Re: PESO: Three lucky shots
On 4/12/04, Juan Buhler, discombobulated, unleashed: Surprisingly, all three images are at least not embarassing: http://www.jbuhler.com/blog/archives/0141.html Pentax ist D, K30/2.8, Photoshop channel mixer. Not in the least. I love the first one. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Really OT: More on spy/adware problems
On 4/12/04, William Robb, discombobulated, unleashed: Get a router. I bought one even before the broadband was installed here. Links up to a wireless Airport Base Station and we jes cruuisin. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
RE: Delightfully Diminutive
I can relate to that. A lot of people seem to be obsessed with how small a camera is. Since I dont carry a camera with me all the time - while doing other things - I don't care much about size and weight. When I'm photographing, I don't do anything else. So, I don't need a camera that will fit in a pocket. I'm more concerned about the results and the quality of my outfit. On the other hand Im quite happy with the (small) size and weight of the *ist D. It fits me (I have rather small hands), but I'mm quite happy it's not smaller. For MF I use a Pentacon Six, which handles like a 35mm SLR and produce good reslults. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 4. december 2004 05:24 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: Delightfully Diminutive To me, twice the size and twice the weight is irrelevant. Perhaps that's a function of my having shot Pentax 6x7 for quite a while and my predilection for equipment that has enough heft to be capable of anchoring itself. I have a very compact Leica, and sometimes I enjoy shooting with that -- ditto an MX and 40/2.8 -- but for the most part the size of the equipment is somewhat irrelevant when I'm concerned about getting good results. And, as I said, in most cases I prefer a heftier rig. Paul The FA 20 f2.8, compared to the Sigma 20mm f1.8. The Sigma is twice the size and more than twice the weight. Well, I'll be testing the newcomer to see how it does at f2.8 relative to the Sigma. The manual that came with it has a printing date of 2003. So I guess there was a manufacturing run last year. I suspect this will mean that a DA or D FA 18-20 won't appear anytime soon. Joe
Re: Re: Heretical question: 43LTD vs SMC-A 50F2
... but I have: http://home.t-online.de/home/tumbschef/Galerie/Blumen/Bilder1/pic08.jpg Epson 1660 scan Best, Bernd --original message--- On Sat, 4 Dec 2004, alexander wrote: good compared to other fast standard lenses. But what I like most about this lens its color reproduction, and the contrasty and color-saturated (but IMO not intrusive) out of focus images. Have you got an example of this on line? Thanks, Kostas
Re: Delightfully Diminutive
Hi, Sunday, December 5, 2004, 11:06:30 AM, Jens wrote: I can relate to that. A lot of people seem to be obsessed with how small a camera is. Since I dont carry a camera with me all the time - while doing other things - I don't care much about size and weight. When I'm photographing, I don't do anything else. So, I don't need a camera that will fit in a pocket. I'm more concerned about the results and the quality of my outfit. On the other hand Im quite happy with the (small) size and weight of the *ist D. It fits me (I have rather small hands), but I'mm quite happy it's not smaller. For MF I use a Pentacon Six, which handles like a 35mm SLR and produce good reslults. Depends on the type of subject you shoot. If your camera is so big it frightens horses then you won't be much of a horse-photographer. -- Cheers, Bob
Re: Delightfully Diminutive
On 5/12/04, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed: Depends on the type of subject you shoot. If your camera is so big it frightens horses then you won't be much of a horse-photographer. Mine frightens elephant. Cheers, Is That A Banana In Your Pocket Or Are You Just Happy To See Me Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
RE: Some really neat northern lights photos
Greenland got populated by the Scandinavian Vikings a thuosand years ago. I guess the Vikings got there during summer, where the coastal areas appeared quite green. Remember that the climate at that time was considerably warmer than it is today. Greenland is up to this day still a part of the Kingdom of Denmark. Erik the Red, was a Norwegian Viking (actually rebbel an a murderer - a kind of an outlaw - a refugee from Norway and Iceland) left Norway to go to Island and later moved on to Greenland. On a trip to Greenland in 985 he missed Greenland and reached North America, which was then called Wineland, because they found wine plants there (somewhere in todays Canada, I believe). The first European to see North America was a man from Iceland, travelling with Erik the Red. His name was Bjarni Herjolfsson. Actually he dissovered North America, not Christoffer Columbus, who got there about 500 years later. Erik the Red Never reached America himself but wnt back to Greenland. His son Leif the Happy, got to America 10-14 years later. They never really established a Viking coloni there, because the native population (indian, inuit) was giving them a very hard time. So, it was in fact the Vikings who discovered America. After that the world was never the same... Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: David Mann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 4. december 2004 05:37 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: Some really neat northern lights photos On Dec 2, 2004, at 10:29 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I always thought that Greenland was an early example of false advertizing in the attempt to make people move there :-) Probably named by the guy who invented the greenhouse. Cheers, - Dave (we call them glasshouses here) http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
Re: PESO: Three lucky shots
Nice Juan. I particularly like the first one with the man's face framed by the backs of the other pedestrians. Your conversions are looking very good. Paul On Dec 4, 2004, at 8:27 PM, Juan Buhler wrote: Today I went to the area around Union Square here in San Francisco for some shooting. I don't know if it was lack of inspiration or what, but I only pressed the shutter three times. Surprisingly, all three images are at least not embarassing: http://www.jbuhler.com/blog/archives/0141.html Pentax ist D, K30/2.8, Photoshop channel mixer. j -- Juan Buhler http://www.jbuhler.com blog at http://www.jbuhler.com/blog
Re: Heretical question: 43LTD vs SMC-A 50F2
I would think an A50/2 is quite a bit better than a fifty year old Summitar. I think the difference would be obvious on a fairly large print. On the other hand, a fifty year old Summicron 50/2 can probably hold its own against the Pentax glass if one discounts flare resistance. Paul On Dec 4, 2004, at 10:54 PM, Fred wrote: In the end, if you stand in the same spot and take two pictures, one with a Leica IIIF and Summitar lens, and one with a K1000 and SMC-A 50mm F2, how different will the pictures really be? Well, the latter ~has~ to be better - it's taken with a PENTAX !!! Fred
Re: Photoshop CS Bargain Basement
Mishka wrote: just enjoy the program. adobe hasn't really lost anything. changing the credit card number may be a good idea, but other than that, i wouldn't worry about anything. remember, there're india, russia (or, rather, ex-ussr) an china where people consider it utterly stupid to buy a legal copy of anything when one can get it for free. 2 (3?) billion people cannot possibly be wrong :) So right, in fact, that the copyright organisations seem to have come to an agreement with the pirates in, at least, Russia. You can now buy legitimate copies of software there for a fraction of the full price. The on-street price has about doubled. So Photoshop CS is about £4. The one drawback (and it's a doozy for many people on this list) is that English language copies seem to have disappeared. mike
Re: Some really neat northern lights photos
Have to correct you on this one, Jens. It was Leiv Eriksson, son of Erik the Red, who went to Northern America. The spelling of the land was Vinland, from Vine meaning grassland. It has nothing to do with grapes, which is a Eurasian plant, btw. (read the biography of Helge Ingstad a while back) Jostein - Original Message - From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] Greenland got populated by the Scandinavian Vikings a thuosand years ago. I guess the Vikings got there during summer, where the coastal areas appeared quite green. Remember that the climate at that time was considerably warmer than it is today. Greenland is up to this day still a part of the Kingdom of Denmark. Erik the Red, was a Norwegian Viking (actually rebbel an a murderer - a kind of an outlaw - a refugee from Norway and Iceland) left Norway to go to Island and later moved on to Greenland. On a trip to Greenland in 985 he missed Greenland and reached North America, which was then called Wineland, because they found wine plants there (somewhere in todays Canada, I believe). The first European to see North America was a man from Iceland, travelling with Erik the Red. His name was Bjarni Herjolfsson. Actually he dissovered North America, not Christoffer Columbus, who got there about 500 years later. Erik the Red Never reached America himself but wnt back to Greenland. His son Leif the Happy, got to America 10-14 years later. They never really established a Viking coloni there, because the native population (indian, inuit) was giving them a very hard time. So, it was in fact the Vikings who discovered America. After that the world was never the same... Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: David Mann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 4. december 2004 05:37 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: Some really neat northern lights photos On Dec 2, 2004, at 10:29 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I always thought that Greenland was an early example of false advertizing in the attempt to make people move there :-) Probably named by the guy who invented the greenhouse. Cheers, - Dave (we call them glasshouses here) http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
RE: Some really neat northern lights photos
