heavy vehicle, and sitting higher up, with a commanding view of the road. But, that very height makes for a higher centre of gravity and resulting instability. And while weight may not be a bad thing (big wins over small if an SUV crushes a Civic), without proper crush zones (I know that many SUV's now have them), they may not be as safe as they feel. Plus, there's the havoc that such huge vehicles wreak on smaller ones, along with pedestrians and cyclists that they hit. Live I said, it's not that I dislike SUV's, they just aren't the ideal urban vehicle. If one lives in a rural setting, or an area where there is much snow, fine. Commuting to work in a large city? Sorry, but they're wasteful and dangerous. But then, I'm a bicycle guy. ZERO pollution, and you eventually end up with a pretty nice butt, too! cheers, frank Bob Walkden wrote: > Hi, > > I don't know whether the situations are the same with regard to safety > in N. America as they are in Europe, but it's a misconception over > here that SUVs and so on are safer than conventional cars, and it's > very naughty of the motor industry to imply (I don't think they openly > claim) that they are. Because the SUV types of car are classified with > industrial and farm vehicles they are held to a lower safety standard > than conventional cars. So these people driving gaggles of kids to > school every morning under the impression that they are safer in a SUV > than they would be in a Civic are quite wrong. And the danger may even > be increased by the driver's mistaken sense of invulnerability. > > --- > > Bob > -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
Re[3]: 2450 Excitement
Jeff, Guess I'm going to have to time one. I don't recall getting anything remotely close to 15 minutes. I'll try one at max optical resolution on 67 neg and let you know the actual time. Bruce Saturday, November 30, 2002, 5:32:16 AM, you wrote: J> I heard of 15 min. for a high res scan on the 2450. J> If the 3200 is, as they claim, 3 times faster, it will bring the scan time J> to a more bearable 5 min. J> That's why I was toying with the idea of getting a Minolta Scan Multi, for J> it's speedier scans. J> Jeff. J> - Original Message - J> From: "David Brooks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> J> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> J> Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2002 6:15 AM J> Subject: Re: Re: 2450 Excitement >> The high end re scans can take a while:) >> >> Dave >> Begin Original Message >> >> From: "Jeff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> Aside from higher resolution, it supposed to be up to 3 times faster >> than >> the 2450. >> >> Jeff. >> >> >> >> >> Pentax User >> Stouffville Ontario Canada >> http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ >> http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses >> Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail >> >>
Re: Agfa Ultra 100
If you check Agfa's web site, you'll notice that their Ultra 100 is listed as a Consumer film. It's possible that it won't be available in 120 format. Jeff. - Original Message - From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2002 1:07 PM Subject: Re: Agfa Ultra 100 > > - Original Message - > From: Kevin Waterson > Subject: Re: Agfa Ultra 100 > > > > I asked our local Agfa deal about the Ultra 100 and he is > > getting me 20 rolls @ AUD$6.50. At the same time I asked if > > they stocked 120 film and was told that Agfa did not make > > 120 film. > > > > Is this just a stupid sales droid? > > Maybe just an uneducated one. Agfa definitely makes 120 film. > > William Robb > >
Re: Re[2]: Agfa Ultra 100
> Makes me wonder what that Agfa Portrait 160 that I shot through my 67 > was... :) > > > Bruce > Rebadged NPS. Jeff
Re[3]: Hp scanner, printers whatever, they're all bad!
