Re: What Lens Do YOU Want?
I have the M*300/4 and just bought the vivitar macro 2x tc...I have only tried it for one close up shot, a pansy. It looked fine in a 4x6 print. William (3 days behind reading the list and not catching up anytime soon either) in Utah 1/9/2003 10:53:18 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >In a message dated 1/10/2003 12:29:49 AM Eastern Standard Time, >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > >> Look for an M*300 or A*300, you can sometimes find them for >> reasonable >> prices. They are a bit >> old manual focusing lenses but designed as hand holdable. > >Which is probably exactly what I will do. Then add on a TC for when I want really, >really close wild life shots. > >Either a Vivitar Macro Focusing 2x TC, or the Pentax 1.4x TC, or a Pentax AF TC (see, >I've been reading the list!). > >Seems the easiest (and if done, right, cheapest) solution. > >Doe aka Marnie :-) > > >
Re: OT: Mac Blat
There always was one big difference between Lotus and Excel - Lotus didn't screw your keyboard macros when a new version came in! I am still using data entry macros in some spreadsheet jobs that I wrote in 1987, and I'm up to Smartsuite 97. On the other hand, an Excel job I did for a client last year fell in a heap when I was trying to add buttons and other objects to it - there is an undocumented upper limit to the number of objects a workbook can contain! I think too that Lotus was derivative rather than a rip-off. Mitch Kapoor said at a Lotus users conference in 1984, that the first versions (up to 2.1 IIRC) were written in Assembler, but they then rewrote the whole thing in C. The sad thing is that some of the programs written for Windows 3.1 and earlier simply won't run in later versions - I tried Pagemaker 3 the other day, and it won't even install! I wanted to test a lean mean, 1980's era program on today's fast CPU, big memory systems; the only instance I have currently is a dBASE application I wrote in 1989 or thereabouts which absolutely scorches on a Pentium III 450 mHz with 512 mB. John Coyle Brisbane, Australia - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 1:32 PM Subject: Re: OT: Mac Blat > > >Excel is a rip-off of Lotus > > There is no doubt of that, there is very little difference between the two. Anyone familiar with Lotus (Dos Version) can see that all Excel added was a Windows interface -- otherwise they are almost identical. (Except VBA replaced Lotus' macros, but that is really only apparent on a "programming" level -- and not that big a change.) > > > > > Which was a rip-off of SuperCalc which was a rip-off of Visicalc. > > I think Lotus borrowed more from VisiCalc, myself. However, a great deal of Lotus was innovative as well, it really carried spreadsheets to a new and higher level. > > >
Vs: OT: Mac Blat
Microsoft DID have to pay Apple - after a court decision. Easy it wasn´t. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Peter Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Päivä: 12. tammikuuta 2003 2:28 Aihe: Re: OT: Mac Blat >It would be really hard to get Gates (Microsoft) to pay Apple royalties since >the MAC interface is a simplified version of the LISA interface (also Apple), >which was a complete copy of Xerox's experimental interface from their Palo >Alto >Research Center. Neither organization would want to open that can of worms. >(Although in the suit by Apple Microsoft could always claim prior art, but that >would expose both sets of pirates). > >At 01:29 PM 1/11/2003 -0600, you wrote: >> >> how hard it is to use a Mac >> > >> > This is a classic oxymoron! >> >> >>Cotty, >>Considering that "Windows" is a blatant rip-off of the Mac interface that >>Gate's lawyers somehow weaseled him out of paying for, the ease of use of >>_all_ computers is directly related to the ease of use of Macs. Even though >>Windows is still inferior in every way. >> >>In virtually every creative field, there are true innovators, then there are >>the often rapacious, often more energetic and less principled imitators that >>follow on their heels and opportunistically appropriate the market. Windows >>PCs are second-rate consumer products. The Microsoft OS is third-rate. The >>real personal computers are Macs. >> >>Macs are superior products. They work better, they are more elegant, they >>are more pleasant to work with, they're designed better. The OS is much more >>stable and elegant and the interface is far better. Even as objects they are >>much more aesthetically pleasing to have in the home. Now that so many >>outside companies are writing software for them and Apple is no longer >>controlling the compatibility standards, I'm finally experiencing crashes on >>my Mac. But I worked with a Mac Quadra for _six years_ at the magazine, nine >>hours a day, five days a week, and guess how many crashes or freezes I ever >>experienced? None. Zero. It never happened. No downtime, ever, period, >>except one time when the starter battery on the motherboard ran dry. Try >>that with a PC. As soon as I go 100% OSX native, I hope to reclaim that. >> >>I understand that many people have to use PCs because their work demands it, >>their computers are provided by their employers or their workplaces are >>standardized on PCs, they need certain software that is only available for >>PCs, or simply because they've always used PCs and it's difficult to switch >>platforms. There are lots of good reasons for being stuck with PCs. But >>"stuck" is the word. To me, PCs are just appliances. They betray poor taste >>and a lack of aesthetic sense in their makers, if not their owners. They're >>crass. I thank my lucky stars I started with Macs and I will never switch >>unless I am absolutely forced to do so, and then I'll wait until the >>absolute last possible moment. >> >>--Mike >>
Vs: Vivitar Flash on MX or ME Super
There seems to be some kind of malfunction ;-) Not easy to fix online. Are there batteries in the flash? All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Marcel Appenzzell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Päivä: 12. tammikuuta 2003 4:19 Aihe: Re: Vivitar Flash on MX or ME Super >I tried it on six bodies. > >Marcel Appenzzell > >>From: Peter Alling > >>Does any flash work on the body you tried it on. I have a MX which has >>dirty flash contacts down deep in the body. It only works sporadically with any >flash. > >
Vs: Mac Blat
What´s this? There was a law suit which Apple won and Microsoft lost. The interface was indeed originally developed by Xerox Palo Alto Research Center but there´s nothing to indicate that Apple got it free. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: T Rittenhouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Päivä: 12. tammikuuta 2003 2:31 Aihe: Re: Mac Blat >Why Mike, you didn't ask my opinion, so how can it be best? > >BTW, the reason Apple could not keep Gates from using the interface is >because they didn't invent it, Xerox did. > >Ciao, >Graywolf >http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto > > >- Original Message - >From: "Mike Johnston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 2:29 PM >Subject: OT: Mac Blat > > >> >> how hard it is to use a Mac >> > >> > This is a classic oxymoron! >> >> >> Cotty, >> Considering that "Windows" is a blatant rip-off of the Mac interface that >> Gate's lawyers somehow weaseled him out of paying for, the ease of use of >> _all_ computers is directly related to the ease of use of Macs. Even >though >> Windows is still inferior in every way. >> >> In virtually every creative field, there are true innovators, then there >are >> the often rapacious, often more energetic and less principled imitators >that >> follow on their heels and opportunistically appropriate the market. >Windows >> PCs are second-rate consumer products. The Microsoft OS is third-rate. The >> real personal computers are Macs. >> >> Macs are superior products. They work better, they are more elegant, they >> are more pleasant to work with, they're designed better. The OS is much >more >> stable and elegant and the interface is far better. Even as objects they >are >> much more aesthetically pleasing to have in the home. Now that so many >> outside companies are writing software for them and Apple is no longer >> controlling the compatibility standards, I'm finally experiencing crashes >on >> my Mac. But I worked with a Mac Quadra for _six years_ at the magazine, >nine >> hours a day, five days a week, and guess how many crashes or freezes I >ever >> experienced? None. Zero. It never happened. No downtime, ever, period, >> except one time when the starter battery on the motherboard ran dry. Try >> that with a PC. As soon as I go 100% OSX native, I hope to reclaim that. >> >> I understand that many people have to use PCs because their work demands >it, >> their computers are provided by their employers or their workplaces are >> standardized on PCs, they need certain software that is only available for >> PCs, or simply because they've always used PCs and it's difficult to >switch >> platforms. There are lots of good reasons for being stuck with PCs. But >> "stuck" is the word. To me, PCs are just appliances. They betray poor >taste >> and a lack of aesthetic sense in their makers, if not their owners. >They're >> crass. I thank my lucky stars I started with Macs and I will never switch >> unless I am absolutely forced to do so, and then I'll wait until the >> absolute last possible moment. >> >> --Mike >> >> P.S. My "Sunday Morning Photographer" column two weeks from now is called >> "The Best of 2002," in which I name a bunch of products as the best of the >> year and discuss them--best photography book, best digital camera, best >> enlarger, that sort of thing. Can you guess what won "Best Digital >> Photography Computer Workstation"? I'll give you a hint--it's not a dang >PC. >> >> >> >
Free LX screens
Hi all, I found out that I still have two LX focusing screens left: SA-21 and SI-20. Both surplus to requirements as I do not have LX any more. If you are interested e-mail me off-list. I would like to get postage, though. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
Re: OT: Mac Blat
