Re: [Fwd: You have been removed from the list]

[Alan Chan]

Yes, make a complaint.  It may not do much good but, at least you will have 
voiced your dissatisfaction.
Hotmail has a fair amount of problems in this respect, too, but I haven't 
been able to find anyone that will listen to my complaint.  Hell, as far as 
I can see, there's no way for me to voice a complaint.  I'm a paying 
customer, too.  When my subscription runs out, I'm going elsewhere.
??? Are you talking about PDML, or Hotmail? My Hotmail account is free but 
rather unstable. Yahoo is much better. However, since both are free, I don't 
complain.

regards,
Alan Chan
_
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: Tripod question

[Lon Williamson]

Pal, I'm on Cave's side.  This is anal retentive bullshit.
I had a BAAA evening.  Grin.
Folks, Pan and tilt will get you to most shots most of the
time.  There's this SWOOP in photography that urges you to
Spend Spend Spend.  Resist it on ballheads if you have a good
Pan and Tilt.
Lordy lordy lord, Caveman just got done arguing and now I have
to do it.
I'm weak.  Help me, Lord.

Pål Jensen wrote:
Lon wrote:

At a given price point, pan-tilt is usually a better
value.  More precise, locks down better, steadier.
Unless you know you need a ballhead (which are easier
to use when recomposition is frequent), stick with
a pan-tilt.  This amounts to conventional wisdom
as I understand it, and my experience (3 pan-tilt and
3 ballheads) confirms it.
REPLY:
True, in principle a pan/tilt head is sturdier than a ball head, all things equal (a shaky pan/tilt head is of course worse than a steady ball head). However, when weight enters the equation this doesn't hold up as real steady, lightweight pan/tilt heads doesn't exist to my knowledge whereas steady lightweight ball heads do. 

Pål

Re: Pentax announced development of digital medium format

[Alan Chan]

> What about a new FAJ 645 series ? ;-)

No way, the 645 is all black.. that means its PRO!
That's even better! They didn't even need to paint them silver. You know how 
much they will save?  :-)

regards,
Alan Chan
_
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*   
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: You have been removed from the list]

[Kenneth Waller]

I was getting about one of these a day for 10 days or so a couple of weeks
ago. Checked with my provider several times and they could offer no
explanation other than to point me in the direction of the PDML.
Resubscribed alot, sent some emails to the  list guy. All seems well now.

Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: "Frits Wüthrich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Pentax-Discuss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 4:49 PM
Subject: [Fwd: You have been removed from the list]


> PDML doesn't like me any more, it keeps removing me lately because of
> bouncing emails.
> I am on a Linux mailing list also, it also happens there that I get
> messages that there are messages bounced, but I never get removed from
> it.
>
> I am not sure where the problem is: is it with btinternet? Should I
> complain with them?
>
> Frits

Re: Pentax announced development of digital medium format

[Alan Chan]

645 lenses are all A or FA.. ;)
That's why Pentax didn't work on a 645 digital back, because they needed to 
design a 645D which takes no A or FA lenses. They will mount, but wthout 
metering.  :-)

regards,
Alan Chan
_
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: Pentax announced development of digital medium format

[Alan Chan]

Don't feel bad. I'd planned to use it on the DSLR. Little did I know. :(
K15/3.5 is doomed with the *istD. Sell it to me. You need the 'A'.  :-)

regards,
Alan Chan
_
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*   
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: Pentax announced development of digital medium format

[Bruce Dayton]

Jostein,

That would only be if your intention was to go digital instead of
film.


Bruce



Monday, June 16, 2003, 2:29:35 PM, you wrote:

>Snip<

J> Another reason to choose the 645 over 67 is that even the large MedF CCDs
J> are not full size 645...

J> Jostein

Re: Pentax announced development of digital medium format

[gfen]

On Mon, 16 Jun 2003, Caveman wrote:
> >>What is the base of your assumption that it will take existing lenses ?
> > 645 lenses are all A or FA.. ;)
> What about a new FAJ 645 series ? ;-)

No way, the 645 is all black.. that means its PRO!


-- 
http://www.infotainment.org   <-> more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighteenpercent.com<-> photography and portfolio.

Re: Pentax announced development of digital medium format

[Caveman]

gfen wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jun 2003, Caveman wrote:

What is the base of your assumption that it will take existing lenses ?


645 lenses are all A or FA.. ;)
What about a new FAJ 645 series ? ;-)

cheers,
caveman

Re: Pentax announced development of digital medium format

[gfen]

On Mon, 16 Jun 2003, Caveman wrote:
> What is the base of your assumption that it will take existing lenses ?

645 lenses are all A or FA.. ;)

-- 
http://www.infotainment.org   <-> more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighteenpercent.com<-> photography and portfolio.

For RO domains only (Re: Hot: THE Camera !)

[Caveman]

Caveman wrote:

It suspiciously sounds like a Pentax. Could this be the PZ-D ?
Va rog fara comentarii asupra numelui ;-)

cavernosu'

Re: Hot: THE Camera !

[Caveman]

Hints:
- the first letter of the brand is P (you can see that in the pics)
- the flash hot-shoe is lateral and not above the prism
- seller says it takes Pentax lenses
- there is no IS USM mentioned
It suspiciously sounds like a Pentax. Could this be the PZ-D ?

cheers,
caveman ;-)
Brendan wrote:
What in the hell is that thing?

 --- Caveman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Did you
want a camera that's a SLR but also has a
rangefinder, and a 
digital viewfinder ? Don't wait anymore, here it is
! And it takes 
Pentax lenses !


http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2935314567&category=15240

ROFL !

cheers,
caveman ;-)
P.S. Disclaimer: if you bid on that one, don't blame
it on me. Read 
everything careful and judge yourself.



__ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca

Re: Hot: THE Camera !

[Caveman]

My fav is the "photostatic" flash definition ;-) Reminds me a certain 
definition challenged PDMLer ;-)

Fred wrote:
"Even though it looks very complicated, it's just basically a point
and shoot."
;-)

Re: OT: Doggy pics

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 6/16/2003 7:49:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

> Hi,
> 
> For the doggy people, some pics by my friend Holli:
> 
> http://asiafoto.com/pets/dogs/index.htm
> 
> Warning: the page is a bit slow to load
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Rob Studdert (eBay ID: distudio)
> http://members.ebay.com.au/aboutme/distudio/

I really like the one where the dog is in the car looking in the side mirror.

BTW, are you laying down on the ground when you take most of those shots? The low 
angle looks difficult to achieve.

Marnie aka Doe 

Re: slow list?

[Keith Whaley]

Caveman wrote:
> 
> Keith Whaley wrote:
> > This list,. on occasion, resembles "slow glass." If anyone but me
> > remembers what THAT is!
> >
> > Just testing...  
> 
> Shaw's novel ? do I get brownie points ?
> 
> cheers,
> caveman

Yup! See:

http://www.cul.co.uk/books/sfauth15.htm

I don't recall which I read that most impressed me, but it was either:

Other Days, Other Eyes, or

Light of Other Days.

Both slow glass stories by Bob Shaw.
My copy is stashed in a box in the garage, along with some of my other
SF books...

keith

Re: Exhibit finally up

[Mark Roberts]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

>Fantastic! I am sure you will sell something (I admire your work). And the magazine 
>stuff sounds promising, even if you are suspicious.
>
>Sometimes when things go well it's hard NOT to be suspicious, because it sort makes 
>one wonder "what's the catch?" or "when is the other shoe going to fall?" Hehehe.

Hey Marnie/Doe,

I really liked the "Nature Bits" photo on your web page. Specifically,
the way you used that wood as a background for other images. That looks
like a "sellable" idea I may try imitating ;-)

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: Pentax announced development of digital medium format

[Peter Alling]

Then you are screwed.

At 09:06 PM 6/16/03 -0400, you wrote:
Peter Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>I hate you! ;-)

Don't feel bad. I'd planned to use it on the DSLR. Little did I know. :(

>At 06:25 PM 6/16/03 -0400, you wrote:
>>Peter Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >There are still 'K' lenses in the current catalog.  I'm glad I didn't buy
>> >one of these in the last year or so. Then I'd really feel shafted.
>>
>>I bought a used K 15mm f/3.5 (sob!)
>>
>>--
>>Mark Roberts
>>Photography and writing
>>www.robertstech.com
>
>To grasp the true meaning of socialism, imagine a world where everything is
>designed by
> the post office, even the sleaze.
> O'Rourke, P.J.
--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com
To grasp the true meaning of socialism, imagine a world where everything is 
designed by
the post office, even the sleaze.
O'Rourke, P.J.

Re: First shot a keeper (was Re: "My" Photography Show)

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 6/16/2003 3:15:54 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

> Lon, your comments are interesting. Some of the things that tend to make the
> first shot a keeper:
> 
> 1. Can't afford a lot of film and processing. This kind of makes one find a
> picture before shooting.
> 
> 2. You don't get no second chance. This is probably where you wife's
> technique comes from.
> 
> 3. Look, look, look, look, look, shoot! Pass on the medeocre stuff.
> 
> 4. Learned on a camera that only gives you a few shots per roll. Where I
> come from.
> 
> 5. Learned on a camera that required a lot of fiddling 
> before you could
> shoot.
> 
> 6. Don't give a damn. Impatience is the driving force.
> 
> ANY OTHERS?
> 
> Ciao,
> Graywolf
> http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto

Been thinking about what Lon said, myself. Especially as how it applies to me in 
particular. ;-) I do reshoot subjects, but not the same subject in the same way. And 
where I have been most successful so far, on the whole, but not always (let's 
emphasize the not always part), is on the first shot of a subject. It is a bit strange.

1. This is a factor, for sure.
2. Yup, definitely. Either you get it right, or you just don't get it and it's a toss. 
Because the conditions or place may not be repeatable. Or the conditions at the place 
may not be.
3. Yup.
6. Yup.

