Re: Monkey Hug

[Cotty]

On 7/9/04, Anders Hultman, discombobulated, unleashed:

>
>Yes. In Swedish too, but we spell it with one p: "apelsin".
> 
>> So, how do you say "apple" in Danish and Norwegian?
>
>Danish: æble
>Norwegian: eple
>Swedish: äpple
>
>All three are pronounced quite much like English "apple".

Hey I like this thread :-)




Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_

PESO: First Photo (was Re: *ist D purchased on a whim)

[Stuart]

As soon as I bought the camera, I quickly opened up the boxes, installed batteries, 
lens and memory card and took this photo. My first photo on the *ist D. Not bad for a 
beginner I feel.

http://www.lamdesign.co.uk/photos/displayimage.php?album=15&pos=87

(Actually, it was the 4th photo, but the same sitting and the first one to use the 
flash as I had by then worked out which button opened it up.)

-- 
Stuartmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Recomendations for where to CLA an MX & ESII?

[Marc Osborne]

I recently posed the same question and several list members suggested 
Premier Camera Service in Tennessee. I was very pleased with the 
results. The communication was very fast, the prices reasonable, and the 
cameras back quickly and looking and acting brand new. Go to 
www.premier-camera.com.

Marc
Steve Pearson wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I have an MX and a Spotmatic ES II that both need to
have a CLA.  Can anyone recommend someone that works
on both?  Preferably in the US.
Thanks in advance!

___
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush

 

Re: IST-D discontinued?

[John Francis]

Kevin Waterson mused:
> 
> This one time, at band camp, "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > I agree. This camera is only one year old. I'm sure it will have buyers for
> > at least one or two more years.
> > Or at least until a replacement (pro specs & built quality) is introduced.
> > Preferably one with faster AF and FPS :-)).
> 
> 12 Megapixels

Fair enough.

> 6.3 FPS

Why that number?   But at least 5fps, anyway.

And, far more importantly, a buffer capable of holding more than
five or six frames.  I'd like to see 20, but would settle for 10.

> Ability to save files directly to Computer

Why?   Just so you can run the camera without a memory card in it?
Let the camera write the frames to the buffer, and then to memory. 
No need to complicate that data path; keep it simple,  make it fast.
In parallel, allow asynchronous upload to the computer, etc.
 
> any other requests?

Faster transfer speeds.  USB2.0 as a minimum - firewire would be better.
And, optionally, 802.11g wireless transfer.

Re: pdmler on tv

[Paul Stenquist]

You mean the story about the Montgomery County killer?
Seriously, congratulations on all that exposure and kudos to you for 
chipping in on the nice charity project.
Paul

On Sep 6, 2004, at 10:59 PM, tom wrote:
Click on the video link -
http://www.wusatv9.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=33016
tv

RE: Dreams can come true ;-)

[Stuart Moore]

>Is there a similar offer going in the UK anywhere?
Don't be daft ;-) - when do we ever get decent offers?

-- 
Stuart  mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Monkey Hug

[Keith Whaley]

Much as I like etymology, I looked "apple" up in my Oxford Dictionary of 
English Etymology.
The word, in all it's similarities from language to language, has 
"originated" in all European languages from Italy to the top of Scandanavia.
Of course, it's taken from the Old English, Old Frisian, etc...
And, I also learned that in English, Apple's first stressed vowel is shown 
as "æ" like the Danes use it. Never knew that.
Most languages don't stray far from the tree  and with few exceptions, 
the written word is easily recognizable.
I suspect it's even more obvious when pronounced, as Anders pointed out.

Cotty wrote:
>
On 7/9/04, Anders Hultman, discombobulated, unleashed:

Yes. In Swedish too, but we spell it with one p: "apelsin".

So, how do you say "apple" in Danish and Norwegian?

Danish: æble
Norwegian: eple
Swedish: äpple
All three are pronounced quite much like English "apple".

Hey I like this thread :-)
Me too!  - keith
Cheers,
  Cotty

Re: pdmler on tv

[Cotty]

On 6/9/04, tom, discombobulated, unleashed:

>Click on the video link -
>
>http://www.wusatv9.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=33016
>
>tv

If you're gonna start appearing *in front* of the camera, time to slap on
a bit of Grecian 2000.

Nice one mate. Those interiors were your new office? Or was that just
coincidental?




Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_

Re: Irfanview and raw files

[John Forbes]

I found exactly the same.  I shall be emailing Irfan about this.
John
On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 20:29:46 +0200, Henk Terhell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
wrote:

I have downloaded new version 3.92 of Irfanview with plug-ins and tried
to load a PEF raw file. Loading is slow but it does read this format now
and is able to convert to JPEG or TIFF. But the colours show up very
reddish, different from the Pentax software. Anybody can confirm this?
Henk Terhell


--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

Re: Paint Shop Pro 9 built in RAW support for *ist D

[Steve Jolly]

Stuart wrote:
I got around to trying out the latest version of Paint Shop Pro today
(it is still in beta but should be released very shortly) and was
delighted to find that it could read the RAW files from my *ist D
without any additional plug ins. The tweaking you could do before
pulling the image fully into the editor seemed fine to me but then I
am new to the camera.
The main program itself seems better organised than before and the
options to correct digital photographs pretty decent.
Anyone else had a play? I am think it is worth paying for the
upgrade.
I had a quick play at about 2am last night.  The "digital noise removal" 
tool looked to me like it uses a very similar algorithm to Neat Image, 
and produced a noticeable reduction in the film grain of the first image 
I tried it on.  I'll have a proper play with it at some point and post 
some test images.

S

M 50 f1.4 loose barrel

[Lon Williamson]

My Pentax M 50mm f1.4 has developed a loose barrel.
The front section that has the 49mm thread on it is
noticably wobbly when extended.
Is there a simple way to firm this up?  Screws
somewhere that can be tightened?
Help me, Obe Wan Pdml.  You're my only hope.
--Princess Lon  (not)

PESO: what is this fruit? How do I get such decent photos on the *ist D?

[Stuart]

I have never tried a close up picture of fruit before, but wandering through the rain 
forest in Dominica, as you do, I snapped this. (Feel free to tell me what the fruit is 
as well because I can not remember. Pomegranate possible?)

http://www.lamdesign.co.uk/photos/displayimage.php?album=4&pos=0

Now this was taken using the macro mode and default settings on the small 4meg Olympus 
410 using default settings. I have cropped the image slightly (you can see the 
original elsewhere in the portfolio) but not messed with the colours, contrast, et al. 
This camera was bought for my wife just before the holiday in Dominica started.

At the end of the holiday, I picked up a *ist D. Now if only I could get as good a 
photo with the fancier camera... (like I told my wife)

Feedback on what is good/bad about the photo would be appreciated and advice on how to 
achieve even better on the *ist would be more welcome. (Note the lenses I have are as 
follows: 18-35, 28-80, 80-320 - all original Pentax zoom lenses.)


-- 
Stuart  mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: M 50 f1.4 loose barrel

[Henri Toivonen]

Lon Williamson wrote:
My Pentax M 50mm f1.4 has developed a loose barrel.
The front section that has the 49mm thread on it is
noticably wobbly when extended.
Is there a simple way to firm this up?  Screws
somewhere that can be tightened?
Help me, Obe Wan Pdml.  You're my only hope.
--Princess Lon  (not)

I had the same problem when I got me 50/1.4.
You have to unscrew the filter-ring (The one that says PENTAX SMC-M 50 
bla bla) and beneath it there are 3 screws that you tighten.
Getting the ring off is the tough part, I pretty much destroyed mine 
when I did it.

/Henri

Re: Takumar 85/1.8 price

[Fred]

>> For my shooting style - "on the street" (etc.) [...] a
>> 60-120/2.8.

> Is that a ZOOM lens?  Pentax or Billy Joe Bob brand?

  Yes, Shel, it's a "Billy Joe Bob brand" - .

I'm referring to the Tokina AT-X 60-120/2.8 manual focus zoom.
Despite the f/2.8 max aperture, it's actually a nice small zoom for
carrying about, especially for informal portraits.

Fred

Re: Paint Shop Pro 9 built in RAW support for *ist D

[Frantisek]

PJA>> Or else it's a phantom feature, a proposed feature that (was never)/(had
PJA>> yet to be) implemented.
S> My guess would be that it will simply follow the Windows color
S> space and reflect this so if you invest in color space management
S> for Windows and select an alternative to Bill's default of sRGB
S> then PSP will use it.

In Windows, I think you can only choose your monitor colour space.
This is used to display properly the graphics. This gets passed to the
application. It's up to the application to choose its internal working
space, which it is quite useful to have a wider gamut one than sRGB.

At least that's my limited guess :)

Good light!
   fra

Re: Takumar 85/1.8 price

[Frantisek]

F> I'm referring to the Tokina AT-X 60-120/2.8 manual focus zoom.
F> Despite the f/2.8 max aperture, it's actually a nice small zoom for
F> carrying about, especially for informal portraits.

Hi Fred, do you know if they ever made it in AF mount? It would be an
good range for 1.5x DSLR, the 80-200 2.8 zooms just get too long with
the crop factor.

Good light!
   fra

Removing front ring (Was Re: M 50 f1.4 loose barrel)

[mike.wilson]

Hi,
Henri wrote:
Getting the ring off is the tough part, I pretty much destroyed mine when I did it.
Get hold of a rubber bung that is wide enough to place on the front of 
the lens and touch the ring all round the front element, just narrower 
than the filter threads.  Homebrewing supply shop would be a good 
source. 8-)

Cut a couple of circles of lens tissue and put them on the front 
element.  Press the bung down onto the ring and turn it, just like you 
were trying to get the lid off a glass jar.  The only rings that won't 
come off like this, in my experience, are the ones in damaged filter 
threads.  You will need to repair the threads first.  Reverse the 
procedure to reinstall.

You need the lens tissue to protect the front element.  Even if the 
rubber does not have some form of grit incorporated, it may have picked 
up something nasty before you get hold of it.  Two layers will normally 
be enough but more will not be overkill.

