Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor
That's the paradox. You probably have not read H C Andersen :-) Peter If the Emperor of Digital Photography has no clothes, how can anyone disrobe her? Godfrey
FS Friday: Pentax Spotmatic F Body + SMC Takumar Lenses + Peleng Fish Eye + Nikon Gear
Dear All, To partly finance my move to digital, I want to sell my pentax gear: Pentax Spotmatic F body SMC Takumar screwmount lens: 1.4/50mm; 1.8/85mm; 4/100mm Macro; 4/200mm All in good working condition. Also available: Vivitar 2.8/24mm lens; Belarus-made MC Peleng 3.5/8mm fisheye circular lens - with screw mount and Nikon adaptor (Like new - hardly used - shot less than 15 pictures) Nikon N80 with Nikkor AF 28-80mm 1:3.5-5.6D; Nikkor AF75-240mm 1:4.5-5.6D (entire Nikon set in Very good condition 9+) Please make offer. Pictures and any more details on request. If you are in and around Chicago, you are welcome to see the items physically. Thanks and Warm Regards Krishna.
Frank is not alone ...
On the local (CBS) news tonight was coverage of the current wave of attacks on the San Francisco homeless (some deranged excrescence is taking pot-shots at them with a BB gun). They interviewed a group of three homeless guys, one of whom was wearing a set of rabbit ears which appeared to me to be identical to those Frank has been seen to wear.
Re: PESO - Dimples
I second Shel, Aaaw. Bruce Dayton wrote: Hello pentax-discuss, I was needing to test the A 28-135/4 lens for suitability for some of my wedding and portrait work. So I requested my 4 year old daughter to help me out. She can be a ham at times, but is a good sport. I do like the rendering this lens has on skin - reasonably sharp, but not harsh. Any thoughts you have would be appreciated. Pentax *istD, A 28-135/4 near 100-135mm ISO 400, 1/250 sec @ f/5.6 http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_1790.htm Converted from Raw to 16 bit Tiff with Capture One LE and sized/sharpened for web with BreezeBrowser Pro. -- 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
OT: Tan's Ride - our new site is Live!!
Woohoo!! Guys and gals!! Remember our big ride across Australia that we are doing for charity?? Well, after many late nights and lotsa teeth grinding, the labour of love aka our new website is finally live as of about five minutes ago!! Please support us guys and girls, this is a huge thing that we are doing and our fundraising tally needs to go up!! Please visit our site, feel free to view our blog and leave a comment, or if you feel really generous, you may purchase items from the Gift Club or leave us an online donation through Paymate with your credit card. By next week, we will have merchandise available for purchase, so this is another way that you could help us!! All of the funds we are raising are being donated to two wonderful children's charities and all of the information about the charities is available on our site. I know that this is all off topic guys, but it is for a great cause and we really could do with a hand!! Plus, all of the photos on the site were taken by me with Pentax equipment! ;) The site can be found here: www.headwindsanddreams.com Thanks for looking and for your support, we can't wait to hear your comments!! tan.:)
Re: Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor
From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/04/14 Thu PM 11:10:40 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2005 1:02 PM Subject: Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor That only proves that you haven't met the emperor. You have this idea that digital printing is somehow superior to tradition custom printing. At some point, it may end up that way, because the people doing custom work are being forced to adapt to digital. The pro boys like digital because because they can sit in front of a computer and pretend to be talented, and because it is cheaper for them to churn out inkjet prints, rather than pay for quality printing. Paul, it's about economics, not quality. Even more so in the consumer market, because you don't ever need to have a picture printed again. Many, many people are happy with viewing their pictures on the camera LCD. Add the ones who look at them on a computer monitor and you have the great majority of the modern camera buying public. The economic repercussions of this in the photographic marketplace have only just begun. mike - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
A man's tripod... I'm, ahem, almost a man