David, I have to say, that in the US, that is not the case and in my own experience - yes I have owned, Espsons, Canons and HP's - that HP's are reliable. The worst reliability that I have experienced is the cheap Epsons. They print beautifully when they work. But head clogs and paper feeding really are poor (785 and 820). I had an 870 model (cost much more) that always worked great. I have had 4 or 5 Canons - all printed pretty good - no real problems. The HP's I have owned have performed reliably. They are not the best photo printers. If your intention is home printing of photos, I would get an expensive Epson. But for everyday printing (non-photo) I would not hesitate to get an HP. Bruce Saturday, November 30, 2002, 3:26:38 AM, you wrote: DB> I also have the 11c plus the 42s and 48gx calculators for work.These DB> products and the laserjets are fine.Most people i know have gotten DB> rid of their HP printers and bought Epson or Canon.We still use the DB> Laserjets at work and are fine. DB> Dave DB> Begin Original Message DB> From: "Dr E D F Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> DB> Sent: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 09:44:39 +0200 DB> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> DB> Subject: Re: Hp scanner, printers whatever, they're all bad! DB> I also have an HP 11C Scientific Calculator here DB> on my table that I bought in Stuttafords, Claremont (Cape), in April DB> 1982 DB> Pentax User DB> Stouffville Ontario Canada DB> http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ DB> http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses DB> Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
Re: Agfa Ultra 100
- Original Message - From: Kevin Waterson Subject: Re: Agfa Ultra 100 > I asked our local Agfa deal about the Ultra 100 and he is > getting me 20 rolls @ AUD$6.50. At the same time I asked if > they stocked 120 film and was told that Agfa did not make > 120 film. > > Is this just a stupid sales droid? Maybe just an uneducated one. Agfa definitely makes 120 film. William Robb
Re: Re[2]: Tiny Cars
Bob, In North America, everything above the latitude of roughly Rome has trouble with potholes. The climate is such that the temperatures are below 0 degrees Centigrade every night and often below 0 Fahrenheit (-16 deg C?) during the December-March time period. This includes most of the population of the Northeastern and Midwestern US, and all of our Canadian friends to the north. In most cases, nobody does much to repair the roads during this season. Some of this is lazy politicians. Some of this is the technical difficulty of working in frozen conditions. (The daily freeze and thaw plays havoc with the surface.) As a result, there are often only two driving seasons here, Winter and construction season. Delays are unpleasant parts of both seasons. Regards, Bob S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > One of my peeves with them forcing Kyoto on us is that the > > infrastructure where I live has deteriorated to the point where > > driving a small vehicle has become a safety issue, yet we will > > be penalized even more for driving vehicles that will stand up > > to the roads. > > seems to me you should be getting your politicians to fix the > potholes!
Re[2]: Agfa Ultra 100
Makes me wonder what that Agfa Portrait 160 that I shot through my 67 was... :) Bruce Saturday, November 30, 2002, 2:05:05 AM, you wrote: KW> This one time, at band camp, KW> Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>Does anyone know if Agfa is intending to >> release Ultra 100 in 120/220? KW> I asked our local Agfa deal about the Ultra 100 and he is KW> getting me 20 rolls @ AUD$6.50. At the same time I asked if KW> they stocked 120 film and was told that Agfa did not make KW> 120 film. KW> Is this just a stupid sales droid? KW> Kind regards KW> Kevin KW> -- KW> Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. KW> See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html KW> Kevin Waterson KW> Byron Bay, Australia
Re[2]: electra studio flash
Feroze, I strongly suggest you take a look at the Alien Bees website (www.alienbees.com) and do a few searches for them. I did some research and recently got a pair. If you are thinking of some studio oriented lights (not clip on flash) then you should check them out. One way they lower the cost is to ship direct rather than go through distribution. Bruce Saturday, November 30, 2002, 1:03:48 AM, you wrote: FK> I've asked them, all I got is a FK> one page handout that shows FK> the product, gives the wattages available FK> and the prices and states that its manufactured FK> with Japanese components, they have a couple FK> softboxes, octoboxes, some grids, some honeycombs FK> and some umbrellas, a flash trigger and a meter. FK> How am I supposed to tell if the stuff is good or FK> not from this. I would like to buy elinchrom lights FK> but it is out of my price range at the moment. FK> And I don't think all lights are created equal, I rather FK> not invest if it proves to be sub-standard! FK> Feroze FK> - Original Message - FK> From: "Leonard Paris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> FK> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> FK> Sent: Friday, November 29, 2002 5:16 PM FK> Subject: Re: electra studio flash >> But, if there are dealers listed, there should be brochures or tech data >> available by request from a dealer. >> >> Sorry for the long delay on this reply. >> >> Len >> --- >> >> >From: "Feroze Kistan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >Subject: Re: electra studio flash >> >Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2002 23:53:03 +0200 >> > >> >tried that of course, got a lot of music hits, and lots of >> >sites where they selling them. I needed to find more product info >> > >> >Feroze >> >- Original Message - >> >From: "Len Paris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2002 9:31 PM >> >Subject: RE: electra studio flash >> > >> > >> > > See