Hello Jostien. I believe that Leiv Eriksson and Leif Den Lykkelige (The Happy) is in fact the same person - son of Erik den Røde (the Red). I have seen a TV broadcast - broadcasted in relation to a recent viking boat trip, following the trail of Leif or Erik - from the coastal areas, where he/they are belived to have landed. The location showed some kind of evidence of their presence. This broadcast also showed evidence of local plants, closely related to wine. I know that this could very well prove to be wrong, of course. Anyway, the present climate would not allow wine growing. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Jostein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 5. december 2004 14:45 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: Some really neat northern lights photos Have to correct you on this one, Jens. It was Leiv Eriksson, son of Erik the Red, who went to Northern America. The spelling of the land was Vinland, from Vine meaning grassland. It has nothing to do with grapes, which is a Eurasian plant, btw. (read the biography of Helge Ingstad a while back) Jostein - Original Message - From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] Greenland got populated by the Scandinavian Vikings a thuosand years ago. I guess the Vikings got there during summer, where the coastal areas appeared quite green. Remember that the climate at that time was considerably warmer than it is today. Greenland is up to this day still a part of the Kingdom of Denmark. Erik the Red, was a Norwegian Viking (actually rebbel an a murderer - a kind of an outlaw - a refugee from Norway and Iceland) left Norway to go to Island and later moved on to Greenland. On a trip to Greenland in 985 he missed Greenland and reached North America, which was then called Wineland, because they found wine plants there (somewhere in todays Canada, I believe). The first European to see North America was a man from Iceland, travelling with Erik the Red. His name was Bjarni Herjolfsson. Actually he dissovered North America, not Christoffer Columbus, who got there about 500 years later. Erik the Red Never reached America himself but wnt back to Greenland. His son Leif the Happy, got to America 10-14 years later. They never really established a Viking coloni there, because the native population (indian, inuit) was giving them a very hard time. So, it was in fact the Vikings who discovered America. After that the world was never the same... Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: David Mann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 4. december 2004 05:37 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: Some really neat northern lights photos On Dec 2, 2004, at 10:29 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I always thought that Greenland was an early example of false advertizing in the attempt to make people move there :-) Probably named by the guy who invented the greenhouse. Cheers, - Dave (we call them glasshouses here) http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
Chobi Mela III - Int'l Festival of Photography, Asia 2004
Hi all, someone on another photography forum's drawn my attention to this event- Chobi Mela III, International Festival of Photography, Asia 2004, currently held in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Some very interesting shots on display here: http://www.chobimela.org/ Here's a shot from the exhibition (out of the few I've had the time to look at) that I've found really moving: http://www.chobimela.org/g_in_raghurai.htm Sorry actually that's his portfolio- it's the 6th shot. Cheers, Ryan
PAW - Bee and Flower Pic ;-))
http://www.nathanfoto.com/paw/2004/2004_34alt1.jpg This isn't my shot, but when I saw it I just had to share it. Taken with the Leica 100mm Apo Macro mounted on a Canon 10D Shel
Re: *istDS Review on photo.shopping.com
Mea Culpa. I made that statement after talking with someone from the Singapore Pentax distributors and poring over the *ist-DS spec sheet with him. On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 09:24:41 +1000, John Coyle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Francis, why wouldn't you be able to use your M lenses on either the *istD or *istDS? I have used mine many times on my *istD without any difficulty. If the reason is that you think the focal length shift is unacceptable, then save money by getting the lenses designed for the D series - you'd have to do so anyway if you change systems. John Coyle Brisbane, Australia - Original Message - From: Francis Tang [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 3:29 PM Subject: Re: *istDS Review on photo.shopping.com SNIP I'm always anticipating the release of the next Pentax dSLR, precisely because I have a collection of Pentax glass. However, judging by the *ist-D and *ist-DS, it looks like this is not a good reason anyway. The only lenses I would be able to salvage frrom my collection are the A24/2.8 (which would no longer be a super wide), A50/1.4 (hardly standard anymore - perhaps a good portrait lens) and the A70-210/4 (but that's not my most used lens). Sadly, I wouldn't be able to use the M35/2 (which I love on the MX, and would make a nice standard lens for the istD/S), nor my M85/2 (which despite being previously described as a dog on this list, I love anyway). The other glass I wouldn't miss so much (a smattering of 50s, plus a Vivitar 28/2.8 and a Ricoh 135/2.8). SNIP Francis Tang. PDML lurker, one-time hobby photographer.
Re: Really OT: More on spy/adware problems
- Original Message - From: Cotty Subject: Re: Really OT: More on spy/adware problems On 4/12/04, William Robb, discombobulated, unleashed: Get a router. I bought one even before the broadband was installed here. Links up to a wireless Airport Base Station and we jes cruuisin. Cotty, I know virus' aren't much of an issue for Mac users, but are the spyware/adware programs an issue? William Robb
RE: *istDS Review on photo.shopping.com
I made the same statement when I first looked at the Ds's manual But as a fellow list member mentioned, they don't tell you about the info on how to use the non-A lenses on the manual. I think they'll prefer that you go and buy new lenses! So, I would not trust the manual or spec sheets on this particular matter. Cheers Andy -Original Message- From: Francis Tang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 10:42 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: *istDS Review on photo.shopping.com Mea Culpa. I made that statement after talking with someone from the Singapore Pentax distributors and poring over the *ist-DS spec sheet with him.
Re: Really OT: More on spy/adware problems
I'm going through the same thing with my daughter's IBM clone. It's bloody frustrating. The only answer I know is to get a Mac. I don't think you have anywhere near the problems with a Mac. I know that I have no problems with my Mac. But my daughter says she has so much on her computer that she could not imagine changing machines, so I keep running spybot and ad aware trying to stay on top of this adware. Vic
PESO: Strange Bird
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2934874size=lg
PESO: Classic Movie House
I used the PhotoShop 81 warming filter on this after processing the RAW. I probably could have achieved exactly the same result by turning up the temperature in the RAW converter, but the need for a warmer look was an afterthought. The photo was taken just before sunset but the sign was in the shade. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2934923
Re: Delightfully Diminutive
Or, maybe a very good horse photographer (as in a circus trainer who can train a horse to let a wildcat ride it). graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Bob W wrote: Depends on the type of subject you shoot. If your camera is so big it frightens horses then you won't be much of a horse-photographer.
Dishonest auction - again (and MZ-5 vs MZ-5n)
So, this guy is trying again... See http://my.qxl.no/accdb/viewItem.asp?IDI=13556944 I've mentioned the item before - fortunately it would appear that there were no bidders at the time. The price is somewhat reduced, now, but he's still including the picture of an MZ-5n even though he's selling an MZ-5, and claiming that there are just cosmetical differences between the two. Just in case I'm the one who's it wrong, isn't that quite wrong, or downright dishonest? Doesn't the MZ-5n have a number of updates to the *functionality* compared to the MZ-5? (Bojidar Dimitrov's page says it does, I think.) - Toralf
Re: Paw: Fall colours #2
arghh! my eyes! my eyes! tone it down... = ] --- Forwarded message --- Forwarded by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Forwarded date: 2004-12-04 18:07:20 http://caughtinmotion.com/paw/mad2_04.jpg I think this one is a bit better than #1,but its still not as sharp as i'd like it to be. I think its more film flatness than anything. Taken near Harcourt Ontario back in October. I like to shoot lakes and swamps,probably because most of my field survey career was taken up trying to avoid them in summer and not fall through them in winter.LOL Enjoy and comments welcome. Dave Svetova kniznica SME - literarne klenoty 20. storocia - http://knihy.sme.sk
Re: Dishonest auction - again (and MZ-5 vs MZ-5n)
Toralf Lund a écrit : So, this guy is trying again... See http://my.qxl.no/accdb/viewItem.asp?IDI=13556944 I've mentioned the item before - fortunately it would appear that there were no bidders at the time. The price is somewhat reduced, now, but he's still including the picture of an MZ-5n even though he's selling an MZ-5, and claiming that there are just cosmetical differences between the two. Just in case I'm the one who's it wrong, isn't that quite wrong, or downright dishonest? Doesn't the MZ-5n have a number of updates to the *functionality* compared to the MZ-5? (Bojidar Dimitrov's page says it does, I think.) - Toralf At least DOF prreview which is enough to make a BIG difference to me --- Thibouille
December Trivia Q No1.
Ok, guys and gals. Time for some Pre-Christmas family fun. Below is a list of names. What does this particular list represent? (The people behind these names all share one particular thing in common. What is it?) Lasse Slim Aarons Bernie Abramson Eve Arnold Zinn Arthur Richard Avedon Ernest Bachrach Ed Baird Larry Barbier Baron George Barris Cecil Beaton Anthony Beauchamp Bob Beermann Hal Berg Bernard of Hollywood Carlyle Blackwell Jr. John Bryson Bill Burnside Tom Caffrey Lee Caloia Cornell Capa Jack Cardiff Jock Carroll William Carroll Dave Cicero Edward (Ed) Clark Henri Cartier-Bresson David Conover Ed Coonenwerth Henri Dauman Bruce Davidson André de Dienes Nat Dillinger Alfred Eisenstaedt Glenn Embree John Engstead Elliott Erwitt Ed Feingersh Peter Fland John Florea Len Globus Allan Grant Bud Graybell Milton H. Greene Earl Gustie Ernst Haas Philippe Halsmann James Haspiel Bob Henriques Joseph Hepner Potter Hueth George Hurrell Joseph Jasgur Tom Kelley Douglas Kirkland Gene Kornman Hans Knopf Larry Kronquist Bob Landry Earl Leaf Lee Lockwood Joshua Logan Harold Lloyd Peter Mangone Paul Mechling John Miehle George Miller Richard C. Miller Jimmy Mitchell Earl Moran Inge Morath Nikolas Muray Arnold Newman Leif-Erik Nygards Don Ornitz Gordon Parks Paul Parry Carl Perutz Frank Powolny David Preston Bert Reisfeld Willy Rizzo Ben Ross Bob Sandberg Lawrence Schiller Sam Shaw Joe Shere George Silk Eric Skipsey Bert Stern Phil Stern Dennis Stock Earl Theisen John Vachon Seymour Wally Weegee Leigh Wiener Laszlo Willinger Bob Willoughby Gary Winogrand Raphael Wolff William Read Woodfield Jerome Zerbe
Re: December Trivia Q No1.