Hi Doug... Thank you for the recommendation. I have a copy of Color It! (v.3.09) I got with my Epson digital camera. I use it along with it's Scan Wizard plug-in to manipulate my scanner images, but, I have NOT yet used it to fool around with digital photo images. It's not that I'm _looking_ for some image manipulation software, I'm not! If I gave anyone that impression, I apologize. With Graphic Converter, Image Expert, Kai's PhotoSoap, Color It!, ArcSoft's brand new Photo Impression, all of which I already have, I can probably do just about all the image manipulation I'd conceivably need. I was merely sticking my 2¢ in, saying that I do know a tiny bit about Adobe's PhotoShop, simply because I know folks that have the full up version on their personal Windows machines. Therefore I do know what a huge program PhotoShop is, and I was commenting on how expensive it is, and expressing my _opinion_ that it's so much more than MOST folks will ever need. For the pro photographer, no comment. They have needs I'll never run across, so that's way out of my ken...but for the 'average' Mac owner, there are programs out there that are much smaller, much cheaper, and for THEM, easily as capable. Thanks again for the recommendation. Color It! is indeed a great image creation and manipulation appl for the Mac. keith whaley * * * * Doug Brewer wrote: > > Try Microfrontier's Color It!, > > http://www.microfrontier.com/products/colorit40/index.html > > At 6:53 PM -08001/11/03, Keith Whaley wrote: > > > >I'd much rather use something else... > > > >keith whaley > > -- > Douglas Forrest Brewer > Ashwood Lake Photography > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.alphoto.com
Re: I have just joined the list
Keith wrote >Even so, if I had never visited California, I might never have moved. Where abouts in Ca are you Keith? Cotty Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
Re: Photo Book Collecting
>Here's what that list was compiled for: > >http://www.steves-digicams.com/smp/09082002.html > >The link is embedded in the column. Oh dear, I only have one book from that list: 'The Americans'. Looks like I need to go use the book tokens I got for Christmas ;-) Cotty Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
Re: Lens Flare and French Flags
>Never head it called anything but a flag here in the states. Must be another >of those inexplicable Limmy things. For those with a questioning look on their non-US faces, Americans have often referred to Brits as 'Limeys' due to the fact that Her Majesty's sailing ships of olde used to carry plenty of citrus fruit to ward off scurvy. If I hadn't lived there I would probably never have discovered this. What most Anericans don't know is that Brits refer to them as Yanks. A slightly affectionate term, it has nothing to do with north / south battles gone by. Actually I prefer oranges :-) Cotty Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
Re: Vs: Vivitar Flash on MX or ME Super
Merci, Raimo and everyone else. I banged the flash a few hard thumps with my hand, and, voila ... she's now working. My little niece, Zazie, can now take pictures dans le métro for her school project. Marcel Appenzzell From: "Raimo Korhonen" There seems to be some kind of malfunction ;-) Not easy to fix online. Are there batteries in the flash? _ The new MSN 8 is here: Try it free* for 2 months http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup
Re: Vs: Vivitar Flash on MX or ME Super
Merci, Raimo and everyone else. I banged the flash a few hard thumps with my hand, and, voila ... she's now working. My little niece, Zazie, can now take pictures dans le métro for her school project. Marcel Appenzzell From: "Raimo Korhonen" There seems to be some kind of malfunction ;-) Not easy to fix online. Are there batteries in the flash? _ MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: Lens Flare and French Flags
>Would a better solution be to buy the Tamron 14mm, which has >superior multi-coating? I believe that Tamron also make the >14mm Nikkor, although I don't know whether the two lenses >actually share the same design. Thanks John. Canon actually. I got it from eBay USA at a good price. Of course, a Pentax DSLR and 15mm 3.5 would have fit the bill nicely... Cotty Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
Re: OT: web page quetsions
Nicholas Wright wrote: > > If you use a Macintosh there's a program call PhotoSiteTimeSaviour > available from . It's freeware and it works very > well. I use it to generate all the proof pages at my website > . Go there and click on proofs and click on a > recent game to see how it works. You have a nice, clean site, Nick. The Proof page opens quickly, as do the photos on all the pages. Easy to see the site prep code is crisp! If you used PSTS to generate all that, it's impressive! keith whaley > Feel free to ask any questions you like. > > On Saturday, January 11, 2003, at 08:44 PM, CBWaters wrote: > > > I'm building a web site and need some advice for the photo-pages I'll > > probably be adding a lot of pictures over time and need an easy way to > > format them. I'm a total newby building for the web and have been > > using > > Coffee Cup to work-up the HTML. I'm probably looking for some kind of > > template not unlike the PUG with a page of smaller photos you click if > > you > > want to see the larger ones. > > Any advice is welcome. > > > > Thanks gang, > > > > Cory Waters > > > > > > Nick Wright > http://www.sportsshooter.com/nickwright/
Re: Photo Book Collecting
Hi, Sunday, January 12, 2003, 6:41:48 AM, you wrote: > On the other hand, lots of times the authors are good sources of the books. > They sometimes buy up the unsold copies and keep them to sell them out of > their basements or something. one of the best photo galleries in London is Focus Gallery, run by 2 of the women who started the Photographers' Gallery. They are very well connected in the UK photographic world, and frequently have stacks of signed 1st editions from the photographer's basement. I've had a few of my books that way. I know a writer who is so convinced that he will one day win the Nobel Prize that he buys up stacks of remainders of his own work on the grounds that he'll make a killing when Stockholm calls...! --- Bob
RE: Picture Window Pro Recommendation
>I too, give a hearty thumbs up to Picture Window. As a photographer I >have found it to suit my needs quite well - and yes, the price is much >lower than Photoshop. Having used Photoshop 3, 4, and 5.5 since 1998 may I throw in a couple a pennies? If I knew then what I know now, I would have liked (pretending that it was available at the time) somebody to recommend Photoshop Elements to me. Reasons: It is true that most photographers processing images on computer will never use the full Photoshop's capability. However, if you are truly serious about progressing through your passion, possibly towards career aspirations, then using the 'Adobe way' is going to make things easier, and keep things familiar. It's not just about palettes and menus, it's about keyboard shortcuts. A professional Photoshop user has one hand on the stylus (mouse/trackpad), the other on the keyboard. It's about setting up macros within Photoshop (Photoshop Actions), and it's about compatibility with other applications that may need to import native PS files. It's about knowing off the top of your head what you are reading about when you come across a pro graphics forum and they are discussing something about Photoshop, something that may well come in handy for you. It's about all these things and much more. If you have absolutely no aspirations towards one day turning your ambitions into a career, or if you are highly satisfied with using what you have, then look no further. Better to know what you are using inside out and be content with it than to stumble across something new and wade in too deep. However, if you consider yourself in a transitional phase (possibly lasting years ;-) between am and pro status and would like to get to grips with what is used out there in the real world of professional image manipulation, then start out with Photoshop Elements. Stick with it. Learn the interface, learn the shortcuts, learn the actions until you can post-produce your photographs quickly and efficiently. If and when the day comes that you gradually or suddenly get thrown into the deep end and have to buckle down with the real Photoshop, you will be prepared and even willing to get stuck in. If only I could have read this back in 1998, I would have replied straight away with lots of thank you's and kisses and hugs and would you like to come back to my place bouncy-bouncy's. [ Note: This is not to say that Picture Window or indeed any other similar application will not do the job just as good, just my personal observation based on what I have seen working in professional image post production environments over the years.] Kind regards, Cotty Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
Re: Photo Book Collecting
Cotty wrote: > > >Here's what that list was compiled for: > > > >http://www.steves-digicams.com/smp/09082002.html > > > >The link is embedded in the column. > > Oh dear, I only have one book from that list: 'The Americans'. I'd LIKE to have that book...now that I know about it, I'll have to look around for a copy. What a combination, an excellent photog and Jack Kerouac... keith whaley > Looks like I need to go use the book tokens I got for Christmas ;-) > > Cotty
Digital printing (was: Re: Pentax DSLR: e-mail from Pentax USA)
>i took a one day photo workshop today. the guy shoots large format 4x5 and >scans his slides at 8000 dpi, the optical resolution of his scanner. >anything less, he says, and he loses quality that he can tell on his >exhibition prints, now of which are less than 8x10 inches. he also said >that for the professional color fine art photographer, anyone who still >does wet prints is nuts. the quality and consistency possible with digital >output is so much higher that anyone still doing wet prints is doing a >serious diservice to what is captured in slides. on top of that, digital >prints nowadays outlast anything else in color. Herb, Can you tell us what the bloke was using to print with? Inkjet? Dye-sub? Other? Thanks, Cotty Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
Re: OT: Anyone running PS7 on a Mac?