7. Not thinking too much. One can over analyze a shot, dance back and forth and try 
and try. Over trying sometimes negates good results -- in any art form (or in sports 
too, I would think). Effortless as possible is best, because then it comes from 
instinct of what looks good, from the gut, and less from the over-rationalizing head. 
And in the end, photography is visual and appeals mainly to the senses/emotions, ergo, 
it is not that reasoned or logical. So not thinking too much -- i.e not over thinking 
it. Sound right?

Marnie aka Doe ;-)

Re: Get this!

[Christian Skofteland]

this is another one from the same seller:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=15247&item=2935271473

Christian Skofteland
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


- Original Message -
From: "collinb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 6:46 PM
Subject: OT: Get this!


>
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2935271526&category=15248
>
> This guy must be a really fascinating character!
>
> collin
>

Re: Exhibit finally up

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 6/16/2003 3:11:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

> Well, after a full week of printing, mounting, matting and framing I
> succeeded in getting everything ready. This morning/afternoon I went
> down to the East End Food Co-op and Vegetarian Cafe and hung the whole
> lot on the walls! ;-) I'm pretty pleased with how it all looks. However
> this exhibit works out, it will have been great preparation for the Arts
> on the River Festival where I'm showing prints next month.
> 
> Side note: Just as I was packing up my stuff to leave I was approached
> by the publisher of a regional (western Pennsylvania) magazine about
> using one of my photos - cover shot, no less. No financial terms
> discussed yet. I am now experienced enough to be suspicious! (On the
> other hand, I just received a check from Adirondack Sports & Fitness
> magazine for the shots they used a couple of weeks ago.) We'll see...
> 
> Still, if that's an indication of how well the stuff is 
> received it's a
> good start.
> 
> -- 
>Mark Roberts

Fantastic! I am sure you will sell something (I admire your work). And the magazine 
stuff sounds promising, even if you are suspicious.

Sometimes when things go well it's hard NOT to be suspicious, because it sort makes 
one wonder "what's the catch?" or "when is the other shoe going to fall?" Hehehe.

Good luck.

Marnie aka Doe :-)

Re: Pentax announced development of digital medium format

[Mark Roberts]

Peter Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>I hate you! ;-)

Don't feel bad. I'd planned to use it on the DSLR. Little did I know. :(

>At 06:25 PM 6/16/03 -0400, you wrote:
>>Peter Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >There are still 'K' lenses in the current catalog.  I'm glad I didn't buy
>> >one of these in the last year or so. Then I'd really feel shafted.
>>
>>I bought a used K 15mm f/3.5 (sob!)
>>
>>--
>>Mark Roberts
>>Photography and writing
>>www.robertstech.com
>
>To grasp the true meaning of socialism, imagine a world where everything is 
>designed by
> the post office, even the sleaze.
> O'Rourke, P.J.

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: Hot: THE Camera !

[frank theriault]

Personally, I'm holding out for Wheatfield's Camera Car.  I hear it has
"AUTO"-exposure, and "AUTO"-focus...

It's a bit on the bulky size, though.

-frank

Brendan wrote:

> What in the hell is that thing?
>
>  --- Caveman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Did you
> want a camera that's a SLR but also has a
> > rangefinder, and a
> > digital viewfinder ? Don't wait anymore, here it is
> > ! And it takes
> > Pentax lenses !
> >
> >
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2935314567&category=15240
> >
> > ROFL !
> >
> > cheers,
> > caveman ;-)
> >
> > P.S. Disclaimer: if you bid on that one, don't blame
> > it on me. Read
> > everything careful and judge yourself.
> >
>
> __
> Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca

--
"What a senseless waste of human life"
-The Customer in Monty Python's Cheese Shop sketch

Re: First shot a keeper (was Re: "My" Photography Show)

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 6/16/2003 4:38:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

> Well that's bull.  But your're entitled to your opinion I 
> suppose.

I agree -- it's bull. The best photographer in my last class was this guy who had 
already taken his photos pre-class (the teacher didn't especially like that -- wanted 
people to take their photos during class so his critiques would have some application 
-- but he was good so he didn't criticize much) on a trip to St. Thomas. In his case, 
it was more a matter of picking out the best ones and if any would be better cropped.

All the ones he ended up putting in the show were the originals, uncropped. The ones 
he got right the first time. 

And the presumption that women are better at visual arts totally negates all the past 
great painters over the centuries who were mainly men (however, yes, a lot of that was 
cultural, as women were usually not "allowed" to be artists).

I *would* agree in the US and other Western cultures that women are more supported for 
being "artsy-fartsy" or doing some kind of craft. While a man might be frowned on as 
being somewhat sissy (or "worse") for doing the same thing.

Unless, however, he is an architect, drafter, wood worker, film maker, musician, 
photographer, and/or painter, etc.

Genius knows no father, and "art" knows no gender.

Whatever. ;-)

Marnie aka Doe

Re: Hot: THE Camera !

[Fred]

"Even though it looks very complicated, it's just basically a point
and shoot."

;-)

Fred

Re: Pentax announced development of digital medium format

[Mark Roberts]

"Bill Owens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>It works from the body, just like the PZ-1p.  Remember, most people here
>complained about the MZ-S not having aperture available from the body.  Now
>the complaint is they want to use the aperture ring instead of the body.
>
>Go Figure!

The PZ-1p allowed you to control the aperture from the body *or* the
lens. An important difference when the lens doesn't have an "A" setting.

I still have (and love) my PZ-1p!

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

OT: Doggy pics

[Rob Studdert]

Hi,

For the doggy people, some pics by my friend Holli:

http://asiafoto.com/pets/dogs/index.htm

Warning: the page is a bit slow to load

Cheers,

Rob Studdert (eBay ID: distudio)
http://members.ebay.com.au/aboutme/distudio/

PO Box 701
HURSTVILLE BC NSW 1481
AUSTRALIA

Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Please check my current eBay auctions:
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/ebay/

Re: slow list?

[Peter Alling]

Are you planning to redeeming them?

At 08:30 PM 6/16/03 -0400, you wrote:
Keith Whaley wrote:
This list,. on occasion, resembles "slow glass." If anyone but me
remembers what THAT is!
Just testing...  
Shaw's novel ? do I get brownie points ?

cheers,
caveman
To grasp the true meaning of socialism, imagine a world where everything is 
designed by
the post office, even the sleaze.
O'Rourke, P.J.

Re: Hot: THE Camera !

[Brendan]

What in the hell is that thing?

 --- Caveman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Did you
want a camera that's a SLR but also has a
> rangefinder, and a 
> digital viewfinder ? Don't wait anymore, here it is
> ! And it takes 
> Pentax lenses !
> 
>
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2935314567&category=15240
> 
> ROFL !
> 
> cheers,
> caveman ;-)
> 
> P.S. Disclaimer: if you bid on that one, don't blame
> it on me. Read 
> everything careful and judge yourself.
>  

__ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca

Re: Paypal?

[Bruce Dayton]

I personally have had no problems with PayPal.  They do what they say
and charge what they say they charge.  It has made ebay far easier to
deal with.  I hate having to deal with a bank check or money order.


Bruce



Monday, June 16, 2003, 12:21:26 PM, you wrote:

>> Let's say I win an auction for $10, I pay $10 for a item, do I have to pay 
>> 3% or does the seller pay it (out of the $10)?

DGAJ> Unless they've changed it since I signed up, it works like
DGAJ> this:

DGAJ> The person sending money never pays an extra fee to
DGAJ> PayPal.

DGAJ> People can get no-fee accounts if they never expect to
DGAJ> receive more than a certain amount of money in a single
DGAJ> month -- I think it's $300, but a quick check of the
DGAJ> FAQ on www.paypal.com will verify or refute that.

DGAJ> People who sign up for accounts that can receive more than
DGAJ> $300 in a month, get a small fee taken out of payments they
DGAJ> receive.

DGAJ> People who do a Whole Lot More business qualify for a smaller
DGAJ> percentage fee.

DGAJ> I've heard some real horror stories about PayPal (take a 
DGAJ> look at ), but personally I have
DGAJ> not had any problem with them at all (including using their
DGAJ> ATM card to spend money from my PayPal account in brick-and-mortar
DGAJ> stores, and having money transferred from my PayPal account to 
DGAJ> my checking account).  I'm not too thrilled with their recent 
DGAJ> changes to the list of what you're allowed to buy using their 
DGAJ> service -- it hasn't affected me, but the some of the specifics
DGAJ> annoy me on a political level -- and have been considering signing
DGAJ> up with a competing service so that anyone who needs to send me
DGAJ> money but is boycotting PayPal can do so, but PayPal seems to be
DGAJ> the ubiquitous online payment service, and my address is the 
DGAJ> one htat collects money for online CD sales for The Homespun 
DGAJ> Ceilidh Band, so I'm not going to drop PayPal unless they pull
DGAJ> something that does affect me directly.

DGAJ> As for the fee, I just factored that into the "shipping and
DGAJ> handling" fee (call it part of "handling") for online CD sales,
DGAJ> and when friends send me money for other reasons, the fee comes
DGAJ> to a small enough amount that I manage not to lose sleep over
DGAJ> it.

DGAJ> Again, the _sender_ does not pay a fee.

DGAJ> -- Glenn

Re: slow list?

[Caveman]

Keith Whaley wrote:
This list,. on occasion, resembles "slow glass." If anyone but me
remembers what THAT is! 

Just testing...  
Shaw's novel ? do I get brownie points ?

cheers,
caveman

Re: Pentax announced development of digital medium format

[Bruce Dayton]

This is unusual.  Most of the time they are totally silent until a
year after they release the product.  Getting into the act early with
product plans being announced is quite a change.

At the least, it indicates that they don't intend to give up on Medium
Format.


Bruce



Monday, June 16, 2003, 11:05:44 AM, you wrote:

C> Yeah. Why buy a Mamiya RBZ or Hassy with a digital back now, when you 
C> could wait an unspecified amount of time for an unspecified product from 
C> Pentax ?

C> Just wait. It's "The Pentax Way".