www.google.com/ enter the words "electra studio flash" and click FK> on >> > > the search button. You will be rewarded with many links. Welcome to >> > > the Internet. >> > > >> > > Len >> > > --- >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > -Original Message- >> > > > From: Feroze Kistan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> > > > Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2002 12:54 PM >> > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > > > Subject: electra studio flash >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Has anyone ever heard of this brand, I'm trying to find more >> > > > info but I cant find a website or anything. Is this a new brand? >> > > > >> > > > Feroze >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> >> >> _ >> Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. >> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail >> >>
Re: JPEG and Genuine Fractals
This means that if something untoward happens you have to scan the file again. I always keep one original scan and save the processed files under different names. When I'm satisfied I delete all but the original and the final one. After a while they go on a backup CD and can then be deleted from the PC. But since I have lots of space the last four years of scans are still there - and on backup CDs of course. Using Photoshop's own .psd format, rather than a compressing algorithm not only means you don't lose quality, but things go much faster. Loading to and from memory and hard drives seems to be more efficient. But this may be my imagination. But whatever you do along the way saving as a jpeg files should be the very last thing you do. Dan is having trouble with a file he sent to the PUG. My guess is JPEG compression has buggered it up. Dr E D F Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery Updated: March 30, 2002 - Original Message - From: "Ann Sanfedele" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2002 3:50 PM Subject: Re: JPEG and Genuine Fractals > Dr E D F Williams wrote: > > > Processing 'jpeg' files with Photoshop, or any other program, is > > inadvisable. Each time you save a file in this compressed format it changes > > for the worse. After initial scanning the file should be saved in > > Photoshop's own '.psd' format. > > I EXPORT to file format to make the .jpg files for loading onto the Web after > doing all the > retouching and resizing in Photoshop before doing so. I'm using photo deluxe > 4.0 which > sofar has been all I need for prepping stuff for the web. If I'm printing I > keep the file > in the photoshop form. But I don't save it right after initial scanning... I > work on it first > and then save it.. I think this is saving me space in ram while im in photo shop > but > I may be wrong about that. > > I'm jumping in in the middle of this but hope my comments are of some use... > > annsan >
Re: Re[2]: Tiny Cars
- Original Message - From: Bob Walkden Subject: Re[2]: Tiny Cars > > seems to me you should be getting your politicians to fix the > potholes! Unfortunately, we can't seem to get them to do anything thatmight be considered worthwhile. > > I saw some statistics quoted for the UK recently which showed the total > cost to the taxpayer of transporting all our goods by road in heavy lorries > rather than by rail, and an enormous part of it was down to repairing the > damage these things do to the roads. I saw this for myself recently when a > big lorry drove over the pavement (sidewalk) near my house, and all the paving > stone jus crumbled beneath its wheels, or were forced up into tent-like > structures when the bollards were uprooted. It sounds as though if this had > happened in Canada it would have been left that way and everybody > would have sold their minis and bought tanks to deal with it... Unfortunately, that's the situation we are in here. I got tired of it after wrecking my 3rd car on "paved" streets, and bought a vehicle more able to handle things. Around here, it's pretty difficult to keep things in good repair anyway, we have heavy clay laden soil which is prone to frost heaving, the bedrock is about 4km from the surface, and we get long really cold spells. Probably just about the worst conditions imaginable for road building, other than muskeg. William Robb
RE: Re[2]: Tiny Cars and PUG
> and it's very naughty of the motor > industry to imply (I don't think they openly > claim) that they are. Well, they certainly encourage that feeling, and of course if an SUV is in a crash with a smaller car, the SUV will fare better. But the truth is, they do roll a lot more easily because they're not wide enough for their height. At the very least, SUV owners should probably get additional training to learn to handle them. Ok, getting off my soapbox now... :)
RE: PUG Theme Idea
Or, along similar lines, "Happy accidents", which would be photos that went very bad but still came out looking kind of cool...or maybe that's the same thing anyway. :) I've been planning on making a section like that on my own site. > -Original Message- > From: CBWaters [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2002 7:51 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: PUG Theme Idea > > > How about: > "The worst photo you have that's still great" > > I think it would be funny to have a month's web page be > filled with terrible looking shots. They would each have > some redeeming quality that makes them either intrinsically > or sentimentally worth displaying, of course. > > Just an idea. > > Cory Waters >
Re: AF220T
Craig a écrit: Hi all, hope you can help. I acquired a Pentax AF220T without any instructions. I see in an ad that it can be used with the "A" lens setting, but it doesn't say if it can be used with individual lens settings. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks in advance. AF220T and others Pentax's owner manual aren at: http://www.pentax.com/docstore/index.cfm?show=6 Michel
RE: Hp scanner, printers whatever, they're all bad!