On any sized graph, Dan, it's a large X ! keith Dan Scott wrote: > > On Saturday, January 11, 2003, at 07:37 PM, T Rittenhouse wrote: > > > He don't have to go to all those meetings the pointy haired guys insist > > upon? > > > > Ciao, > > Graywolf > > Well, I guess that must be the answer. Has anyone ever derived a > productivity to meeting ratio? > > Dan Scott
RE: Photoshop for non-wealthy
>*of course, if I were to believe all the people who tell me Real >Photographers >don't use Windows, I'd probably have to believe the same people when they >tell >me Real Photographers don't use Pentaxes ... see how silly that is? Eleanor, I don't think it's about *real* photographers. I think it's about professional photographers. It's the environment they work in that dictates what they use. I was filming at a politician's funeral on Friday in a small Oxfordshire village, attended by several key political figures including our Prime Minister. The press pack numbered about 2 dozen. Of the 12 stills photographers, all were using PowerBooks except for one chap on a Sony Viao. Yet you are right - in this day and age there is practically no difference between the two platforms. They will both do the job mightily well. I think that it's more to do with the 'cultures'. The domestic culture pushes Windows - we go down to CompUSA or PC World and heck, you might as well get a PC, cos that's where it's at. Conversely the culture in the pro world is Mac. No written rules, just silly peer pressure to conform. Mercifully, some don't and forge their own way ahead. Long may that spirit last, for surely it defines the human race? Cotty Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
Re: Photoshop vs. Picture Window
I've used Ulead Systems' PhotoImpact since it was called ImagePals 2.0 in 1993. I've just upgraded to PhotoImpact version 8. The PhotoImpact 8 home page is at http://www.ulead.com/pi/runme.htm?SN=111A3-08000-00067725&LN=21&TYPE=220103 Many reviewers now consider it the best low-cost alternative to PhotoShop. Reviews and awards are summarized at http://www.ulead.com/pi/reviews.htm . Version 8 includes several new features for the photographer. You can see the list of new features in .PDF at http://www.ulead.com/pi/pi_new.pdf (The HTML version at http://www.ulead.com/pi/new.htm is less detailed.) I picked up my copy at about $70 on the Web. Even though the price keeps coming down, PhotoImpact now includes Photo Explorer, the $30 thumbnail-viewing program. PhotoImpact can use plug-ins designed for PhotoShop. Of course, Cotty raised some excellent points about the "common interface" and "common community" advantages of using PhotoShop. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: web page quetsions
Cotty.. here's something I did up for some of the Karaoke stuff I do in my weekend evenings. Yes, I like Karaoke.. trust me.. it's not like you've seen it anywhere else. http://www.chang-sang.com/bigcitymusic/html/photo_page.html The photos are out of date but you get the idea... Cheers, Dave -Original Message- From: CBWaters [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 9:44 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: OT: web page quetsions I'm building a web site and need some advice for the photo-pages I'll probably be adding a lot of pictures over time and need an easy way to format them. I'm a total newby building for the web and have been using Coffee Cup to work-up the HTML. I'm probably looking for some kind of template not unlike the PUG with a page of smaller photos you click if you want to see the larger ones. Any advice is welcome. Thanks gang, Cory Waters
Service manual scumbag
The guy who was selling my service manuals on eBay didn't get any bidders on his first auction. He re-listed last night (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3000207451&ssPageName=ADME:B:SS:US:1) but the auction comes up as invalid this morning. Looks like someone tipped off eBay. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Photoshop vs. Picture Window
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >I picked up my copy at about $70 on the Web. Even though the price keeps coming down, PhotoImpact now includes Photo Explorer, the $30 thumbnail-viewing program. [EMAIL PROTECTED]< what version of PhotoExplorer is included and can it be installed standalone? i like using it for thumbnail viewing and file organization (but not cataloging). i have 7.02 Pro. Herb
Re: OT: Mac Blat
Rob Studdert wrote: > > On 11 Jan 2003 at 13:34, Keith Whaley wrote: > > > Rob Studdert wrote: > > > > > > On 11 Jan 2003 at 13:29, Mike Johnston wrote: > > > > > > > Macs are superior products. They work better, they are more elegant, they > > > > are more pleasant to work with, they're designed better. > > > > > > Mike, you should get out more. > > > > He has. That's why he knows what he knows... > > I'd argue that anyone with such a narrow perspective has not had sufficient > experience with both platforms or has not had the benefit of using a well > designed and configured PC based computer. BTW computers are tools not Ikea > furniture. Yes, and there are some out there who still insist on using wooden lead pencils for writing. The output will eventually be the same, but getting there is more laborious ~ consumes a greater number of manhours. Given the output in 'plain text' I've seen operators who far prefer the old amber or green screen and archaic text of early Dos days... Not many, but some do. These guys work for themselves, you understand. No-one wants to hire them for some odd reason. I'm not trying to be absurd here, these people exist. Just as folks exist that have used both, are equally (or almost equally) proficient with both platforms, who prefer Windows. I'm NOT arguing that, however... I've used both Macs and Windows and Unix (Sun) machines, professionally, for CADD work, and while I could eventually get the same work out of all of them, I far prefer the Macintosh for my work platform because it's far easier for ME to work with, it's more intuitive and they ALL work alike, 2 years old or 15 years old! Up thru O/S 8.x they did, anyhow. That's changing. I recognize that. But, that's just me. Others may have other opinions. No problem with that. It's just that I've not met very many who are equally proficient in CADD or Graphics design on either machine that actually prefer Windows units... These people predominately prefer the Mac. IMMHO. keith whaley > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html
Re: Apology: OT Mac Blat
Next time, stick to something less controversial like which flavor of Christianity is best . . . 8^)
Re: OT: web page quetsions
Thanks, I searched for a long time before I found that program and am very happy with it. His latest beta has lots of cool new features but also lots of bugs. Can't wait for him to finish with it. I've got an older G3/333mhz iMac that I'd sell you for $400. It's in great shape, but it only has 32mb RAM so you'd prolly want to upgrade that. It has OS 9.1 on it right now. On Sunday, January 12, 2003, at 06:07 AM, CBWaters wrote: Thanks Nick but I couldn't afford a Mac ;) They almost got me as they were running those "switch" ads right when I needed a new box but the price to buy-in was much higher than building another WinTel computer. Cory Nick Wright http://www.sportsshooter.com/nickwright/
Re: OT: Re: Profanity
It's one of the side effects of being on a list focussed on a target that moves as fast as molasses in Siberia. Dan Scott LOL. This sentence explains much of what happens on this list. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SF1 body dead in the water
On Sunday, January 12, 2003, at 05:27 AM, Dale Leeper wrote: Hi all, SF1 body - dead in the water despite fresh batteries - The last time I checked cameras and water don't mix. Nick Wright http://www.sportsshooter.com/nickwright/
sorry... Re: OT: web page quetsions
That was supposed to be only to CB, sorry. Nick On Sunday, January 12, 2003, at 09:39 AM, Nicholas Wright wrote: hanks, I searched for a long time before I found that program and am very happy with it. His latest beta has lots of cool new features but also lots of bugs. Can't wait for him to finish with it. I've got an older G3/333mhz iMac that I'd sell you for $400. It's in great shape, but it only has 32mb RAM so you'd prolly want to upgrade that. It has OS 9.1 on it right now.
Re: Vs: Mac Blat
Apple got it free. At 10:18 AM 1/12/2003 +0100, you wrote: What´s this? There was a law suit which Apple won and Microsoft lost. The interface was indeed originally developed by Xerox Palo Alto Research Center but there´s nothing to indicate that Apple got it free. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: T Rittenhouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Päivä: 12. tammikuuta 2003 2:31 Aihe: Re: Mac Blat >Why Mike, you didn't ask my opinion, so how can it be best? > >BTW, the reason Apple could not keep Gates from using the interface is >because they didn't invent it, Xerox did. > >Ciao, >Graywolf >http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto > > >- Original Message - >From: "Mike Johnston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 2:29 PM >Subject: OT: Mac Blat > > >> >> how hard it is to use a Mac >> > >> > This is a classic oxymoron! >> >> >> Cotty, >> Considering that "Windows" is a blatant rip-off of the Mac interface that >> Gate's lawyers somehow weaseled him out of paying for, the ease of use of >> _all_ computers is directly related to the ease of use of Macs. Even >though >> Windows is still inferior in every way. >> >> In virtually every creative field, there are true innovators, then there >are >> the often rapacious, often more energetic and less principled imitators >that >> follow on their heels and opportunistically appropriate the market. >Windows >> PCs are second-rate consumer products. The Microsoft OS is third-rate. The >> real personal computers are Macs. >> >> Macs are superior products. They work better, they are more elegant, they >> are more pleasant to work with, they're designed better. The OS is much >more >> stable and elegant and the interface is far better. Even as objects they >are >> much more aesthetically pleasing to have in the home. Now that so many >> outside companies are writing software for them and Apple is no longer >> controlling the compatibility standards, I'm finally experiencing crashes >on >> my Mac. But I worked with a Mac Quadra for _six years_ at the magazine, >nine >> hours a day, five days a week, and guess how many crashes or freezes I >ever >> experienced? None. Zero. It never happened. No downtime, ever, period, >> except one time when the starter battery on the motherboard ran dry. Try >> that with a PC. As soon as I go 100% OSX native, I hope to reclaim that. >> >> I understand that many people have to use PCs because their work demands >it, >> their computers are provided by their employers or their workplaces are >> standardized on PCs, they need certain software that is only available for >> PCs, or simply because they've always used PCs and it's difficult to >switch >> platforms. There are lots of good reasons for being stuck with PCs. But >> "stuck" is the word. To me, PCs are just appliances. They betray poor >taste >> and a lack of aesthetic sense in their makers, if not their owners. >They're >> crass. I thank my lucky stars I started with Macs and I will never switch >> unless I am absolutely forced to do so, and then I'll wait until the >> absolute last possible moment. >> >> --Mike >> >> P.S. My "Sunday Morning Photographer" column two weeks from now is called >> "The Best of 2002," in which I name a bunch of products as the best of the >> year and discuss them--best photography book, best digital camera, best >> enlarger, that sort of thing. Can you guess what won "Best Digital >> Photography Computer Workstation"? I'll give you a hint--it's not a dang >PC. >> >> >> > Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx
Re: OT: Mac Blat
On Sat, 11 Jan 2003, Mike Johnston wrote: > Considering that "Windows" is a blatant rip-off of the Mac interface that > Gate's lawyers somehow weaseled him out of paying for, the ease of use of > _all_ computers is directly related to the ease of use of Macs. Even though > Windows is still inferior in every way. And MacOS is a blatant ripoff of Xerox's X Window System and Parc? Whine, whine, whine, Mac mac mac.. versus whine whine whine, PC PC PC. I hearby nominate this sort of useless argument to the same field as gun talk. Stupid. pointless, and bound to aggravate everyone involved. So, you disagree with the firearm discussions, and I'm going to vehemently disagree with this thread. Matter of fact, if this is what's going ot start upo, I'm afraid I'm going to have to start threads on firearms. The rest of the nonsense has been snipped, move on to ANY other topic.. Like film versus digital, we haven't talked about that in what seems like hours. -- http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com<-> photography and portfolio.
Re: I have just joined the list
I know exactly where that is! I was up there the other day. My daughter lives in Ben Lomond. >From your old place, drive east to 17, head south, then up Rt. 9 to Ben Lomond. Middle of the redwoods. Cotty wrote: > > Hi Keith, > > Between 1967 and 1976 I lived here: > > http://maps.yahoo.com/py/maps.py?&country=us&uz=95129&addr=bing+drive&city= > San+Jose&state=CA&zip=95129&mag=6 > > Long time ago but we left when I was 16. Very formative years. I haven't > been back (to CA) since, but it is my plan to in a few years. > > Cheers, > > Cotty Give a shout, and we'll tip a pint or two! keith
Re: Why is there NEVER enough bookshelf space?