Good day! Some of you might remember me griping about my wimpy tripod. Well I didn't get one for my birthday (sigh) so I bit the bullet and built one my self. Using scrap wood, Elmers glue, a few nuts and bolts, and some elbow grease I managed to come up with something quite stable. http://www.photosynth.ca/photo/f/tripod.html It weighs a tonne and isn't very tall but for $2.43 Canadian I'm quite satisfied ;-). I use it with a bean bag on top since I haven't got a decent head (it's, you know, got all kinds of fur and lumps on it ;-) ), which is a bit inconvenient but better than nothing. Now all I need is a good long lens to put on top of it.. Oh and a cable release.. and a gitzo pan head, and a proper blind, and a digital body and heck maybe a real tripod to go underneath it :-). Francis, panting and drooling with tongue out, tail waging. -- Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.5 - Release Date: 07/04/2005
Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor
Ah. The joys of nudism. :-) HC Andersens fairytale is quite funny. How anyone can cast up digital as some kind of regent in photographic prints is beyond me. Shel has stated times again that his aim was something a lot more modest than the language he used in his first post pretended, so in the end it has turned out quite realistic, that a lot of people don't know how to get the most of their medium. Put me in a chemical darkroom, and see what I produce. Grannys inkjets would be better... LOL Jostein - Original Message - From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 6:22 AM Subject: Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor On Apr 14, 2005, at 11:35 AM, Lindamood, Mark wrote: The Emperor of Digital Photography has no clothes. If the Emperor of Digital Photography has no clothes, how can anyone disrobe her? Godfrey
Re: Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Paul, it's about economics, not quality. Even more so in the consumer market, because you don't ever need to have a picture printed again. Many, many people are happy with viewing their pictures on the camera LCD. Add the ones who look at them on a computer monitor and you have the great majority of the modern camera buying public. The economic repercussions of this in the photographic marketplace have only just begun. Dunno Mike, I think if you drop the print from the consumer equation, you're basically into the realm of home video where stills will loose against moving pictures any day. I think that most of the consumers still shoot stills with a print in mind. Jostein
Re: Re: The Decline and Fall of the Photograph
From: David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/04/15 Fri AM 03:29:32 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: The Decline and Fall of the Photograph Have faith Shel, things will get better better. The output from the first photographic processes wasn't much to look at, but the technology evolved look what you can do now. :-) But how did it evolve? Not by people looking at Fox Talbot's image of Laycock Abbey window and saying, That's it. No further improvement is possible. The sceptical eye is the only one that sees what is really going on. You just have to be careful to not turn into the cynical eye. 8-) mike - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
RE: A man's tripod... I'm, ahem, almost a man
Nice job Francis! You remind me of me, if I can't afford it, build it! Actually I just get sick and tired of the crazy prices some people charge for simple stuff and decide I can do it better for less. I'm usually wrong but it's fun anyway. ;-) That Manly tripod just cries out for a manly ballhead, like this one: http://www.donsauction.com/pdml/BallHead.jpg Send me your address (off list) and I'll send it to you, it's a spare I don't use anymore. You'll have to figure out how to mount it, but looks like you've got ingenuity to spare for that! Don -Original Message- From: Francis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 2:29 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: A man's tripod... I'm, ahem, almost a man Good day! Some of you might remember me griping about my wimpy tripod. Well I didn't get one for my birthday (sigh) so I bit the bullet and built one my self. Using scrap wood, Elmers glue, a few nuts and bolts, and some elbow grease I managed to come up with something quite stable. http://www.photosynth.ca/photo/f/tripod.html It weighs a tonne and isn't very tall but for $2.43 Canadian I'm quite satisfied ;-). I use it with a bean bag on top since I haven't got a decent head (it's, you know, got all kinds of fur and lumps on it ;-) ), which is a bit inconvenient but better than nothing. Now all I need is a good long lens to put on top of it.. Oh and a cable release.. and a gitzo pan head, and a proper blind, and a digital body and heck maybe a real tripod to go underneath it :-). Francis, panting and drooling with tongue out, tail waging. -- Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.5 - Release Date: 07/04/2005