To alleviate the grit problem entirely, you could try to get hold of 
some thickwalled rubber tubing of an appropriate diameter.  I use rubber 
spheres, sliced at various points to give me a selection of ring faces, 
because I have a ready supply of them.

mike
CITY OF SUNDERLAND COLLEGE DISCLAIMER
Confidentiality: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and 
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If 
they come to you in error you must take no action based on them, nor must you copy or 
show them to anyone; please reply to this email and highlight the error.
Please note that the views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the 
author and do not necessarily represent those of the college.
Security Warning: Please note that this email has been created in the knowledge that 
Internet email is not a 100% secure communications medium. We advise that you 
understand and observe this lack of security when emailing us.
Viruses: Although we have taken steps to ensure that this email and attachments are 
free from any virus, we advise that in keeping with good computing practice the 
recipient should ensure thay are actually virus free.

Re[2]: Paint Shop Pro 9 built in RAW support for *ist D

[Stuart Moore]

Hello Frantisek,

PJA>>> Or else it's a phantom feature, a proposed feature that (was never)/(had
PJA>>> yet to be) implemented.
S>> My guess would be that it will simply follow the Windows color
S>> space and reflect this so if you invest in color space management
S>> for Windows and select an alternative to Bill's default of sRGB
S>> then PSP will use it.

F> In Windows, I think you can only choose your monitor colour space.
F> This is used to display properly the graphics. This gets passed to the
F> application. It's up to the application to choose its internal working
F> space, which it is quite useful to have a wider gamut one than sRGB.

I spent some time on the Microsoft website. As far as I can work out, sRGB is the 
built in default and indeed it is "based" on monitor capabilities but Windows is 
colour space neutral in that it will use any colour space properly provided and there 
are published APIs (amongst other things) for this. However, the market for 
alternative colour spaces is small and specialist so there are only a few alternatives 
out there and they tend to be expensive. A number of programs including Photoshop 
bypass the Windows management and implement their own colour space (not a huge risk 
for the market leader in graphics to take as everyone else will make their products 
work with it anyway regardless of Microsoft standards).

Looking through various postings about the latest PSP, my view of the consensus is 
that JASC decided not to try and hack Windows themselves or license an existing 
alternative colour space model on the basis that there is not much demand for it from 
the target customer base (those with more sophisticated requirements assumed to be 
using Adobe Photoshop I guess).

That aside, it is not clear to be what I am losing out on as the RAW images from the 
*ist D seem to be only 12 bit (16 bit with 4 bits zeroed) let alone 24 bit. What might 
I want to do to the images that would only work with increased bit depth?

(I appreciate that I can scan from film at a higher density - my Perfect 3200 is well 
capable.)


-- 
Stuartmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: M 50 f1.4 loose barrel

[Mark Roberts]

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 06:33:26 -0400, you wrote:

>My Pentax M 50mm f1.4 has developed a loose barrel.
>The front section that has the 49mm thread on it is
>noticably wobbly when extended.
>
>Is there a simple way to firm this up?  Screws
>somewhere that can be tightened?
>
>Help me, Obe Wan Pdml.  You're my only hope.

Easy fix. First unscrew the nameplate ring from the filter ring. The
way to do this is find a rubber bath tub stopper that's just under
49mm in diameter. Press this plug onto the ring and unscrew it. Now
you'll see three tiny screws that hold the filter ring onto the main
body of the lens. At least two of them will be loose. tighten all
three and then screw the nameplate ring back in with your bath tub
plug and you're set.

Re: M 50 f1.4 loose barrel

[Cotty]

On 7/9/04, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed:

>>My Pentax M 50mm f1.4 has developed a loose barrel.
>>The front section that has the 49mm thread on it is
>>noticably wobbly when extended.
>>
>>Is there a simple way to firm this up?  Screws
>>somewhere that can be tightened?
>>
>>Help me, Obe Wan Pdml.  You're my only hope.
>
>Easy fix. First unscrew the nameplate ring from the filter ring. The
>way to do this is find a rubber bath tub stopper that's just under
>49mm in diameter. Press this plug onto the ring and unscrew it. Now
>you'll see three tiny screws that hold the filter ring onto the main
>body of the lens. At least two of them will be loose. tighten all
>three and then screw the nameplate ring back in with your bath tub
>plug and you're set.

Just a word of caution to add to Mark's excellent advice above: if you do
this actually in the bath tub, make sure you let the water out first.




Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_

RE: M 50 f1.4 loose barrel

[Don Sanderson]

Here's a picture of the correct tool for the job, it will give you an idea
of what you are trying to accomplish with the bath stopper, cork and lens
tissue.
This is cutout to clear the front element.

http://www.donsauction.com/PDML/LensTool.htm

Don

> -Original Message-
> From: Lon Williamson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 5:33 AM
> To: PDML Pentax Discuss
> Subject: M 50 f1.4 loose barrel
>
>
> My Pentax M 50mm f1.4 has developed a loose barrel.
> The front section that has the 49mm thread on it is
> noticably wobbly when extended.
>
> Is there a simple way to firm this up?  Screws
> somewhere that can be tightened?
>
> Help me, Obe Wan Pdml.  You're my only hope.
>
> --Princess Lon  (not)
>

FAO: Dan re Irfanview rotation

[John Forbes]

There is a short(ish)cut using R & L for lossless rotation.
Do shift-J to get into the rotation menu, then R or L for 90 or 270 degree  
rotation, and Enter to execute.

Not quite as quick as a simple R & L, but faster than using the mouse.
John
--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

September PUG

[Daniel J. Matyola]

A lot of work went into the September PUG gallery, and there are a 
number of very interesting photographs this month.

For some reason, however, there has been very little discussion of the 
PUG on this list.   Are we getting to the point were we will abandon the 
PUG gallery in favor of PAW, WOW, PESO, etc.?  I, for one, hope not.

Dan M

Re: Mediocre lenses

[frank theriault]

On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 23:10:10 -0700, Shel Belinkoff
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Frank would LOVE a lens that was designed for "pleasing out-of-focus areas"
> 

Shel,

All my lenses have a special feature for easily producing out of focus areas.

The I move the front ring on the lens (back ring on RF cameras) back
and forth until everything is nice and sharp.

Then, I turn that ring at least 1/4 turn (doesn't matter if it's to
the left or the right).  Then I'm all set to shoot!!

I don't believe that this works with autofocus.



cheers,
frank



-- 
"It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt

Re: Mediocre lenses

[Steve Jolly]

frank theriault wrote:
On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 23:10:10 -0700, Shel Belinkoff
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Frank would LOVE a lens that was designed for "pleasing out-of-focus areas"

Shel,
All my lenses have a special feature for easily producing out of focus areas.
The I move the front ring on the lens (back ring on RF cameras) back
and forth until everything is nice and sharp.
Then, I turn that ring at least 1/4 turn (doesn't matter if it's to
the left or the right).  Then I'm all set to shoot!!
I don't believe that this works with autofocus.
It's easier with those newfangled DA lenses that allow you to switch 
from autofocussing to manualdefocussing without having to flip a switch 
or anything.

S

Re: Takumar 85/1.8 price

[Shel Belinkoff]

H  I've used a couple of Tokina ATX zoom lenses that were
well-rated here, and was mostly disappointed by them.  One was, I believe,
an 80~200/2.8, and it had a lot of barrel and pincushion distortion at the
ends, and a considerable amount of light falloff at the widest two
apertures.  Likewise for another Tokina ATX, although I don't recall the
focal length/range.  They seemed to be well built, although at the price of
being rather large and heavy.  Just curious how the 60~120 seems to you in
this regard. Of course, I often shoot at wider apertures, or at least
prefer to, so optical quality in that regard is important, more so in some
situations than at f/8.0.

Shel 

Fred sed:

> I'm referring to the Tokina AT-X 60-120/2.8 manual focus zoom.
> Despite the f/2.8 max aperture, it's actually a nice small zoom for
> carrying about, especially for informal portraits.

OT: Glad Cesar's Okay! was: Gold 50 f1.2

[frank theriault]

On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 01:12:50 -0400, Cesar Matamoros II
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  Fortunately Frances brought nothing our way - hardly
> any rain at all at my place.  

Cesar,

Glad to hear you're okay!  

I keep seeing all sorts of horrendous images on CNN, wondering how
close this stuff is to you...

cheers,
frank


-- 
"It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt

Re: Travels with Stan - European version

[frank theriault]

On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 22:02:35 -0500, Stan Halpin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I will be headed to Italy in a few days, there to link up with list
> member Gianfranco and explore the environs of Napoli. Then on to
> Vilnius (up near Ulan Bator I think), then home with a stopover in
> Warsaw.

Sounds like fun!  Say hi to Gianfranco for me, and any other PDMLers
you may bump into on your travels
> 
> This is really a work trip, but along the way I will do courier
> service, take photos, search out wild parties, and otherwise behave as
> a good PDMLer should behave.

Wild parties?  PDML?  I don't think so, sir!  

cheers,
frank


-- 
"It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt

Re: Mediocre lenses

[Shel Belinkoff]

Thanks for that tip, Frank.  

I didn't mean to poke fun at your focusing skills, but it was such a fine
opportunity I couldn't pass it up.  I'm sure you'll "get even" at some
point .  And I'm sure someone'll jump in and suggest ways to manually
focus AF lenses, too.

But my jab also had a somewhat more serious side, that being the use of OOF
areas in making photographs.  While I piggybacked my sarcastic comment onto
your work, I've noticed a decided lack of people shooting at wider
apertures here.  Perhaps it's because most people are making nature shots
or macros, but even with the photos of people lots of depth of field is
evident.  maybe that's because of DSLR cameras and the smaller digital
sensor dimensions, but it may also be the result of slower zooms that are
so frequently used along with higher speed films or the higher minimum
speeds that are part of the Pentax DSLR concept.  Whatever happened to
shooting @ f1.4, or f2.0 or 2.8?  Oh, wait, many of the new lenses don't
seem to have those apertures.  Those are wonderful apertures for portraits,
and even for "street" fotographie to soften the backgrounds.

BTW, I like the Erwitt tag line in your sig 

Shel 

> From: frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 23:10:10 -0700, Shel Belinkoff
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Frank would LOVE a lens that was designed for "pleasing out-of-focus
areas"

> All my lenses have a special feature for easily producing out of focus
areas.
>
> The I move the front ring on the lens (back ring on RF cameras) back
> and forth until everything is nice and sharp.
>
> Then, I turn that ring at least 1/4 turn (doesn't matter if it's to
> the left or the right).  Then I'm all set to shoot!!
>
> I don't believe that this works with autofocus.

Re: There goes my baby..