C> cheers,
C> caveman

C> KT Takeshita wrote:
>> On 03.6.16 1:28 PM, "Jostein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>>Squeezed the text on the webpage through Babelfish. Here's what came out.
>>>I feel sorry for the spilt blood of Contax and Hasse Lu :-)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> HEADLINEPENTAX TO DEVELOP DIGITAL MEDIUM FORMAT CAMERA IN RESPONSE
>> TO THE NEEDS BY PROFESSIONALS
>> 
>> TEXT
>> Pentax has started the development of digital medium format camera.
>> 
>> In addition to the proliferation of digital cameras, DTP system has been
>> progressing rapidly and the needs from photo studios are increasing.  In
>> this environment, Pentax (Imaging System Business Division, Product Planning
>> Dep't) have entered into the "production planning".
>> 
>> While Pentax have been enjoying the top share in the MF market, its design
>> is unique and could not respond to the digital back method (in place of film
>> back).
>> 
>> OTOH, Kodak, who have been supplying digital back to Mamiya OP, Contax and
>> HB etc, recognize the possibility to collaborate with Pentax (Professional
>> Division, DSC Team), and are positive in developing the digital system for
>> Pentax equipment.
>> 
>> 
>> Ken
>> 
>> 

Re: First shot a keeper (was Re: "My" Photography Show)

[Nick Zentena]

On June 16, 2003 05:11 pm, frank theriault wrote:

> pooched - didn't even use a handheld, didn't even know about Sunny 16, just
> went by the exposure "instructions" on the inside of the film box!  Came
> back with incredible photos of Egypt.

The stuff on the box is basically Sunny 16. It's modified a little for modern 
shutters [How many 1/100  or 1/400 shutters today?]. What I find funny is 
Fuji's datasheet for Velvia gives the same info. Makes you wonder just how 
accurate exposure needs to be.

Nick

Re: slow list?

[Keith Whaley]

This list,. on occasion, resembles "slow glass." If anyone but me
remembers what THAT is! 

Just testing...  

keith whaley

frank theriault wrote:
> 
> Sent a couple of posts over an hour ago, which still haven't made it to
> the list.
> 
> Just testing...
> 
> -frank

Hot: THE Camera !

[Caveman]

Did you want a camera that's a SLR but also has a rangefinder, and a 
digital viewfinder ? Don't wait anymore, here it is ! And it takes 
Pentax lenses !

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2935314567&category=15240

ROFL !

cheers,
caveman ;-)
P.S. Disclaimer: if you bid on that one, don't blame it on me. Read 
everything careful and judge yourself.

Re: First shot a keeper (was Re: "My" Photography Show)

[Leonard Paris]

In a way it's bull but in another way it's not.  Traditionally, at least in 
the US, we seem to train our girls from childhood towards the artistic side 
and our boys towards the technical side.  Not that they both aren't capable 
of learning either side.

Len
---

From: Peter Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: First shot a keeper (was Re: "My" Photography Show)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 17:38:06 -0400
Well that's bull.  But your're entitled to your opinion I suppose.

At 04:30 PM 6/16/03 -0400, you wrote:
T Rittenhouse wrote:
ANY OTHERS?
Visual artistic sense is innate for women and acquired for men (exceptions 
exist). If you don't believe that, try to decorate your room or house 
yourself.
The only photographic domain where men are definitely better is porn. They 
know exactly what a man would want to see.

cheers,
caveman
To grasp the true meaning of socialism, imagine a world where everything is 
designed by
the post office, even the sleaze.
O'Rourke, P.J.

_
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: a thought on marketing philosophy

[Caveman]

Kenneth Waller wrote:
6 MP is simply good enough for a large number of folks.  
snip, snip...

The biggest problem with 6 MP is the wide angle problem.
Huh? 
Isn't the wide angle "problem" caused by the size of the sensor?
Per se, not even that. The problem is caused by using the sensor in a 
camera and with lenses that were designed for a different image size.

cheers,
caveman

Re: a thought on marketing philosophy

[Kenneth Waller]

- Original Message - 
From: "Steve Desjardins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 10:26 AM
Subject: Re: a thought on marketing philosophy


> 6 MP is simply good enough for a large number of folks.  

snip, snip...
>  The biggest problem with 6 MP is the wide angle problem.

Huh? 
Isn't the wide angle "problem" caused by the size of the sensor?

Kenneth Waller

Re: [Fwd: You have been removed from the list]

[Leonard Paris]

Yes, make a complaint.  It may not do much good but, at least you will have 
voiced your dissatisfaction.
Hotmail has a fair amount of problems in this respect, too, but I haven't 
been able to find anyone that will listen to my complaint.  Hell, as far as 
I can see, there's no way for me to voice a complaint.  I'm a paying 
customer, too.  When my subscription runs out, I'm going elsewhere.

Len
---
_
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online  
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963

Re: How important is that little cap?

[Leonard Paris]

Dust and dirt and other types of crud tend to get in there too, if you don;t 
have the cap.  After a few years, the connection can corrode, as well, uless 
it is gold plated.

Len


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: How important is that little cap?
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 13:39:52 -0700
How important is the "Electronic cable release socket cap", that little bit 
of plastic that covers the socket for the cable release on the ZX-M and 
related bodies?

Just realized that mine turned up missing.  At first glance, it doesn't 
seem very important -- the cap itself doesn't make a tight seal, meaning 
the only purpose it could serve would be to protect the contact pins from 
physical damage, and the pins are recessed, making such damage unlikely.  
Suppose it could also serve to protect the inner electronics from 
electrostatic discharge.

I'm mostly inclined to believe it's a cosmetic thing, in which case I'll 
get along well enough without it.

--
David Barts
Portland, OR
_
Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

Re: First shot a keeper (was Re: "My" Photography Show)

[Peter Alling]

You sure she isn't a ringer, just how well do you know this woman.

At 06:43 PM 6/16/03 -0400, you wrote:
frank theriault wrote:
Here's one of my favourite shots of hers, taken with a disposable that she
took as a back up, and had to use because she ran out of 35mm film:
http://www.urbancaravan.com/images/caravan.jpg
I like it too.

I freaking hate her!  
C'mon. Love her. First, it's your sister. Second, you may learn from her ;-)

Well, I did some "testing" myself, i.e. shooting side by side with 
cavewoman, same time, same place. Her shots look spontaneous and fresh. 
Mine look heavy, elaborate and boring. I try to beat her with longer 
lenses and getting details and abstracts. I can succeed at that - she 
avoids long focals (but that's because of camera shake and she won't ever 
bother with tripods; I suspect she'd beat me there too if she had an IS 
lens; but shhh don't tell her).

cheers,
caveman
To grasp the true meaning of socialism, imagine a world where everything is 
designed by
the post office, even the sleaze.
O'Rourke, P.J.

OT: Get this!

[collinb]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2935271526&category=15248

This guy must be a really fascinating character!

collin

Re: Pentax announced development of digital medium format

[Caveman]

Bill Owens wrote:
It works from the body, just like the PZ-1p.  Remember, most people here
complained about the MZ-S not having aperture available from the body.  Now
the complaint is they want to use the aperture ring instead of the body.
Go Figure!
The decent thing would be to allow you to use it both ways, at your will.

cheers,
caveman
P.S. How do you set aperture with two *current* pieces of equipment like 
a MZ-5n with a FAJ lens ? Ain't this flagrant incompatibility ?

Re: First shot a keeper (was Re: "My" Photography Show)

[Caveman]

frank theriault wrote:
Here's one of my favourite shots of hers, taken with a disposable that she
took as a back up, and had to use because she ran out of 35mm film:
http://www.urbancaravan.com/images/caravan.jpg
I like it too.

I freaking hate her!  
C'mon. Love her. First, it's your sister. Second, you may learn from her ;-)

Well, I did some "testing" myself, i.e. shooting side by side with 
cavewoman, same time, same place. Her shots look spontaneous and fresh. 
Mine look heavy, elaborate and boring. I try to beat her with longer 
lenses and getting details and abstracts. I can succeed at that - she 
avoids long focals (but that's because of camera shake and she won't 
ever bother with tripods; I suspect she'd beat me there too if she had 
an IS lens; but shhh don't tell her).

cheers,
caveman

Re: Pentax announced development of digital medium format

[Bill Owens]

It works from the body, just like the PZ-1p.  Remember, most people here
complained about the MZ-S not having aperture available from the body.  Now
the complaint is they want to use the aperture ring instead of the body.

Go Figure!

Bill

- Original Message - 
From: "Caveman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 5:54 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax announced development of digital medium format


> Pål Jensen wrote:
>
> > They never played "compatibility" games with current lenses. Only those
that nobody has bought for more than 20 years.
> >
>
> Well, then tell us how the aperture ring on the FA lenses (limited if
> you want) works with their latest film camera (*ist).
>
> cheers,
> caveman
>
>

Re: slow list?

[frank theriault]

Yeah, just ahead of the other two...  

cheers,
frank

Peter Alling wrote:

> Got here this time.
>
> At 06:09 PM 6/16/03 -0400, you wrote:
> >Sent a couple of posts over an hour ago, which still haven't made it to
> >the list.
> >
> >Just testing...
> >
> >-frank
> >
> >--
> >"What a senseless waste of human life"
> >-The Customer in Monty Python's Cheese Shop sketch
>
> To grasp the true meaning of socialism, imagine a world where everything is
> designed by
>  the post office, even the sleaze.
>  O'Rourke, P.J.

--
"What a senseless waste of human life"
-The Customer in Monty Python's Cheese Shop sketch

Re: Pentax announced development of digital medium format

[Peter Alling]

I hate you! ;-)

At 06:25 PM 6/16/03 -0400, you wrote:
Peter Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>There are still 'K' lenses in the current catalog.  I'm glad I didn't buy
>one of these in the last year or so. Then I'd really feel shafted.
I bought a used K 15mm f/3.5 (sob!)

--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com
To grasp the true meaning of socialism, imagine a world where everything is 
designed by
the post office, even the sleaze.
O'Rourke, P.J.