Re: Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor
From: Jostein [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/04/15 Fri AM 07:40:13 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Paul, it's about economics, not quality. Even more so in the consumer market, because you don't ever need to have a picture printed again. Many, many people are happy with viewing their pictures on the camera LCD. Add the ones who look at them on a computer monitor and you have the great majority of the modern camera buying public. The economic repercussions of this in the photographic marketplace have only just begun. Dunno Mike, I think if you drop the print from the consumer equation, you're basically into the realm of home video where stills will loose against moving pictures any day. I think that most of the consumers still shoot stills with a print in mind. In mind, maybe. But when it gets to going to the shop with the card (do you have more than one?) and talking to the man about all that technical crap and then the prints come back and they don't look like you remember and Auntie's head is cut off. Unlike chemical photography, there is an alternative. You can show people your pictures on a screen. Doesn't have to be a computer - for £30 you can buy a device that shows them on your TV. My father in law is one of the few people I know (locally...) with a digital camera who prints. He takes 1~2Mb files, prints them at A4 with a 7 or 8 year old HP, using the normal colour cart and shows them to me to demonstrate how good they are. Sometimes he has to tell me what the subject is. An extreme example but I suspect that most people just would not bother. Instant gratification is, in part, what digital is about and the most instant way to see you prints is on screen. Printing them is just too much effort for most (or, at least, many) people. mike - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
RE: Pentax KX meter problem
Based on my experience buying, using and selling these cameras, the problem is usually PIT. Photographer inducing trouble. The meter switching is weird. If you press battery button the meter always responds with a good battery but the meter does not work until you pull out the wind lever part way and then press the shutter button partially. Almost everyone gets confused by this setup. You turn meter off by pushing wind lever closed. Try it, the meter my be fully working as it is Hi, I know exactly what you're getting at here and I'd have to agree with the general comment, however I've been using an MX since 1979 and I am fully familiar with the setup. I've even tried inching the lever slightly as if to wind on etc. no response from the meter even at the moment of tripping the shutter. It got to paranoia at one point and I got the other KX out just to check my methods 8) All the best, John
Re: Pentax KX meter problem
Sadly the KX meter is a one of a kind. I think you can use Spotmatic F, K1000 and KM meters interchangeably (I may be wrong about the KM). The KX was a whole other bird. Damn! John
Re: Pentax KX meter problem
Sadly the KX meter is a one of a kind. I think you can use Spotmatic F, K1000 and KM meters interchangeably (I may be wrong about the KM). The KX was a whole other bird. You're right about all the above. The KX meter *was* unique. The K2 used the same type silicon photo diode, but different metering circuitry due to the autoexposure nature of the beast. Double damn!! John
Rawshooter 1.1.2
For those of you using Rawshooter, they've posted an update. I couldn't find the release notes, but I understand there isn't much changed except support for the D2X. And it's still free. I've been using it as my primary converter and love it, mostly because it is so easy to batch process, and the eyedropper tool makes white balance a cinch. Can't think of a downside, it would be nice to have a batch rename function like PS built in - I like my PEFs renamed, but RSE will only rename the output files. It's part of their philosophy not to change the raw files at all, but it's a bit of an inconvenience. http://www.pixmantec.com/products/rawshooter.html -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~derbyc
Re: Rawshooter 1.1.2