[frank theriault]

On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 14:03:34 +1000, Ryan Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So after trying unsuccessfully to come to terms with my ist D's
> focus-inaccuracy, and discovering yet another problem (battery depleted
> message when connecting to laptop with battery grip on), I pedalled my way
> down to CR Kennedy and booked it in for a checkup. My baby flies away
> tonight on a lonely plane ride to Melbourne.
> 
> In the meantime, ist D no. 2 sits well-behaved on my shelf after a brief
> outing to eBay land. Anyone in the market for an ist D (gold 50-year Aus.
> anniversary ed.)or knows anyone who is, before I list it somewhere else?
> 
> Cheers,
> Ryan

So, you're getting rid of both?  I don't understand...

cheers,
frank 



-- 
"It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt

Re: Mediocre lenses

[Shel Belinkoff]

Ha, you didn't disappoint, Steve 



> > All my lenses have a special feature for easily producing out of focus
areas.
> > 
> > The I move the front ring on the lens (back ring on RF cameras) back
> > and forth until everything is nice and sharp.
> > 
> > Then, I turn that ring at least 1/4 turn (doesn't matter if it's to
> > the left or the right).  Then I'm all set to shoot!!
> > 
> > I don't believe that this works with autofocus.
>
> It's easier with those newfangled DA lenses that allow you to switch 
> from autofocussing to manualdefocussing without having to flip a switch 
> or anything.
>
> S

Re: Adorama Auctions

[frank theriault]

On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 06:37:28 +0200, Boris Liberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 
So I had to scan by credit card monthly statement (in
> Hebrew) and send it over by e-mail. It worked :).  

Not surprising.  I once heard that there are more Jews in New York
City than in the State of Israel.  I'm guessing that ~someone~ at
Adorama speaks or reads Hebrew.  

cheers,
frank





-- 
"It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt

Re: Mediocre lenses

[Rob Studdert]

On 7 Sep 2004 at 6:39, Shel Belinkoff wrote:

> But my jab also had a somewhat more serious side, that being the use of OOF
> areas in making photographs.  While I piggybacked my sarcastic comment onto your
> work, I've noticed a decided lack of people shooting at wider apertures here.

Limited DOF is my bestest photo pal. :-)


Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998

Re: Recomendations for where to CLA an MX & ESII?

[frank theriault]

On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 18:43:14 -0700 (PDT), Steve Pearson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
> 
> I have an MX and a Spotmatic ES II that both need to
> have a CLA.  Can anyone recommend someone that works
> on both?  Preferably in the US.
> 
> Thanks in advance!

I know you said "preferably in the US", and I'm sure you'll get lots
of suggestions, but I'll chime in with my guys here in Toronto,
Komineks:

http://www.kominek.com/

They have a former Pentax Canada repair guy on staff, who really knows
what he's doing.  FWIW, they also have a former Leica guy, too.

Dave Chang-Sang (formerly of this list) brought them a Pentax zoom
that Pentax Canada refused to touch (no parts), and Komineks repaired
it, and at a very reasonable price.  They've CLA'ed my MX as well as a
couple of my Spots, with no problems.  I don't know about ES's, but
you could always ask them - they return e-mails very promptly.

So, if you have to ship your bodies out anyway, going across the
border won't make that much difference (well, it may be a bit slow
coming back into the US, due to all that security stuff at the border,
but it'll get there...).

cheers,
frank

-- 
"It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt

Re: Mediocre lenses

[Kostas Kavoussanakis]

On Tue, 7 Sep 2004, Shel Belinkoff wrote:

> speeds that are part of the Pentax DSLR concept.  Whatever happened to
> shooting @ f1.4, or f2.0 or 2.8?  Oh, wait, many of the new lenses don't
> seem to have those apertures.  Those are wonderful apertures for portraits,
> and even for "street" fotographie to soften the backgrounds.

Let me chip in. Wifey and I were looking at some pictures I took while
on a long weekend in August. One of them I took with the K135/2.5 @
2.5, and featured Her Indoors, the Bairn and the most wonderful bokeh
I had ever seen (and I do have and shoot wide-open the FA50/1.7). Not
surprising when you frequent PDML to look out for the bokeh. Thing is,
She Who Must Be Obeyed noticed it too!

She wants an enlargement of it, but (here is the but) I need to
understand first if her eyes are focused as sharp as the daughter's.
Comes with the bokeh, I should think.

My 2p,

Kostas (what a lens this 135 is, what a lens)

Fourth time lucky?

[Kostas Kavoussanakis]

My endeavours to pick up a used SMC-F 70-210/4-5.6 must be well known
to everyone in the list by now. It seems I stroke lucky in my fourth
effort, most notably the cheapest deal and the worse feedback ebayer.

Looking forward to taking some piccies with it. Chances are that,
although much heavier, it will replace the M75-150/4 in my forthcoming
holiday for a good (virtual) kicking.

Kostas

Re: Mediocre lenses

[frank theriault]

On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 06:39:25 -0700, Shel Belinkoff
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks for that tip, Frank.
> 
> I didn't mean to poke fun at your focusing skills, but it was such a fine
> opportunity I couldn't pass it up.  I'm sure you'll "get even" at some
> point .  And I'm sure someone'll jump in and suggest ways to manually
> focus AF lenses, too.
> 
> But my jab also had a somewhat more serious side, that being the use of OOF
> areas in making photographs.  While I piggybacked my sarcastic comment onto
> your work, I've noticed a decided lack of people shooting at wider
> apertures here.  Perhaps it's because most people are making nature shots
> or macros, but even with the photos of people lots of depth of field is
> evident.  maybe that's because of DSLR cameras and the smaller digital
> sensor dimensions, but it may also be the result of slower zooms that are
> so frequently used along with higher speed films or the higher minimum
> speeds that are part of the Pentax DSLR concept.  Whatever happened to
> shooting @ f1.4, or f2.0 or 2.8?  Oh, wait, many of the new lenses don't
> seem to have those apertures.  Those are wonderful apertures for portraits,
> and even for "street" fotographie to soften the backgrounds.
> 
> BTW, I like the Erwitt tag line in your sig 
> 
> Shel

No offense taken, Shel.  I knew you were just joking around.  Hell,
I'm the first one to realize that much of the time, I'm not the
sharpest shooter around.  

You'll be happy to know that just this weekend, I bought a roll of
Fuji Acros (iso 100), for the express purpose of opening up the little
hole in the lens a bit. 

As far as AF lenses go, yes, one can switch it to manual focus, but
that's just another bother to be concerned about.  So much easier to
have MF all the time...  


-- 
"It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt

Re: Adorama Auctions

[pnstenquist]

If Adorama is anything like B&H, they probably all speak Hebrew. B&H staffers appear 
to all be Hassidic Jews. The same was true of 47th Street Photo, although I'm not sure 
if it's still in existence. Both stores were/are very well run and always very honest 
and fair.


> On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 06:37:28 +0200, Boris Liberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  
> So I had to scan by credit card monthly statement (in
> > Hebrew) and send it over by e-mail. It worked :).  
> 
> Not surprising.  I once heard that there are more Jews in New York
> City than in the State of Israel.  I'm guessing that ~someone~ at
> Adorama speaks or reads Hebrew.  
> 
> cheers,
> frank
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> "It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
> as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt
> 

Re: There goes my baby..

[Ryan Lee]

Oh no, no. 2 was a short term investment from the start. No 1 on the other
hand isn't so well and has been shipped off for the CR Kennedy technicians
to take a look at (they're based in Victoria, not Queenland, apparently.)
Now I just need to find a loving home for number 2 soon, and I'll probably
hold the record for the quickest *ist D turnover rate!

Cheers,
Ryan

- Original Message - 
From: "frank theriault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 11:39 PM
Subject: Re: There goes my baby..

> So, you're getting rid of both?  I don't understand...
>
> cheers,
> frank
>
>
>
> -- 
> "It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
> as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt

Re: Takumar 85/1.8 price

[Peter J. Alling]

Keith,
He also called it SMC, so I'm assuming that he knew Asahi was Pentax.  
In my mind I substituted as I assumed he did.  So my conclusion was
that he asking about the the M42 lens.  I have both and they are both 
equally good.  I could be wrong but the assumptions seemed reasonable.

Keith Whaley wrote:
Hi Peter,
I gather the buyer knew it was an M42 mount, since he called it a 
Takumar.
The only thing up to question is, is it an Auto- or S.M-C Tak?

No, I'm wrong, he called it a Pentax Takumar, of which there were none...
So, we have two things to determine, is it an Asahi or a Pentax.
Then, of course, he has a choice depending on what camera body he 
wants so use it on.

I had the same dilemma a couple or three years ago.
I had a chance to buy a model II of the f/2.5 135mm /sc takumar.
While I had a few M42 bodies, I wanted to use it on my M-series bodies 
(MG, MV, MX.)
So, I left the adapter ring on it, and really enjoyed it!

Later I found a K-mount 135, a Vivitar Series 1 f/2.3, a lovely piece 
of glass...

keith whaley
Peter J. Alling wrote:
The SMC Takumar is one of the lenses that became a K mount with 
virtually no changes except the mount of course.
Comments about the Pentax should apply to the Tak as well.  150 seems 
to be a reasonable price, but remember it
is a M42 lens so you'll need an adapter...

Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
On Mon, 6 Sep 2004, Dr. Heiko Hamann wrote:
 

I've got the chance to get a Pentax Takumar 85/1.8 for 150,- Euro. Is
that a good price and should I go for it? Stan's website shows very 
good
comments on this lens.
  

I don't think Stan's site has anything like that. If it's the K85/1.8
it is meant to be a good lens. I don't think there is a Takumar
bayonet 85mm lens.
Kostas
 




--
Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is a virtue. Fleas are interested 
in dogs.
   P. J. O'Rourke

Re: Adorama Auctions

[graywolf]

Hebrew, Yiddish, or both. Adorama, and B&H, are owned by Jews and 90+% of their 
employees are also. Which is why neither are open on Saturdays.

--
frank theriault wrote:
On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 06:37:28 +0200, Boris Liberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 
So I had to scan by credit card monthly statement (in
Hebrew) and send it over by e-mail. It worked :).  

Not surprising.  I once heard that there are more Jews in New York
City than in the State of Israel.  I'm guessing that ~someone~ at
Adorama speaks or reads Hebrew.  
cheers,
frank


--
graywolf
http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html

Re: Cotty still on the dark side was[Re: Nod's As Good As A Wink To A Blind Bat]

[Peter J. Alling]

Alright maybe not.  (Damn now it can only be funny in a firesign theater 
sort of way).