Lasse Karlsson a écrit : Ok, guys and gals. Time for some Pre-Christmas family fun. Below is a list of names. What does this particular list represent? (The people behind these names all share one particular thing in common. What is it?) Lasse Slim Aarons Bernie Abramson Eve Arnold Zinn Arthur Richard Avedon Ernest Bachrach Ed Baird Larry Barbier Baron George Barris Cecil Beaton Anthony Beauchamp Bob Beermann Hal Berg Bernard of Hollywood Carlyle Blackwell Jr. John Bryson Bill Burnside Tom Caffrey Lee Caloia Cornell Capa Jack Cardiff Jock Carroll William Carroll Dave Cicero Edward (Ed) Clark Henri Cartier-Bresson David Conover Ed Coonenwerth Henri Dauman Bruce Davidson André de Dienes Nat Dillinger Alfred Eisenstaedt Glenn Embree John Engstead Elliott Erwitt Ed Feingersh Peter Fland John Florea Len Globus Allan Grant Bud Graybell Milton H. Greene Earl Gustie Ernst Haas Philippe Halsmann James Haspiel Bob Henriques Joseph Hepner Potter Hueth George Hurrell Joseph Jasgur Tom Kelley Douglas Kirkland Gene Kornman Hans Knopf Larry Kronquist Bob Landry Earl Leaf Lee Lockwood Joshua Logan Harold Lloyd Peter Mangone Paul Mechling John Miehle George Miller Richard C. Miller Jimmy Mitchell Earl Moran Inge Morath Nikolas Muray Arnold Newman Leif-Erik Nygards Don Ornitz Gordon Parks Paul Parry Carl Perutz Frank Powolny David Preston Bert Reisfeld Willy Rizzo Ben Ross Bob Sandberg Lawrence Schiller Sam Shaw Joe Shere George Silk Eric Skipsey Bert Stern Phil Stern Dennis Stock Earl Theisen John Vachon Seymour Wally Weegee Leigh Wiener Laszlo Willinger Bob Willoughby Gary Winogrand Raphael Wolff William Read Woodfield Jerome Zerbe Mmmm photographers? -- Thibouille
Re: Chobi Mela III - Int'l Festival of Photography, Asia 2004
Consider yourself lucky that Caveboy seems to have left the list, he doesn't like pictures with political commentary. William Robb - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 8:28 AM Subject: Chobi Mela III - Int'l Festival of Photography, Asia 2004 Hi all, someone on another photography forum's drawn my attention to this event- Chobi Mela III, International Festival of Photography, Asia 2004, currently held in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Some very interesting shots on display here: http://www.chobimela.org/ Here's a shot from the exhibition (out of the few I've had the time to look at) that I've found really moving: http://www.chobimela.org/g_in_raghurai.htm Sorry actually that's his portfolio- it's the 6th shot. Cheers, Ryan
Re: Really OT: More on spy/adware problems
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Really OT: More on spy/adware problems I'm going through the same thing with my daughter's IBM clone. It's bloody frustrating. The only answer I know is to get a Mac. I don't think you have anywhere near the problems with a Mac. I know that I have no problems with my Mac. But my daughter says she has so much on her computer that she could not imagine changing machines, so I keep running spybot and ad aware trying to stay on top of this adware. Put those programs into your scheduled tasks, get a router, learn what processes should be running so you can see if anything running in task manager shouldn't be, and watch what you download. The problem I am finding is that I now have so many security routines running in the background that my machine is slower than I would like because of the background programs. William Robb
Re: December Trivia Q No1.
- Original Message - From: Thibs Subject: Re: December Trivia Q No1. Lasse Karlsson a écrit : Ok, guys and gals. Time for some Pre-Christmas family fun. Below is a list of names. What does this particular list represent? Looks like a list of names to me. William Robb
Re: Chobi Mela III - Int'l Festival of Photography, Asia 2004
On 5/12/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed: Hi all, someone on another photography forum's drawn my attention to this event- Chobi Mela III, International Festival of Photography, Asia 2004, currently held in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Some very interesting shots on display here: http://www.chobimela.org/ Here's a shot from the exhibition (out of the few I've had the time to look at) that I've found really moving: http://www.chobimela.org/g_in_raghurai.htm Sorry actually that's his portfolio- it's the 6th shot. This photog is featured in the current issue of Foto8. Indeed, very moving stuff. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: December Trivia Q No1.
On 5/12/04, Lasse Karlsson, discombobulated, unleashed: Ok, guys and gals. Time for some Pre-Christmas family fun. Below is a list of names. What does this particular list represent? (The people behind these names all share one particular thing in common. What is it?) Lasse [snip] Weegee Hey Lasse, you're hitting the Christmas booze early this year aren't you? ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
RE: PESO: Classic Movie House
hi, I took the liberty of altering this shot with a bunch of stuff like perspective, desaturating the marquee, bringing up the underside of the marquee, cropping, etc. Makes for an interesting comparison I noticed the two signs are not at true right angles, didn't take the time to try to alter that too, way too much work... http://jcoconnell.com/temp/temp120504.jpg the altered photo is shown above is for critique purposes only and will be delete shortly of course. I don't steal photos! Later, JCO -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 11:23 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PESO: Classic Movie House I used the PhotoShop 81 warming filter on this after processing the RAW. I probably could have achieved exactly the same result by turning up the temperature in the RAW converter, but the need for a warmer look was an afterthought. The photo was taken just before sunset but the sign was in the shade. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2934923
Re: Really OT: More on spy/adware problems
On 5/12/04, William Robb, discombobulated, unleashed: Cotty, I know virus' aren't much of an issue for Mac users, but are the spyware/adware programs an issue? Bill I wouldn't know where to start looking? How does one know if there is spyware/adware infesting the system? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Strange Bird
That is gorgeous, Paul. Maris Paul Stenquist wrote: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2934874size=lg
Re: Really OT: More on spy/adware problems
Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 5/12/04, William Robb, discombobulated, unleashed: Cotty, I know virus' aren't much of an issue for Mac users, but are the spyware/adware programs an issue? Bill I wouldn't know where to start looking? How does one know if there is spyware/adware infesting the system? Well most of that stuff works subliminally, you know. The first symptom is purchasing Canon equipment... -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Really OT: More on spy/adware problems
HAR! graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Mark Roberts wrote: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 5/12/04, William Robb, discombobulated, unleashed: Cotty, I know virus' aren't much of an issue for Mac users, but are the spyware/adware programs an issue? Bill I wouldn't know where to start looking? How does one know if there is spyware/adware infesting the system? Well most of that stuff works subliminally, you know. The first symptom is purchasing Canon equipment...
Re: Really OT: More on spy/adware problems
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry for the repeat OT.Looking for a little more guidance here. So i downloaded Ad Aware and it found a bunch of stuff which i quarintined. I then downloaded Spybot,it found a bunch more but quits 1/2 way through the removal part. Friday my shortcut to my internet connection would not work,so i had to make a new one(yup i know how to do that.lol) and when i brought up my IE 6 i had lost all my history and popups came in faster than i could close them. Its a nightmare i have never had to go through before on this computer. I checked and my conection is armed for MS firewall,but still getting through. Loaded Googles popup tool,but it does not stop them just puts them in the bottom tool bar,but it really slows the connections down,which i'm sure you all know. Having another firewall might help. There is a free version of Zone Alarm available. mike
RE: PESO: Classic Movie House
Nice work, but I can't say that I like the result. The perspective on the marquee appears artificial to my eye. The shot is obviously taken from street level, so the side of the marquee should form a trapezoid. I prefer the original crop as well, with the sign in the right third of the frame. hi, I took the liberty of altering this shot with a bunch of stuff like perspective, desaturating the marquee, bringing up the underside of the marquee, cropping, etc. Makes for an interesting comparison I noticed the two signs are not at true right angles, didn't take the time to try to alter that too, way too much work... http://jcoconnell.com/temp/temp120504.jpg the altered photo is shown above is for critique purposes only and will be delete shortly of course. I don't steal photos! Later, JCO -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 11:23 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PESO: Classic Movie House I used the PhotoShop 81 warming filter on this after processing the RAW. I probably could have achieved exactly the same result by turning up the temperature in the RAW converter, but the need for a warmer look was an afterthought. The photo was taken just before sunset but the sign was in the shade. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2934923
Re: Strange Bird
Thanks Maris. It was a RAW file that I had overlooked the first time I reviewed the results of that shooting day. That's why I rarely delete files that are at least halfway decent. Paul That is gorgeous, Paul. Maris Paul Stenquist wrote: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2934874size=lg
RE: PESO: Classic Movie House
I didn't say it was better, just my take on it, I didn't like the crop on the original though, It seems out of balance to me with all that empty sky on the left. The postion of the sign is not paramount in my opinion, the overall balance of the images is... regarding perspective, neither version is going to look natural, the only way to have done that was to keep the lens and film parallel to the signs and that wasn't done of course. To my eye, the building on the right looks much better in the altered version, there's way too much convergence in the original imho... JC) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 1:21 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: PESO: Classic Movie House Nice work, but I can't say that I like the result. The perspective on the marquee appears artificial to my eye. The shot is obviously taken from street level, so the side of the marquee should form a trapezoid. I prefer the original crop as well, with the sign in the right third of the frame. hi, I took the liberty of altering this shot with a bunch of stuff like perspective, desaturating the marquee, bringing up the underside of the marquee, cropping, etc. Makes for an interesting comparison I noticed the two signs are not at true right angles, didn't take the time to try to alter that too, way too much work... http://jcoconnell.com/temp/temp120504.jpg the altered photo is shown above is for critique purposes only and will be delete shortly of course. I don't steal photos! Later, JCO -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 11:23 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PESO: Classic Movie House I used the PhotoShop 81 warming filter on this after processing the RAW. I probably could have achieved exactly the same result by turning up the temperature in the RAW converter, but the need for a warmer look was an afterthought. The photo was taken just before sunset but the sign was in the shade. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2934923
RE: PESO: Classic Movie House
Hi Paul, Not much of a pic, IMO, but such images are kind of nice to have around. One can never tell when they may be useful, and they certainly may have some value historically at some point. However, the photo does bring up an interesting point, and that is the best, or perhaps, most interesting, time of day to make such a shot. With the marquee lights being on, I'd guess that the time was early evening (oh, I see now, just before sunset), but the sky looks a little too bright for that. There are a couple of marquees around here that I'd like to snap, and was thinking that around sunset (a little later than your shot, perhaps) may be a better time, affording a bit of interest in the sky and a darker background to offset and lend more punch to the marquee. Any comments? As for the perspective business, JCO's adjustment doesn't seem at all natural. There should be a little taper to the marquee, and any other tall vertical when viewed from ground level. I may be mistaken, but weren't the columns on the Parthenon build to be a little wider at the top so that when viewed from ground level they'd appear not to taper? Shel [Original Message] From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] I used the PhotoShop 81 warming filter on this after processing the RAW. I probably could have achieved exactly the same result by turning up the temperature in the RAW converter, but the need for a warmer look was an afterthought. The photo was taken just before sunset but the sign was in the shade. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2934923