Derby Chang wrote: For those of you using Rawshooter, they've posted an update. I couldn't find the release notes, but I understand there isn't much changed except support for the D2X. And it's still free. Oh, here's the what's new from the installation exe. That makes it more worthwhile. New functionality and improvements: - Ability to change background brightness for Thumbnails and preview area - Improved mapping WB to Kelvin scale - Improved/faster thumbnail extraction and proxy creation - Improved color rendering (Minolta/Nikon) - Optionally Prepend priority # to output - Star-icon to show that a file was recently converted is now persistent - New keyboard short-cuts: Alt+Up/Down to adjust EV level Alt+Shift+Up/Down to adjust Fill-Light level Shift+Up/Down to adjust Shadow Contrast level Ctrl+R/E to rotate Clockwise/counter-clockwise Alt+Z/X to Reset/Restore corrections - Using 1,2,3,F without Ctrl during slideshow will automatically advance to next image - Updated User Guide ...various cosmetic improvements Additional camera compatibility: - Preliminary support for Nikon D2HS - Support for Nikon 8400 - Support for PowerShot G2 Bugs fixes. General including: - Using scroll wheel in Processing parameters cause crash - Inconsistent format of Maker/Model string in EXIF - Launching RSE in 16 bit Display color mode cause crash - Monitor ICC profile is sometimes not detected - User Guide sometimes unable to open or appears broken - Running RSE as a User with restricted OS privileges cause crash - Thumbnails sometimes appears garbled - Copy Corrections sometimes fail - Other stability related improvements Bug fixes. Camera related including: - Minolta: Inconsistent interpretation of As Shot WB - Nikon D2X: images shot in cropped mode show with purple edge - Olympus: Some images appear clipped in the shadows - Pentax: Some images appear clipped in the shadows - Nikon: Some NEF files is not recognized after being saved in Nikon Capture - RebelXT/350D: A 128 pixels wide band sometimes appear at the bottom - Some DNG files (from supported cameras) is not recognized Known problems. Camera related: - Nikon D2X/D2Hs: Incorrect AsShot WB interpretation -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~derbyc
Re: Meter vs Meter
Meter? Being metric, I have a light metre. It's about 3.34 nanoseconds. Cheers, - Dave (sorry... it's Friday) http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
Re: PAW PESO - The Conversation
On Apr 15, 2005, at 4:36 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm sometimes startled when the person walking or standing next to me suddenly starts talking (often loudly) with no indication of who they are talking to. I've noticed that people always speak very loudly into cellphones. Some even speak loudly into landlines. One guy I know, the only time he ever speaks quietly is when he's making a highly personal phone call at work :) Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
Re: OT?:Resize for web question
On Apr 15, 2005, at 3:20 PM, Rob Studdert wrote: OK, so on your system I assume that files rendered as sRGB with and without profile look very similar on screen? So like anything it really comes down to knowing what you are doing, the generic colour settings in the Mac OS aren't necessarily optimised for dealing with the majority of graphics sources? The generic profile is almost exactly the same as sRGB, but as I said I haven't checked the gamma. You are right about it coming down to knowing what you're doing, but that's true of any system. Given the lack of colour aware browsers for the Windows platform can only assume that the developers don't consider it a problem, it's a pretty sad situation really. I think it has its advantages. In Safari, the colour management only extends to graphics. This is fair enough because you can embed a profile into a picture but not into a web page. So things like text and background colours specified in the HTML are rendered directly in the monitor's colour space (a fancy way of saying the RGB numbers are sent straight from the file to the screen without any processing). Now consider this scenario, which has bitten me in the past - but only with Safari. Create an HTML document with a specified background colour of some non-neutral midtone. Now create a graphic in Photoshop that blends into that background at the edges, and add it into the HTML after saving it with an embedded profile. When you load the page in Safari, the CMS will convert the image into the monitor's colour space for display. In doing so it changes the RGB numbers. The resultant RGB value of the image background is now slightly different to that of the page background so you will see a discontinuity around the image. If the file was sRGB it won't be as obvious as some other working space. For this reason I am careful when editing web graphics (not photos) to either save without a profile, or not even colour-manage it in the first place. I'm sure it'd be possible to add support for a meta tag that specifies a colour space but that would create more problems than it solves. The fact that you can only get any value out of colour management with a calibrated profiled system, combined with the difficulty of actually writing a CMM, means that it really isn't worth doing unless the OS provides an easy API to do it for you. Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