Re: a thought on marketing philosophy

[Dag T]

På mandag, 16. juni 2003, kl. 23:09, skrev Mark Roberts:

Dag T <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Also, the chips have dielectric filters on the sensors separating the
colours.  These filters are very angular dependent.  Traditional wide
angles tend to focus light toward the edges of the film at a sharp
angle, and are therefore not very suitable for digital cameras.
This is a myth. Long ago debunked.
1) The angle sensitivity of CCD and CMOS chips is nowhere near enough 
to
be troubled by the mild angles possible with current 35mm lens mounts
(62-66 degrees). See Canon EOS-1Ds for demonstration.
1Ds has some nice solutions, yes.  From what I understand they have 
some microlenses.

Do you known then, how they made the filters?

2) Single lens reflex cameras don't use *traditional* wide angles, they
use retrofocus designs, which don't produce angles any greater than a
normal (50mm) lens.
There are different types having different problems.  You could say 
that the ones having most vignetting have largest problems here as 
well, or you could just look have far toward the film plane the rear 
lens element stretches.  If Pentax skips the 15 f/3.5 I would expect a 
new one with a different design.

DagT

Re: [Fwd: You have been removed from the list]

[Alan Chan]

I don't know what caused the problem, but it happened to me 2 days ago. I 
just resubscribe again and it seems to work fine.

regards,
Alan Chan
PDML doesn't like me any more, it keeps removing me lately because of
bouncing emails.
I am on a Linux mailing list also, it also happens there that I get
messages that there are messages bounced, but I never get removed from
it.
I am not sure where the problem is: is it with btinternet? Should I
complain with them?
Frits
_
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*   
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: Paypal?

[Alan Chan]

Let's say I win an auction for $10, I pay $10 for a item, do I have to pay 
3% or does the seller pay it (out of the $10)?
The charge is always on the one who received the payment. So the answer is, 
seller. You only pay $10.

regards,
Alan Chan
_
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online  
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963

Re: Paypal?

[Alan Chan]

Ok, please help someone ebay illiterate.  What pros and cons are there with 
paypal?
They charged you certain % when you receive payment, everytime. The most 
basic account is next to useless you will need to upgrade to Premier Account 
as soon as you need to do some real business. There is like 10 days waiting 
period if the payment was made by credit card. You will need a credit card 
for Premier Account. All these are cons. The pro? You get the money 
instantly, or they get the money. Get it?  :-)

regards,
Alan Chan
_
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

Re: FA77 observation...

[Alan Chan]

I could be wrong, but setting the goal to keep this lens as compact as 
possible there were a few compromises in several areas which the FA43 
doesn't suffer.

1) The helical thread area is a bit small (F101) to support the weight of 
the front section. I believe this causes the strange characteristic. If you 
apply slight force on the front barrel, the focus ring would be locked (but 
not permanently). However, I don't have any M lenses with me so I cannot 
compare.

2) The screw holes on the filter frame (D101) were made too narrow (u shape) 
and caused 1/3 of the metal being compressed and distorted when tightening 
the screws, because the stress was not properly supported.

3) The cover frame (D102) that support the hood is so thin it could be 
distorted if not careful. But I don't suppose this would happen unless you 
hit the hood.

4) There is a large opening between the front (0-S100) & intermediate lens 
groups (0-S200) for the aperture diaphragm turning plate (B204) that draws 
lots of dust in. But this is not a FA77 specific problem. Have you noticed 
your FA77 is very dust inside? It's actually the dust on 2 surfaces near the 
aperture blades only. Unscrew the intermediate lens groups (0-S200) and you 
can blow off the dust.

regards,
Alan Chan
I am not sure if it is any kind of "problem" per se.  One does not notice 
it
until told.   Perhaps just the way it is designed :-).  It does not give me
any problem.
Not that I am defending Mr.Harakiri :-).
_
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

Re: a thought on marketing philosophy

[Mark Roberts]

Dag T <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


>Also, the chips have dielectric filters on the sensors separating the 
>colours.  These filters are very angular dependent.  Traditional wide 
>angles tend to focus light toward the edges of the film at a sharp 
>angle, and are therefore not very suitable for digital cameras.

This is a myth. Long ago debunked.
1) The angle sensitivity of CCD and CMOS chips is nowhere near enough to
be troubled by the mild angles possible with current 35mm lens mounts
(62-66 degrees). See Canon EOS-1Ds for demonstration.
2) Single lens reflex cameras don't use *traditional* wide angles, they
use retrofocus designs, which don't produce angles any greater than a
normal (50mm) lens.

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: a thought on marketing philosophy

[Caveman]

Dag T wrote:
Traditional wide 
angles tend to focus light toward the edges of the film at a sharp 
angle, and are therefore not very suitable for digital cameras.
What would be the solution ? Exaggerated retrofocus design ? How about 
sharpness and distortion ? Oh, wait, never mind. You Fix It Later In 
Photoshop (TM) anyway.

cheers,
caveman ;-)

Re: Quote of the Day

[T Rittenhouse]

I don't think so. IIRC, the 0.95 mounted to an outside breech lock on the 7
& 7S, it did not fit the inner 39mm Leica mount, nor the earlier cameras.

Also, the SLR lens has to be mounted ahead of the mirror housing which
requires a larger diameter mount. Plus, the EF mount has a shorter film to
flange distance than the FD. That was so FD lenses could be used with an
adaptor, there were adaptor for several other manufactures mounts also.

The Pentax K mount had the same philosophy to start with, but it came out a
good decade before the Canon EF when electronics was not yet a
consideration.

Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto


- Original Message -
From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


> Canon produced a f 0.95 lens in Leica screw mount, so I don't think the
> size of the FD throat was a limitation on making an F1.0 normal lens.

[Fwd: You have been removed from the list]

[Frits Wüthrich]

PDML doesn't like me any more, it keeps removing me lately because of
bouncing emails.
I am on a Linux mailing list also, it also happens there that I get
messages that there are messages bounced, but I never get removed from
it.

I am not sure where the problem is: is it with btinternet? Should I
complain with them?

Frits

-Forwarded Message-

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: You have been removed from the list
Date: 16 Jun 2003 08:25:32 -0400

Your mail address [EMAIL PROTECTED] has been removed
from the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailinglist.
It generated an excessive amount of bounced mails.

Before sending in a subscription request to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] again, please ensure that
this problem has been resolved.  When in doubt, ask your system
administrator or send mail to "postmaster".

The last one of those bounced mails has been quoted below:
>From  Mon Jun 16 08:25:32 2003
>Received: from mx.mailix.net ([216.148.221.135])
>   by host24.websitesource.com (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id h5GCPVG16441
>   for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 16 Jun 2003 08:25:32 -0400
>Received: from nobody by mx.mailix.net with local (Exim 3.36 #6)
>   id 19Rt1r-0004Ww-00
>   for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 16 Jun 2003 05:24:07 -0700
>X-Failed-Recipients: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: Mail Delivery System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender
>Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 05:24:07 -0700
>
>This message was created automatically by mail delivery software (Exim).
>
>A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
>recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed:
>
>  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>(generated from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
>SMTP error from remote mailer after end of data:
>host stargate.btinternet.com [194.73.73.117]:
>421 plutonium.btinternet.com SMTP incoming data timeout - closing connection.:
>retry timeout exceeded
>
>-- This is a copy of the message, including all the headers. --
>
>Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Received: from [209.239.33.40] (helo=host24.websitesource.com)
>   by mx.mailix.net with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #6)
>   id 19HqM7-00069Y-00
>   for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 19 May 2003 12:31:31 -0700
>Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
>   by host24.websitesource.com (8.10.2/8.10.2) id h4JJVUm01508
>   for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 19 May 2003 15:31:30 -0400
>Resent-Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 15:31:30 -0400
>X-Authentication-Warning: host24.websitesource.com: dbrewer set sender to [EMAIL 
>PROTECTED] using -f
>X-Originating-IP: [198.26.125.12]
>X-Originating-Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: "Leonard Paris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: What's with the "L" teleconverters?
>Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 14:31:23 -0500
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
>Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 May 2003 19:31:23.0374 (UTC) FILETIME=[3B5488E0:01C31E3D]
>Resent-Message-ID: <"Te2HLB.A.dX.SETy-"@host24.websitesource.com>
>Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>X-Mailing-List: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> archive/latest/33551
>X-Loop: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Precedence: list
>Resent-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>Hold on.  I'm sure somebody can give you the Long and the Short of it. ;-)
>
>Len
>---
>
>
>>From: Thomas Haller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>To: "Pentax Discuss (E-mail)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Subject: What's with the "L" teleconverters?
>>Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 12:30:03 -0700
>>
>>Pardon my stupidity, but what are the "L" style Pentax teleconverters all
>>about?
>>
>>I just bought a nice 1.4x "S" teleconverter from KEH for my MX (along with 
>>a
>>really
>>clean winder and a 90 degree viewfinder adapter too!) and I was looking at
>>the "L"
>>style converters, that seem to have a lens sticking out of their center.
>>What's up
>>with that? What are they for? How do they work? (and so forth...)
>>
>>- THaller
>>
>
>_
>Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.  
>http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
>
>made it here!!!made it here!!!
>
-- 
Frits Wüthrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: Paypal?

[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]

I use it regularly.

Pros:
   Speed.Many buyers prefer to use it.
 You get your money quickly and safely.
   Availablity.  Get a PayPal debit card @ no charge.
 Makes life easier when you're paying cash.
   Plastic.  It's the only way many have to take plastic.
   1.5% back.Like Discover you get a %age back on purchases.
 Buy a $200 lens and that's $3 back in your pocket.

Cons:
   Cost.
   Cost.
   Cost.
   Cost.

Collin

***
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 11:14:20 -0700 
From: "Paul Eriksson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Ok, please help someone ebay illiterate. What pros and cons are there with 
paypal? 

thanks 
Paul 
***



mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .

Re: Pentax announced development of digital medium format

[KT Takeshita]

On 03.6.16 3:44 PM, "Pål Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> In other words, this is not necessarily a digital back but a digital medium
> format camera; that is, a camera that take one of the Pentax MF lenses.
> Is this the rumored 645D or is it related to the new and compact 67, or is it
> both?

We've been hearing for quite some time that Pentax have been developing
645D.
However, this particular article suggests more like Kodak made a move
because of share of MF market by Pentax.  It makes more sense to Kodak to
make digital backs for Pentax MF cameras than any other brands naturally,
and Pentax probably found common benefit there.
To me, it sounds like 645 digital back and Pentax are willing to modify the
current design to take the digital back (hence exchangeable film back too).
But then why not for 67 too.  Compact 67 rumour is not dead yet.  Like this
article, something suddenly crops up out of nowhere.

Cheers,

Ken

How important is that little cap?

[n5jrn]

How important is the "Electronic cable release socket cap", that little 
bit of plastic that covers the socket for the cable release on the ZX-M 
and related bodies?

Just realized that mine turned up missing.  At first glance, it doesn't 
seem very important -- the cap itself doesn't make a tight seal, 
meaning the only purpose it could serve would be to protect the contact 
pins from physical damage, and the pins are recessed, making such 
damage unlikely.  Suppose it could also serve to protect the inner 
electronics from electrostatic discharge.

I'm mostly inclined to believe it's a cosmetic thing, in which case 
I'll get along well enough without it.

--
David Barts
Portland, OR

Re: a thought on marketing philosophy

[Dag T]

På mandag, 16. juni 2003, kl. 22:11, skrev Caveman:

Kenneth Waller wrote:
6 MP is simply good enough for a large number of folks.
snip, snip...
The biggest problem with 6 MP is the wide angle problem.
Huh? Isn't the wide angle "problem" caused by the size of the sensor?
Per se, not even that. The problem is caused by using the sensor in a 
camera and with lenses that were designed for a different image size.

Also, the chips have dielectric filters on the sensors separating the 
colours.  These filters are very angular dependent.  Traditional wide 
angles tend to focus light toward the edges of the film at a sharp 
angle, and are therefore not very suitable for digital cameras.

DagT

Re: Paypal?

[T Rittenhouse]

PayPal fee is to the seller. BidPay on the other hand charges the buyer.

>From a buyers viewpoint there are almost no disavantages to PayPal. Of
course, you may overspend if you use your credit card.

The seller has to provide lots of information. The funds are not
automatically transferred to the seller, but remain in his PayPal account
untill he goes through the hassle of transfering them to his bank. BUT, it
give the seller the ability to accept creadit card purchases with no up
front costs, just the transaction fee.

Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto


- Original Message -
From: "Paul Eriksson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


> Let's say I win an auction for $10, I pay $10 for a item, do I have to pay
> 3% or does the seller pay it (out of the $10)?

Re: First shot a keeper (was Re: "My" Photography Show)

[Caveman]

T Rittenhouse wrote:
ANY OTHERS?
Visual artistic sense is innate for women and acquired for men 
(exceptions exist). If you don't believe that, try to decorate your room 
or house yourself.
The only photographic domain where men are definitely better is porn. 
They know exactly what a man would want to see.

cheers,
caveman

First shot a keeper (was Re: "My" Photography Show)

[T Rittenhouse]

Lon, your comments are interesting. Some of the things that tend to make the
first shot a keeper:

1. Can't afford a lot of film and processing. This kind of makes one find a
picture before shooting.

2. You don't get no second chance. This is probably where you wife's
technique comes from.

3. Look, look, look, look, look, shoot! Pass on the medeocre stuff.

4. Learned on a camera that only gives you a few shots per roll. Where I
come from.

5. Learned on a camera that required a lot of fiddling before you could
shoot.

6. Don't give a damn. Impatience is the driving force.

ANY OTHERS?

Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto


- Original Message -
From: "Lon Williamson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 11:21 AM
Subject: Re: "My" Photography Show


> No reframing, no puddling around, etc.
> Reminds me of my wife and how she shoots.
> Instinctive, no fooling around, first shots usually a keeper.
> She's much better than I am at most types of photography, I am
> better than her at stuff that requires patience.  She's _much_
> quicker, a by-product of her 5 years as a photojournalist on a
> small midwestern paper, I assume.
>
> I'm not sure the guy approach of "understanding" technical details helps.
> Notice how much bandwidth Caveman and Pal have wasted over _accurate_
> exposure recently?
>
> I read this book recently titled, I think, "Faces", by a woman
> photographer for a London newspaper.  She ran around for about
> 35 years with a meterless OM camera, B&W film, and a 200 watt tungsten
> light bulb (she sometimes assaulted a lamp with it if she needed a bit
more
> light).  Her typical shot was with a 100mm f2.8 lens, wide open.
>
> Her stuff is, of course, very good.  She mentioned she noticed that
> either the first or last frame on a roll was often the keeper.
>
> Sounds like you are a first frame sort of person.
>
>
>
>

Exhibit finally up

[Mark Roberts]

Well, after a full week of printing, mounting, matting and framing I
succeeded in getting everything ready. This morning/afternoon I went
down to the East End Food Co-op and Vegetarian Cafe and hung the whole
lot on the walls! ;-) I'm pretty pleased with how it all looks. However
this exhibit works out, it will have been great preparation for the Arts
on the River Festival where I'm showing prints next month.

Side note: Just as I was packing up my stuff to leave I was approached
by the publisher of a regional (western Pennsylvania) magazine about
using one of my photos - cover shot, no less. No financial terms
discussed yet. I am now experienced enough to be suspicious! (On the
other hand, I just received a check from Adirondack Sports & Fitness
magazine for the shots they used a couple of weeks ago.) We'll see...

Still, if that's an indication of how well the stuff is received it's a
good start.

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: a thought on marketing philosophy

[Leonard Paris]

Yes, the Picture CDs that I have gotten were optimized for 4 x 6-inch 
prints.  Not that you can't rez them up a bit on your own but you probably 
wouldn't be real excited about printing them at 8 x 10.

Photo CDs are a lot more expensive here (where I am) $2.00 - $2.50 per image 
scanned but the prints you can make with them are great.

Len
---

From: "Kenneth Waller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: a thought on marketing philosophy
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 15:27:39 -0400
I've seen similar offers, that didn't include a Photo CD but a Picture CD.
There's a big difference between the two. Low resolution scans in the
Picture CD vs 5  levels of scans in the  Photo CD (from
128X192 to 2048X3072 pixels).
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: "Bill Owens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 8:12 AM
Subject: Re: a thought on marketing philosophy
> I think it's just marketing hype.  It appears to me that they are 
selling
> the same old disposable at an increased price to include a Photo CD.  
Not
a
> bad concept considering that Joe and Jane Sixpack probably don't have a
> scanner and/or image editing software, but do have a computer that 
enables
> them to email their photos to Aunt Martha.
>
> Bill
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Keith Whaley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 7:44 AM
> Subject: Re: a thought on marketing philosophy
>
>
> > Speaking of the right time to enter the market with a product, how 
about
> > Kodak, and it's 27 exposure "one-time-use camera system [disposable]
> > DIGITAL cameras?
> > My Sunday paper came in a plastic wrapper/envelope, with the Kodak 
adv.
> > on the outside.
> > Order Premium prints and you'll get a CD with your images on it.
> >
> > All sorts of questions come to mind, but I'd sure like to know more of
> > the details about the camera, even tho' it's considered a 
disposable...
> >
> > Come to think of it, they didn't call it a digital camera - they said
> > you'd get back digital pictures, on a CD, when you ordered Kodak 
Premium
> > prints. Does that mean all jpegs?
> >
> > So, perhaps I'm doing some assuming of facts not in evidence. How is
> > this any different from recording your images on regular film, with a
> > regular camera, and having it developed and printed by Kodak, and 
asking
> > for prints plus a PhotoCD?
> > Seems to be the same arrangement to me.
> > Were the Kodak Photo CDs you used to get back when requested recorded
> > with a proprietary format, but they're offering jpegs now? Don't know,
> > but I'll bet someone here has the info...
> >
> > Maybe I'm making a mountain out of a molehill, but it's the first time
> > I've seen Kodak include the word 'digital' in an ad for disposable
> > cameras!  
> >
> > keith whaley
> >
> > Jostein wrote:
> > >
> > > I think your points are very good, Collin. I Have been thinking alon
the
> > > same lines too. :-)
> > > There was a report to the List this winter that Pentax had set up a
new
> > > factory in China to produce digital cameras (which was very 
positively
> > > received by the stock market, IIRC). To a relatively speaking small
> company,
> > > that kind of investment has to be a risk to take. -Which of course
> increase
> > > the importance of finding the right moment to enter the market.
> > >
> > > Jostein
> > >
> > > - Original Message -
> > > From: "collinb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Subject: a thought on marketing philosophy
> > >
> > > > Here's something to consider about Pentax' conservative approach 
to
> DSLRs.
> > > > Being a smaller competitor, it's necessary to be certain that each
> product
> > > > released is profitable.  Also, with a new series of products it's
> > > important to
> > > > hit the curve when it's definitely on the uphill side, when
> profitability
> > > > is maximum,
> > > > volumes are highest, and the opportunity is has the lowest
likelihood
> of
> > > > failure.
> > > >
> >
> >
>
>
>

_
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

Re: Pentax announced development of digital medium format

[Caveman]

Pål Jensen wrote:
In other words, this is not necessarily a digital back but a digital medium format camera; that is, a camera that take one of the Pentax MF lenses. 
What is the base of your assumption that it will take existing lenses ?

cheers,
caveman

Re: Pentax announced development of digital medium format

[Caveman]

We don't need no stinkin' lens mount compatibility. It impairs new 
equipment sales and slows down progress. They should be changed on a 
regular basis, each two years or so. This would prevent such lowly 
tactics as buying used, which impairs cash flow to the company and makes 
difficult to recover money spent on research, development and tooling. 
In fact, I propose an even better approach. An yearly "photo" tax that 
we should pay to the companies. If you want to take photos, you pay the 
tax. This can be easily enforced with the appropriate firmware. You pay 
the tax and get an yearly authorisation code that you enter, or go to an 
authorised camera shop to do it for you.

cheers,
caveman ;-)
Jim Apilado wrote:
Of course lenses for the 645 won't be compatible.  Right?