Cotty wrote:
On 6/9/04, Peter J. Alling, discombobulated, unleashed:
 

Cotty spoke of beating you and had some photos of bats 
   

Er, I do?
Typo?
Meanwhile, Alfred, time for my supper.

Cheers,
 Cotty
___/\__
||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_

 


--
Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is a virtue. Fleas are interested 
in dogs.
   P. J. O'Rourke

Re: Re[2]: Paint Shop Pro 9 built in RAW support for *ist D

[Rob Studdert]

On 7 Sep 2004 at 12:42, Stuart Moore wrote:

> I spent some time on the Microsoft website. As far as I can work out, sRGB is
> the built in default and indeed it is "based" on monitor capabilities but
> Windows is colour space neutral in that it will use any colour space properly
> provided and there are published APIs (amongst other things) for this. However,
> the market for alternative colour spaces is small and specialist so there are
> only a few alternatives out there and they tend to be expensive. 

Most current monitor "drivers" produced to suite late Windows variants 
(98,XP,2K etc) will load a monitor profile under the "colour management" 
display tab however its validity is limited by the set-up of the monitor. 
Working colour space profiles are generally distributed freely. Specialized 
output device or custom profiles for consumer printers/scanners sometimes cost 
an arm and a leg however custom profiles supplied by a pro-lab set-up to 
provide optimal results on their equipment is usually supplied free.

> A number of
> programs including Photoshop bypass the Windows management and implement their
> own colour space (not a huge risk for the market leader in graphics to take as
> everyone else will make their products work with it anyway regardless of
> Microsoft standards).

Photoshop introduced the gamma tool which was initially set-up to implement 
some colour calibration to the display system. It modifies the display card 
look-up table (LUT) to normalize gamma however the gamma tool can be discarded 
if you are using a calibrated monitor as Photoshop always utilizes the Windows 
monitor profile, you can however set the default working colour space to 
whatever icc profile you choose.

> Looking through various postings about the latest PSP, my view of the consensus
> is that JASC decided not to try and hack Windows themselves or license an
> existing alternative colour space model on the basis that there is not much
> demand for it from the target customer base (those with more sophisticated
> requirements assumed to be using Adobe Photoshop I guess).

Even ThumbsPlus (which is primarily a image file management program) provides 
the option to "Obtain current monitor profile from Windows on program startup" 
and also a default working space (used to render images which do not have an 
embedded CS). It's a long time since I used PSP but I'm surprised that it 
appears they've not yet reasonably implemented colour management.

> That aside, it is not clear to be what I am losing out on as the RAW images from
> the *ist D seem to be only 12 bit (16 bit with 4 bits zeroed) let alone 24 bit.
> What might I want to do to the images that would only work with increased bit
> depth?

Not sure what you are asking here? The sensor system delivers 12bits per pixel 
RAW in a matrix of RGBG. You must consider that for each decoded output pixel 
at 1:1 scaling a cluster of RAW pixels are used to interpolate the final pixel 
value. The precision of that calculation is limited to 16 bits per colour 
channel (48bit colour) but can be truncated to 8bits per colour channel (24bit 
colour). Obviously there is a limit in the usable bit depth which would be a 
function of the decoding algorithm employed plus the system noise etc but I'm 
definitely sure it would be reasonable to assume at least 14bits per colour 
channel of usable output precision and even if the last bits are noise 
components they will act as a dither of sorts.

If you generate a 24bit and 48bit TIFF from a single RAW PEF file you will note 
the colour count is far higher for the 48bit image (PSP used to have a colour 
count option). An image generated with 16bits per colour channel can be 
manipulated by a greater degree without incurring the penalty of visible 
artifacts such as banding.


Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998

Re: IST-D discontinued?

[Peter J. Alling]

Not if they were in their right mind.
Paul Stenquist wrote:
Hadn't seen it until you posted it here. But it seems to be another  
example of Pentax pre-photokina paranoia. I can't imagine that any  
company in their right mind would say that they are going to  
discontinue a camera before existing stock is sold out.
On Sep 6, 2004, at 3:32 PM, Nicolas Colarusso wrote:

Anyone seen this
http://www.pentaxuser.co.uk/forum/ 
ftopic923.html&sid=7410148a29f812d9833bf21
b689092c5

-Original Message-
From: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: September 6, 2004 15:28
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Adorama Auctions
2 were used Pentax bodies, 3 were used K mount lenses, all were as  
good or
better than described.
Their rating system seems nearly as conservative as I understand 
KEH's  is.

Don
-Original Message-
From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 06, 2004 2:21 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Adorama Auctions
Thanks ... doesn't help much, really, unless the items you purchased
were used.  I'm mostly interested in knowing how accurately they
describe the merchandise.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Don Sanderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 9/6/2004 9:31:12 AM
Subject: RE: Adorama Auctions
Shel, if it helps:
I haven't used their auctions but have purchased mailorder several
times with 100% satisfactory results.






--
Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is a virtue. Fleas are interested 
in dogs.
   P. J. O'Rourke

Re: Adorama Auctions

[John Forbes]

I'm glad to hear what you say about these two stores.  A number of other  
stores in and around New York are much less honourable, as I have  
discovered for myself.

John

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 14:17:59 +, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If Adorama is anything like B&H, they probably all speak Hebrew. B&H  
staffers appear to all be Hassidic Jews. The same was true of 47th  
Street Photo, although I'm not sure if it's still in existence. Both  
stores were/are very well run and always very honest and fair.


On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 06:37:28 +0200, Boris Liberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
wrote:
 
So I had to scan by credit card monthly statement (in
> Hebrew) and send it over by e-mail. It worked :).  

Not surprising.  I once heard that there are more Jews in New York
City than in the State of Israel.  I'm guessing that ~someone~ at
Adorama speaks or reads Hebrew.  
cheers,
frank


--
"It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt


--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

Re: Mediocre Lenses ( wasRe: Takumar 85/1.8 price)

[Peter J. Alling]

To appeal to the people who wanted old fashioned quality, and the 43mm 
was successful enough to inspire Nikon to create a "copy".

Caveman wrote:
If the manufacturer lets you know what it was designed for (e.g. in 
the promotional materials, on their web sites and in the booklet that 
comes in the lens box), that's OK with me.
But if you have to buy the lens first then discover yourself what it 
is good for (or not), it stinks.
Anyone ever seen any indication of what Pentax intended the limiteds 
for (except show-off) ?

Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Just a thought/question: If a lens is termed "mediocre" in general, but
gives good results in a specific situation, perhaps even one for 
which it
was designed, is it really a mediocre lens?



--
Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is a virtue. Fleas are interested 
in dogs.
   P. J. O'Rourke

Re: M 50 f1.4 loose barrel

[Lon Williamson]

Screws under the front baffle, eh?
Ok.  I'm off to find something to remove it.
BTW, this problem does not seem to affect
sharpness.  I can rattle the barrel around
and the glass beneath does not move.  It
just irks me.
-Lon, no longer princess, now the frog.

Re: Pentax at the Track

[Stephen Moore]

John --
Extremely well done!
I'm pretty sure it's going to influence
my next racetrack shoot...
Thanks for sharing,
Stephen Moore
___
John Mason wrote:
Fellow Pentaxians,
The first fruits of my photo documentary project on
drag racing are up on the Fixing Shadows website:
http://fixingshadows.org/

Re: Takumar 85/1.8 price

[Keith Whaley]

Okay, Peter...
I was trained to read precisely what was written, and so many people "sort 
of" get it right when they identify something, you have to be come adept at 
reading between the lines, which is literally guessing.
Based on a few clues, we all did alright, didn't we.

Re SMC, there's quite literally several, such as smc, SMC, 
Super-Multi-Coated, and they were all applied to their given lenses for a 
reason. They meant something specific.
While "smc" and "SMC" both represent Super Multi-Coating, what lenses they 
were engraved on were different from each other. For a lens collector, or 
just someone with a motivated interest, they simply are not the same.

Sorry to be a pedant about it all, but what one calls something should 
represent a specific item, not generalities.
I find the minutiae of identifying a specific lens part of the excitement of 
collecting.
They all had their specific place in the production line of lens manufacture.
To assign a "name" to a lens more or less arbitrarily is shuffling the deck.

Others have no problem with calling all of them SMCs, no matter what the 
factory called them...
Hey! If they're happy, more power to them.

I'll try to be less of a nit-picker, honest.  
keith whaley
Peter J. Alling wrote:
Keith,
He also called it SMC, so I'm assuming that he knew Asahi was Pentax.  
In my mind I substituted as I assumed he did.  So my conclusion was
that he asking about the the M42 lens.  I have both and they are both 
equally good.  I could be wrong but the assumptions seemed reasonable.

Keith Whaley wrote:
Hi Peter,
I gather the buyer knew it was an M42 mount, since he called it a 
Takumar.
The only thing up to question is, is it an Auto- or S.M-C Tak?

No, I'm wrong, he called it a Pentax Takumar, of which there were none...
So, we have two things to determine, is it an Asahi or a Pentax.
Then, of course, he has a choice depending on what camera body he 
wants so use it on.

I had the same dilemma a couple or three years ago.
I had a chance to buy a model II of the f/2.5 135mm /sc takumar.
While I had a few M42 bodies, I wanted to use it on my M-series bodies 
(MG, MV, MX.)
So, I left the adapter ring on it, and really enjoyed it!

Later I found a K-mount 135, a Vivitar Series 1 f/2.3, a lovely piece 
of glass...

keith whaley
Peter J. Alling wrote:
The SMC Takumar is one of the lenses that became a K mount with 
virtually no changes except the mount of course.
Comments about the Pentax should apply to the Tak as well.  150 seems 
to be a reasonable price, but remember it
is a M42 lens so you'll need an adapter...

Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
On Mon, 6 Sep 2004, Dr. Heiko Hamann wrote:
 

I've got the chance to get a Pentax Takumar 85/1.8 for 150,- Euro. Is
that a good price and should I go for it? Stan's website shows very 
good
comments on this lens.
  


I don't think Stan's site has anything like that. If it's the K85/1.8
it is meant to be a good lens. I don't think there is a Takumar
bayonet 85mm lens.
Kostas
 

Re: Sometimes I like grain!