Re: PAW PESO - The Conversation (Redux)
Bruce suggested a slightly wider crop, so here it is. I think he was right about the pic needing a little more space. Thanks, Bruce! http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/convers3.html Shel [Original Message] From: Bruce Dayton I do wish that I could see just a bit more wall in front of her, to strengthen the impression of her talking to seemingly nobody. The tonality of the BW is quite nice - technically well done. Overall a thumbs up. Nice job. -- Best regards, Bruce ... To my surprise, I found this woman having a conversation with a wall ... or was she? Today one never knows to whom or what people are talking. http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/convers.html
FS Friday
Here's a list of my stuff on eBay today. 7508019862 Sigma 135/1.8 Sigmatel lens, (YS) Pentax-K 7508020464 Tokina 24-40/2.8 AT-X lens, Pentax-KA 7508024722 Tokina 17/3.5 RMC SL lens, M42 7508025396 Vivitar Series 1 35-85/2.8 VMC lens, M42 7508029226 Vivitar Series 1 90/2.5 VMC macro lens set, M42 7508033354 Vivitar 135/2.8 Close Focusing macro lens, M42 7508034106 Vivitar Series 1 200/3 VMC lens, M42 7508034642 Carl Zeiss Jena 135/3.5 MC lens, M42 Jim www.jcolwell.ca
New *istDS firmware V1.02
Haven't seen anyone mention this yet. http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/ja/info/20050415e.html -- Peter Williams
Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor
even more (by a huge margin) stuff that's produced from film in the labs stinks. so? mishka On 4/14/05, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My objective was not to compare a wet print to a digital print. My objective was exactly as stated: a lot of stuff that's produced digitally and that is represented as quality stinks! Shel [Original Message] From: Herb Chong if Shel's objective was to compare a wet print to a digital print and say that he likes wet prints better, he succeeded. most fine art pros around me have gone digital printing because they like the results better.
Re: The Decline and Fall of the Photograph
On 4/14/05, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No I didn't ... show me where i said that. All I said was that the eleven prints I examined were of poor quality and that the results were wildly inconsistent, and cited an example of one list member's prints that looked substantially different in three separate instances. ok, i made an assumption. if you compared a consumer level lab print to a consumer level inkjet prints, i find your conclusions strange and inconsistent with my own observations. I wouldn't expect you to see any decline or fall ... thank you very much for getting personal. it's so much more fun this way. best, mishka
Re: New *istDS firmware V1.02
on 15-04-2005 12:47, Peter Williams at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Haven't seen anyone mention this yet. http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/ja/info/20050415e.html What a beautiful translation - Download of Microsoft Mac OS Version software - for all these who use Microsoft version of Mac OS ;-) -- Best regards Sylwek
Re: The Decline and Fall of the Photograph
isn't worth much in way of a response Kenneth Waller -Original Message- From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Apr 15, 2005 12:20 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: The Decline and Fall of the Photograph All this fuss because someone didn't like a couple of prints Extrapolating the decline and fall of anything but common sense from that isn't worth much in way of a response. Godfrey PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: PESO: San Francisco Nighttime Panorama
100% If you give them away for nothing, to other than friends, then that's what they're worth. Kenneth Waller -Original Message- From: John Celio [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Apr 15, 2005 12:52 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: PESO: San Francisco Nighttime Panorama http://www.neovenator.com/gallery/files/d5/panorama_2_med.html (make sure you click the image to see the large version) Just freakin' awesome. If prints are for sale, sign me up. :-) Thanks to everyone who responded. All the positive comments are making me seriously consider making prints to sell. I have no idea how to go about selling my photos, as I've only given prints away as gifts in the past. For instance, what percentage markup do photographers put on their prints, framed and unframed? Anything else I should know? Thanks, John Celio -- http://www.neovenator.com http://www.newpixel.net AIM: Neopifex Hey, I'm an artist. I can do whatever I want and pretend I'm making a statement. PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: Frank is not alone ...