RE: Epson Printer (Stylus Photo)
Eureka! The little software application I got from a Danish guy on www.fotokritik.dk really works! I have managed to reset my counters using this software. My old, but rarely used Epson (1997) is now printing again!! (My printer have rested since I lived in Ireland in 2001). It's not printing very pretty (banding in the black sections), but i guess after having run a lot of cleaning fluid through the nozzles, it may get better still. The SSC Service Utility can be found at: http://www.ssclg.com/epsone.shtml/epsons.shtml All the best Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Herb Chong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 4. december 2004 02:46 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: Fw: Epson Printer (Sylus Photo) i wore out my 1270. carriage rail started rubbing and eventually seized after 3 years. i have a 1280 now and am holding off for a 4000 so that i can do true 16x20 prints. the high end Epsons are very reliable for ink handling. Herb - Original Message - From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 8:21 AM Subject: Re: Fw: Epson Printer (Sylus Photo) I started out with an Epson 1270 that gave me years of service without so much as a hiccup, even when left for extended periods without use. No clogs or any other glitches. Sold *lots* of prints from it and won some awards for some of them. It's now in the hands of Stan Halpin and I'm the happy owner of an Epson 2200. :)
Re: Delightfully Diminutive
To me, twice the size and twice the weight is irrelevant. Perhaps that's a function of my having shot Pentax 6x7 for quite a while and my predilection for equipment that has enough heft to be capable of anchoring itself. I have a very compact Leica, and sometimes I enjoy shooting with that -- ditto an MX and 40/2.8 -- but for the most part the size of the equipment is somewhat irrelevant when I'm concerned about getting good results. And, as I said, in most cases I prefer a heftier rig. Paul The FA 20 f2.8, compared to the Sigma 20mm f1.8. The Sigma is twice the size and more than twice the weight. Guys, take a deep breath and relax. I was just expressing my pleasure at the size and weight of the lens. I didn't say that small was good or necessary, or that large was bad. I didn't even say that size and weight were relevant to anything. Joe
RE: PESO: Classic Movie House
You're right. It would have been better if it had been shot a bit later. The lights would have been more prominent. I just happened to be walking by and snapped this. It wasn't a planned shoot. However, I may return one of these days with a tripod and a variety of lenses and see what I can do. Paul Hi Paul, Not much of a pic, IMO, but such images are kind of nice to have around. One can never tell when they may be useful, and they certainly may have some value historically at some point. However, the photo does bring up an interesting point, and that is the best, or perhaps, most interesting, time of day to make such a shot. With the marquee lights being on, I'd guess that the time was early evening (oh, I see now, just before sunset), but the sky looks a little too bright for that. There are a couple of marquees around here that I'd like to snap, and was thinking that around sunset (a little later than your shot, perhaps) may be a better time, affording a bit of interest in the sky and a darker background to offset and lend more punch to the marquee. Any comments? As for the perspective business, JCO's adjustment doesn't seem at all natural. There should be a little taper to the marquee, and any other tall vertical when viewed from ground level. I may be mistaken, but weren't the columns on the Parthenon build to be a little wider at the top so that when viewed from ground level they'd appear not to taper? Shel [Original Message] From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] I used the PhotoShop 81 warming filter on this after processing the RAW. I probably could have achieved exactly the same result by turning up the temperature in the RAW converter, but the need for a warmer look was an afterthought. The photo was taken just before sunset but the sign was in the shade. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2934923
RE: PESO: Classic Movie House
You guys must have been looking at non shifted converging lines images all your life. Those converging verticals are not at all natural looking but you seem to be so used to looking at them you think they someohow are natural? I am not saying the altered version looks totally correct either ( it cant ) but the first version is not very realistic looking to my eye. This is one of the reasons I enjoy 4x5 photography so much, you do not have to make these compromises as you can just shift the lens to get the most natural looking image possible. What would be interesting would be for you to go back and photograph the scene from the same point with a camera equipped with a shift lens and then compared that to the original and altered versions of this image. Regarding as to whether rectangles should be rendered as trapezoids or as rectangles, if you shift lens , they remain rectangles regardless of height and look really nice to my eyesI don't think the pro architechural photogs would be using shift lens techniques if they looked the same or worse than non shift techniques... JCO -Original Message- From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 1:57 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: PESO: Classic Movie House Hi Paul, Not much of a pic, IMO, but such images are kind of nice to have around. One can never tell when they may be useful, and they certainly may have some value historically at some point. However, the photo does bring up an interesting point, and that is the best, or perhaps, most interesting, time of day to make such a shot. With the marquee lights being on, I'd guess that the time was early evening (oh, I see now, just before sunset), but the sky looks a little too bright for that. There are a couple of marquees around here that I'd like to snap, and was thinking that around sunset (a little later than your shot, perhaps) may be a better time, affording a bit of interest in the sky and a darker background to offset and lend more punch to the marquee. Any comments? As for the perspective business, JCO's adjustment doesn't seem at all natural. There should be a little taper to the marquee, and any other tall vertical when viewed from ground level. I may be mistaken, but weren't the columns on the Parthenon build to be a little wider at the top so that when viewed from ground level they'd appear not to taper? Shel [Original Message] From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] I used the PhotoShop 81 warming filter on this after processing the RAW. I probably could have achieved exactly the same result by turning up the temperature in the RAW converter, but the need for a warmer look was an afterthought. The photo was taken just before sunset but the sign was in the shade. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2934923
Re: December Trivia Q No1.
A number of them were superb photographers! keith Cotty wrote: On 5/12/04, Lasse Karlsson, discombobulated, unleashed: Ok, guys and gals. Time for some Pre-Christmas family fun. Below is a list of names. What does this particular list represent? (The people behind these names all share one particular thing in common. What is it?) Lasse [snip] Weegee Hey Lasse, you're hitting the Christmas booze early this year aren't you? ;-) Cheers, Cotty
Takumar 35/2.3 and 85/1.8
I was hoping that somebody may be able to educate me. I am hoping to grow my collection of M42 mount lenses and am particularly interested in the two lenses noted above. The 35/2.3 seems to be extremely rare so finding information is virtually impossible. I was also hoping to ask for more information about the Takumar 85/1.8's. My questions revolve around build quality, image quality, where I might be able to buy these lenses and last but not least, how much I should expect to pay. My guess is that I'm going to find the answer to the last question quite scary! I'm using these lenses on a Canon 20D with an adapter. Thank you in anticipation. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.4.5 - Release Date: 12/3/2004
RE: Takumar 35/2.3 and 85/1.8
while the smct 85mm F1.8 is a truly great lens, avoid the Auto Tak 85mm F1.8. Why do you want the 35mm F2.3? Nothing special. I would recommend the 35mm F3.5 SMCT, the 35mm F2 ST (67mm threaded version), or the SMCT 35mm F2 instead. JCO -Original Message- From: Gateway [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 2:25 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Takumar 35/2.3 and 85/1.8 I was hoping that somebody may be able to educate me. I am hoping to grow my collection of M42 mount lenses and am particularly interested in the two lenses noted above. The 35/2.3 seems to be extremely rare so finding information is virtually impossible. I was also hoping to ask for more information about the Takumar 85/1.8's. My questions revolve around build quality, image quality, where I might be able to buy these lenses and last but not least, how much I should expect to pay. My guess is that I'm going to find the answer to the last question quite scary! I'm using these lenses on a Canon 20D with an adapter. Thank you in anticipation. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.4.5 - Release Date: 12/3/2004
Re: Takumar 35/2.3 and 85/1.8
There are two screwmount 85/1.8 lenses. The early one was an Auto Takumar (I think that's the designation) lens that required manual stopdown and was not very well considered. The second came late in the screwmount era. It's called the Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 85/1.8, and it's a great lens. It is said to be optically identical to the very desirable K mount 85/1.8. The lens can usually be found used for about $300. Ebay is your best bet. I think I saw one there just the other day. I'm not familiar with the 35/2.3. Paul I was hoping that somebody may be able to educate me. I am hoping to grow my collection of M42 mount lenses and am particularly interested in the two lenses noted above. The 35/2.3 seems to be extremely rare so finding information is virtually impossible. I was also hoping to ask for more information about the Takumar 85/1.8's. My questions revolve around build quality, image quality, where I might be able to buy these lenses and last but not least, how much I should expect to pay. My guess is that I'm going to find the answer to the last question quite scary! I'm using these lenses on a Canon 20D with an adapter. Thank you in anticipation. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.4.5 - Release Date: 12/3/2004
RE: Takumar 35/2.3 and 85/1.8
With the SMCT 35/2, you have to watch out for the dreaded yellow peril. The glass is frequently yellowed due to the use of radioactive materials. Paul while the smct 85mm F1.8 is a truly great lens, avoid the Auto Tak 85mm F1.8. Why do you want the 35mm F2.3? Nothing special. I would recommend the 35mm F3.5 SMCT, the 35mm F2 ST (67mm threaded version), or the SMCT 35mm F2 instead. JCO -Original Message- From: Gateway [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 2:25 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Takumar 35/2.3 and 85/1.8 I was hoping that somebody may be able to educate me. I am hoping to grow my collection of M42 mount lenses and am particularly interested in the two lenses noted above. The 35/2.3 seems to be extremely rare so finding information is virtually impossible. I was also hoping to ask for more information about the Takumar 85/1.8's. My questions revolve around build quality, image quality, where I might be able to buy these lenses and last but not least, how much I should expect to pay. My guess is that I'm going to find the answer to the last question quite scary! I'm using these lenses on a Canon 20D with an adapter. Thank you in anticipation. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.4.5 - Release Date: 12/3/2004
Re: Really OT: More on spy/adware problems
- Original Message - From: Cotty Subject: Re: Really OT: More on spy/adware problems On 5/12/04, William Robb, discombobulated, unleashed: Cotty, I know virus' aren't much of an issue for Mac users, but are the spyware/adware programs an issue? Bill I wouldn't know where to start looking? How does one know if there is spyware/adware infesting the system? For us Windows users, generally if you notice your system slowing down a lot you are probably running stuff you don't want. Some of the stuff will change your browser homepage as well, but that's a dead give away that somethings wrong. In Windows, all the process that are currently running can be brought up in the task manager. I don't know if you Mac boys have a similar way of monitoring what running or not. Once you know what should be running, anything that shouldn't be running can be removed. William Robb
Re: December Trivia Q No1.