[brooksdj]

> Guess I should put my pics where my mouth is.
> This is a snap taken with a 105SL (My carseat camera) on Fuji 400.
> 
> http://www.donsauction.com/PDML/IowaField.jpg
> 
> Don
> 

Hey Don. It works for me. Nice colours and yes i can see the grain you are refering 
to,but
it gives it 
a "painting" feel to it.
Atleast on my work un cal'd monitor.

Dave Brooks 

photo.net posting

[CRB]

For those who don't watch photo.net ...
http://www.photo.net/gc/view-one?classified_ad_id=586816

... especially those dslr lusters.

Sincerely,

C. Brendemuehl

-
'Every one of us is, even from his mother's womb, a master craftsman of idols.'
-- John Calvin (1509-64)

___
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!

Re: Mediocre Lenses ( wasRe: Takumar 85/1.8 price)

[frank theriault]

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 11:05:13 -0400, graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Another one of those Latin words that get bad connotations just for being Latin.
> As Peter says, mediocre is actually synonymous with OK. Not great, not bad, just OK!

Well, Tom,

I agree with you and Peter, insofar as mediocre likely means "of
medium or ordinary quality".  Which really isn't a bad thing, is it?

Of course, in the way in which it's currently used, mediocre means "of
barely acceptable quality", or worse.

My guess is that we (at least we in the West) live in a world of
superlatives.  So, if it's not "the best", it must be bad.  Middling
is not good enough.  In fact, Good Enough is not good enough, if you
catch my drift.

It used to be that to put forth a supreme effort was to "give 100%". 
But since that phrase is so overused, it's now no longer meaningful to
us.  Now, we must give "110%", "200%", or as I heard from a sports
commentator during the Olympics, "1000%!"  

I won't go into the reasons for all of the above (OT, plus not nearly
enough room here for that sort of discussion), but suffice to say that
since everything new is touted as "the best", then in order to
distiguish between all these things that are "the best", we have to
come up with new "super-superlatives".  In the meanwhile, "ordinary"
words, like mediocre and "nice", end up being insults, when they are
in reality anything but that.

cheers,
frank the ordinary



-- 
"It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt

Re: Re[4]: Paint Shop Pro 9 built in RAW support for *ist D

[Rob Studdert]

On 7 Sep 2004 at 16:37, Stuart Moore wrote:

> Hello Rob,
> 
> You have gone way beyond my understanding now. I was picking up on a 
criticism
> of PSP that the latest version of PSP still does seem to have addressed.

Hi Stuart,

Sorry if it went a bit over your head, unfortunately colour management is one 
of the least well documented and most complex areas of digital imaging and of 
course one of the most critical elements to achieving good and consistent 
results. It took me a while to get my head around it.

> The latest version does have monitor gamma correction and also allows you to
> select monitor profiles.

This is a contradiction of sorts (if they co-exist), the monitor profile should 
also set the gamma, in ThumbsPlus there is also a gamma control however setting 
it to zero invokes the windows monitor profile. I tried to DL the latest PS to 
have a look at their colour management however their site is slow as a wet week 
at the moment.

The gamma tool in Photoshop adjusts the LUT to set the gamma, this little 
freeware tool will emulate the Adobe gamma tool:

http://quickgamma.de/indexen.html

A good tool for visually assessing black-point (and many other settings) is the 
Nokia Monitor Test 2.0 (no longer available at the Nokia site):

http://www.idg.pl/ftp/pc_2678/Nokia%20Monitor%20Test%202.0.html
http://www.computerworld.pl/ftp/2678/Nokia%20Monitor%20Test%202.0.html

> However, the underlying format still seems to be sRGB and whilst the *ist D 
can
> be set to use AdobeRGB it would appear that I would not be able to manipulate
> photos in PSP without losing information.

For all intents sRGB encompasses the colour gamut of most RGB monitors so your 
monitor profile will likely be a slight variation on the sRGB profile. Your 
working colour space can enclose a larger colour gamut than the display as the 
colour management system maps the wide gamut values to fit into the monitors 
sRGB gamut so you can't actually see any of the extra information on screen but 
it is being used.

Using the Adobe RGB colour space as your working colour space will provide 
prints with a wider colour gamut since there are colours outside the sRGB gamut 
that the printers can lay on paper especially in the cyan/green and yellow 
hues. Working in an sRGB working space (not monitor profile) discards any extra 
information outside the sRGB gamut.

> I have been using Fireworks and PSP for year happy in my ignorance - like 
many
> others I suspect - but now I feel that I am missing out on something. Every 
now
> and then I get the urge to invest in Photoshop but just cannot bring myself 
to
> do it.

It's really the only sensible solution of you are seriously into image 
manipulation, you might soften the blow by purchasing and old legitimate copy 
and upgrading?

For a good graphical representation of how colour gamuts compare see:

http://www.iccview.de/index_eng.htm

If your browser doesn't have a VRML interpreter loaded then follow the links to 
http://www.parallelgraphics.com/products/cortona/

It's well worth it as it should answer some questions.

Cheers,



Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998

Re: PAW: Water Bomber

[frank theriault]

On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 12:06:08 US/Eastern, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> Boy Frank,that brings back some memories. I spent 2 summers(1971/72)in Gogama 
> Ontario with
> Lands
> and Forsets as a student. Occasionally,when all of the regular firefighters were out 
> on
> sites,and a
> small fire erupted,they would send us out to do what we could.Saw lots of 
> bombers,twin
> Otters,single
> beavers etc.
> I remember one guy getting flattened by the trailing edge of a drop.Shook him up a 
> lot but
> nothing
> broken.

> 
> Ok nice shot.
> 

Thanks, Dave (I think ).  Yeah, those waterbombers are cool.  A
friend of mine had a summer job at the forest fire towers in Alberta. 
Out in the middle of nowhere, he was only allowed to turn on his
electric generator for about an hour a day, in order for his gasoline
to last the whole week or however long his shift was.

When he saw a plume of smoke, he'd radio to headquarters, give them a
location, and some time later the water bombers would come, put out
the (still small) fire, and go away.

He said it was neat...

cheers,
frank


-- 
"It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt

Re: PAW: Crabapples

[Keith Whaley]

Peter J. Alling wrote:
Paul Stenquist wrote:
I shot this an hour or so ago with the *ist D and the Vivitar Series 1 
90/2.5. It's at about 1:2. Love that lens.
Paul
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2673922&size=lg

Nice, I like it, not sure why, but I do.
Probably because of it's velvety bokeh!
It is very nice...
keith whaley

Re: photo.net posting

[frank theriault]

On Tue,  7 Sep 2004 12:27:03 -0400 (EDT), CRB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> For those who don't watch photo.net ...
> http://www.photo.net/gc/view-one?classified_ad_id=586816
> 
> ... especially those dslr lusters.
> 

He's selling it to fund the purchase of Medium Format gear?  

He's rather bucking the trend, it seems...  

cheers,
frank


-- 
"It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt

Re: Takumar 85/1.8 price

[Fred]

> Hi Fred, do you know if they ever made it in AF mount?

Nope.  Tokina hasn't made it (AT-X 60-120/2.8) since the
early-to-mid eighties, I would say.  It was released at about the
same time as the AT-X 100-300/4, and not too long after the AT-X
80-200/2.8 (and these three lenses are amongst my favorites).  But,
it was pre-autofocus era...  Sorry.

> It would be an good range for 1.5x DSLR, the 80-200 2.8 zooms just
> get too long with the crop factor.

I see.  It works well for a portrait zoom on a 35mm-format body, but
I guess a small 90-180/2.8 does sound appealing for *ist-D use, as a
moderate zoom...

Fred

Re: PAW: Water Bomber

[John Forbes]

Not the right sort of employment for those who you tend to sleep on the  
job.  Wake up, and you're in the middle of an inferno.

Serves you right I suppose.
John
On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 12:47:26 US/Eastern, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 12:06:08 US/Eastern,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Boy Frank,that brings back some memories. I spent 2  
summers(1971/72)in Gogama Ontario
with
> Lands
> and Forsets as a student.

Then Frank wrote.
Thanks, Dave (I think ).  Yeah, those waterbombers are cool.  A
friend of mine had a summer job at the forest fire towers in Alberta.
Out in the middle of nowhere, he was only allowed to turn on his
electric generator for about an hour a day, in order for his gasoline
to last the whole week or however long his shift was.
When he saw a plume of smoke, he'd radio to headquarters, give them a
location, and some time later the water bombers would come, put out
the (still small) fire, and go away.
He said it was neat...
cheers,
frank
Actually i was hoping to get a job in the fire towers in Northern  
Ontario.Thats what i
liked about the
job.The solitude. At one with the trees and wind.
As students we went on supply runs for the tower guys every other week.  
They all liked the
job and if
i had of bought my SP500 a year ealier,would have had some neat pic;s.

Dave


--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

Re: pdmler on tv

[Cotty]

On 7/9/04, tom, discombobulated, unleashed:

>Yeah, that's the new office, those are all 16x20's and 30x40's on the walls.
>Some shots from our opening party -
>
>http://www.romanphotography.com/office/
>
>Chicks dig the gray...the thinning is another matter

LOL. Tell me about it. I go for the Jean-Luc Picard look. I have no choice!

Well done on the TV appearance, you looked like you knew what you were
doing and I reckon that's 90% of wedding shoots?


Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_

RE: photo.net posting

[Dave]

Bucking the trend possibly, but although I've not really looked I've heard
it's definitely the time to buy into medium format in the used market.

> -Original Message-
> From: frank theriault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 12:37 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: photo.net posting
>
>
> On Tue,  7 Sep 2004 12:27:03 -0400 (EDT), CRB
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > For those who don't watch photo.net ...
> > http://www.photo.net/gc/view-one?classified_ad_id=586816
> >
> > ... especially those dslr lusters.
> >
>
> He's selling it to fund the purchase of Medium Format gear?
>
> He's rather bucking the trend, it seems...  
>
> cheers,
> frank
>
>
> --
> "It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
> as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt
>

Re: Cesar & hurricane Frances

[frank theriault]

On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 17:48:00 +0100, Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/9/04, Cesar Matamoros II, discombobulated, unleashed:
> 
> > I had one shower and a couple of times it sprinkled.
> 
> Don't worry mate, this happens to most blokes when they get older ;-)
> 

They have a fairly simple medical procedure for that...  

-frank


-- 
"It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt

RE: Gold 50 f1.2

[Cesar Matamoros II]

I am thinking more the White Cobra rather than the Grey Sea Snake.

Any thoughts as to what to reskin another LX with :-)?