At 04:01 AM 11/01/2003 -0500, you wrote: Rats. It's 2:30 in the morning. I just got a new bookcase, wrestled it into place, and have spent the last several hours loading photography books into it. And--of course--they don't all fit. I was hoping I'd have space left over. Rats. --Mike Books breed when you're not watching them. When I moved over to Canada, all the books were packed up and I gave away two boxes full of paperbacks. Moved into the new house and bought a new 5 shelf bookcase. Set up the bookcases, the old ones too and filled them all. I still have two boxes full of books left . Six weeks on a boat. It's amazing what books can get up to in that time. Wendy Beard, Ottawa, Canada http://www.beard-redfern.com
Re: OT: Mac Blat
On Sun, 12 Jan 2003, gfen wrote: > I hearby nominate this sort of useless argument to the same field as gun > talk. Stupid. pointless, and bound to aggravate everyone involved. This is what happens when you read messae #100 in a list of 400.. by the time the end rolls around, its (thankfully) already over. -- http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com<-> photography and portfolio.
Re: Service manual scumbag
I clicked it and it is not invalid His auction is still going strong. Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "Mark Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 9:27 AM Subject: Service manual scumbag > The guy who was selling my service manuals on eBay didn't get any bidders on > his first auction. He re-listed last night > (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3000207451&ssPageName=AD ME:B:SS:US:1) > but the auction comes up as invalid this morning. Looks like someone tipped > off eBay. > > -- > Mark Roberts > Photography and writing > www.robertstech.com >
Re: Service manual scumbag
I think you spoke too soon Mark, I clicked on the link and it came up immediately. At 09:27 AM 1/12/2003 -0500, you wrote: The guy who was selling my service manuals on eBay didn't get any bidders on his first auction. He re-listed last night (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3000207451&ssPageName=ADME:B:SS:US:1) but the auction comes up as invalid this morning. Looks like someone tipped off eBay. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx
RE: Service manual scumbag
I'm with Christian.. it's coming up here too. Dave -Original Message- From: Christian Skofteland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 11:09 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Service manual scumbag I clicked it and it is not invalid His auction is still going strong. Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "Mark Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 9:27 AM Subject: Service manual scumbag > The guy who was selling my service manuals on eBay didn't get any bidders on > his first auction. He re-listed last night > (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3000207451&ssPageName=AD ME:B:SS:US:1) > but the auction comes up as invalid this morning. Looks like someone tipped > off eBay. > > -- > Mark Roberts > Photography and writing > www.robertstech.com >
Re: Pentax DSLR: e-mail from Pentax USA
>no, i mean 4x5 inch format slides at 8000 dpi at 16-bits/channel color >depth. he has four 120GB drives he uses for his working storage and >downconverts to 8 bits/channel enough so that one Photoshop image fits on a >single CD for archiving purposes. Great Scott! The world's gone mad :-) Cot Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
Re: Service manual scumbag
By the way, it appears that he has also sold some Porsche maint. manuals on CD. I wonder who he stole those from, or for that matter, if they are available free online. He has all positive feedback too. You have to admit that the Pentax CD LOOKS really nice! Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "David Chang-Sang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 11:30 AM Subject: RE: Service manual scumbag > I'm with Christian.. > it's coming up here too. > > Dave > > -Original Message- > From: Christian Skofteland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 11:09 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Service manual scumbag > > > I clicked it and it is not invalid His auction is still going strong. > > Christian Skofteland > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > - Original Message - > From: "Mark Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 9:27 AM > Subject: Service manual scumbag > > > > The guy who was selling my service manuals on eBay didn't get any bidders > on > > his first auction. He re-listed last night > > > (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3000207451&ssPageName=AD > ME:B:SS:US:1) > > but the auction comes up as invalid this morning. Looks like someone > tipped > > off eBay. > > > > -- > > Mark Roberts > > Photography and writing > > www.robertstech.com > > > > > >
RE: web page quetsions
>Cotty.. or even Cory! >here's something I did up for some of the Karaoke stuff I do in my weekend >evenings. Yes, I like Karaoke.. trust me.. it's not like you've seen it >anywhere else. > >http://www.chang-sang.com/bigcitymusic/html/photo_page.html > >The photos are out of date but you get the idea... > >Cheers, >Dave Cot Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
Re: Pentax and Casio to merge?
> > Marketing BS. > There is a perception that Pentax can't design a computer system in any of their cameras. The reality is that, they can and they did. As for chip fabrication, they don't have the means to do so, hence they sometimes contract out the work to Casio or Hitachi which happens to make boring parts for their other cameras as well.Casio's field expertise in making small computers is no doubt well known, expecially with their FX-720P (a calculator/pocket computer combo). Some zoom compact cameras made by Pentax had parts made not only by Casio, but by Sanyo, Hitachi, Matshushita, Mabuchi, Seiko and Copal. Just because Pentax is working with Casio on the digital doesn't mean that Pentax is merging with them. If they do, why not say Pentax is merging with all of the other companies? > but because the level of compactness > > of the camera itself. This means, all of the > > functions inside the camera needs to be controlled > by > > the main CPU, while most of the sub-functions are > > controlled by their relative ASICs (Application > > Specific Integrated Circuits). ASIC is also being > > used in the Optios to convert the analog input of > the > > CCD chip into digital, therefore making the CCD > chip > > brand used irrelevant. > > > > Not really. Stuff hard coded into an ASIC will be > very sensor > dependant. The reason this is all done inside an > ASIC is twofold: > > - Size > - Cheapest to manufacture for volume consumer > electronics. > That's exactly what I meant. CCD chip brand is irrelevant because once Pentax sources out a CCD chip for the model, they tend to stick with it. In fact, sourcing parts for digitals is easier than sourcing parts for a 35mm compact, where a maker is required to stock parts for up to 7 years, some up to 10 for service repairs. All makers make digitals on a quota basis. They will either only make a camera on the need to sell basis or make a specified number of them. With a number in mind, they can source out a reliable CCD chip manufacturer for the best possible price vs performance based on quantity purchase. A maker must also rely on the CCD chip manufacturer's ability to deliver parts on time and be able to do so in the forseeable future for future models. The maker's dependence on the supplier's reputation to provide the necessary parts is key to deciding on what Pentax will use. A Pentax rep tech had told me that they will not treat a CCD chip like some holy grail that some CCD chip manufacturers like to portray themselves in the consumer magazines. A CCD chip is just one part of the many hundreds to thousands of parts in a digital camera. The consumer will past judgement on how good the pictures are from a Pentax digital. And so far, the Optios are doing great and have very few returns and I have every confidence that their DSLR will do the same. Rick... __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Re: Lens Flare and French Flags
No. I have the Tamron 14/2.8 and this is one lens that flares even the sun is completely out of the frame- in one memorable instance, I got flare on an overcast day; couldn't even the see the damn sun but had flare all over the place. Makes me wish I'd saved up more and waited for that A 15/3.5 Consoling myself with the 20~35; great flare control with this lens RK John Whicker wrote: > Would a better solution be to buy the Tamron 14mm, which has > superior multi-coating? I believe that Tamron also make the > 14mm Nikkor, although I don't know whether the two lenses > actually share the same design.
Meetings, WAS: Re: OT: Anyone running PS7 on a Mac?
> Well, I guess that must be the answer. Has anyone ever derived a > productivity to meeting ratio? Dan, One of the things my last employer did right was that they had a corporate rule limiting all meetings to no more than 1 hour. Amazingly effective--actually forced people to get things done during the meeting and then allowed them to do real work during the rest of the day. The employer before that never had meetings, and that was worse than too many meetings. Nobody was ever on the same page and there was never any face-to-face to lighten up the office-political shenanigans. It sucked. --Mike
Re: Picture Window Pro Recommendation was - Re: OT: Mac Blat
Keith Whaley said: "Now, if only it were made for the Mac..." Now and then someone asks about Mac support on the Picture Window support bulletin board. Someone from Digital Light and Color usually answers that it should run fine under Virtual PC, but they don't really advertise or support that. See you later, gs
Re: Photo Book Collecting
> Oh dear, I only have one book from that list: 'The Americans'. That's a good start. --Mike
Re: Service manual scumbag
I wrote the seller a nasty-gram this morning. In his reply he said, "I am not familiar with Mark Roberts web page and even if I was how does that make me a theif? I bought the CD's from another supplier, possibly they obtained the manuals from the website you referenced. I will however, stop selling the CD's if it offends you. With the money you save from getting your repair information for free and the new rope that you do not have to buy, who knows the possibilities! : )" On Sunday 12 January 2003 04:24 pm, Christian Skofteland wrote: > By the way, it appears that he has also sold some Porsche maint. > manuals on CD. I wonder who he stole those from, or for that matter, > if they are available free online. He has all positive feedback too. -- Ken Archer Canine Photography San Antonio, Texas "Business Is Going To The Dogs"
RE: Picture Window Pro Recommendation
Cotty, Everybody should read your message twice... I was introduced to Photoshop not because I'm a photographer but because my Graphics Department used it at the magazine. Virtually every professional photography, publishing, graphics, and production shop uses it. (There are Quark/Pagemaker battles at such places, but nothing similar with Photoshop--it's Universal.) Plus, it's cross-platform, so Mac and PC users speak the same language (and lest anyone think my Mac bigotry is knee-jerk, I have yet to see any professional publishing house or graphics or advertising firm that _doesn't_ use Macs). Many of the "Help" features on Elements v.2 are new to Photoshop. So anyone who has familiarity with any earlier version of P'shop shouldn't necessarily assume that it's hard to learn. Adobe has made it much more beginner-friendly. --Mike > Having used Photoshop 3, 4, and 5.5 since 1998 may I throw in a couple a > pennies? > > If I knew then what I know now, I would have liked (pretending that it > was available at the time) somebody to recommend Photoshop Elements to me. > > Reasons: It is true that most photographers processing images on computer > will never use the full Photoshop's capability. However, if you are truly > serious about progressing through your passion, possibly towards career > aspirations, then using the 'Adobe way' is going to make things easier, > and keep things familiar. > > It's not just about palettes and menus, it's about keyboard shortcuts. A > professional Photoshop user has one hand on the stylus (mouse/trackpad), > the other on the keyboard. It's about setting up macros within Photoshop > (Photoshop Actions), and it's about compatibility with other applications > that may need to import native PS files. It's about knowing off the top > of your head what you are reading about when you come across a pro > graphics forum and they are discussing something about Photoshop, > something that may well come in handy for you. It's about all these > things and much more. > > If you have absolutely no aspirations towards one day turning your > ambitions into a career, or if you are highly satisfied with using what > you have, then look no further. Better to know what you are using inside > out and be content with it than to stumble across something new and wade > in too deep. > > However, if you consider yourself in a transitional phase (possibly > lasting years ;-) between am and pro status and would like to get to > grips with what is used out there in the real world of professional image > manipulation, then start out with Photoshop Elements. Stick with it. > Learn the interface, learn the shortcuts, learn the actions until you can > post-produce your photographs quickly and efficiently. > > If and when the day comes that you gradually or suddenly get thrown into > the deep end and have to buckle down with the real Photoshop, you will be > prepared and even willing to get stuck in. > > If only I could have read this back in 1998, I would have replied > straight away with lots of thank you's and kisses and hugs and would you > like to come back to my place bouncy-bouncy's. > > [ Note: This is not to say that Picture Window or indeed any other > similar application will not do the job just as good, just my personal > observation based on what I have seen working in professional image post > production environments over the years.]