Quoting Lasse Karlsson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Ok, guys and gals. Time for some Pre-Christmas family fun. Below is a list of names. What does this particular list represent? (The people behind these names all share one particular thing in common. What is it?) I've read the list very carefully and I am certain of one thing they have in common. None is on my Christmas card list. ERNR
Re: Takumar 35/2.3 and 85/1.8
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Takumar 35/2.3 and 85/1.8 With the SMCT 35/2, you have to watch out for the dreaded yellow peril. The glass is frequently yellowed due to the use of radioactive materials. JCO, didn't you come up with a cure for that which didn't involve impacting the lens with a large hammer? William Robb
Re: Dishonest auction - again (and MZ-5 vs MZ-5n)
Quoting Thibs [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Toralf Lund a écrit : So, this guy is trying again... See http://my.qxl.no/accdb/viewItem.asp?IDI=13556944 I've mentioned the item before - fortunately it would appear that there were no bidders at the time. The price is somewhat reduced, now, but he's still including the picture of an MZ-5n even though he's selling an MZ-5, and claiming that there are just cosmetical differences between the two. Just in case I'm the one who's it wrong, isn't that quite wrong, or downright dishonest? Doesn't the MZ-5n have a number of updates to the *functionality* compared to the MZ-5? (Bojidar Dimitrov's page says it does, I think.) - Toralf At least DOF prreview which is enough to make a BIG difference to me To me too. It's the difference between an SLR that I'll buy and one I won't. Autobracketing, which isn't a deal-maker for me personally, is a significant difference also IMO. ERNR
Re: PAW - Bee and Flower Pic ;-))
On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 06:31:25AM -0800, Shel Belinkoff wrote: http://www.nathanfoto.com/paw/2004/2004_34alt1.jpg This isn't my shot, but when I saw it I just had to share it. Taken with the Leica 100mm Apo Macro mounted on a Canon 10D Wonderful! If I had to find something to critique, I'd suggest that perhaps a slightly slower exposure, with more blur on the wings, would be even better. But that's gilding the lily.
Re: Takumar 35/2.3 and 85/1.8
William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] With the SMCT 35/2, you have to watch out for the dreaded yellow peril. The glass is frequently yellowed due to the use of radioactive materials. JCO, didn't you come up with a cure for that which didn't involve impacting the lens with a large hammer? Extended exposure to UV from an aquarium lamp, IIRC. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
RE: Takumar 35/2.3 and 85/1.8
Reminder : The yellow peril is no longer an issue. They can be easily cleared with exposure to UV lighting (artificial or natural). They might need another clearing in year 2034. JCO -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 2:40 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Takumar 35/2.3 and 85/1.8 With the SMCT 35/2, you have to watch out for the dreaded yellow peril. The glass is frequently yellowed due to the use of radioactive materials. Paul while the smct 85mm F1.8 is a truly great lens, avoid the Auto Tak 85mm F1.8. Why do you want the 35mm F2.3? Nothing special. I would recommend the 35mm F3.5 SMCT, the 35mm F2 ST (67mm threaded version), or the SMCT 35mm F2 instead. JCO -Original Message- From: Gateway [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 2:25 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Takumar 35/2.3 and 85/1.8 I was hoping that somebody may be able to educate me. I am hoping to grow my collection of M42 mount lenses and am particularly interested in the two lenses noted above. The 35/2.3 seems to be extremely rare so finding information is virtually impossible. I was also hoping to ask for more information about the Takumar 85/1.8's. My questions revolve around build quality, image quality, where I might be able to buy these lenses and last but not least, how much I should expect to pay. My guess is that I'm going to find the answer to the last question quite scary! I'm using these lenses on a Canon 20D with an adapter. Thank you in anticipation. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.4.5 - Release Date: 12/3/2004
RE: Takumar 35/2.3 and 85/1.8
that wasn't me, I restore them, not destroy them. I would smash some lenses though given the opportunity even if they werent yellowed! JCO -Original Message- From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 2:44 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Takumar 35/2.3 and 85/1.8 - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Takumar 35/2.3 and 85/1.8 With the SMCT 35/2, you have to watch out for the dreaded yellow peril. The glass is frequently yellowed due to the use of radioactive materials. JCO, didn't you come up with a cure for that which didn't involve impacting the lens with a large hammer? William Robb
Re: December Trivia Q No1.
Hi, Sunday, December 5, 2004, 5:01:19 PM, Lasse wrote: Ok, guys and gals. Time for some Pre-Christmas family fun. Below is a list of names. What does this particular list represent? (The people behind these names all share one particular thing in common. What is it?) Lasse Slim Aarons [...] Jerome Zerbe they all photographed Marilyn Monroe -- Cheers, Bob
RE: Takumar 35/2.3 and 85/1.8
I have an opportunity to get the Tak 35/2.3 so was wondering what would be a fair price for it, also for the 85/1.8 (it is Auto unfortunately so may not buy it if it ain't so good). I'll probably buy the Tak 35/2 down the road, I love messing about with the 35's as they are close to normal on my 20D. What kind of outrageous sums of money should I expect to be relieved of for these two lenses? Gareth -Original Message- From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 3:09 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Takumar 35/2.3 and 85/1.8 William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] With the SMCT 35/2, you have to watch out for the dreaded yellow peril. The glass is frequently yellowed due to the use of radioactive materials. JCO, didn't you come up with a cure for that which didn't involve impacting the lens with a large hammer? Extended exposure to UV from an aquarium lamp, IIRC. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.4.5 - Release Date: 12/3/2004 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.4.5 - Release Date: 12/3/2004
Re: Takumar 35/2.3 and 85/1.8
- Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell Subject: RE: Takumar 35/2.3 and 85/1.8 that wasn't me, I restore them, not destroy them. I would smash some lenses though given the opportunity even if they werent yellowed! You might want to go back and reread my question,. a bit more carefully... William Robb
RE: Takumar 35/2.3 and 85/1.8
OK, I thought you meant I was the smasher! Yeah, I use a 18 black light I bought for $20 and it works great, usually fully cleared lens in a few weeks... JCO -Original Message- From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 2:59 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Takumar 35/2.3 and 85/1.8 - Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell Subject: RE: Takumar 35/2.3 and 85/1.8 that wasn't me, I restore them, not destroy them. I would smash some lenses though given the opportunity even if they werent yellowed! You might want to go back and reread my question,. a bit more carefully... William Robb
Re: Re: Heretical question: 43LTD vs SMC-A 50F2
On Sun, 5 Dec 2004, Bernd Scheffler wrote: ... but I have: http://home.t-online.de/home/tumbschef/Galerie/Blumen/Bilder1/pic08.jpg Epson 1660 scan Thanks Bernd. Kostas Best, Bernd --original message--- On Sat, 4 Dec 2004, alexander wrote: good compared to other fast standard lenses. But what I like most about this lens its color reproduction, and the contrasty and color-saturated (but IMO not intrusive) out of focus images. Have you got an example of this on line? Thanks, Kostas
Re: PAW - Bee and Flower Pic ;-))
Well, maybe, but a slower shutter speed would have required more DOF, and that may not be so good for this photo. Shel [Original Message] From: John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 06:31:25AM -0800, Shel Belinkoff wrote: http://www.nathanfoto.com/paw/2004/2004_34alt1.jpg This isn't my shot, but when I saw it I just had to share it. Taken with the Leica 100mm Apo Macro mounted on a Canon 10D Wonderful! If I had to find something to critique, I'd suggest that perhaps a slightly slower exposure, with more blur on the wings, would be even better. But that's gilding the lily.
OT I hope a fellow PDMLer got this one
SMC Pentax 110 F 300mm lens http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemrd=1item=3857142148 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: December Trivia Q No1.
From: Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 9:58 PM Subject: Re: December Trivia Q No1. Hi, Sunday, December 5, 2004, 5:01:19 PM, Lasse wrote: Ok, guys and gals. Time for some Pre-Christmas family fun. Below is a list of names. What does this particular list represent? (The people behind these names all share one particular thing in common. What is it?) Lasse Slim Aarons [...] Jerome Zerbe they all photographed Marilyn Monroe Now, what makes you think they all did that, Bob? Lasse
Re: PAW - Bee and Flower Pic ;-))
On 5 Dec 2004 at 13:30, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Well, maybe, but a slower shutter speed would have required more DOF, and that may not be so good for this photo. The problem is that these little guys don't just hover they are always on the move and they move pretty fast in macro terms. I've shot very similar shots with varying success sans flash. The example following was shot with my V125/2.5 at 1/640, f8, ISO200: http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio/temp/IMGP3090.jpg 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: *istDS Review on photo.shopping.com
Andy, the firmware upgrade came after the printing of the manual, so it was impossible to include it. The unfortunate thing is that some Pentax users wishing to upgrade will be deterred, as were you and Francis Tang, by lack of knowledge on the part of the dealer/distributor with regard to the operation of older lenses. Many years ago, the company I worked for wanted to become a distributor for Canon cameras, but the loops we would have had to go through, and the facilities we would have had to provide, including a first-class workshop,made us decide against it. It seems a shame that that is not required of it's distributors today by Pentax: in Australia particularly, I would be insisting that Pentax lens kits were offered with Pentax bodies, not Sigma, as happens here. John Coyle Brisbane, Australia - Original Message - From: Andy Chang [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 12:54 AM Subject: RE: *istDS Review on photo.shopping.com I made the same statement when I first looked at the Ds's manual But as a fellow list member mentioned, they don't tell you about the info on how to use the non-A lenses on the manual. I think they'll prefer that you go and buy new lenses! So, I would not trust the manual or spec sheets on this particular matter. Cheers Andy -Original Message- From: Francis Tang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 10:42 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: *istDS Review on photo.shopping.com Mea Culpa. I made that statement after talking with someone from the Singapore Pentax distributors and poring over the *ist-DS spec sheet with him.