Cesar
Panama City, Florida

-Original Message-
From: Stan Halpin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 06, 2004 10:31 PM


That would look great on one of Cesar's skinned LXn...

stan


On Sep 6, 2004, at 5:13 AM, Ryan Lee wrote:

> The gold 50 1.2 is old news, but I just stumbled onto this page which I
> thought was neat- never seen that lens off the body before..
> http://www.pentax-fan.jp/LENS/KS/K50_12G.html
>
> Cheers,
> Ryan
>
> PS. ugh..
>
>

Re: Takumar 85/1.8 price

[Peter J. Alling]

No problem, just explaining my thought processes.  I'm a software 
engineer by trade by the IT market is only just recovering.  I've been 
doing odd jobs mostly dealing with end users who are none to precise 
about their requirements and needs, it's almost like developing esp.  
God help me when I'm wrong...

Keith Whaley wrote:
Okay, Peter...
I was trained to read precisely what was written, and so many people 
"sort of" get it right when they identify something, you have to be 
come adept at reading between the lines, which is literally guessing.
Based on a few clues, we all did alright, didn't we.

Re SMC, there's quite literally several, such as smc, SMC, 
Super-Multi-Coated, and they were all applied to their given lenses 
for a reason. They meant something specific.
While "smc" and "SMC" both represent Super Multi-Coating, what lenses 
they were engraved on were different from each other. For a lens 
collector, or just someone with a motivated interest, they simply are 
not the same.

Sorry to be a pedant about it all, but what one calls something should 
represent a specific item, not generalities.
I find the minutiae of identifying a specific lens part of the 
excitement of collecting.
They all had their specific place in the production line of lens 
manufacture.
To assign a "name" to a lens more or less arbitrarily is shuffling the 
deck.

Others have no problem with calling all of them SMCs, no matter what 
the factory called them...
Hey! If they're happy, more power to them.

I'll try to be less of a nit-picker, honest.  
keith whaley
Peter J. Alling wrote:
Keith,
He also called it SMC, so I'm assuming that he knew Asahi was 
Pentax.  In my mind I substituted as I assumed he did.  So my 
conclusion was
that he asking about the the M42 lens.  I have both and they are both 
equally good.  I could be wrong but the assumptions seemed reasonable.

Keith Whaley wrote:
Hi Peter,
I gather the buyer knew it was an M42 mount, since he called it a 
Takumar.
The only thing up to question is, is it an Auto- or S.M-C Tak?

No, I'm wrong, he called it a Pentax Takumar, of which there were 
none...
So, we have two things to determine, is it an Asahi or a Pentax.

Then, of course, he has a choice depending on what camera body he 
wants so use it on.

I had the same dilemma a couple or three years ago.
I had a chance to buy a model II of the f/2.5 135mm /sc takumar.
While I had a few M42 bodies, I wanted to use it on my M-series 
bodies (MG, MV, MX.)
So, I left the adapter ring on it, and really enjoyed it!

Later I found a K-mount 135, a Vivitar Series 1 f/2.3, a lovely 
piece of glass...

keith whaley
Peter J. Alling wrote:
The SMC Takumar is one of the lenses that became a K mount with 
virtually no changes except the mount of course.
Comments about the Pentax should apply to the Tak as well.  150 
seems to be a reasonable price, but remember it
is a M42 lens so you'll need an adapter...

Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
On Mon, 6 Sep 2004, Dr. Heiko Hamann wrote:
 

I've got the chance to get a Pentax Takumar 85/1.8 for 150,- 
Euro. Is
that a good price and should I go for it? Stan's website shows 
very good
comments on this lens.
  


I don't think Stan's site has anything like that. If it's the K85/1.8
it is meant to be a good lens. I don't think there is a Takumar
bayonet 85mm lens.
Kostas
 






--
Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is a virtue. Fleas are interested 
in dogs.
   P. J. O'Rourke

Re: photo.net posting

[Peter J. Alling]

I'd make an offer except I've got to sell some lenses first.
CRB wrote:
For those who don't watch photo.net ...
http://www.photo.net/gc/view-one?classified_ad_id=586816
... especially those dslr lusters.
Sincerely,
C. Brendemuehl
-
'Every one of us is, even from his mother's womb, a master craftsman of idols.'
-- John Calvin (1509-64)
___
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
 


--
Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is a virtue. Fleas are interested 
in dogs.
   P. J. O'Rourke

Re: PAW - Close Friends

[frank theriault]

On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 09:50:41 -0700, Shel Belinkoff
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://home.earthlink.net/~sbelinkoff/close.html
> 
> Invoking the "rule of thirds" 

I have to admit, there's something vaguely threatening about this one, Shel.

I think that the line on the wall gives this one the feel of a police
ID line-up.  And the expressions on the guys, especially the one on
the left, are quite ambiguous, almost threatening.  Not overtly
threatening, but it's as if there's something bubbling under the
surface.  - "You talking to me?  I don't see anyone else here, so you
must be talking to me!" 

All that being said, I like this one a lot, precisely because it makes
me think.  It's not the usual "pretty portrait", full of smiles.  It
may be as well that when I saw the title before opening it, I was
expecting something different, maybe two people hugging and smiling,
and I got something quite different.

I just love the tonality of the greys.  And, of course, the
composition (rule of thirds ) is most interesting.

So tell me, do you know these guys, or did you just bump into them on
the street and ask if you could take their photo?

A very very strong, emotional photo, IMHO.  Thanks.

cheers,
frank



-- 
"It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt

Re: PAW - Close Friends

[Peter J. Alling]

Only you could invoke the rule of thirds in such a way as to look like 
you were avoiding it.
I have to admit I did like composition when I first looked at it but 
even if I hadn't it's been growing on me. 
Really well done.

Shel Belinkoff wrote:
http://home.earthlink.net/~sbelinkoff/close.html
Invoking the "rule of thirds" 
Shel Belinkoff

 


--
Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is a virtue. Fleas are interested 
in dogs.
   P. J. O'Rourke

Re: Mediocre lenses

[frank theriault]

On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 17:54:26 +0100, Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in a vain
attempt to be humourous, wrote:
)
> 
> Depth of field is vastly over eighted.
> 
> D'oh

First you insult me ("not the fastest lens in the bag"), now there's
this Horrible Play on Words.

That's it, Cotty, you're kill-filed!!  

have a good life,
frank


-- 
"It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt

Re: photo.net posting

[frank theriault]

On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 13:02:18 -0400, Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bucking the trend possibly, but although I've not really looked I've heard
> it's definitely the time to buy into medium format in the used market.

No doubt about it, Dave.  

But, the reason that there are good deals available on Medium Format
stuff is for the precise reason that folks are flooding the market
with it, in an attempt to finance a foray into digital.

In this case, the seller, by selling his DSLR to finance the purchase
of Medium Format gear is going precisely against the flow.  OTOH,
he'll get a good price for his DSLR, and be able to buy low into the
world of MF, so if it makes him happy, more power to him.

cheers,
frank



-- 
"It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt

Re: Takumar 85/1.8 price

[Keith Whaley]

Peter J. Alling wrote:
No problem, just explaining my thought processes.  I'm a software 
engineer by trade by the IT market is only just recovering.  I've been 
doing odd jobs mostly dealing with end users who are none to precise 
about their requirements and needs, it's almost like developing esp.  
God help me when I'm wrong...
I DO understand, Peter!  
The "average" end user has only a rudimentary idea of what he really wants 
or needs.
He does have to be told -- and led -- and educated.
How many of those don't _want_ to be told what they need?  Even when it's 
painfully obvious?  Uh huh...

Good luck getting back in  the market!
keith
Keith Whaley wrote:
Okay, Peter...
I was trained to read precisely what was written, and so many people 
"sort of" get it right when they identify something, you have to be 
come adept at reading between the lines, which is literally guessing.
Based on a few clues, we all did alright, didn't we.
[...]

Re: photo.net posting

[frank theriault]

On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 12:55:58 US/Eastern, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>   
> I dont know if thats true Frank.
> If you remember my film question of last week i was looking to see what the others 
> did for
> "fall
> coulors" film. Since i have owned the 6x7 i have done 75-80% of this with the 6x7 
> and the
> rest 35mm.
> Didl not really llike what i got out of the D1,but i have not tried the D2h yet.
> I'm not fussy on the 35-70mm lens i have for the D2h.It could be that aswell.
> However i'm happy with Provia,Kodak 100VS and Reala and Portra 400.
> 
> Dave
> 

I'm talking trends, not specifics, Dave.  I know not everyone who owns
medium format is selling their stuff off.  I'm aware that there are
many compelling reasons for continuing to use medium format, and that
it has many strengths over digital.

But, many people are selling off their MF, and in many cases, it's to
finance or partially finance going digital.  It may only be
(hypothetically) 10% or 20% of medium format users, but if it's that
high, it's still enough to flood the market and drive prices of used
MF stuff down.

I've heard of many selling MF to get into digital.  The seller here is
the first that I've heard of who is selling his digital to buy MF. 
That was the only point I was trying to make.

cheers,
frank



-- 
"It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt

Re: PAW - Close Friends

[Shel Belinkoff]

Hi Frank ...

These were two really gentle and accommodating fellows.  I was walking
along, grabbing shots in almost (for me) a Winogrand fashion, saw these two
leaning against the wall, and could see something interesting.  In an
instant we made contact, they saw the camera, acknowledged that it was OK
to make the photo, and the guy on the (viewer's) right stiffened into the
pose you see while the other guy just "hung loose."

The seam on the wall does lend a certain feel to the photo, that's for
sure.  Police lineup    The idea crossed my mind, but in a
somewhat different context and for a different reason.

So glad you enjoyed the pic.


Shel Belinkoff
"People that hate cats will come back as mice in their next life." 