On 4/15/05, John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On the local (CBS) news tonight was coverage of the current wave of attacks on the San Francisco homeless (some deranged excrescence is taking pot-shots at them with a BB gun). They interviewed a group of three homeless guys, one of whom was wearing a set of rabbit ears which appeared to me to be identical to those Frank has been seen to wear. I no longer wear those rabbit ears. Lately, I've taken to wearing an aluminium foil helmet, to better repell the communications rays that both the Government and the Aliens have been bombarding me with. Okay, the Government and the Aliens are actually one and the same entity (MJ 12 and all that...), but that's getting a bit off topic, and since politics ist verboten, I can say no more. Besides, if I do say more, they'll get my family, or worse. So, although the guy on TV wasn't me, he could have been wearing my old ears, since I ditched 'em months ago. thanks for caring, frank LOL -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor
Jostein wrote: - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Paul, it's about economics, not quality. Even more so in the consumer market, because you don't ever need to have a picture printed again. Many, many people are happy with viewing their pictures on the camera LCD. Add the ones who look at them on a computer monitor and you have the great majority of the modern camera buying public. The economic repercussions of this in the photographic marketplace have only just begun. Dunno Mike, I think if you drop the print from the consumer equation, you're basically into the realm of home video where stills will loose against moving pictures any day. I think that most of the consumers still shoot stills with a print in mind. Jostein Don't forget the whole scrapbooking craze. At least in the U.S. there are now whole chains of stores devoted to what are essentially just fancy photo albums. There are still a lot of consumers that prefer physical prints to digital images. And economically speaking, there are still millions of people who only take the occasional snapshot at family get-togethers and on vacation. For them, buying disposable film cameras makes a lot more economic sense then buying a computer, monitor, software, printer, photo paper, ink, digital camera, and memory which they then have to figure out how to use. In the end they end up with pictures that aren't any better then they could have gotten from Walgreens or Walmart, and instead of saving a whole bunch of money like a professional photographer, they're actually out a bunch of money they could have spent on Budweiser and frozen pizzas. Glenn
Re: PAW PESO - The Conversation
On 4/15/05, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When I was a kid and disobeyed my mom's orders, she'd often say that talking to me was like talking to a wall. To my surprise, I found this woman having a conversation with a wall ... or was she? Today one never knows to whom or what people are talking. http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/convers.html Shel This one totally rocks!! Says a lot about society/alienation/communication/etc/etc. I could go on, but I've spent about 10 minutes so far looking at it, playing through various scenarios, having fun with it. Of course, exposure and other technical stuff is spot-on (goes without saying with your photos). This is a great photo. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: PAW PESO - The Conversation (Redux)
On 4/15/05, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bruce suggested a slightly wider crop, so here it is. I think he was right about the pic needing a little more space. Thanks, Bruce! http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/convers3.html Absolutely!! Bruce's suggestion (and your execution of it) makes this an even stronger image. Great stuff!!! -frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: PESO: Natural World
On 4/14/05, John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Frank, spelling! Your photos are really pretty, and they're really good. Of course they are. I was just joking around. vbg cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
RE: Pentax KX meter problem (resend)
Based on my experience buying, using and selling these cameras, the problem is usually PIT. Photographer inducing trouble. The meter switching is weird. If you press battery button the meter always responds with a good battery but the meter does not work until you pull out the wind lever part way and then press the shutter button partially. Almost everyone gets confused by this setup. You turn meter off by pushing wind lever closed. Try it, the meter my be fully working as it is Hi, I know exactly what you're getting at here and I'd have to agree with the general comment, however I've been using an MX since 1979 and I am fully familiar with the setup. I've even tried inching the lever slightly as if to wind on etc. no response from the meter even at the moment of tripping the shutter. It got to paranoia at one point and I got the other KX out just to check my methods 8) All the best, John --- End of Forwarded Message --- John Whittingham Technician