Re: December Trivia Q No1.
Hi, Slim Aarons [...] Jerome Zerbe they all photographed Marilyn Monroe Now, what makes you think they all did that, Bob? all their photographs of Marilyn Monroe -- Cheers, Bob
Re: *istDS Review on photo.shopping.com
This weekend I experimented some with my new *ist-DS. I mounted my Super Takumar 300mm F4, using a K mount adapter, put the camera in manual focus and 'Av' mode and it seemed to work just fine. Also tried out my Tamrom SP500mm mirror lens on the camera. Kind of nice having a 750mm F8 lens available. Setting ASA to 1600 allowed me to use a shutter speed of 1/1000 sec, which made hand holding quite easy. Again the camera was in manual focus and 'Av' mode. If you'd like to see the results from the Tamron I loaded a couple of images to my website. http://ist.uwaterloo.ca/~fwwidall/ISTDS/ Be warned these are quite large files (close to 1Mb) as I didn't resize them, just increased the compression setting. Two of the images are with the Tamron SP500mm, the third is with the DA 18-55mm (@18mm). All the shots were taken from the same place. Not something I'll use a lot, but it was fun having such a long lens to play with. There's a fair amount of noise in the '1600' images but I've discovered that there istD profiles available for Neat Image (v4) which do an excellent job in reducing it. I'm really enjoying experimenting with the camera, and I haven't even started on changing the myraid of possible settings, and comparing the results. -- Fred Widall, Email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] URL: http://www.ist.uwaterloo.ca/~fwwidall --
Re: OT I hope a fellow PDMLer got this one
damn On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 08:36:45 +1000, Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: SMC Pentax 110 F 300mm lens http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemrd=1item=3857142148 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: *istDS Review on photo.shopping.com
On 5 Dec 2004 at 18:16, Fred Widall wrote: Also tried out my Tamrom SP500mm mirror lens on the camera. Kind of nice having a 750mm F8 lens available. Setting ASA to 1600 allowed me to use a shutter speed of 1/1000 sec, which made hand holding quite easy. Again the camera was in manual focus and 'Av' mode. Hey, you're not supposed to be able to shoot hand held with a lens that long :-) Not something I'll use a lot, but it was fun having such a long lens to play with. There's a fair amount of noise in the '1600' images but I've discovered that there istD profiles available for Neat Image (v4) which do an excellent job in reducing it. You are best off producing the profiles to suite yourself as each is dependent not just on ISO but on exposure time, sharpening and contrast settings. For critical work I shoot the scene in and out of focus so that I have good soft areas (which display the noise characteristics for the given settings but no image detail) from which I dynamically build noise profiles. The results can be stunning. However you may find that if you shoot RAW and post-process in PS CS the NR facilities will significantly reduce the need to use other NR utilities plus you could eliminate some of the nasty CA that sometimes rears its head (such as in your 18mm shot) I'm really enjoying experimenting with the camera, and I haven't even started on changing the myraid of possible settings, and comparing the results. :-) 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: Photoshop CS Bargain Basement
It's interesting... I just retraced my steps and found out how I got to www.markdownsoftware in the first place. It was from a link provided by amazon.com under the heading Customers interested in Photoshop for Astrophotographers may also be interested in:. There's also another link there for www.buysusa.com which offers Adobe software at 90% off. It says that one receives a full CD version which must be activated. I haven't read all the fine print, but I do find it amazing that amazon.com would be 'complicit' in encouraging copyright infringement. Tom C. From: mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Photoshop CS Bargain Basement Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 13:12:13 + Mishka wrote: just enjoy the program. adobe hasn't really lost anything. changing the credit card number may be a good idea, but other than that, i wouldn't worry about anything. remember, there're india, russia (or, rather, ex-ussr) an china where people consider it utterly stupid to buy a legal copy of anything when one can get it for free. 2 (3?) billion people cannot possibly be wrong :) So right, in fact, that the copyright organisations seem to have come to an agreement with the pirates in, at least, Russia. You can now buy legitimate copies of software there for a fraction of the full price. The on-street price has about doubled. So Photoshop CS is about £4. The one drawback (and it's a doozy for many people on this list) is that English language copies seem to have disappeared. mike
MZ-S - new to me
I picked up a used MZ-S, as the last of the 35mm film line. (I suppose the *ist is the probable end of the film line, but whatever...) It is a really nice camera. It remindes me of a modern Super Program. The functions are similar, but updated with autofocus. The weight is a bit more than a Super Program, but less than an LX. Fit and finish are great, but not waterproof. I don't like the viewfinder very much, but I'll learn to live with it. The sound of the shutter/winder is different too. It seems much quieter than the LX or PZ-1p shutter. I feel less mirror vibration too. The advantage is the built-in 2.5 fps winder, and that I now have something lighter that the PZ-1p to use with my FA lenses. I took the FA50/1.4 for a walk and cut myself. Anybody got a line on a cheap BG-10 battery pack or GG60 grid screen? The companion digital MZ-D would have been one great camera! Sorry we all missed it. Regards, Bob S.
Re: *istDS Review on photo.shopping.com
I would think that only works for static subjects ... Shel [Original Message] From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] critical work I shoot the scene in and out of focus so that I have good soft areas (which display the noise characteristics for the given settings but no image detail) from which I dynamically build noise profiles. The results can be stunning.
Re: *istDS Review on photo.shopping.com
On 5 Dec 2004 at 16:13, Shel Belinkoff wrote: I would think that only works for static subjects ... Best but not necessary, as long as the blurred scene contains similar gradations and is shot at the same exposure settings it's good enough to serve to build a noise profile. 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
PDML Mini-FAQ
http://www.graywolfphoto.com/pentax/pdml-faq.html Posted every Sunday (if I remember). --- This is a mini-FAQ for the PDML (Pentax Discussion Mailing List) Last revised:2004.08.17 UNSUBSCRIBING-- To unsubscribe from the PDML you need to send a message with unsubscribe as the subject to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sending an unsubscribe message to the list will get you nothing but a bunch of silly replies. WHY WAS I KICKED OFF THE LIST--About the only thing that gets you kicked of the list is bouncing e-mail. Check that your mailbox at your ISP is not full. It is best if you download all mail from this list, and any other mailing lists you may be on, to your computer and erase the messages in your ISP mailbox. AFAIK all mail clients will let you do that. LIST MEMBERS-- Remember that the people here on the PDML live all over the world. Their Customs, languages, beliefs, religions, values, and most of all their SENSE OF HUMOR may vary. Always take this into consideration when reading or replying to their comments. Also their command of English may not be up to your standards (mine isn't, and it is my native language), but think about how you would do in their language and give them a break. 99.9% of the people on this list are great wonderful terrific (add 16 more superlatives of your choice here) people who anyone would be glad to have as friends. I, especially, know this because many have gone out of their way to help me from time to time. POLITICS/RELIGION-- Since some of us, me up toward the top of the list, can not seem to remain civil in these kinds of discussions we very much prefer not to have threads about them on the list. This is violated often, until someone goes off the deep end and then most of us shut up. CAT PHOTOS-- A former popular list participant swore he would leave the list if anyone mentioned guns again, or posted a link to a cat picture. He left anyway which shows that you might as will ignore such stuff. However, many consider Guns/Abortion/Etc as part of Politics and Religion, so generally they should be avoided. Although Cat Photos are now, seemingly, OK again. FOR SALE-- Use the following as guidelines. Pentax stuff anytime, although many only want to have to look on Fridays, and prefer For Sale Fridays. Most of us would prefer that you limit any non-Pentax stuff to Fridays as well. Regular list members only, please. EBAY-- It is all right to mention your own auctions. Do not mention other items until the auction is over (common courtesy). An exception is obviously funny and BS stuff like the 11 million dollar Canon 1Ds digital, or non-photographic stuff like the wedding dress that was the basis of a long thread here a while back. FLAMES/TROLLS-- People who can not keep from continually attacking others, or who insist on trying to incite folks to anger should be totally ignored, these are the only folks I filter out of my mail stream, and I would suggest everyone else do the same. For they will, if they have their way, destroy the nicest mailing list on the Internet. Note: losing your cool now and then is not the same thing at all, or I would have to killfile my own posts (embarrassed grin). COLONS (:) in subject line-- it has been pointed out that some mail readers treat anything with a colon in the subject like a RE: or SV: (both mean the samething) and that can mess up threaded mail readers. So try to use -- instead if you feel the need to separate things in the subject line. These are the only ones I can think of that have mass general agreement, though common courtesy is always appreciated here. Some folks do not like the off topic stuff, but we who engage in it are usually the old timers here, and are not going to pay much attention to them (grin). --- ACRONYMS: HAR!, GRIN!, Etc-- Indications that the post/comment was meant to be humorous, and that you should not take it too seriously. There are a lot of Variations on these, but they all mean various degrees of the same thing. Of course a few folks here just use the old fashioned smiley. :) PUG-- Pentax Users Gallery. A monthly gallery of photos by PDML members. Things there are kind of up in the air right now. As soon as the maintainer says we have a permanent solution, I will add a link here. PAW-- Photo A Week (also PESO-- Photo Every So Often), a thing introduced to the list a while back by Shel Belinkoff where you can put up a photo you want commented on and folks will tell you how you should have done it (grin). WOW-- Workover Of the Week (or WOrkshop a Week), similar to the above where you post a photo somewhere that folks can download it, and they run it through Photo Shop or whatever to show you how they would have done it. Seems like a good learning tool, but I have not seen any lately. OTHER ACRONYMS-- OTOH, IIRC, etc. These are usually pretty standard and list of them can easily be found by doing a Google search for internet acronyms. --- DISCLAIMER-- The PDML is operated and maintained by Doug Brewer who volunteered to
RE: PESO: Classic Movie House
That sounds like a great idea ... you can probably get some super photographs. http://webpages.charter.net/dnance/photos/marquees.htm http://cinematreasures.org/links/C0_32_5 http://www.wagnersign.com/theatermarquees.htm Shel [Original Message] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 12/5/2004 11:07:30 AM Subject: RE: PESO: Classic Movie House You're right. It would have been better if it had been shot a bit later. The lights would have been more prominent. I just happened to be walking by and snapped this. It wasn't a planned shoot. However, I may return one of these days with a tripod and a variety of lenses and see what I can do. Paul
Re: Delightfully Diminutive
Is it the Camera or the man carrying it? (Hey, that sounds like the start of an Ad campaign!) Cotty wrote: On 5/12/04, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed: Depends on the type of subject you shoot. If your camera is so big it frightens horses then you won't be much of a horse-photographer. Mine frightens elephant. Cheers, Is That A Banana In Your Pocket Or Are You Just Happy To See Me Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: *istDS Review on photo.shopping.com
I don't get it, but I'll accept what you say without reservation since I'm as ignorant as a carrot about such things. Shel [Original Message] From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 5 Dec 2004 at 16:13, Shel Belinkoff wrote: I would think that only works for static subjects ... Best but not necessary, as long as the blurred scene contains similar gradations and is shot at the same exposure settings it's good enough to serve to build a noise profile.