Jim A.

Re: Pentax announced development of digital medium format

[Pål Jensen]

In other words, this is not necessarily a digital back but a digital medium format 
camera; that is, a camera that take one of the Pentax MF lenses. 
Is this the rumored 645D or is it related to the new and compact 67, or is it both?

Pål

Re: "My" Photography Show

[Kenneth Waller]

Nice work, great presentation. Thanks for posting.
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 2:44 PM
Subject: "My" Photography Show


> Well, not "mine." I finally finished the advanced photography class I was
taking and it ended in a little show. Actually, when everything was hung
(eight students remaining) it looked d__n good and not that little. This is
my part of the show. Depending how you figure it, I've been doing
photography about seven to seven and a half months, probably closer to seven
and a half.
>
> http://members.aol.com/tamecomputer/
>
> Got bumped off the list again due to an overfull mailbox. I was so busy
the last 2-3 weeks I let it go.
>
> But back on the list again, yip!, (and, boy, do I have a lot to read).
>
> Marnie aka Doe :-)
>
>

Re: Pentax announced development of digital medium format

[Jim Apilado]

Of course lenses for the 645 won't be compatible.  Right?

Jim A.

> From: Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 18:15:53 +0200
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Fw: Pentax announced development of digital medium format
> Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Resent-Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 12:12:48 -0400
> 
> 
>> Pentax has just announced in Japan that they are developing a new medium
>> format camera that can take Kodak digital back, with assistance from kodak:
>> 
>> http://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=20030616-0004-nkn-ind
>> 
>> Would you please spread the news on PDML?
> 
> 
> 

Re: a thought on marketing philosophy

[Kenneth Waller]

I've seen similar offers, that didn't include a Photo CD but a Picture CD.
There's a big difference between the two. Low resolution scans in the
Picture CD vs 5  levels of scans in the  Photo CD (from
128X192 to 2048X3072 pixels).

Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: "Bill Owens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 8:12 AM
Subject: Re: a thought on marketing philosophy


> I think it's just marketing hype.  It appears to me that they are selling
> the same old disposable at an increased price to include a Photo CD.  Not
a
> bad concept considering that Joe and Jane Sixpack probably don't have a
> scanner and/or image editing software, but do have a computer that enables
> them to email their photos to Aunt Martha.
>
> Bill
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Keith Whaley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 7:44 AM
> Subject: Re: a thought on marketing philosophy
>
>
> > Speaking of the right time to enter the market with a product, how about
> > Kodak, and it's 27 exposure "one-time-use camera system [disposable]
> > DIGITAL cameras?
> > My Sunday paper came in a plastic wrapper/envelope, with the Kodak adv.
> > on the outside.
> > Order Premium prints and you'll get a CD with your images on it.
> >
> > All sorts of questions come to mind, but I'd sure like to know more of
> > the details about the camera, even tho' it's considered a disposable...
> >
> > Come to think of it, they didn't call it a digital camera - they said
> > you'd get back digital pictures, on a CD, when you ordered Kodak Premium
> > prints. Does that mean all jpegs?
> >
> > So, perhaps I'm doing some assuming of facts not in evidence. How is
> > this any different from recording your images on regular film, with a
> > regular camera, and having it developed and printed by Kodak, and asking
> > for prints plus a PhotoCD?
> > Seems to be the same arrangement to me.
> > Were the Kodak Photo CDs you used to get back when requested recorded
> > with a proprietary format, but they're offering jpegs now? Don't know,
> > but I'll bet someone here has the info...
> >
> > Maybe I'm making a mountain out of a molehill, but it's the first time
> > I've seen Kodak include the word 'digital' in an ad for disposable
> > cameras!  
> >
> > keith whaley
> >
> > Jostein wrote:
> > >
> > > I think your points are very good, Collin. I Have been thinking alon
the
> > > same lines too. :-)
> > > There was a report to the List this winter that Pentax had set up a
new
> > > factory in China to produce digital cameras (which was very positively
> > > received by the stock market, IIRC). To a relatively speaking small
> company,
> > > that kind of investment has to be a risk to take. -Which of course
> increase
> > > the importance of finding the right moment to enter the market.
> > >
> > > Jostein
> > >
> > > - Original Message -
> > > From: "collinb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Subject: a thought on marketing philosophy
> > >
> > > > Here's something to consider about Pentax' conservative approach to
> DSLRs.
> > > > Being a smaller competitor, it's necessary to be certain that each
> product
> > > > released is profitable.  Also, with a new series of products it's
> > > important to
> > > > hit the curve when it's definitely on the uphill side, when
> profitability
> > > > is maximum,
> > > > volumes are highest, and the opportunity is has the lowest
likelihood
> of
> > > > failure.
> > > >
> >
> >
>
>
>

Re: Paypal?

[D. Glenn Arthur Jr.]

> Let's say I win an auction for $10, I pay $10 for a item, do I have to pay 
> 3% or does the seller pay it (out of the $10)?

Unless they've changed it since I signed up, it works like
this:

The person sending money never pays an extra fee to
PayPal.

People can get no-fee accounts if they never expect to
receive more than a certain amount of money in a single
month -- I think it's $300, but a quick check of the
FAQ on www.paypal.com will verify or refute that.

People who sign up for accounts that can receive more than
$300 in a month, get a small fee taken out of payments they
receive.

People who do a Whole Lot More business qualify for a smaller
percentage fee.

I've heard some real horror stories about PayPal (take a 
look at ), but personally I have
not had any problem with them at all (including using their
ATM card to spend money from my PayPal account in brick-and-mortar
stores, and having money transferred from my PayPal account to 
my checking account).  I'm not too thrilled with their recent 
changes to the list of what you're allowed to buy using their 
service -- it hasn't affected me, but the some of the specifics
annoy me on a political level -- and have been considering signing
up with a competing service so that anyone who needs to send me
money but is boycotting PayPal can do so, but PayPal seems to be
the ubiquitous online payment service, and my address is the 
one htat collects money for online CD sales for The Homespun 
Ceilidh Band, so I'm not going to drop PayPal unless they pull
something that does affect me directly.

As for the fee, I just factored that into the "shipping and
handling" fee (call it part of "handling") for online CD sales,
and when friends send me money for other reasons, the fee comes
to a small enough amount that I manage not to lose sleep over
it.

Again, the _sender_ does not pay a fee.

-- Glenn

Re: Paypal?

[gfen]

On Mon, 16 Jun 2003, Paul Eriksson wrote:
> Let's say I win an auction for $10, I pay $10 for a item, do I have to pay
> 3% or does the seller pay it (out of the $10)?

Seller eats the cost.

(currently very hateful of paypal for having to endure verifying my
account, and now i see either the vendor, ebay, or paypal is charging me
7% tax when my state is only 6%...wonder who i get to eyell at)



-- 
http://www.infotainment.org   <-> more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighteenpercent.com<-> photography and portfolio.

Re: Paypal?

[Nick Zentena]

On June 16, 2003 02:14 pm, Paul Eriksson wrote:
> Ok, please help someone ebay illiterate.  What pros and cons are there with
> paypal?


I can only talk from the point of somebody that sends money.

Pros:

Fast payment so the seller ships the item fast. Hopefully.
No fees.
Supposedly you can ask for your money back within 30 days if things go bad. 
Never had to do this so don't know how easy it is.

Cons:

If you're buying in a different currency they now do the currency exchange 
themselves. While the rate they give isn't horrible it's worse then what my 
CC company gives. 

Nick

Re: Paypal?

[Paul Eriksson]

Let's say I win an auction for $10, I pay $10 for a item, do I have to pay 
3% or does the seller pay it (out of the $10)?

thanks again
Paul
From: Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Paypal?
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 14:38:49 -0400
"Paul Eriksson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Ok, please help someone ebay illiterate.  What pros and cons are there 
with
>paypal?

Pro:
Fast and simple way to send money.
Con:
Pay Pal takes a cut of every transaction (about 3%).
--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com
_
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

Re: Paypal?

[Mark Roberts]

"Paul Eriksson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Ok, please help someone ebay illiterate.  What pros and cons are there with 
>paypal?

Pro:
Fast and simple way to send money.

Con:
Pay Pal takes a cut of every transaction (about 3%).

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: FA77 observation...

[KT Takeshita]

On 03.6.16 2:14 PM, "Caveman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Since several people had the same problem...

I am not sure if it is any kind of "problem" per se.  One does not notice it
until told.   Perhaps just the way it is designed :-).  It does not give me
any problem.
Not that I am defending Mr.Harakiri :-).

Cheers,

Ken

Re: Quote of the Day

[Mark Roberts]

Lon Williamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>If a radial contact layout has some advantage,
>what is it?

I don't think there is an advantage. It's neither better nor worse, just
different. That said, the radial arrangement does get the contacts out
of the lens mount itself, which is steel (in better lenses, anyway) and
requires all kind of insulating spacers and bushings in Pentax's lens
mount. These insulating bits can be eliminated if the contacts are
mounted in plastic substructures in the lens and camera. 

I'm wondering if the elimination of the aperture simulator in the Pentax
lens mount is to provide room for some radially-arranged contacts in
that spot some time in the future.

>I realize that a larger throat lets you produce lenses that
>might otherwise be impossible.  On the other hand, if I can't get
>an available light shot with a 50mm 1.4, then what the hell.

Yes, but having an 85/1.2 or a 50/1.0 in your product line is as much
about marketing as it is about taking photographs. You could argue
that's it's *more* about marketing than photography.

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: a thought on marketing philosophy

[Pål Jensen]

> Then they have an efficiency problem. Like in pouring in more effort and 
> money than C/M/N, and lagging behind in results.