Re: pz-1p focusing screen for mz-s
> are they interchangeable No idea > i have the grid one for the pz-1p and would love it on the mz-s Why? There is a grid screen for the MZ-S (cheap) and the MZ-S screens are much better than those for the Z-1p. Pål
Print life
Hi Marnie: Yes, print life from color prints leave something to be desired. The best right now would be Fuji Crystal Archive, and Ilfochrome (Cibachrome) at about 60 years each, followed by Konica at 30-40 years. Kodak has a notorious reputation for fading and is listed around 15-20 years though it also seems to fade faster under display condition then the Fuji or Konica media. I don't know how Agfa or some of the secondary manufacturers like Mitsubishi are. I would think they are at least as good as the Kodak, probably somewhere between Kodak and Konica. Kodak has come out with a new paper, Duralife, that is supposed to be longer lived, but I've seen no figures on it. Epson dye based printers have a life of 5-15 years depending on the media it's printed on. The printers using ultra-chrome inks have a 40-80 year life depending on media and the full archival inks have over 100 year life, though they have a reduced gamut. I'm not sure about the 2200, but the wide format 7600 and 9600 printers can be configured for either ultra-chrome or archival inks, though you can not switch back and forth. For reference, an archivally processed fiber based B&W print can have a 100-200 year lifespan if properly stored of course. BUTCH "Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself" Hermann Hesse (Demian)
Re: Photoshop vs. Picture Window
Herb wrote: What version of PhotoExplorer is included and can it be installed standalone? i like using it for thumbnail viewing and file organization (but not cataloging). i have 7.02 Pro. 7.03--not the freebie version 6 that won't read GIFs and burdens you with popup reminders to buy the real thing. Yes, it can be used in standalone mode. This "bundled" 7.03 differs from the standalone 7.03 by letting you see files that you've saved in PhotoImpact's layered UFO format and integrating with PhotoImpact 8 as a sort-of module. The standalone 7.03 cannot be upgraded, but then, you wouldn't need to if you get the bundled 7.03. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Digital Print LE, WAS: Re: Pentax DSLR: e-mail from Pentax USA
> Is that true, that digital prints made using those type of printers can now > outlast regular prints made at a photo lab? Pretty much. There are a number of variables and unknowns: 1. Digital print LE (life expectancy) is a function of the ink/paper combination, not just one or the other. 2. Print degradation must be defined: usually it is a certain percentage of color fade in the weakest dye or pigment. 3. Accelerated aging tests can't test for effects that are not known or accepted. 4. Different labs' and companies' standard for LE shouldn't be cross-compared. That is, if a company says ink-paper combination A lasts "25 years" and Wilhelm Research says combination B lasts 30 years, you haven't really learned that B lasts longer than A. All this got started because Kodak seems to have made a unilateral Corporate decision in the late '40s that good LE was too expensive and until the 1980s turned away from processes that had good LE and followed a course of producing cheaper color materials that had poor LE. Ektacolor prints from the 1970s have perhaps the worst LE of any widely used photographic materials. The reason Henry Wilhelm hates Kodak so much is that it is rather cynical to BOTH ignore print LE in AND run comprehensive advertising campaigns to the effect that photographs preserve memories! (We can easily forget, today, how much advertising presence Kodak had back then.) There's more to the story, but believe me I watch what I say in public when it comes to some of the uglier legal incidents of those days. I've editorialized in the past that I think we were damned lucky that early digital inkjet prints had such execrably poor LE. What it did was to bring LE to the forefront as a consumer issue. Now the manufacturers can't sweep it under the rug as they did with conventional color materials--it's become well accepted as a technical feature to be considered when purchasing a printer. This is very lucky for us. It forces the manufacturers to address the issue in their R&D. If early digital inkjet prints had had a print LE of, say, ten years, the issue might never even have come up. --Mike
Re: Pentax DSLR: e-mail from Pentax USA
Hi Boris, On Sun, 12 Jan 2003 14:51:00 +0200, Boris Liberman wrote: > Both you and Doug scan at 4000 dpi resulting in roughly 24 MP files. > So no matter which DSLR you were to choose from available today, you > will be getting at most half of the pixels you usually get. Well, that's true, but digital capture could very well give me a better image to work with, even at half the number of pixels. I don't know, because I haven't messed with high-end (6+ MP) digital cameras yet. Don't overlook the string of messages between me and Herb and Paul about graininess and speckles and all of the other stuff that goes along with scanning at 4k dpi. The thing that concerns me about starting with less resolution is getting big prints. If the image starts out with less crap in it, though, stuff like that fractal scaling program (?Fractal Dimensions?) might work a lot better. > As for 1500x1000 scans from the lab. Well, I printed few of them on my > Epson 790 Photo Stylus. I asked for half A4 size which would be > roughly 15x21 cm - about 6" x 8". It looked reasonable for putting > some of the educational shots onto the wall of our daughter's room... That's pretty much the way I see those images. I print them 20-up on 8.5" x 11" paper to use as pseudo contact sheets. I use them to put stuff on the Web, too. But they're not useful for largish prints, above maybe 6" x 4". TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
For Sale
I have the below for sale to the group before placing them on eBay. Please contact me off-list if interested or would like pictures: P30t - EX+ condition. Includes strap and original manual - $75.00 Pentax FA 28-80 f/3.5 - f/5.6 (This is the black body) New in box - $60.00 Tokina MF 28-70 f/3.5 - f4.5 - EX+ with caps - $40.00 Sigma MF 28mm f/2.8 - EX+ with hood - $35.00 Sears MF 135mm f/2.8 EX condition with caps - $25.00 Later, Gary
Re: OT: HTML Editors
tom wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > > > Arachnophilia -- http://www.arachnoid.com/arachnophilia/ > > > > Freeware which the author has been supporting/updating for years. > > This is what I use, though I like the older version more than the new > java version. > > I used to use VI back in the day... > > tv VI Yuck! I used Kedit. yum. but neither of them are code, we might point out to youngsters.. just a way of getting your code on virtual paper. They are just line editors. annsan the old spec writer
Re: Digital printing
Herb, Interesting... Sounds like each system is calibrated slightly different. Bruce Sunday, January 12, 2003, 5:29:46 AM, you wrote: >Snip< HC> incidentally, Bruce Dayton, if you are reading this, he took the same file HC> i sent you and, without seeing your or my prints as references, adjusted HC> the print to be in between what i chose and what your D-Labs operator chose HC> as color balance, slightly closer to my color rendition. he kept the sRGB HC> color profile that i came in with. mine is a slightly cooler and redder HC> rendition than his, while the D-labs output is on the yellow green side. HC> Herb
Re: Meetings, WAS: Re: OT: Anyone running PS7 on a Mac?
On Sun, 12 Jan 2003 10:37:39 -0600, Mike Johnston wrote: > One of the things my last employer did right was that they had > a corporate rule limiting all meetings to no more than 1 hour. One of my former bosses said "no chairs makes for shorter meetings", and he enforced the rule that chairs were not allowed in meeting rooms unless customers were present in the meeting. It did, in fact, make for shorter meetings. On top of that, people seemed less inclined to screw around while standing. :-) TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: I have just joined the list
>I know exactly where that is! >I was up there the other day. >My daughter lives in Ben Lomond. >From your old place, drive east to 17, head south, then up Rt. 9 to >Ben Lomond. Middle of the redwoods. Amazingly small world :-) We used to go down there - is it near Santa Cruz? I so desperatekly want to photograph the California coast - gotta do the Ansel bit before I die. It'll happen. Cot Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
Re: Pentax and Casio to merge?
>A Pentax rep tech had told me that they will not treat >a CCD chip like some holy grail that some CCD chip >manufacturers like to portray themselves in the >consumer magazines. A CCD chip is just one part of >the many hundreds to thousands of parts in a digital >camera. The consumer will past judgement on how good >the pictures are from a Pentax digital. And so far, >the Optios are doing great and have very few returns >and I have every confidence that their DSLR will do >the same. I'll bet anyone in this list a pint of Fiddler's Elbow that it will be a CMOS in the Pentax DSLR. Cotty Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
Re: OT: Mac Blat
A logical extension of this argument would be that all people who use Pentax 35mm SLRs, and have professional aspirations, should switch to another brand, since virtually no working professionals use Pentax 35mm gear. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree that this is generally a useless, aggravating discussion. However, I think the fact that professional photographers, publishers, and graphic designers have all standardized on Macs and Photoshop is something that people should be reminded of once in a while.