I have to disagree as well. HP doesn't sell only refurbished products. You just got taken advantage of by whomever you bought the scanner from, unfortunately. I am now on my second HP printer at home, the 970 Cxi, and it works great. I have printed photos and my wedding invitations on it with beautiful results. I also just ordered the Scanjet 5500c, which has a photo feeder on the top so you can just feed your photos through it and it scans them automatically.
Re[2]: Tiny Cars and PUG
Hi, I don't know whether the situations are the same with regard to safety in N. America as they are in Europe, but it's a misconception over here that SUVs and so on are safer than conventional cars, and it's very naughty of the motor industry to imply (I don't think they openly claim) that they are. Because the SUV types of car are classified with industrial and farm vehicles they are held to a lower safety standard than conventional cars. So these people driving gaggles of kids to school every morning under the impression that they are safer in a SUV than they would be in a Civic are quite wrong. And the danger may even be increased by the driver's mistaken sense of invulnerability. --- Bob Saturday, November 30, 2002, 2:29:56 PM, you wrote: > Oh, no, Jeff, > Even if I were ever to buy a car (who knows?), I'd never get rid of the bike. > > BTW, I don't mean my original post to be slagging anyone who drives SUV's or > Great Hunking 4WD V8 Pickup Trucks or anything - these things have their > place. But those micro-cars (or whatever they are) make so much more sense > for urban driving. > Unfortunately, I don't think we in North America will ever get them (in the > near future anyway), because I doubt that they meet crash requirments. > Oh well, back to PUG :-) > frank > Jeff wrote: >> Imagine, you might get rid of your bike yet. >> > -- > "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist > fears it is true." -J. Robert > Oppenheimer
Re[2]: Tiny Cars
Hi, > One of my peeves with them forcing Kyoto on us is that the > infrastructure where I live has deteriorated to the point where > driving a small vehicle has become a safety issue, yet we will > be penalized even more for driving vehicles that will stand up > to the roads. seems to me you should be getting your politicians to fix the potholes! I saw some statistics quoted for the UK recently which showed the total cost to the taxpayer of transporting all our goods by road in heavy lorries rather than by rail, and an enormous part of it was down to repairing the damage these things do to the roads. I saw this for myself recently when a big lorry drove over the pavement (sidewalk) near my house, and all the paving stone jus crumbled beneath its wheels, or were forced up into tent-like structures when the bollards were uprooted. It sounds as though if this had happened in Canada it would have been left that way and everybody would have sold their minis and bought tanks to deal with it... --- Bob
Re: Sekonic L408
Hi, you might want to consider the L-608, which is a combined zoom-spot, ambient, wide-area-reflected and flash meter. I have one and it's very good indeed, my one quibble being that's it's probably rather more than I need if I'm just taking one Leica M body out with me. http://www.sekonic.co.uk/l608.htm It's also quite expensive, but I discovered when I was shopping around that, at the time, the L-408 was only very marginally cheaper, presumably because they wanted to shift the L-608. I've no experience with the Pentax Spotmeters. --- Bob Saturday, November 30, 2002, 3:00:34 PM, you wrote: > Yesterday I expressed my inerest in purchasing a Pentax Digital Spotmeter. > Today I ran across some info on the Sekonic L408. > Does anyone have any experience with both meters? > Is a 5 degree spot sufficient for landscape work, or the 1 degree spot is > that much better? > I like the fact that the L408 is an ambient/flash meter with many nice > features. > Jeff.