Huh? This WAS the result!

Re: Which macro lens would you buy

[Pål Jensen]

Christian wrote:

Or.   Pentax SMC-A 200/4 macro or Pentax SMC-FA 200/4 ED IF
macro...   But who can justify the cost?


REPLY:
Justification? Who needs to justify things? :o)


Pål

Re: Which macro lens would you buy

[Pål Jensen]

--- Tony Cogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi
> I want to quit using close-up filters and start
> using a macro lens for 
> flowers, insects, etc.  Which lens would be a good
> place to start?


For insects a 200 Macro is definitely the no. 1 choice. It is great for flowers as 
well. The working distance and perspective means it is easier to control the 
background and excact camera placement becomes less critical the longer the focal 
lenght. And you don't scare away the critters by going too close. Save the close-up 
filters for the shorter focal lenghts if you plan eto use them for macro as well. 

Pål

Re: Tripod question

[Pål Jensen]

Lon wrote:

At a given price point, pan-tilt is usually a better
value.  More precise, locks down better, steadier.
Unless you know you need a ballhead (which are easier
to use when recomposition is frequent), stick with
a pan-tilt.  This amounts to conventional wisdom
as I understand it, and my experience (3 pan-tilt and
3 ballheads) confirms it.


REPLY:
True, in principle a pan/tilt head is sturdier than a ball head, all things equal (a 
shaky pan/tilt head is of course worse than a steady ball head). However, when weight 
enters the equation this doesn't hold up as real steady, lightweight pan/tilt heads 
doesn't exist to my knowledge whereas steady lightweight ball heads do. 

Pål

Re: Paypal?

[Caveman]

Paul Eriksson wrote:
Ok, please help someone ebay illiterate.  What pros and cons are there 
with paypal?
I balked at the moment when they asked for my social security number.

cheers,
caveman

Re: Did you hear the one about Bob Shell?

[Peter Alling]

The State cannot legislate morality no matter how it hard they 
try.  Pornography
is more in the eye of the beholder than anything.  The question of legality, no
matter what the justification depends on the jurisdiction.

At 08:40 PM 6/16/03 +1000, you wrote:
Here's a hypothetical question.  Definitely hypothetical, my wife's not that
kind of girl.
Presuming that a person took pornographic photos (not of anything illegal,
of course), but never intended to distribute them and always meant to keep
them private, is that illegal or immoral?  That is, if it's legal to perform
certain acts, and thus see them as a participant,  is it nevertheless an
offence to photograph those acts even for strictly private viewing?
I'm not making presumptions about Bob Shell, it just happens to remind me of
a  circumstance in Australia about 30 years ago, where a celebrity ran foul
of the law because he had a private collection of intimate photographs of
himself and his wife.
regards,
Anthony Farr
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
(snip)
> There is another possibility, if as Greywolf says Shell was producing
> "pornography", real
> or imagined the local prosecutor may be out to make Roanoke "safe for God
> Fearing people".
>
>
(earlier message snipped)
To grasp the true meaning of socialism, imagine a world where everything is 
designed by
the post office, even the sleaze.
O'Rourke, P.J.

Re: "My" Photography Show

[Lon Williamson]

No reframing, no puddling around, etc.
Reminds me of my wife and how she shoots.
Instinctive, no fooling around, first shots usually a keeper.
She's much better than I am at most types of photography, I am
better than her at stuff that requires patience.  She's _much_
quicker, a by-product of her 5 years as a photojournalist on a
small midwestern paper, I assume.
I'm not sure the guy approach of "understanding" technical details helps.
Notice how much bandwidth Caveman and Pal have wasted over _accurate_
exposure recently?
I read this book recently titled, I think, "Faces", by a woman
photographer for a London newspaper.  She ran around for about
35 years with a meterless OM camera, B&W film, and a 200 watt tungsten
light bulb (she sometimes assaulted a lamp with it if she needed a bit more
light).  Her typical shot was with a 100mm f2.8 lens, wide open.
Her stuff is, of course, very good.  She mentioned she noticed that
either the first or last frame on a roll was often the keeper.
Sounds like you are a first frame sort of person.

RE: OT: Slide projector recommendations

[Ed Matthew]

Dear Ed and Kenneth,

> "If you are looking for a new projector check out the Kodak
> Ektagraphic series, it's what I've seen most used by the
> pros - before digital projection."
>
I'm no expert, but I was told the "only" difference between the cheaper
Kodak carousel projectors and the Ektagraphic projectors in the precision 
of
the slide registration from one machine to another so they can be used to 
do
dissolves between two projectors and so forth.

That if you are going to only use one projector, there is little reason to
go to the Ektagraphic line. Now I imagine the truth is more like that the
_main_ difference is the machine to machine registration, but I thought I
mention what the _salesman_ told me! :-)
- Have fun! THaller
Due to school use (past -retired now), photo club use, and personal use, I 
am familiar with both the Ektagraphic line and the standard carousel line. 
The Ektagraphics seem slightly sturdier. I would guess that machine to 
machine registration *is* the main difference, as you imply.

Regards,
Ed
_
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: Which macro lens would you buy

[Christian Skofteland]

Vivitar Series 1 105/2.5.  Best bang for the buck for a lens that goes
life-size without accessories, is sharp as anything Pentax makes and has the
little "A" on it for those pesky new bodies.

Or.   Pentax SMC-A 200/4 macro or Pentax SMC-FA 200/4 ED IF
macro...   But who can justify the cost?

Go with the Vivitar.

Christian Skofteland
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [thats it] "My" Photography Show

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 6/16/2003 5:53:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

> Marnie,
> 
> Thanks for posting these images.
> 
> This is excellent work.  You've reached a standard in months
> that I still aspire to after a mere three decades!
> 
> Some might argue this demonstrates the value of tuition.  I
> would argue that it demonstrates that you have a great
> talent, and one that is still developing.
> 
> Good luck!
> 
> John

Whoa, thanks! (Not going to publically reply to any more than this one, that gets old 
-- replying to all.)

As Bob Walkden pointed out, very politely :-), I arranged the weaker photographs to 
support the stronger photographs. That is why I did the right-hand wood montage, I 
felt none of those images were truly strong enough to stand on their own (except 
possibly the poppies, but the teacher wanted it cropped -- which I did -- but I liked 
it better uncropped). And once I had one montage, I needed another for balance.

Why not play up the strongest and down play the weakest? It's sort of like picking out 
clothes when one is over weight -- don't wear horizontal stripes, do find flattering 
clothes that conceal the bulk and flatter something else, like the color of one's 
eyes. Hehehehehe.

Marnie aka Doe ;-) A little sneakiness, er flattering balance, goes a long way.

RE: OT: Slide projector recommendations

[Thomas Haller]

Dear Ed and Kenneth,

> "If you are looking for a new projector check out the Kodak
> Ektagraphic series, it's what I've seen most used by the 
> pros - before digital projection."
>
I'm no expert, but I was told the "only" difference between the cheaper
Kodak carousel projectors and the Ektagraphic projectors in the precision of
the slide registration from one machine to another so they can be used to do
dissolves between two projectors and so forth.

That if you are going to only use one projector, there is little reason to
go to the Ektagraphic line. Now I imagine the truth is more like that the
_main_ difference is the machine to machine registration, but I thought I
mention what the _salesman_ told me! :-)

- Have fun! THaller

Re: "My" Photography Show

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 6/16/2003 6:34:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

> Hi, Marnie,
> 
> So, in other words, nothing much has changed from your initial assessment, which was 
> about two or three classes into the course.

Pretty much. Although once I realized he really was trying to help and just was a 
blankity blank perfectionist, I calmed down a bit about the critiques.

> 
> He's a good stock photographer.  A nice guy.  But a lousy teacher (if what a teacher 
> is supposed to do is not merely pass on knowledge, but motivate and excite students).
> 
> Interesting that it sounds like he's having trouble breaking out of the "stock" 
> mode, and that his "artistic" stuff, while very competent, is safe and repetitive.

That is what I found interesting too. In my own shots what he liked best were the safe 
shots. Okay, the safe shots were probably the best shots, in the one can look at it 
and see immediately what it is type of sense, and maybe the best technically, but safe 
nevertheless. And I suppose, that logically, one should be able to do safe shots first 
well before branching out into the area of more risk. Logically. 

But I am not sure that *I* can approach photography that way. I tend to fool around 
and try things, and have from the beginning. Sure it means a lot of lousy shots, but I 
am happier doing it that way. The safe way -- well, to me it makes photography too 
much of a skill, a craft, just a matter of learning technique and less an art form. I 
do sort of wonder if my critique where I urged him to take more risks himself offended 
him or not. :-) Probably never know.

> 
> Anyway, sounds like in spite of everything, and in spite of your teacher, you did 
> learn a fair bit in the course.  
> Again, wonderful images in your portion of the show.

Not sure how much I learned, actually, now that I think about it. I think maybe what I 
learned was how to be more critical of my own stuff, how to assess it better. That is 
what I probably learned the most. And I think I learned more by looking at other 
students' shots and listening to their critiques. Because when I got a shot he/they 
liked, I got it "right" the very first time. Every time. No reshoots. Not sure what 
that tells me actually.

He did say "freaking fantastic" when I brought in the barn, "best landscape brought 
into class so far!" Of course, that kept me going. And I do think it's good, however, 
one photograph (well, two, the tree is good too) does not a photographer make. And so 
much of that was luck, the sun was just starting to go down when I reached that spot, 
and I looked up and went, "oh, wow."  

> 
> Congrats for sticking it through to the end!
> 
> ciao,
> frank

Thanks, maybe that is what I learned. Sticking with it. :-) He did announce at the 
beginning we would learn his prejudices and biases. Which we did. But I think what I 
need now is more technique stuff, I still am learning that -- exposure, focusing (with 
auto focus), framing, films. And don't feel I know enough yet about that to be that 
good yet. So if I take a class again, it will be one where the teacher goes on a shoot 
with us and maybe I can get some assistance in what I am DOING. 