Re: Photo Book Collecting
>> Oh dear, I only have one book from that list: 'The Americans'. > > >That's a good start. > >--Mike Okay, here's the rest (photographic work only, ie no how-to books)... 2. '40 Years of Photography' - Jeanloup Sieff 3. 'Faites Commes si Je n'Aitais pas La' - Jeanloup Sieff 4. 'Arnold Newman' - Philip Brookman 5. 'One Mind's Eye' - Arnold Newman 6. 'Faces' - Jane Bown 7. 'California' - Ansel Adams 8. 'Portraits' - Bruce Davidson 9. 'Portraits' - Peter Weiermair 10. 'Famed' - Michael Birt 11. 'Fruits' - Shoichi Aoki 12. 'Photographers and Their Images' - Fi McGhee 13. 'Pipe Dreams' - John Thornton 14. 'Diners' - Gerd Kittel 15. 'Portraits' - Steve McCurry 16. 'Slightly Out of Focus' - Robert Capa 17. 'Seeing he Light: Wilderness and Salvation: A Photographer's Tale' - Tom Shroder and John Barry (photos by Clyde Butcher) ...and a few compendiums like World Press Photo, National Portrait Gallery collections etc etc. :-) Cotty Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
Re: chem jugs
David Brooks wrote: > All i need is some jugs(prograstinating on spending $8.99 each at > Henrys)and some distilled H2O and i,m off.Second darkroom/developing > classes atart Jan 29 Whoo Hooo any plastic jugs will do fine for b&w chems. I use the gallon & half-gallon "Sunny Delight" ones as they are of a fairly stout plastic. their contents are rather tasty, as well :^) just keep them in a dark cabinet. Bill - Bill D. Casselberry ; Photography on the Oregon Coast http://www.orednet.org/~bcasselb [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: PUG comments
Maciej, Thanks for your Pug comments, and mentioning my entry. I always enjoy reading listmember Pug comments. This month I've been out trying to get some snowy winter shots, but it's mostly been raining around these parts. Harald Rust Washington state Maciej wrote: "Pacific Twilight" by Harald Rust Simply great. The colors of sunset, the shapes of rocks with the sun shining between them, the oval shape of this little gulf in the foreground which looks very good contrasted with the pointy rock in the middle of it. And the reflections in the water that give that final touch. __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
OT: Technical resources
Hi, Can anybody point me to websites containing serious informations about various technological aspects of the photographic equipment construction? I'm looking for some serious stuff, not the popular one which can be found on an average site for beginners. TIA Regards Artur ***r-e-k-l-a-m-a** Chcesz oszczedzic na kosztach obslugi bankowej ? mBIZNES - konto dla firm http://epieniadze.onet.pl/mbiznes
RE: Service manual scumbag
Hi Mark, How are you sure they are "your manuals"? Did you "Mark" them in a way? Some of the manuals I bought in a normal shop, I could scan and sell, I guess? Anyhow I'm glad with your service on your web! Your scan quality is so much better than the poor quality of a professional(?) company like Pentax does with the User Manuals on their USA website! Greetings, Jos -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Verzonden: Sunday, January 12, 2003 3:28 PM Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Onderwerp: Service manual scumbag The guy who was selling my service manuals on eBay didn't get any bidders on his first auction. He re-listed last night (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3000207451&ssPageName=AD ME:B:SS:US:1) but the auction comes up as invalid this morning. Looks like someone tipped off eBay. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Pentax and Casio to merge?
On 1/12/03 11:33 AM, "Rick Diaz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There is a perception that Pentax can't design a > computer system in any of their cameras. The reality > is that, they can and they did. Hi folks, Above is true. In the current digital development, Pentax are putting more emphasis on the software side (they can design any level of hardware), and hiring more software engineers now. They also formed a JV called "Gear Neuve" with Altech & Sanyo to promote the direct digital image transmission thru PHS, mainly targeted for commercial use (construction industry etc). This will also trickle into consumer market eventually. Pentax is certainly not sleeping. All they are doing is to measure the most profitable and timely entry into the lucrative market. BTW, one of the largest camera franchise published their best 10 sales ranking of digital cameras for the last fiscal half of 2002. Just for your entertainment. Surprise, surprise! >From the gadget freak land of Japan, trend is still the compact P&S. Advanced amateurs, like everywhere else, are basically taking a "wait & see" attitude for DSLR. No rush, unless you really need them, such as for product shots etc. Today's digital P&S satisfy most consumers. This particular franchise predicts the popularity of 5mp P&S and DSLR at $1,000 level in 2003. We shall see. Other large camera franchise would soon release their latest ranking. 1st Pentax Optio 330GS Explosive sales. Very Pentax-like compactness. Swivelling monitor is excellent. 2nd Nikon D100 Excellent body construction. Reduction of price by less initial options worked well. Good constant sales. 3rd Minolta DiMage Xi Shot up to 3rd ranking despite it was released only in Nov. Thin & stylish body. Switch campaign (X to Xi) also worked. 4th Canon IXY digital 200a Excellent ranking despite the full model change to IXY320 in Oct. 5th Canon EOS D-60 Behind D100 mainly because of product shortage in July/Aug. It comes with more initial options, as opposing to D100. 6th Pentax Optio 430RS Pioneer in 4mp P&S digital. Very Pentax-like, such as compact metal body and user friendly button controls. 7th Fuji FinePix F401 Square body with blue illumination, high res honeycomb CCD. 8th Nikon CoolPix 5000 Despite over 1 year old model, overwhelming support from wide angle lovers. With the free firmware update, both new and used ones are selling constantly. 9th Minolta DiMage 7i 28-200mm equiv. Of versatile zoom. Manual zoom is the key to the success. Very easy to frame the picture. 10th Olympus Camedia 5050 Excellent ranking despite the release in Nov. and the price is not that cheap. Can use XD, SmartMedia & CF. 5mp with F1.8 lens. Sales is expected to rise.
Re: OT: Mac Blat
"Bruce R" posted: > A logical extension of this argument would be that all people who use > Pentax 35mm SLRs, and have professional aspirations, should switch to > another brand, since virtually no working professionals use Pentax 35mm > gear. > And you never miss an opportunity to make this argument, do you?
Re: Print life
On Sunday, January 12, 2003, at 01:25 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I thought (reading a photographic magazine that I can't seem to find right now) that Epson had released a small home inkjet in the last six month that would use ultra-chrome or archival inks -- plugged as lasting 70 years. I will see if I can find the mag or do more > research. I guess I was thinking of these -- wide format Epson printers. And I guess for a lot they would not be considered "home printers" since they aren't small and aren't cheap. Many use ultra-chrome or archival inks. I looked into them awhile back because I was thinking of printing art work (done digitally on the computer -- thinking of them for down the road if I can ever afford one). Not sure how well they do photos. I would have to research that too. The printer you are thinking about is the Epson 2200 which uses the ultrachrome inks. Runs about $700 when you can find someone with stock. Right now demand seems to be slightly exceeding production. Dan Scott
Re: OT: Mac Blat
Bruce Rubenstein wrote: > > A logical extension of this argument would be that all people who use > Pentax 35mm SLRs, and have professional aspirations, should switch to > another brand, since virtually no working professionals use Pentax 35mm > gear. > > BR That's not at all logical. It's merely an extension of your inaccurate presumption. One has nothing to do with the other, in any way imaginable. Totally Apples and Pentaxii... keith whaley > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >I agree that this is generally a useless, aggravating discussion. However, I > >think the fact that professional photographers, publishers, and graphic > >designers have all standardized on Macs and Photoshop is something that > >people should be reminded of once in a while. > >
Way off Topic --- sorry --- Hi Fi
Hi all, I'm off the list so will need to be contacted directly. I found, in a trunk of stuff that's been stored for twenty years, a Shure pickup head in an SME Ultralight head. It has been used a few times, but was kept for use on very special recordings of which I had only a dozen or so. I used a less expensive Shure cartridge for everyday music. That was sold with the HiFi equipment long ago. If any one on the list is interested let me know. Its a Shure V15 Type II SuperTrack and the stylus is in perfect condition - I've checked it under the microscope. I can't do a test since I have no HiFi equipment now. But there is no reason why it should not be in perfect working condition. These things are quite rare I've been told. Don Don Williams ___ Dr E D F Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery Updated: March 30, 2002
Re: Please behave (was OT: Mac Blat)
On 1/12/03 3:03 PM, "Bruce Rubenstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A logical extension of this argument would be that all people who use > Pentax 35mm SLRs, and have professional aspirations, should switch to > another brand, since virtually no working professionals use Pentax 35mm > gear. I have many Japanese friends who also frequent PDML. You are well known to them :-). Sometimes, you spread misleading info :-). You are certainly a knowledgeable person but frankly you can contribute to PDML in better ways without trying to satisfy your sadistic mind. Much of your info come from Nikon list and Pentax-hating NYC camera dealers, at least that's what people say. Perhaps. I do not pretend to be knowledgeable on photography but I just wish to say that the bad thing about your post (not al of them) is essentially making Pentax owners dumb and stupid in their selection of Pentax gear. Moreover, my Japanese colleagues agree that you must be on some kind of mission for "switch campaign" :-). I hope you are not benefiting by doing so. As in any part of the world, Pentax owners are not just the bargain hunting cheap crowd. They are determined Pentax users, finding the merits in Pentax. Many of them appreciates the Pentax glasses, and conscientious design of bodies which are distinct Pentax tradition. Also, many Pentax users also have Nikon and Canon as I do. If Pentax won't do a job in certain sports shooting etc which require higher FPS, you just buy a suitable set of Nikon or Canon (or Minolta or whatever) equipment for that purpose. But PDMLers predominantly use Pentax. Many Pentax users also choose Pentax because they do not want to be regarded in the same mould of crowd. They may wish to be Maverick, as I do ;-). Anyone can buy C/N if they so wish. It is even easier to do so. But it is indeed difficult to stay with Pentax in the sea of N/C unless you do appreciate their gears. While we all make sarcastic comments on N/C etc, they are all