> [Original Message]
> From: frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 9/7/2004 10:12:54 AM
> Subject: Re: PAW - Close Friends
>
> On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 09:50:41 -0700, Shel Belinkoff
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > http://home.earthlink.net/~sbelinkoff/close.html
> > 
> > Invoking the "rule of thirds" 
>
> I have to admit, there's something vaguely threatening about this one,
Shel.
>
> I think that the line on the wall gives this one the feel of a police
> ID line-up.  And the expressions on the guys, especially the one on
> the left, are quite ambiguous, almost threatening.  Not overtly
> threatening, but it's as if there's something bubbling under the
> surface.  - "You talking to me?  I don't see anyone else here, so you
> must be talking to me!" 
>
> All that being said, I like this one a lot, precisely because it makes
> me think.  It's not the usual "pretty portrait", full of smiles.  It
> may be as well that when I saw the title before opening it, I was
> expecting something different, maybe two people hugging and smiling,
> and I got something quite different.
>
> I just love the tonality of the greys.  And, of course, the
> composition (rule of thirds ) is most interesting.
>
> So tell me, do you know these guys, or did you just bump into them on
> the street and ask if you could take their photo?
>
> A very very strong, emotional photo, IMHO.  Thanks.
>
> cheers,
> frank
>
>
>
> -- 
> "It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
> as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt

Re: PAW - Close Friends

[Shel Belinkoff]

Thank you Peter 

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: Peter J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> Only you could invoke the rule of thirds in such a way as to look like 
> you were avoiding it.
> I have to admit I did like composition when I first looked at it but 
> even if I hadn't it's been growing on me. 
> Really well done.

Re: pdmler on tv

[frank theriault]

> On 7/9/04, tom, discombobulated, unleashed:
> 
> >Yeah, that's the new office, those are all 16x20's and 30x40's on the walls.
> >Some shots from our opening party -
> >
> >http://www.romanphotography.com/office/
> >
> >Chicks dig the gray...the thinning is another matter

Geez, tom,

You use a Canon, it's digital, and you have an office.  You really
~must~ be a Pro then, eh?  

Unfortunately, I can't watch the clip, as the 'puter don't belong to
me, and I don't feel comfortable downloading the needed software to
view the clip.  Cool office, though.

So, grey hair's a turn-on for the chickitas, eh?  I'll have to
remember that.  

cheers,
frank
> 

-- 
"It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt

Re: PAW: Crabapples

[pnstenquist]

Thanks to all who commented. The Vivitar lens does deliver nice bokeh. It's only 
shortcoming, compared to Pentax lenses, is flare resistance, but fitted with a good 
hood and pointed away from the sun, it's a winner.


> 
> 
> Peter J. Alling wrote:
> 
> > Paul Stenquist wrote:
> > 
> >> I shot this an hour or so ago with the *ist D and the Vivitar Series 1 
> >> 90/2.5. It's at about 1:2. Love that lens.
> >> Paul
> >> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2673922&size=lg
> 
> > Nice, I like it, not sure why, but I do.
> 
> Probably because of it's velvety bokeh!
> 
> It is very nice...
> 
> keith whaley
> 

Re: PAW - Close Friends

[Daniel J. Matyola]

A very nice shot.  The feeling would have been much different if you 
centered the pair and cropped out most of the empty space.

Shel Belinkoff wrote:
http://home.earthlink.net/~sbelinkoff/close.html
Invoking the "rule of thirds" 
Shel Belinkoff

.
 

Re: Pentax at the Track

[Stephen Moore]

Mostly motorcycle and vintage sports car roadracing.
Your piece reminded me that it's too easy to get
hung up on the cars or bikes. There's a whole human
side that I find myself neglecting, and that you've
captured really well.
Perhaps it has to do with cost, but the bike sports
(roadracing and motocross) seem to have as much
diversity as drag racing -- though I've yet to see
a female motocrosser! ;-)
Stephen

John Mason wrote:
Now, don't embarrass me.  What are you shooting? 
Sports cars, Nascar, drags?  Monster trucks?

RE: PAW - Close Friends

[Malcolm Smith]

frank theriault wrote:

> "You talking to me?  
> I don't see anyone else here, so you must be talking to me!" 

Time for you to cover your mirrors again Frank .

Malcolm

Re: pdmler on tv

[Peter J. Alling]

frank theriault wrote:
On 7/9/04, tom, discombobulated, unleashed:
   

Yeah, that's the new office, those are all 16x20's and 30x40's on the walls.
Some shots from our opening party -
http://www.romanphotography.com/office/
Chicks dig the gray...the thinning is another matter
 

Geez, tom,
You use a Canon, it's digital, and you have an office.  You really
~must~ be a Pro then, eh?  
Unfortunately, I can't watch the clip, as the 'puter don't belong to
me, and I don't feel comfortable downloading the needed software to
view the clip.  Cool office, though.
So, grey hair's a turn-on for the chickitas, eh?  I'll have to
remember that.  
cheers,
frank
 

 

Frank, don't download the software just the clip, (ok not the clip the 
asx file which will load the clip).  Open the folder and double click on 
it.  Microsoft Media player will use the information in the asx file to 
download and play the clip.

--
Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is a virtue. Fleas are interested 
in dogs.
   P. J. O'Rourke

RE: pdmler on tv

[tom]

> -Original Message-
> From: frank theriault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> 
> So, grey hair's a turn-on for the chickitas, eh?  I'll have 
> to remember that.  

Just remember to be careful with your choice of headgear. 

tv

RE: pdmler on tv

[tom]

> -Original Message-
> From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> 
> On 7/9/04, tom, discombobulated, unleashed:
> 
> >Yeah, that's the new office, those are all 16x20's and 
> 30x40's on the walls.
> >Some shots from our opening party -
> >
> >http://www.romanphotography.com/office/
> >
> >Chicks dig the gray...the thinning is another matter
> 
> LOL. Tell me about it. I go for the Jean-Luc Picard look. I 
> have no choice!
> 
> Well done on the TV appearance, you looked like you knew what 
> you were doing and I reckon that's 90% of wedding shoots?

The wedding planner (my sister) called me and told me I had 30 minutes to
get down to the jefferson memorial for the interview. I figured they would
just ask me a few questions, but instead he had us pretend to scout the
location and did that whole reality tv thing. In fact, I wasn't even going
to bring a camera, but #7 told me I should.

So yeah, I might have looked like I knew what I was doing but I was totally
flying by the seat of my pants!

The weirdest part was cycling through the crap shots he had me take on the
back of the camera. "Show all this unedited poo on tv? Sure, great idea!"

tv

Re: Mediocre lenses

[Cotty]

On 7/9/04, frank theriault, discombobulated, unleashed:

>> Depth of field is vastly over eighted.
>> 
>> D'oh
>
>First you insult me ("not the fastest lens in the bag"), now there's
>this Horrible Play on Words.
>
>That's it, Cotty, you're kill-filed!!  
>
>have a good life,
>frank

now that's FAME!!!

Hey, you know when you just mentioned 'You lookin at me? You talking to
me?" in another thread - - it got me thinking and you in that green
jacket at GFM - - it does remind me a bit of Al Pacino in Taxi Driver



and



!!!




Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_

Re: Mediocre lenses

[Cotty]

On 7/9/04, Cotty, discombobulated, unleashed:

>Hey, you know when you just mentioned 'You lookin at me? You talking to
>me?" in another thread - - it got me thinking and you in that green
>jacket at GFM - - it does remind me a bit of Al Pacino in Taxi Driver
>
>

or even Robert de Niro!

D'oh, bad day, don't ask




Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_

Re: pdmler on tv

[Cotty]

On 7/9/04, tom, discombobulated, unleashed:

>The wedding planner (my sister) called me and told me I had 30 minutes to
>get down to the jefferson memorial for the interview. I figured they would
>just ask me a few questions, but instead he had us pretend to scout the
>location and did that whole reality tv thing. In fact, I wasn't even going
>to bring a camera, but #7 told me I should.

(on behalf of Tan who is under the knife and can't be with us)  :  That
is so you.

>
>So yeah, I might have looked like I knew what I was doing but I was totally
>flying by the seat of my pants!

That's TV news through and through.

>
>The weirdest part was cycling through the crap shots he had me take on the
>back of the camera. "Show all this unedited poo on tv? Sure, great idea!"

Cutaways lad. Cutaways.

It was a good piece.




Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_

Re: photo.net posting

[brooksdj]

> Frank Said:
> I'm talking trends, not specifics, Dave.  I know not everyone who owns
> medium format is selling their stuff off.  I'm aware that there are
> many compelling reasons for continuing to use medium format, and that
> it has many strengths over digital.
> 
> But, many people are selling off their MF, and in many cases, it's to
> finance or partially finance going digital.  It may only be
> (hypothetically) 10% or 20% of medium format users, but if it's that
> high, it's still enough to flood the market and drive prices of used
> MF stuff down.
> 
> I've heard of many selling MF to get into digital.  The seller here is
> the first that I've heard of who is selling his digital to buy MF. 
> That was the only point I was trying to make.
> 
> cheers,
> frank

I thought about that after i hit send. I agree with your opening sentence Frank and i 
see
your point now.

Nothing like a big clunky mirror slap at 6am in the bush to wake up the birds and 
fish.LOL

Dave

Cinematography (was Re: Mediocre lenses

[Bob W]

Hi,

> Here's a suggestion that might help you achieve better or more interesting
> composition: watch movies.  Watch them on a DVD player ideally.  Watch them

I'm with Shel on this one. A recent film which I think was beautifully
photographed is 'Mystic River'. It isn't 'in yer face' beautiful.
Instead it's subtle, and muted and very underplayed, but a great
pleasure.

Others I recommend to people are 'The Sheltering Sky', directed by
Bertolucci with cinematography by Storaro - in fact, anything where
Storaro was the cinematographer is superb, and anything by Bertolucci
is also beautifully photographed (they work together a lot).
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0005886/

A great favourite of mine from the 1970s is 'The Duellists', the first
feature film by Ridley Scott (Blade Runner, Alien, Hannibal, ...). The
cinematography in that one is really exceptional.

The list could go on and on. I'm always very conscious of the
cinematography when I watch a movie, and always looking for ideas to
steal.