Re: Really OT: More on spy/adware problems
On 5/12/04, William Robb, discombobulated, unleashed: In Windows, all the process that are currently running can be brought up in the task manager. I don't know if you Mac boys have a similar way of monitoring what running or not. Once you know what should be running, anything that shouldn't be running can be removed. Okay. We have a cute little bar across the bottom called the Dock and it shows any application that is running, even if it's icon does not normally 'live' there. I have noticed no unusual activity there, and the computer certainly hasn't slowed down. Will keep an eye out tho - Macs are not totally impervious as some seem to think.. Many thanks. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Marilyn Monroe anyone? (Was: December Trivia Q No1.)
From: Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi, Slim Aarons [...] Jerome Zerbe they all photographed Marilyn Monroe Now, what makes you think they all did that, Bob? all their photographs of Marilyn Monroe Ok, I was just being curious whether you immediately spotted the Monroe connection just by the names, or if you had to check it out. (Anyway, when sending the Q. I thought Bob W. will definitely know (or be curious enough to find) the answer if he's on line.) Congratulations, Bob, well done! You are hereby declared the first and only winner of the new The Virtual Marilyn Monroe Legacy Award! (Bows and applauses.) Anyway, I've been digging a bit deeper into the Marilyn Monroe universe lately, particularly by how she's been photographed and presented throughout her career. It's a fascinating universe indeed. She definitely was (or became) a uniqueum(?) in terms of coming across through a lens pointed at her. She will also remain the icon and maintain the symbolic status that she already gained during her lifetime. Adding the personal aspects of her life to it, she will be the closest anyone will ever get to giving a face to the notion of A Modern Day Female Jesus-character. One of the reasons for my recent Monroe studies is that I will soon start trying to more seriously get into studio (portrait) shooting, as I finally seem to be able to afford to buy some useful gear and also have some (small) studio space available in my own house. In planning for this I thought I'd do some studying on the world and history of star and glamour portrait photography. Since so many big name photographers have shot Marilyn Monroe and so much of their work is readily available on the net I thought this would be a great way to study the art. So I've collected some 6.800 shots of her from the age of six months in 1926 up till her death in August 1962. It has been a very rewarding experience, in various respects. I have found it very interesting to take a closer look at a certain type of film publicity glamour photography, which deals with certain types of light set ups and poses and which developed into an art and craft of it's own as a photography genre. It would be interesting to learn the technique, and maybe try to expand on it and integrate with othertypes of shooting. There are a few (new to me) names that have emerged and some of whose work I will select for further studies: Frank Polowny, Lazlo Willinger, C. S. Bull and G. Hurrell (among some others). Fascinating stuff and very interesting. Is there by chance any list member who ever saw Marilyn Monroe live? Another question for this list would be: Was M.M. ever shot with a Pentax camera? (In all probability she was, although maybe not by a pro, but by one of many thousands of fans who would take the opportunity to shoot her whenever she appeared in sight.) Thirdly: If any, do you have a favourite Marilyn Monroe photo, one that have stuck for one reason or another? (There are many famous shoots of her, as publicity stunts or by some name photographers, ranging all the way from pin ups (or nudes) to very intimate art- and soulful portraits.) Thanks, Lasse
Re: *istDS Review on photo.shopping.com
On 5 Dec 2004 at 17:05, Shel Belinkoff wrote: I don't get it, but I'll accept what you say without reservation since I'm as ignorant as a carrot about such things. The key is that the noise remains relatively constant for a given exposure and post process settings. Since image details are difficult to discriminate from noise by the noise profiling software it's best to have minimal image detail but it's good to have a representation of the hues and tones contained in the scene, hence my suggestion to shoot a frame OOF. The noise profiles included with the software are derived using a calibration image which contains gray scale boxes and is defined primarily by ISO and camera type only. http://www.neatimage.com/im/target/NICalibrationTarget1024grayscale.png http://www.neatimage.com/profiling-examples.html 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: Marilyn Monroe anyone? (Was: December Trivia Q No1.)
Correction of misspelling. Below I wrote Polowny. It should of course read POWOLNY. Thanks, Lasse - Original Message - From: Lasse Karlsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 3:30 AM Subject: Marilyn Monroe anyone? (Was: December Trivia Q No1.) From: Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi, Slim Aarons [...] Jerome Zerbe they all photographed Marilyn Monroe Now, what makes you think they all did that, Bob? all their photographs of Marilyn Monroe Ok, I was just being curious whether you immediately spotted the Monroe connection just by the names, or if you had to check it out. (Anyway, when sending the Q. I thought Bob W. will definitely know (or be curious enough to find) the answer if he's on line.) Congratulations, Bob, well done! You are hereby declared the first and only winner of the new The Virtual Marilyn Monroe Legacy Award! (Bows and applauses.) Anyway, I've been digging a bit deeper into the Marilyn Monroe universe lately, particularly by how she's been photographed and presented throughout her career. It's a fascinating universe indeed. She definitely was (or became) a uniqueum(?) in terms of coming across through a lens pointed at her. She will also remain the icon and maintain the symbolic status that she already gained during her lifetime. Adding the personal aspects of her life to it, she will be the closest anyone will ever get to giving a face to the notion of A Modern Day Female Jesus-character. One of the reasons for my recent Monroe studies is that I will soon start trying to more seriously get into studio (portrait) shooting, as I finally seem to be able to afford to buy some useful gear and also have some (small) studio space available in my own house. In planning for this I thought I'd do some studying on the world and history of star and glamour portrait photography. Since so many big name photographers have shot Marilyn Monroe and so much of their work is readily available on the net I thought this would be a great way to study the art. So I've collected some 6.800 shots of her from the age of six months in 1926 up till her death in August 1962. It has been a very rewarding experience, in various respects. I have found it very interesting to take a closer look at a certain type of film publicity glamour photography, which deals with certain types of light set ups and poses and which developed into an art and craft of it's own as a photography genre. It would be interesting to learn the technique, and maybe try to expand on it and integrate with othertypes of shooting. There are a few (new to me) names that have emerged and some of whose work I will select for further studies: Frank Polowny, Lazlo Willinger, C. S. Bull and G. Hurrell (among some others). Fascinating stuff and very interesting. Is there by chance any list member who ever saw Marilyn Monroe live? Another question for this list would be: Was M.M. ever shot with a Pentax camera? (In all probability she was, although maybe not by a pro, but by one of many thousands of fans who would take the opportunity to shoot her whenever she appeared in sight.) Thirdly: If any, do you have a favourite Marilyn Monroe photo, one that have stuck for one reason or another? (There are many famous shoots of her, as publicity stunts or by some name photographers, ranging all the way from pin ups (or nudes) to very intimate art- and soulful portraits.) Thanks, Lasse
Re: December Trivia Q No1.