excellent makers and equip. Everybody knows it. Just take it easy. You should respect other people's choice and decision. I seldom saw severe critique by PDMLers of your choice of Nikon. If there were any, it was just teasing. You are obviously a disgruntled Pentax user and your input would be invaluable in a way. But you do not have to insult people who use Pentax. PDML, as I like to understand, is to exchange info on good as well as bad on our beloved equip. But frankly, your attitude here is extremely un-gentleman like. One of the very prominent virtues of this list is the remarkable resiliency and the decency of people who participate in this list, in spite of occasional flame wars. The culture of this list apparently has been built up over the years by various participants. It is this unique culture of this list, in my opinion, that attracts people to this list, besides the wealth of info you can get from it. So, I would respectfully request that you stop making silly and poisonous posting only in an attempt to make Pentax owners feel bad. In fact, very few people are affected by your such postings. They are wise enough to ignore or kill your posts (am I the only fool making comments on this? :-), and you should realize that you are embarrassing yourself. Don't be a naked emperor. Your bad posts are tolerated only because this is none other than PDML. You know it and you are taking advantage of it. The remarkable resiliency of PDMLers as a whole is allowing you to stay in this list. If you did the same thing in any other list, you know too well what's going to happen. So, your harsh critique on Pentax gear is always welcome, but please keep the minimum etiquette. Sorry for giving you a lecture, but let's keep the list somewhat more decent. Bye for now Cheers, Ken
Re: I have just joined the list
Cotty wrote: > > >I know exactly where that is! > >I was up there the other day. > >My daughter lives in Ben Lomond. > >From your old place, drive east to 17, head south, then up Rt. 9 to > >Ben Lomond. Middle of the redwoods. > > Amazingly small world :-) I find it so, more and more! > We used to go down there - is it near Santa Cruz? Just before you get to the south end of Rt. 17, where it meets up with Rt. 1, you get off at Mt. Herman road, thru the small town of Scotts Valley and then head north up Rt. 9, along the San Lorenzo River. That junction is several miles north of Santa Cruz, but indeed in the vicinity! Daughter's house backs up on the west bank of that river. She's got a nice patio 1/2 way down the semi-wooded slope, room for 6 or 8 chairs, cool and shady in the summer, great view of the river slowly heading by... > I so desperately want > to photograph the California coast - gotta do the Ansel bit before I die. > > It'll happen. > > Cot Sure it will! I'll send you some maps... keith whaley
Re: Print life
Hi Marnie: I would be very surprised if Epson doesn't introduce an A4 size 7 ink ultra-chrome printer in the sub $300 range in the next year or so. The 2200 at $699 is right on the border line for being affordable to the casual hobbyist. I'm thinking of getting one after I replace my old computer. BUTCH "Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself" Hermann Hesse (Demian)
OT computer speed (was Mac Blat)
Bruce: Thanks for the link to the Rob Galbraith link. I plan to replace my PII 350 this winter and the Dell 8200 is one of the computers I'm looking at. For my use (non-production) it looks like plenty, though I probably will cram all the RAM in it that I can. BUTCH "Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself" Hermann Hesse (Demian)
Re: Please behave (was OT: Mac Blat)
Look, Johnston initially made the argument that the Mac is the preferred platform because it is used by professionals. This implies that if you want to work like professional you should use a Mac. Since the computer is now a photographic tool, the same premise would apply to the most basic tool of the photographer, which is the camera. In the same way that PCs are not professional grade tools, neither are Pentaxes. If you think that this is one big crock for camera brands, then it is also one big crock for which computer platform is more legitimate than the other. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >I agree that this is generally a useless, aggravating discussion. However, I >think the fact that professional photographers, publishers, and graphic >designers have all standardized on Macs and Photoshop is something that >people should be reminded of once in a while. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: O I have many Japanese friends who also frequent PDML. You are well known to them :-). Sometimes, you spread misleading info :-).
Re: Please behave (was OT: Mac Blat)
On 12 Jan 2003 at 17:24, Bruce Rubenstein wrote: > Look, Johnston initially made the argument that the Mac is the preferred > platform because it is used by professionals. This implies that if you > want to work like professional you should use a Mac. Since the computer > is now a photographic tool, the same premise would apply to the most > basic tool of the photographer, which is the camera. In the same way > that PCs are not professional grade tools, neither are Pentaxes. > If you think that this is one big crock for camera brands, then it is > also one big crock for which computer platform is more legitimate than > the other. I've got to back Bruce up on these points, the "Mac Blat" thread was crammed full of brand based fallacies.. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html
OK, check out MY Pentax service manual auction on eBay ;-)
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3000553578 -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Pentax and Casio to merge?
Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I'll bet anyone in this list a pint of Fiddler's Elbow that it will be a >CMOS in the Pentax DSLR. Only a fool would take that bet! The lower cost of CMOS and the ever-improving quality has made it almost universal, even in very high-end DSLRs. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: OT computer speed (was Mac Blat)
I'm glad someone found it useful. I wish that he had an Athlon based system in there. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bruce: Thanks for the link to the Rob Galbraith link. I plan to replace my PII 350 this winter and the Dell 8200 is one of the computers I'm looking at. For my use (non-production) it looks like plenty, though I probably will cram all the RAM in it that I can.
Re: Aaron R.--new stuff
> You are probably right Mike,that you would want to enlarge these > puppies big,but i had Aaron enlarge 4, 6x6 negs this past summer to > 8"x8" with a border.They looked great.I'm going to stick with 6x6 > format(plus 35mm) for a little while longer anyway:) Oh, gee, Dave, no, there's no right and wrong here. It's just a matter of taste. I'm sure a LOT of people would agree with you on this (maybe more than would agree with me). --Mike
Re: OK, check out MY Pentax service manual auction on eBay ;-)
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 01/12/03 at 05:35 PM, Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: |>http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3000553578 best ever use of Ebay. magnificent! Bran -- --- Futility is futile. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
Re: Way off Topic --- sorry --- Hi Fi
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >If any one on the list is interested let me know. Its a Shure V15 Type II SuperTrack and the stylus is in perfect condition - I've checked it under the microscope. I can't do a test since I have no HiFi equipment now. But there is no reason why it should not be in perfect working condition. These things are quite rare I've been told. Don Don Williams< the damper might have hardened and increased resonance above 20K. that can lead to mistracking at lower frequencies just below 20K and a bit lower. Herb
Re: ULead PhotoExplorer Pro
i see on their web site that they just released PhotoExplorer 8. i'll see what is involved for upgrading and if it is worth it. the stuff on the web site doesn't describe anything i need, but the things i am interested in are faster thumbnails and preview. don't see an upgrade cost either. Herb...
Re: Print life
> Not that I really expect anyone to keep my prints around for 70-80 years. It's > just the thought of enduring. I've written extensively on this topic too. The nutshell version: nobody knows what posterity will value. Therefore the *typical* LE of the *prevailing* materials is very important--more important than the limits of the best technology at any given time. IOW, the more prints that survive, the more likely that the prints that the future will want will survive. (Hope I said that right. :-\ ) --Mike
Re: Pentax DSLR: e-mail from Pentax USA
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >I wouldn't be surprised if Canon had similar ratings on some of their newest printers. Although Epson is the leader, the others are working hard to catch up. Bruce< competition is good, in this case. the 2200 is in my sights for an upgrade to my 1280, but i have no clue as to when i can make it a reality. Herb
Re: Please behave (was OT: Mac Blat)
Sorry Bruce, I was not responding to your particular contention under the Mac Blat thread, hence changing the subject line. But I thought you never failed to grab the opportunity to poison the list to the point it became so predictable when and how you show up with equally predictable posts. I suppose a lot of people would think the same way but they are too nice to say things here. I am just a lurker and it would be less harmful if I said things many people wanted to say. BTW, I am getting a wealth of info from this list and I am grateful for it, thank you folks. Cheers, Ken On 1/12/03 5:24 PM, "Bruce Rubenstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Look, Johnston initially made the argument that the Mac is the preferred > platform because it is used by professionals. This implies that if you > want to work like professional you should use a Mac. Since the computer > is now a photographic tool, the same premise would apply to the most > basic tool of the photographer, which is the camera. In the same way > that PCs are not professional grade tools, neither are Pentaxes. > If you think that this is one big crock for camera brands, then it is > also one big crock for which computer platform is more legitimate than > the other. > > BR > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> > I agree that this is generally a useless, aggravating discussion. However, I think the fact that professional photographers, publishers, and graphic designers have all standardized on Macs and Photoshop is something that people should be reminded of once in a while. >> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> O >> >> I have many Japanese friends who also frequent PDML. You are well known to >> them :-). >> Sometimes, you spread misleading info :-). >> > >
Re: Pentax and Casio to merge?
> I'll bet anyone in this list a pint of Fiddler's Elbow that it will be a > CMOS in the Pentax DSLR. You're on. But I want a real British Ginger beer, okay? I'll buy you a Leinenkugel's (local Wisconsin brew) if I lose. :-) --Mike
Single best tip or trick for better pictures?