Re: Tiny Cars and PUG
On Sat, 30 Nov 2002, frank theriault wrote: > Just going through the first couple of PUG pics this month makes me wish > that we in North America had the brains to market little urban cars. > God, those things are cute! Oh, way to insult all those Yugo owners, Frank! ;) -- http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com<-> photography and portfolio.
Re: PUG submissions
Thanks folks, My AOL is fixed now! Bob S.
Re: PUG submissions
Paul, No, it was a 61K jpeg when I sent it. Bill Robb tell me it's a 65K file by him, and I had to reload AOL yesterday, so... I've got to find those quality settings again. I think 'AOL' is doing me in (on the way back to me). Regards, Bob S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << If the file was 61K before you saved it, the jpeg would probably be about 13K or less and would be extremely low resolution. Paul >>
RE: Tiny Cars
William Robb wrote: > The roads in my neck of the woods would swallow one of those > little things whole. My wife used to have a Honda Civic with 12" > wheels. One day while driving on one of our main streets, I hit > a rain filled pothole big enough to blow a tyre and crack the > windshield. > One of my peeves with them forcing Kyoto on us is that the > infrastructure where I live has deteriorated to the point where > driving a small vehicle has become a safety issue, yet we will > be penalized even more for driving vehicles that will stand up > to the roads. That's why my family still (since the early 80s) drive Land-Rover's. The roads are so poorly maintained, plus the introduction of massive speed humps, which now knacker (or remove whilst traversing) family car exhaust systems, around here. Of course, putting this back on topic, the height advantage on and off road is great for photography! Malcolm
Re: PUG submissions
I went back and took a look. It comes up as 62K on my machine as well. I misunderstood your original post. Paul Paul Stenquist wrote: > > If the file was 61K before you saved it, the jpeg would probably be > about 13K or less and would be extremely low resolution. > Paul > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > I checked this month's gallery and my picture is fuzzy. > > I've done PUG before, so I submitted a picture under 600 pixels, height & > > width. > > It was 61K, also under the 75K limit in size. > > What I get is a 13K image. > > Am I the only one who sees the 13K image (evil AOL), > > or did the auto PUG processor do something to me??? > > Regards, Bob S.
Re: Tiny Cars and PUG
> > Hopefully learning to avoid crashes is the main purpose of a driving license > in Europe. > > Thibault Grouas. > You don't understand. To get our driving licence, we must pass a "bumper cars" driving test. Jeff.
Re: PUG submissions
On Saturday, November 30, 2002, at 08:28 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I checked this month's gallery and my picture is fuzzy. I've done PUG before, so I submitted a picture under 600 pixels, height & width. It was 61K, also under the 75K limit in size. What I get is a 13K image. Am I the only one who sees the 13K image (evil AOL), or did the auto PUG processor do something to me??? Regards, Bob S. Bob, I see a 62K image (nice shot, btw). If it looks different to you now compared to when you uploaded, make sure you are viewing it with the same program both times. Don't know why, but diff programs don't always render the same image the same way. Dan Scott
Re: Tiny Cars and PUG
« frank theriault » <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote : > Unfortunately, I don't think we in North America will ever get them (in the > near future anyway), because I doubt that they meet crash requirments. Hopefully learning to avoid crashes is the main purpose of a driving license in Europe. Thibault Grouas.
Re: PUG submissions
If the file was 61K before you saved it, the jpeg would probably be about 13K or less and would be extremely low resolution. Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I checked this month's gallery and my picture is fuzzy. > I've done PUG before, so I submitted a picture under 600 pixels, height & > width. > It was 61K, also under the 75K limit in size. > What I get is a 13K image. > Am I the only one who sees the 13K image (evil AOL), > or did the auto PUG processor do something to me??? > Regards, Bob S.
Sekonic L408
Yesterday I expressed my inerest in purchasing a Pentax Digital Spotmeter. Today I ran across some info on the Sekonic L408. Does anyone have any experience with both meters? Is a 5 degree spot sufficient for landscape work, or the 1 degree spot is that much better? I like the fact that the L408 is an ambient/flash meter with many nice features. Jeff.