They are all on your list... HAR! Regards, Bob... From: Lasse Karlsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ok, guys and gals. Time for some Pre-Christmas family fun. Below is a list of names. What does this particular list represent? (The people behind these names all share one particular thing in common. What is it?) Lasse Slim Aarons Bernie Abramson Eve Arnold Zinn Arthur Richard Avedon Ernest Bachrach Ed Baird Larry Barbier Baron George Barris Cecil Beaton Anthony Beauchamp Bob Beermann Hal Berg Bernard of Hollywood Carlyle Blackwell Jr. John Bryson Bill Burnside Tom Caffrey Lee Caloia Cornell Capa Jack Cardiff Jock Carroll William Carroll Dave Cicero Edward (Ed) Clark Henri Cartier-Bresson David Conover Ed Coonenwerth Henri Dauman Bruce Davidson André de Dienes Nat Dillinger Alfred Eisenstaedt Glenn Embree John Engstead Elliott Erwitt Ed Feingersh Peter Fland John Florea Len Globus Allan Grant Bud Graybell Milton H. Greene Earl Gustie Ernst Haas Philippe Halsmann James Haspiel Bob Henriques Joseph Hepner Potter Hueth George Hurrell Joseph Jasgur Tom Kelley Douglas Kirkland Gene Kornman Hans Knopf Larry Kronquist Bob Landry Earl Leaf Lee Lockwood Joshua Logan Harold Lloyd Peter Mangone Paul Mechling John Miehle George Miller Richard C. Miller Jimmy Mitchell Earl Moran Inge Morath Nikolas Muray Arnold Newman Leif-Erik Nygards Don Ornitz Gordon Parks Paul Parry Carl Perutz Frank Powolny David Preston Bert Reisfeld Willy Rizzo Ben Ross Bob Sandberg Lawrence Schiller Sam Shaw Joe Shere George Silk Eric Skipsey Bert Stern Phil Stern Dennis Stock Earl Theisen John Vachon Seymour Wally Weegee Leigh Wiener Laszlo Willinger Bob Willoughby Gary Winogrand Raphael Wolff William Read Woodfield Jerome Zerbe
Re: Photoshop CS Bargain Basement
Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's interesting... I just retraced my steps and found out how I got to www.markdownsoftware in the first place. It was from a link provided by amazon.com under the heading Customers interested in Photoshop for Astrophotographers may also be interested in:. There's also another link there for www.buysusa.com which offers Adobe software at 90% off. It says that one receives a full CD version which must be activated. I haven't read all the fine print, but I do find it amazing that amazon.com would be 'complicit' in encouraging copyright infringement. Those are paid links. As long as the check clears, Amazon probably doesn't bother investigating each outfit that pays them for clicks. If you sent Amazon a note about it they might take notice, though. If Adobe sent them a note I'm sure they would :) -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
RE: PESO: Classic Movie House
Some great inspiration here, Shel. Thanks. Paul That sounds like a great idea ... you can probably get some super photographs. http://webpages.charter.net/dnance/photos/marquees.htm http://cinematreasures.org/links/C0_32_5 http://www.wagnersign.com/theatermarquees.htm Shel [Original Message] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 12/5/2004 11:07:30 AM Subject: RE: PESO: Classic Movie House You're right. It would have been better if it had been shot a bit later. The lights would have been more prominent. I just happened to be walking by and snapped this. It wasn't a planned shoot. However, I may return one of these days with a tripod and a variety of lenses and see what I can do. Paul
Re: Takumar 35/2.3 and 85/1.8
- Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell Subject: RE: Takumar 35/2.3 and 85/1.8 OK, I thought you meant I was the smasher! I know better than that. William Robb
December Trivia Q No. 2 (extremely easy)
This photographer of the American Southwest and of the Hopi Indians he loved was featured at many shows across the US and Europe. He was also a US Senator. Name him. Regards, Bob... The only difference between a tax man and a taxidermist is the taxidermist leaves the skin. -- Mark Twain
Re: December Trivia Q No. 2 (extremely easy)
I'm taking a wild guess. Barry Goldwater? Bill - Original Message - From: Bob Blakely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 9:02 PM Subject: December Trivia Q No. 2 (extremely easy) This photographer of the American Southwest and of the Hopi Indians he loved was featured at many shows across the US and Europe. He was also a US Senator. Name him. Regards, Bob... The only difference between a tax man and a taxidermist is the taxidermist leaves the skin. -- Mark Twain
filters (on DA 16-45mm)
What filters (type/brand) are you using on the DA 16-45mm? I was set to order a couple of Hoyas (Super HMC Circular-Polarizer, SMC Pro 1 67mm UV) from 2filter.com but then I read something about filters sometimes being too thick and possible causing vignetting on wide lenses (didn't have a clue!). Any suggestions? I also plan to order 77mm and 82mm UV filters as well (for protection), as I am becoming increasing clumsy with my lenses these days. Thanks. - jerome _ Jerome D. Coombs-Reyes, Ph.D. Norfolk State University, Math Dept. http://math.nsu.edu/Math/faculty/jreyes/jreyes.htm http://exposedfilm.net
PESO Mirror mirror....
More flash/macro experiments. Warning ugly bug macro: http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio/temp/IMGP9150.jpg Tech: *ist D, ISO200, Av, Multi-seg metering, EC -0.7, hot shoe mounted TTL Metz 36CT2/SCA372, A200/4 Macro (1:1) + AF1.7 TC @ f18, hand held Comments and questions welcome. 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: filters (on DA 16-45mm)
i frequently stack B+W neutral density filters with a Hoya HMC circular polarizer on my DA 16-45/4 at the wide end with no vignetting. on occasion, i have stacked three filters on the DA 16-45/4. none of my filters are the wide angle versions. none of my wide lenses that take filters are wide enough to vignette with only one filter. i haven't stacked two filters on the DA 14/2.8 yet to try. Herb... - Original Message - From: Jerome Reyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 9:18 PM Subject: filters (on DA 16-45mm) What filters (type/brand) are you using on the DA 16-45mm? I was set to order a couple of Hoyas (Super HMC Circular-Polarizer, SMC Pro 1 67mm UV) from 2filter.com but then I read something about filters sometimes being too thick and possible causing vignetting on wide lenses (didn't have a clue!). Any suggestions? I also plan to order 77mm and 82mm UV filters as well (for protection), as I am becoming increasing clumsy with my lenses these days.
Re: December Trivia Q No. 2 (extremely easy)
Yup! Regards, Bob... The only difference between a tax man and a taxidermist is the taxidermist leaves the skin. -- Mark Twain From: Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm taking a wild guess. Barry Goldwater? Bill - Original Message - From: Bob Blakely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 9:02 PM Subject: December Trivia Q No. 2 (extremely easy) This photographer of the American Southwest and of the Hopi Indians he loved was featured at many shows across the US and Europe. He was also a US Senator. Name him. Regards, Bob... The only difference between a tax man and a taxidermist is the taxidermist leaves the skin. -- Mark Twain
Re: OT I hope a fellow PDMLer got this one
Now that was a bargain. Rob Studdert wrote: SMC Pentax 110 F 300mm lens http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemrd=1item=3857142148 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 -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: Really OT: More on spy/adware problems
Adware usually runs as a service, if it's written properly it won't show up in the Dock. Cotty wrote: On 5/12/04, William Robb, discombobulated, unleashed: In Windows, all the process that are currently running can be brought up in the task manager. I don't know if you Mac boys have a similar way of monitoring what running or not. Once you know what should be running, anything that shouldn't be running can be removed. Okay. We have a cute little bar across the bottom called the Dock and it shows any application that is running, even if it's icon does not normally 'live' there. I have noticed no unusual activity there, and the computer certainly hasn't slowed down. Will keep an eye out tho - Macs are not totally impervious as some seem to think.. Many thanks. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: PESO Mirror mirror....
You should have said, Warning, beautiful bug macro. This is indeed a handsome insect. Golden toned and mechanically elegant, this creature is an attractive subject. And you have captured this pretty insect very well. Nice shot. Paul More flash/macro experiments. Warning ugly bug macro: http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio/temp/IMGP9150.jpg Tech: *ist D, ISO200, Av, Multi-seg metering, EC -0.7, hot shoe mounted TTL Metz 36CT2/SCA372, A200/4 Macro (1:1) + AF1.7 TC @ f18, hand held Comments and questions welcome. 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: filters (on DA 16-45mm)
I commonly have a Pentax UV filter on my DA 16-45 and for the recent Pinnacles pictures that I showed, I used a Cokin Circular polarizer that was fitted into a P-series holder that I had cut the extra filter holders off. I saw no vignetting with that rig. -- Best regards, Bruce Sunday, December 5, 2004, 6:18:12 PM, you wrote: JR What filters (type/brand) are you using on the DA 16-45mm? I was set to JR order a couple of Hoyas (Super HMC Circular-Polarizer, SMC Pro 1 67mm UV) JR from 2filter.com but then I read something about filters sometimes being JR too thick and possible causing vignetting on wide lenses (didn't have a JR clue!). Any suggestions? JR I also plan to order 77mm and 82mm UV filters as well (for protection), as JR I am becoming increasing clumsy with my lenses these days. JR Thanks. JR - jerome JR _ JR Jerome D. Coombs-Reyes, Ph.D. JR Norfolk State University, Math Dept. JR http://math.nsu.edu/Math/faculty/jreyes/jreyes.htm JR http://exposedfilm.net
Intro and 1st post
Dear All, I am a new comer to this list and want to introduce myself. I have been using Pentax body and lens from 1986 - Have about 5000 35-mm slides -- but still consider myself within the realm of amateur. My pix are mostly photo-journalistic, editorial, nature and travel. I wrote a few articles to go with my pix which were published. My equipment consists of Pentax Spotmatic F body and four SMC Takumar screw mount lens: 1.4/50mm, 1.8/85mm, 4/100mm Macro, 4/200mm. I also use a Vivitar 2.8/24mm lens. My recent addition is a Belarus-made MC Pelang 3.5/8mm fisheye circular lens! I mostly use Fujichrome Provia and sometimes Velvia. I am wondering if there are people around who still use this kind of gear -- screw mounts, fixed focals...and as old a body as Spotmatic F. However, I love my lens because of their excellent optical quality (particularly the 100mm macro and the 85mm which I use as a portrait lens!) Also wondering if these old Pentax screw mount lens can be used with any of the new Pentax digital camera bodies that are coming out. If any one has experience in so using, kindly advise. Hoping to actively take part, learn and contribute to the list. Thanks and Warm Regards Krishna.
Re: December Trivia Q No. 2 (extremely easy)
Bob Blakely wrote: This photographer of the American Southwest and of the Hopi Indians he loved was featured at many shows across the US and Europe. He was also a US Senator. Name him. Regards, Bob... The only difference between a tax man and a taxidermist is the taxidermist leaves the skin. -- Mark Twain You are right, it's easy--- Barry Goldwater annsan