I have been working on an addendum for a photo class and have started compiling a list of tips and tricks for better pictures. An Example: "The largest portion of most pictures as described by percentage of picture area normally turns out to be the background. It should surprise no one that the background is also the home of most of the distractions. Make your subject larger and eliminate much of the background. Less background usually equals fewer distractions and better pictures." I would be very interested in learning from this group what you feel is your simple tip or trick for a better picture. All of these tips and tricks are open to criticism and may not apply to all pictures. Please let the responders provide their tips without debating or criticizing their suggestions. The point is to gather input, not to gather criticism for those who provide input. Ed Tyler
Re: OT: Mac Blat
> A logical extension of this argument would be that all people who use > Pentax 35mm SLRs, and have professional aspirations, should switch to > another brand, since virtually no working professionals use Pentax 35mm > gear. It happens. When I joined a group studio around 1988 I switched from Contax to Nikon. All three of the other photographers used Nikon, and between us we had 11 bodies and 30 lenses. Not only could I not borrow the communal equipment, but I couldn't _contribute_ to it, either. So I switched. Bought an N8008 and an F4s and a few lenses the other folks didn't have. I had a pretty close relationship to Bronica in the 1980s, because I wrote some positive articles about them that they purchased for reprint. A not-too-well-kept secret back then was that studio photographers had a hard time using Bronica because most A.D.s only knew Hasselblad. In their eyes, if you shot Hassie, you were a serious photographer and they (the A.D.s) had covered their a**es. If you shot something else, you were going to lose work. What the client wants, ya better give 'em. There have been an awful lot of studio photographers over the past three decades who went into Hasselblad just because it was the thing they had to have. --Mike
OT: Technical resources
> Can anybody point me to websites containing serious informations about > various technological aspects of the photographic equipment construction? > I'm looking for some serious stuff, not the popular one which can be found > on an average site for beginners. Artur, I can't help with a website, but a great book on the subject is _Camera Technology: The Dark Side of the Lens_ by Norman Goldberg. --Mike
Re: Single best tip or trick for better pictures?
The single best tip I ever heard in the last 45 years of taking pictures came from Robert Capa. If your pictures aren't good enough, you aren't close enough. On Sunday 12 January 2003 11:10 pm, Ed Tyler wrote: > I would be very interested in learning from this group what you feel > is your simple tip or trick for a better picture. All of these tips > and tricks are open to criticism and may not apply to all pictures. > Please let the responders provide their tips without debating or > criticizing their suggestions. The point is to gather input, not to > gather criticism for those who provide input. -- Ken Archer Canine Photography San Antonio, Texas "Business Is Going To The Dogs"
Re: OK, check out MY Pentax service manual auction on eBay ;-)
In a message dated 1/12/2003 5:35:08 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=300055357 > 8 > > -- > Mark Roberts > Photography and writing > www.robertstech.com Hey, I want that Captain Pentax magic decoder ring! Unfortunately, I don't have any gold bullion. :-( Doe aka Marnie Hehehe.
Re: Photoshop vs. Picture Window
Mike, That horse isn't dead yet. :) I have tried Elements twice and actually have a copy installed on my system (came with my Epson 2450 scanner). I still don't like it as well as Picture Window Pro. >From my experience (as a photographer only - no graphic artist tendencies) I started with Paint Shop Pro after dabbling with all the beginner programs. I used that for quite awhile. Then tried the trial versions of both Elements and Picture Window Pro. I found that the style and interface of Picture Window Pro was far closer to my style and mind as a photographer. (simple things like crop ratios based on print sizes, etc.) But on your suggestion (always willing to learn new things), I'll give Elements one more try and let you know what I think. BTW, I don't feel that all aspects of Picture Window are better than any other program. I have found that each one does a few things better than the others and others worse. Bruce Sunday, January 12, 2003, 11:24:14 AM, you wrote: >> Many reviewers now consider it the best low-cost alternative to PhotoShop MJ> [...] I picked up my copy at about $70 on the Web. MJ> Paul, MJ> I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but again, Photoshop Elements v. 2 is MJ> more or less comparably priced. I just went to price.com and did a quick MJ> check, and the prices for Elements 2 ranged from $77 to $99.99, with the MJ> average vendor selling it for $79.95. B&H Photo sells it for $89.95 and MJ> CompUSA sells it for $99.99. MJ> So I think it's fair to say it costs $80-100, with $90 being a reasonable MJ> average. >>Cotty raised >>some excellent points about the "common interface" and "common community" >>advantages of using PhotoShop. MJ> Especially without the traditional price disparity of the full retail MJ> version. MJ> --Mike
Re: Photo Book Collecting
> 2. '40 Years of Photography' - Jeanloup Sieff > 3. 'Faites Commes si Je n'Aitais pas La' - Jeanloup Sieff > 4. 'Arnold Newman' - Philip Brookman > 5. 'One Mind's Eye' - Arnold Newman > 6. 'Faces' - Jane Bown I'm familiar with this one. It showed up at a local bookstore and I _almost_ bought it, but I'd never heard of Bown. So I went home and did a bit o' research. Came back a few days later and the book was gone. > 7. 'California' - Ansel Adams > 8. 'Portraits' - Bruce Davidson Augh! Another great book I let get away. Isn't that picture of Samuel Beckett FANTASTIC? I think there's a picture of Antonioni at work in that book that I really liked as well. > 9. 'Portraits' - Peter Weiermair > 10. 'Famed' - Michael Birt > 11. 'Fruits' - Shoichi Aoki > 12. 'Photographers and Their Images' - Fi McGhee > 13. 'Pipe Dreams' - John Thornton > 14. 'Diners' - Gerd Kittel Finally, one I own. Actually I don't have _Diners_, but I have two of his larger books, _Southwest USA_ and _A New England Autumn_. > 15. 'Portraits' - Steve McCurry > 16. 'Slightly Out of Focus' - Robert Capa That's another I should have. I have a fair number of great war photography books. The one I need now is the new Larry Burrows book. That will be an important one. > 17. 'Seeing he Light: Wilderness and Salvation: A Photographer's Tale' - > Tom Shroder and John Barry (photos by Clyde Butcher) So I guess actually I don't have ANY of your list. Can we still talk? --Mike
Re: OT: Mac Blat
Mike, Just interesting food for thought - I found out that the underlying OS for the Agfa D-Labs is Windows 2000. One wonders why they made that decision. One angle could be connectivity. Bruce Sunday, January 12, 2003, 11:47:25 AM, you wrote: >> Whine, whine, whine, Mac mac mac.. versus whine whine whine, PC PC PC. >> >> I hearby nominate this sort of useless argument to the same field as gun >> talk. Stupid. pointless, and bound to aggravate everyone involved. >> >> So, you disagree with the firearm discussions, and I'm going to vehemently >> disagree with this thread. Matter of fact, if this is what's going ot >> start upo, I'm afraid I'm going to have to start threads on firearms. MJ> You could always do what I did during the firearms discussion and simply MJ> leave the list for the duration. The other alternative is censorship, MJ> unfortunately. MJ> I agree that this is generally a useless, aggravating discussion. However, I MJ> think the fact that professional photographers, publishers, and graphic MJ> designers have all standardized on Macs and Photoshop is something that MJ> people should be reminded of once in a while. It serves as a corrective to MJ> the constant propaganda that "all serious computer users use PCs." Macs are MJ> not a fringe product in my world. The magazine publishers I've worked for in MJ> my life have collectively published 56 different newsstand magazines. All MJ> were put together exclusively on Macs. I don't have the widest experience in MJ> the world, but I've been around some, and I have yet to see a single MJ> "creatives" shop--graphics design, advertising, or professional photography MJ> studio--that was running PCs. I'm sure the exceptions exist, but that MJ> doesn't change the prevailing norms. MJ> Some people might be interested in these facts. And, unfortunately, it is MJ> far more germane to a photography discussion site than most topics relating MJ> to firearms. I wish it weren't so--I'd personally be happier if digital MJ> never existed, and the days of film photography were never going to end. But MJ> that's not the reality. Hey, man, replacing the darkroom with computers MJ> wasn't *my* choice! MJ> --Mike
Re: OK, check out MY Pentax service manual auction on eBay ;-)
At 06:25 PM 1/12/2003 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=300055357 > 8 You do realize that despite what you say in the text of your auction, you will get people bidding on your CD for .01 eBay is not the bastion of the best and the brightest.
Re: Single best tip or trick for better pictures?
Slow down. Not always applicable when the subject is moving, but it's applicable, for me, probably 80-90% of the time. Little tip I've evolved for myself, but evidentially tons have already said the same thing, one way or another. Doe aka Marnie
Re: Please behave (was OT: Mac Blat)
Rob, I agree. Bruce Sunday, January 12, 2003, 3:30:38 PM, you wrote: RS> On 12 Jan 2003 at 17:24, Bruce Rubenstein wrote: >> Look, Johnston initially made the argument that the Mac is the preferred >> platform because it is used by professionals. This implies that if you >> want to work like professional you should use a Mac. Since the computer >> is now a photographic tool, the same premise would apply to the most >> basic tool of the photographer, which is the camera. In the same way >> that PCs are not professional grade tools, neither are Pentaxes. >> If you think that this is one big crock for camera brands, then it is >> also one big crock for which computer platform is more legitimate than >> the other. RS> I've got to back Bruce up on these points, the "Mac Blat" thread was crammed RS> full of brand based fallacies.. RS> Rob Studdert RS> HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA RS> Tel +61-2-9554-4110 RS> UTC(GMT) +10 Hours RS> [EMAIL PROTECTED] RS> http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html
Re: Way off Topic --- sorry --- Hi Fi
on 1/12/03 3:42 PM, Dr E D F Williams at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thank you Dr. Williams but I already have one mounted on a Pioneer turntable. Ed > > If any one on the list is interested let me know. Its a Shure V15 Type II > SuperTrack and the stylus is in perfect condition - I've checked it under > the microscope. I can't do a test since I have no HiFi equipment now. But > there is no reason why it should not be in perfect working condition. These > things are quite rare I've been told. > > Don > > Don Williams > ___ > > Dr E D F Williams > http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams > Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery > Updated: March 30, 2002 > > > > Ed Tyler
Re: Single best tip or trick for better pictures?
Or it could be called "Take your time." I sort of prefer "Slow down". A little mental flag that I can raise that grabs my attention. HTH, Doe aka Marnie