Re: JPEG and Genuine Fractals
« Dr E D F Williams » <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote : > Processing 'jpeg' files with Photoshop, or any other program, is > inadvisable. Each time you save a file in this compressed format it changes > for the worse. After initial scanning the file should be saved in > Photoshop's own '.psd' format. JPEG is a destructive compression algorithm. Each compression strips some data from the file. If you save the same file in JPEG format a few times, you will end up with a blurred image with very little data. There are also some non-destructive compression algorythms like LZW compression for TIFF Files. I always save my scanned files in TIFF format with LZW compression. Usually a 50 Meg Photoshop files results in a 25-30 Meg TIFF compressed file. TIFF files are also pretty very well handled by other graphics and dtp software and usually most people tend to import TIFF files in Xpress before print-outs. The only reason you really *have* to save in Photoshop format is for all the photoshop specific dtata stored in the file, like layers and text, and for images with duotones, tritones and such.
Re: Tiny Cars
> The roads in my neck of the woods would swallow one of those > little things whole. My wife used to have a Honda Civic with 12" > wheels. One day while driving on one of our main streets, I hit > a rain filled pothole big enough to blow a tyre and crack the > windshield. > One of my peeves with them forcing Kyoto on us is that the > infrastructure where I live has deteriorated to the point where > driving a small vehicle has become a safety issue, yet we will > be penalized even more for driving vehicles that will stand up > to the roads. > > William Robb > > Just have to wait for those levitating vehicles (a la Jetsons). Jeff.
Limited lens trouble :-(
Seems like my 31 Limited is busted. Only the left part of the image is sharp at wide apertures. Seems like it need a trip to the service shop :-) I know the Pentax service boss around here claim that AF gear see no more repair than older manual focus stuff. Still, the problem rate of my AF gear is tenfold the trouble I've ever had with manual focus. The only service my older equipment has ever needed was when the LX said thank you and goodbye after 19 years of use. It was an easy repair though. Pål
Re: Tiny Cars
- Original Message - From: frank theriault Subject: Re: Tiny Cars > > Unfortunately, I don't think we in North America will ever get them (in the > near future anyway), because I doubt that they meet crash requirments. The roads in my neck of the woods would swallow one of those little things whole. My wife used to have a Honda Civic with 12" wheels. One day while driving on one of our main streets, I hit a rain filled pothole big enough to blow a tyre and crack the windshield. One of my peeves with them forcing Kyoto on us is that the infrastructure where I live has deteriorated to the point where driving a small vehicle has become a safety issue, yet we will be penalized even more for driving vehicles that will stand up to the roads. William Robb
AF220T
Hi all, hope you can help. I acquired a Pentax AF220T without any instructions. I see in an ad that it can be used with the "A" lens setting, but it doesn't say if it can be used with individual lens settings. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks in advance. - Introducing NetZero Long Distance 1st month Free! Sign up today at: www.netzerolongdistance.com
Re: PUG submissions
- Original Message - From: Bob S. Subject: PUG submissions > I checked this month's gallery and my picture is fuzzy. > I've done PUG before, so I submitted a picture under 600 pixels, height & > width. > It was 61K, also under the 75K limit in size. > What I get is a 13K image. > Am I the only one who sees the 13K image (evil AOL), > or did the auto PUG processor do something to me??? Must be an AOL thing. It comes to me as 65,536 bytes. William Robb
Re: Velvia (WAS: Is it possible to "pull" C41 film)
- Original Message - From: Pål Jensen Subject: Re: Velvia (WAS: Is it possible to "pull" C41 film) > The 100VS is very saturated (VS stands for very saturated). I thought it was an acronym for "Velvia Squisher" HAR!! William Robb
Re: Tiny Cars and PUG
Oh, no, Jeff, Even if I were ever to buy a car (who knows?), I'd never get rid of the bike. BTW, I don't mean my original post to be slagging anyone who drives SUV's or Great Hunking 4WD V8 Pickup Trucks or anything - these things have their place. But those micro-cars (or whatever they are) make so much more sense for urban driving. Unfortunately, I don't think we in North America will ever get them (in the near future anyway), because I doubt that they meet crash requirments. Oh well, back to PUG :-) frank Jeff wrote: > Imagine, you might get rid of your bike yet. > -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
PUG submissions
I checked this month's gallery and my picture is fuzzy. I've done PUG before, so I submitted a picture under 600 pixels, height & width. It was 61K, also under the 75K limit in size. What I get is a 13K image. Am I the only one who sees the 13K image (evil AOL), or did the auto PUG processor do something to me??? Regards, Bob S.