Picking out the subject matter and the composition -- hey, I'll do that part. That I 
think I am not too bad at.

Later, Marnie aka Doe ;-) It is nice to be a little real life show though, how many 
beginning photographers get that?

Re: Pentax's future (was: *ist D revisited)

[Pål Jensen]

Mark wrote:

What baffles me is that the Mz-S - just released a couple of years ago - not only 
supports the aperture ring but _needs_ it for aperture priority and metered manual 
operation. I don't think releasing a new, limited mount in the new flagship would have 
made a lot of sense, but if Pentax knew this was the direction they were going in why 
not include on-body aperture control?


REPLY:
It could be that this camera, and the MZ-5/3, are the last "gifts" for the users of K 
and M lenses. They make the last cameras that use the basic traditional interface and 
that the future belong to a new generation of cameras.
I agree with Boz that we are seeing now is possibly the beginning of a transformation 
to a fully electronic mount. Not just a mount that transfer lens data for display only 
like on current cameras, but a camera that actually use this information in metering 
and setting of lenses. The *ists can probably use lenses that electronically set 
apertures. hence, I think they are compatible with future lenses. At least, this is a 
possibility.

Pål 

Re: a thought on marketing philosophy

[Pål Jensen]

Jostein wrote:

To a relatively speaking small company,
that kind of investment has to be a risk to take. -Which of course increase
the importance of finding the right moment to enter the market.


REPLY:
Relative and relative. Relative to General Motors they are a small company but file as 
many patents. Pentax is a multi national company with factories, departments and 
research facilities in many countries. By the late 90's published figures they had 
larger photo/camera division than both Nikon and Minolta, not to mention Olympus and 
the rest (- Canon). It may well be that Canon, Nikon and Minolta are larger companies 
over all, but there's no way any of these companies are willing to put more money into 
their photo division that they can generate in return.  

Pål

Re: Which macro lens would you buy

[Steve Larson]

That would be a good starting point using tubes, as they aren`t
very expensive. The only bummer would be getting enough
shutter speed for handheld shots.
Steve Larson
Redondo Beach, California


- Original Message - 
From: "Lon Williamson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 6:13 AM
Subject: Re: Which macro lens would you buy


> Steve, the request was for nature shots, bugs etc.
> In my experience, edge-to-edge sharpness is often
> not needed in such photography.  I'd be hard pressed,
> on many of my shots, to show a difference
> between macro lens shots and a short telephoto on
> extension.
>
> Steve Larson wrote:
> > True, it will get you the shot, but not edge to edge sharpness that a
> > true macro will generate.
> > Steve Larson
> > Redondo Beach, California
> >
> >
> > - Original Message - 
> > From: "Lon Williamson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 3:15 AM
> > Subject: Re: Which macro lens would you buy
> >
> >
> >
> >>I'd be tempted to buy extension tubes as a first step towards
> >>macro.  Cheaper than a dedicated lens, and can often get you
> >>the shot you want.
> >>
> >>Steve Larson wrote:
> >>
> >>>Hi,
> >>> Vivitar Series 1 90-180/4.5 or Vivitar Series 1 90/2.5 with 1:1
> >>
> > adapter,
> >
> >>>coupled with an LX you have a great macro system.
> >>>Accessory #1) 58mm male to 58mm male filter ring.
> >>>Accessory #2) Vivitar Series 1 28/1.9 for reverse-mounting on 90/2.5
> >>>with 1:1 adapter for extreme close ups.
> >>>
> >>>Steve Larson
> >>>Redondo Beach, California
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>- Original Message - 
> >>>From: "Tony Cogan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 9:49 AM
> >>>Subject: Which macro lens would you buy
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> Hi
> I want to quit using close-up filters and start using a macro lens for
> flowers, insects, etc.  Which lens would be a good place to start?
> 
> Thanks,
> Tony
> 
> 
> 
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

Re: Which macro lens would you buy

[Pentxuser]

Somehow I have managed to collect three macro lenses. Tokina 90F2.5 with 
matched doubler. (excellent well made Quite heavy.) Pentax 100F4 dental macro. 
(small very light 49mm front, and a joy to use. Finally Kiron 105 F2.5 1:1 (Big 
heavy and without a doubt the best of the lot for useability with its fast 
aperture and 1:1 capability. But they are all nice and they are all excellent... 
In a message dated 6/15/03 9:41:25 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

>Try to find a Vivitar Series 1 90/2.5. Better than anything from Pentax
>for less money.
>paul
>
>Tony Cogan wrote:

Re: Which macro lens would you buy

[Lon Williamson]

Steve, the request was for nature shots, bugs etc.
In my experience, edge-to-edge sharpness is often
not needed in such photography.  I'd be hard pressed,
on many of my shots, to show a difference
between macro lens shots and a short telephoto on
extension.
Steve Larson wrote:
True, it will get you the shot, but not edge to edge sharpness that a
true macro will generate.
Steve Larson
Redondo Beach, California
- Original Message - 
From: "Lon Williamson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 3:15 AM
Subject: Re: Which macro lens would you buy



I'd be tempted to buy extension tubes as a first step towards
macro.  Cheaper than a dedicated lens, and can often get you
the shot you want.
Steve Larson wrote:

Hi,
Vivitar Series 1 90-180/4.5 or Vivitar Series 1 90/2.5 with 1:1

adapter,

coupled with an LX you have a great macro system.
Accessory #1) 58mm male to 58mm male filter ring.
Accessory #2) Vivitar Series 1 28/1.9 for reverse-mounting on 90/2.5
with 1:1 adapter for extreme close ups.
Steve Larson
Redondo Beach, California
- Original Message - 
From: "Tony Cogan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 9:49 AM
Subject: Which macro lens would you buy




Hi
I want to quit using close-up filters and start using a macro lens for
flowers, insects, etc.  Which lens would be a good place to start?
Thanks,
Tony

Re: Velvia (wasRe: Exposure)

[Ed Matthew]

won't that reduce the life of the slides to a few dozen viewings?
Not in my experience. However, the best/least expensive dupe is accomplished 
in camera - one to print on Ilfochrome (or scan) and one to project. 
Paranoia does have some value.

Ed

Herb
> It can be projected, and looks good if you have a powerful enough lamp.
> The standard entry level 150 W is underpowered, 250 W works well, some
> Kodak carousel models have 300-350W lamps, and if you're really nuts you
> may go for a 500 W xenon lamp. Which will blow away your mind, you just
> won't believe those images.
caveman
_
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: Which macro lens would you buy

[Steve Larson]

True, it will get you the shot, but not edge to edge sharpness that a
true macro will generate.
Steve Larson
Redondo Beach, California


- Original Message - 
From: "Lon Williamson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 3:15 AM
Subject: Re: Which macro lens would you buy


> I'd be tempted to buy extension tubes as a first step towards
> macro.  Cheaper than a dedicated lens, and can often get you
> the shot you want.
>
> Steve Larson wrote:
> > Hi,
> >  Vivitar Series 1 90-180/4.5 or Vivitar Series 1 90/2.5 with 1:1
adapter,
> > coupled with an LX you have a great macro system.
> > Accessory #1) 58mm male to 58mm male filter ring.
> > Accessory #2) Vivitar Series 1 28/1.9 for reverse-mounting on 90/2.5
> > with 1:1 adapter for extreme close ups.
> >
> > Steve Larson
> > Redondo Beach, California
> >
> >
> > - Original Message - 
> > From: "Tony Cogan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 9:49 AM
> > Subject: Which macro lens would you buy
> >
> >
> >
> >>Hi
> >>I want to quit using close-up filters and start using a macro lens for
> >>flowers, insects, etc.  Which lens would be a good place to start?
> >>
> >>Thanks,
> >>Tony
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Re: Velvia (wasRe: Exposure)

[Ed Matthew]

It can be projected, and looks good if you have a powerful enough lamp. The 
standard entry level 150 W is underpowered, 250 W works well, some Kodak 
carousel models have 300-350W lamps, and if you're really nuts you may go 
for a 500 W xenon lamp. Which will blow away your mind, you just won't 
believe those images.

cheers,
caveman
My experience is the same.

Ed

_
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: FA77 observation...

[Michel Carrère-Gée]

 So what is it? An idea? If it 
helps, I upload the illustration of this lens at 
http://www3.telus.net/wlachan/PL41410_new.pdf.
Hello Alan, sorry I can't help you but I have downloaded this file.
That is the only service manual for lens I have never found; have you 
others ?
I have read only qervice manual for bodies (Thanks for Mark Roberts !)

Michel

Re: Which macro lens would you buy

[gfen]

On Sun, 15 Jun 2003, Brendan wrote:
> Get a revesal ring and a 28mm F2.8 and enjoy ( Aaron
> where is my reversal ring!!!)

Reversing an FA28/2.8 onto my bodies yields teh worst possible results
I've ever had. There's massive flare in the middle of each and every
image.

-- 
http://www.infotainment.org   <-> more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighteenpercent.com<-> photography and portfolio.

Re: Velvia (wasRe: Exposure)

[Alin Flaider]

Herb wrote:

HC> won't that reduce the life of the slides to a few dozen viewings?

  With a good, thick IR filter element before the slide, no. The
  impact of "cold" light is minimal.

  Servus,   Alin


---
Xnet scaneaza automat toate mesajele impotriva virusilor folosind RAV AntiVirus.
Xnet automatically scans all messages for viruses using RAV AntiVirus.

Nota: RAV AntiVirus poate sa nu detecteze toti virusii noi sau toate variantele lor.
Va rugam sa luati in considerare ca exista un risc de fiecare data cand deschideti
fisiere atasate si ca MobiFon nu este responsabila pentru nici un prejudiciu cauzat
de virusi.

Disclaimer: RAV AntiVirus may not be able to detect all new viruses and variants.
Please be aware that there is a risk involved whenever opening e-mail attachments
to your computer and that MobiFon is not responsible for any damages caused by
viruses.