-- 
Cheers,
 Bob

Re: FS: Sigma EX Aspherical 17-35/2.8-4

[Tim]

Bummer! I just picked one up from Amazon for a lot more than that, Paul!
Haven't had the chance to put it to the test yet, but your samples confirm
what my basic 4x6 proofs have shown: the lens does get the job done. Good
luck selling it - shouldn't be a problem at that price.

t 

On 9/4/04 9:40, Paul Stenquist wrote:

> Sorry to be a day late with this, but I'm going to put it on ebay
> tonight, so I thought I should offer it to the list first. I like this
> lens. I've only owned it for a few months, but it has served me well. I
> have weighed the plusses and minuses of this lens against the Pentax
> 16-45/4, and have come to the conclusion that I want the Pentax.
> However it was a narrow decision, and I would not have gone for the
> Pentax if I couldn't have gotten the rebate that's offered when you buy
> it with an *istD.  This lens is considerably faster than the Pentax at
> the wide end, but the Pentax gives me a little more focal length. To me
> that's more important. And I would hope that the Pentax is slightly
> better, although I have no complaints with the sharpness or resolution
> of this lens. I've also found it to be quite flare resistant. I've been
> using it with a B&W skylight filter on the front, which may help. The
> hood also seems to be quite functional. The lens comes complete with a
> nice lens case that has a loop to attach to your belt or camera strap,
> the 82mm B&W filter (an expensive piece of glass in its own right), two
> lens caps (the front one is not original but it fits over the filter
> with the hood installed backwards), and the original equipment hood. I
> can send you pictures of the whole package if you wish. I will take
> $265, shipping included for US addresses. I'll ship international for
> an additional $20. If there are no takers by this evening . It goes on
> ebay. I've posted urls for two pics I shot with this lens. Both have
> been seen here before. Note how well it handled flare from the sun
> hitting the chrome in the car shot.
> Paul
> 
> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2275762
> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2627633
> 
> 
> 

RE: Cinematography (was Re: Mediocre lenses

[Shel Belinkoff]

Wonderfully photographed film  Mystic River was also quite well done.

Shel 

> From: Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> A great favourite of mine from the 1970s is 'The Duellists'

PAW: The Confrontation

[frank theriault]

Another old one, taken with a Spottie/Super Tak 2.0 55mm/Tri-X.

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2676567&size=lg

Comments always welcome - be as brutal as you want.  Thanks in advance...

cheers,
frank
-- 
"It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt

RE: Gold 50 f1.2

[Cesar Matamoros II]

Ryan,

Cannot say that I ever even considered skinning a lens.

I will be getting my car interior reupholstered in the near future, maybe I
should experiment with the leather from that :-)

Blame Ryan, he put the idea into my head ;-P

Feeling like a geek with four computers and OS going,

César
Panama City, Florida


-Original Message-
From: Ryan Lee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 2:28 AM

lol forgot to shoot my *eest before number 1 went interstate. Btw Cesar, out
of curiosity have you ever skinned a lens too?

Cheers,
Ryan
(unsuccessful camera breeder)

- Original Message -
From: "Cesar Matamoros II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


> The second shot shows the brood.

> Cesar
> Panama City, Florida

Re: Cinematography (was Re: Mediocre lenses

[frank theriault]

On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 19:07:37 +0100, Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> Others I recommend to people are 'The Sheltering Sky', directed by
> Bertolucci with cinematography by Storaro - in fact, anything where
> Storaro was the cinematographer is superb, and anything by Bertolucci
> is also beautifully photographed (they work together a lot).
> http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0005886/


One of my favourite movies, and one of my favourite books.  Paul
Bowles, the book's author, was an amateur photog himself.  I came
across a wonderful book of his photos, taken IIRC, mostly during his
travels in North Africa.  I saw it in a library, so I couldn't keep it
.

If anyone sees it, or any other book with his photos in it, it would
be worth a look. IMHO.

cheers,
frank



-- 
"It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt

RE: PAW: The Confrontation

[Shel Belinkoff]

I like this one quite a bit, Frank.  I like that you got close, the angle
at which it was shot, and that it's completely out of context.  makes one
wonder, think a bit ... try to get -into- the mood and the scene.  Can't
read the tag hanging around the guy's neck.  Bad scan?  If so, what does
the tag say?  Seeing it clearly would ad a valuable dimension to this
photograph.

Shel Belinkoff
"People that hate cats will come back as mice in their next life." 


> [Original Message]
> From: frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> Another old one, taken with a Spottie/Super Tak 2.0 55mm/Tri-X.
>
> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2676567&size=lg
>
> Comments always welcome - be as brutal as you want.  Thanks in advance...

Dslr's and Onsite selling :bit long

[brooksdj]

Hi gang.
I'v pretty much finished the crunch of my horse work for the year,1-2 really small ones
that about it.

I have not sat down and spread sheeted this,but i have gone over rough fiqures in the
brainal area. 

It seems to me that only a few short years ago,in my area anyway,that there were just a
couple of 
people diving into using Dslr's at sporting events weither horse,soccer,baseball,hockey
etc.
The one thing i have noticed is that there is now a flood of people with high end and 
or
consumer end 
Dslr's trying to make a buck with the camera,most doing onsite sales,some web 
based(like i
am starting 
to do.)
I cannot help but think this glut is hurting.I mean how many pictures does one really 
need
or willing to 
shell out $20-25.00 for YKWIM.

I'm curious to hear from anyone doing sport shooting(not wedding stuff,cause thats a
different game i 
think)and if they are still selling up to expectations or are you getting the same 
feeling
i am.To many 
players = market share drop.
I know some of my "competiors" have invested in much better computer equipment/programs
than i 
have and can do the funky sport cover pictures,but i'm a traditionalist and besides 
cannot
afford to 
shell out another 2-3K.
That in itself could be the problem. I'm leaving myself in the dust whilst others
overtake.

I quess i bring this up as it was another disapointing summer.People loved my work,just
not buying 
much.At least equine. I hear hockey and motosport people are doing well. Is this the
case.?

Case in point,3 years ago i did well at reining shows.No one was doing onsite,and sales
were in the 
2K per weekend range.Lat year a few more got into it,now less the 1K.This year more
shooters and 
just broke $500 for the weekend(all this is gross BTW).
Its harder to find help so i'm going the web proofs for most work now. Not a lot of 
hits
but some.

However the small kids at schooling horse shows,first timers etc, i do quite well.But
again do i do more 
than 1-2 and glut my own market .???

Again, just curious as to what any weekend shooters have to say or think.

Dave

Re: Mediocre lenses

[frank theriault]

On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 18:58:17 +0100, Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/9/04, Cotty, discombobulated, unleashed:
> 
> >Hey, you know when you just mentioned 'You lookin at me? You talking to
> >me?" in another thread - - it got me thinking and you in that green
> >jacket at GFM - - it does remind me a bit of Al Pacino in Taxi Driver
> >
> >
> 
> or even Robert de Niro!
> 
> D'oh, bad day, don't ask
> 

Somewhere, I have a photo of me with my Mohawk.  I'll have to dig it
out.  I had it a couple of summers ago - actually now that I think of
it, I don't have that photo.  Now that I think of it, it was
Chang-Sang who took a piccie of me when I had it.  Maybe Brooks has
one too.

I got rid of it because my mother hated it so.  

cheers,
frank



-- 
"It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt

Re: PAW: The Confrontation

[pnstenquist]

Very nice, Frank. It's obviously a dramatic moment, so it's intriguing. I like the way 
that the young man is the focal point, rather than the figure in the foreground. Nice 
range of gray tones as well. Good work.


> Another old one, taken with a Spottie/Super Tak 2.0 55mm/Tri-X.
> 
> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2676567&size=lg
> 
> Comments always welcome - be as brutal as you want.  Thanks in advance...
> 
> cheers,
> frank
> -- 
> "It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it
> as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt
> 

Re: Monkey Hug

[Jostein]

What's more, the origin of the apple fruit itself was a mystery for a
good while. Apparently, all domestic apple variants are bred from an
ancestor found in Kashakstan or thereabouts. It is one of the longest
cultivated trees in human history. :-)

Jostein

- Original Message - 
From: "Keith Whaley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 12:01 PM
Subject: Re: Monkey Hug


Much as I like etymology, I looked "apple" up in my Oxford Dictionary
of
English Etymology.
The word, in all it's similarities from language to language, has
"originated" in all European languages from Italy to the top of
Scandanavia.
Of course, it's taken from the Old English, Old Frisian, etc...
And, I also learned that in English, Apple's first stressed vowel is
shown
as "æ" like the Danes use it. Never knew that.
Most languages don't stray far from the tree  and with few
exceptions,
the written word is easily recognizable.
I suspect it's even more obvious when pronounced, as Anders pointed
out.

Cotty wrote:
 >
> On 7/9/04, Anders Hultman, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
>
>>Yes. In Swedish too, but we spell it with one p: "apelsin".

>>>So, how do you say "apple" in Danish and Norwegian?

>>Danish: æble
>>Norwegian: eple
>>Swedish: äpple
>>
>>All three are pronounced quite much like English "apple".

> Hey I like this thread :-)

Me too!  - keith

> Cheers,
>   Cotty

Re: pdmler on tv

[mike wilson]

Hi,
tom wrote:
Some shots from our opening party -
http://www.romanphotography.com/office/
You should have got Frank to do the party pics, for that je ne sais 
quoi.  8-

mike

Re: Monkey Hug

[Jostein]

Not at the moment, I think. Espen "Shampo" Knudsen played for some
Colorado team (Blue jackets?), but I think he quit one or two seasons
ago.

Did you plan to ask them to say appelsin during a game? :-)

Jostein

- Original Message - 
From: "frank theriault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, September 06, 2004 2:47 PM
Subject: Re: Monkey Hug


> On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 23:47:38 +0200, Jostein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If you bump into any Norwegians, try "appelsiiin"...:-)
> > Jostein
>
> Jostein,
>
> Are there any Norwegians playing professional hockey in North
America?
>  I can't think of any off hand...
>
> -frank
>
>
>
> -- 
> "It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat
it
> as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt
>
>

Re: pdmler on tv

[mike wilson]

Hi,
tom wrote:
Some shots from our opening party -
http://www.romanphotography.com/office/
You should have got Frank to do the party pics, for that je ne sais 
quoi.  8-

mike

Professional Pentax

[Caveman]

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0409/04090701creoleafaptus.asp
Bronica *is* supported.

Re: Pentax at the Track

[Keith Whaley]

Stephen Moore wrote:
Mostly motorcycle and vintage sports car roadracing.
Your piece reminded me that it's too easy to get
hung up on the cars or bikes. There's a whole human
side that I find myself neglecting, and that you've
captured really well.
Perhaps it has to do with cost, but the bike sports
(roadracing and motocross) seem to have as much
diversity as drag racing -- though I've yet to see
a female motocrosser! ;-)
Not that _some_ couldn't do it well, but motocrossing takes a lot of tough, 
wiry upper body strength. A lot of it!
Add stamina, and most women simply can't handle the rigors of it. They're 
not built like men. Way it is...not a put down.
Most men can't do it, train as they might. It takes a young kid!

keith whaley
Stephen

John Mason wrote:
Now, don't embarrass me.  What are you shooting? Sports cars, Nascar, 
drags?  Monster trucks?