Re: Tiny Cars and PUG
On 30 Nov 2002 at 8:53, frank theriault wrote: > Just going through the first couple of PUG pics this month makes me wish > that we in North America had the brains to market little urban cars. > God, those things are cute! Hmm.. http://www.home.aone.net.au/audiobias/PB233609m.JPG Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html
Re: Tiny Cars and PUG
Imagine, you might get rid of your bike yet. Jeff - Original Message - From: "frank theriault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2002 8:53 AM Subject: Tiny Cars and PUG > Just going through the first couple of PUG pics this month makes me wish > that we in North America had the brains to market little urban cars. > God, those things are cute! > > cheers, > frank > > -- > "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The > pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert > Oppenheimer > > >
Re: JPEG and Genuine Fractals
Dr E D F Williams wrote: > Processing 'jpeg' files with Photoshop, or any other program, is > inadvisable. Each time you save a file in this compressed format it changes > for the worse. After initial scanning the file should be saved in > Photoshop's own '.psd' format. I EXPORT to file format to make the .jpg files for loading onto the Web after doing all the retouching and resizing in photoshop before doing so. I'm using photo deluxe 4.0 which sofar has been all I need for prepping stuff for the web. If I'm printing I keep the file in the photoshop form. But I don't save it right after initial scanning... I work on it first and then save it.. I think this is saving me space in ram while im in photo shop but I may be wrong about that. I'm jumping in in the middle of this but hope my comments are of some use... annsan
Tiny Cars and PUG
Just going through the first couple of PUG pics this month makes me wish that we in North America had the brains to market little urban cars. God, those things are cute! cheers, frank -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
Re: Agfa Ultra 100
Hi Kevin, > I asked our local Agfa deal about the Ultra 100 and he is > getting me 20 rolls @ AUD$6.50. There is actualy a deal going in some Melbourne stores, so i assume australia wide, where it is 2 for the price of 1. I bought 2 rolls for $7au. Have a look www.vanbar.com.au Regards, Paul
Re: Re: Hp scanner, printers whatever, they're all bad!
I owned the 100LX and 200LX PDA's for years. They went with me everywhere in a custom belt pouch. I still miss them. Jeff. - Original Message - From: "David Brooks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2002 6:26 AM Subject: Re: Re: Hp scanner, printers whatever, they're all bad! > I also have the 11c plus the 42s and 48gx calculators for work.These > products and the laserjets are fine.Most people i know have gotten > rid of their HP printers and bought Epson or Canon.We still use the > Laserjets at work and are fine. > > Dave > Begin Original Message > > From: "Dr E D F Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 09:44:39 +0200 > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Hp scanner, printers whatever, they're all bad! > > > I also have an HP 11C Scientific Calculator here > on my table that I bought in Stuttafords, Claremont (Cape), in April > 1982 > > > > Pentax User > Stouffville Ontario Canada > http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ > http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses > Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail >
JPEG and Genuine Fractals
Processing 'jpeg' files with Photoshop, or any other program, is inadvisable. Each time you save a file in this compressed format it changes for the worse. After initial scanning the file should be saved in Photoshop's own '.psd' format. You can save it as many times as you like and it won't degrade. But jpeg files, even those that are of high quality, still have some compression and each time this is applied (at every save) it degrades the image. Another thing that I've recently discovered is that before Genuine Fractals is used to change the size of an image file all the sharpening and filtering and fiddling needed should be done - on the .psd file. If you work on an image after GFing it, the image gets messed up. Don Dr E D F Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery Updated: March 30, 2002