Re: Pentax KX meter problem (resend)
Sadly the KX meter is a one of a kind. I think you can use Spotmatic F, K1000 and KM meters interchangeably (I may be wrong about the KM). The KX was a whole other bird. Damn! John --- End of Forwarded Message --- John Whittingham Technician
Re: Pentax KX meter problem (resend)
Sadly the KX meter is a one of a kind. I think you can use Spotmatic F, K1000 and KM meters interchangeably (I may be wrong about the KM). The KX was a whole other bird. You're right about all the above. The KX meter *was* unique. The K2 used the same type silicon photo diode, but different metering circuitry due to the autoexposure nature of the beast. Double damn!! John --- End of Forwarded Message --- John Whittingham Technician
RE: Pentax KX meter problem
If that's not it then the power switch that closes when the shutter release is pressed part way may not be contacting and need a cleaning. That would be under the top plate, yes? John
RE: Great Camera Raw Article in Photoshop User
Thans for the pointer! Albano --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Having now looked at the article in the bookstore, I don't think it adds much if anything to these materials I've already collected from the Adobe site: Digital Workflow for Raw Processing by Jeff Schewe (four-part) A Color Managed Raw Workflow by Jeff Schewe and Bruce Fraser and Highlight Recovery in Adobe Camera Raw by Jeff Schewe all listed on and accessible from this page http://www.adobe.com/digitalimag/ps_pro_primers.html So I didn't buy the magazine ... But the main reason I'm going into detail about the whereabouts of these tutorials is Albano's question about online versions of the information. I think he may find these resources useful, and IMO he won't really be missing anything by not having access to the magazine article. ERNR Albano Garcia Photography Graphic Design http://www.albanogarcia.com.ar http://www.flaneur.com.ar __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 Albano Garcia Photography Graphic Design http://www.albanogarcia.com.ar http://www.flaneur.com.ar __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor
Yep, it is easier to send prints to grandma. It is easier to pass prints around for your friends to look at. Prints are really the only reason slides and video never became the mainstream snapshot media. Also, folks on this list, seem to forget that 1/2 the people in this country do not own computers, and 75+% of the people in the world do not have them. Come to think of it since most of us here own maybe 5 computers what does that do for that 1 computer per 2 people statistic? I took some film into Wal-Marts the other day (the local one has downsized the minilab to about 1/3 its area BTW), the nice girl there said she had a hard time getting the yellow out of my prints. She did a good job though as the tan hat in the photos came out neutral gray... graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Jostein wrote: - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Paul, it's about economics, not quality. Even more so in the consumer market, because you don't ever need to have a picture printed again. Many, many people are happy with viewing their pictures on the camera LCD. Add the ones who look at them on a computer monitor and you have the great majority of the modern camera buying public. The economic repercussions of this in the photographic marketplace have only just begun. Dunno Mike, I think if you drop the print from the consumer equation, you're basically into the realm of home video where stills will loose against moving pictures any day. I think that most of the consumers still shoot stills with a print in mind. Jostein -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.11 - Release Date: 4/14/2005
RE: Pentax KX meter problem
Right! Don -Original Message- From: John Whittingham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 7:58 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: RE: Pentax KX meter problem If that's not it then the power switch that closes when the shutter release is pressed part way may not be contacting and need a cleaning. That would be under the top plate, yes? John
Meter vs Meter
David, You're forgiven. Pre-retirement, I remember Fridays as being almost intoxicating. ;-)) Jack __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor
From: Graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/04/15 Fri PM 01:10:24 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor Yep, it is easier to send prints to grandma. It is easier to pass prints around for your friends to look at. Prints are really the only reason slides and video never became the mainstream snapshot media. Also, folks on this list, seem to forget that 1/2 the people in this country do not own computers, and 75+% of the people in the world do not have them. Come to think of it since most of us here own maybe 5 computers what does that do for that 1 computer per 2 people statistic? I took some film into Wal-Marts the other day (the local one has downsized the minilab to about 1/3 its area BTW), the nice girl there said she had a hard time getting the yellow out of my prints. She did a good job though as the tan hat in the photos came out neutral gray... 8-) The question that we want the answer to is What do most of the persons in the street want out of photography? because they way forward for many of us will be based on the companies' answer to it. There are quite a few answers. Some of those answers lead to dead ends. It will be interesting to see what, er, transpires in the next few years. mike - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
Re: The Decline and Fall of the Photograph
Not getting personal at all ... I juust wouldn'rt expect you to see what I'm talking about. Shel [Original Message] From: Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Date: 4/15/2005 4:10:43 AM Subject: Re: The Decline and Fall of the Photograph On 4/14/05, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No I didn't ... show me where i said that. All I said was that the eleven prints I examined were of poor quality and that the results were wildly inconsistent, and cited an example of one list member's prints that looked substantially different in three separate instances. ok, i made an assumption. if you compared a consumer level lab print to a consumer level inkjet prints, i find your conclusions strange and inconsistent with my own observations. I wouldn't expect you to see any decline or fall ... thank you very much for getting personal. it's so much more fun this way. best, mishka
RE: Pentax KX meter problem + enablement!
Time to dig out the old friction screwdriver then, looking on the brighter side I think I've just enabled myself with a SMC Pentax (K) 135 f/2.5 :) All the recent comment prompted me to bid one one with a K1000 body and 3rd party 28mm 2.8. I've been looking for one for some time, but they hold their price very well, I may just be parting with my K 135mm f/3.5 in the near future. John -- Original Message --- From: Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 08:25:58 -0500 Subject: RE: Pentax KX meter problem Right! Don -Original Message- From: John Whittingham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 7:58 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: RE: Pentax KX meter problem If that's not it then the power switch that closes when the shutter release is pressed part way may not be contacting and need a cleaning. That would be under the top plate, yes? John --- End of Original Message ---
Weegee and The Set-up
I'm a big movie fan, especially of certain older BW movies. I watch about one a week. Last night I saw The Set-up directed by Robert Wise and released in 1949. In its simplest form it's a boxing movie. I'd not seen it before and so was very surprised to find that Weegee had a small role as the fights time keeper, the guy who rings the bell to start and end the rounds. He fit so well into the pic, chomping on his ceegar and wearing his somewhat oversized fedora. The movie is highly recommended, BTW. Shel
Re: PESO: Natural World
Just remember to keep telling yourself that Frank. frank theriault wrote: On 4/14/05, John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Frank, spelling! Your photos are really pretty, and they're really good. Of course they are. I was just joking around. vbg cheers, frank -- 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: Pentax KX meter problem
I've never opened a KX but if it's like an MX it's under the bottom plate. John Whittingham wrote: If that's not it then the power switch that closes when the shutter release is pressed part way may not be contacting and need a cleaning. That would be under the top plate, yes? John -- 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: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor
- Original Message - From: Mishka Subject: Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor even more (by a huge margin) stuff that's produced from film in the labs stinks. so? So you are a bad printer. Thats all. William Robb
Re: Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor The question that we want the answer to is What do most of the persons in the street want out of photography? because they way forward for many of us will be based on the companies' answer to it. There are quite a few answers. Some of those answers lead to dead ends. It will be interesting to see what, er, transpires in the next few years. It doesn't matter what the person on the street wants. They will be told what they want by the marketing divisions of the corporations that make photo equipment. Consequently, what they want is what is good for big business. We are seeing a bit of a bump right now, our film processing is actually up a little bit. This bodes well. I am seeing people again who assured me they were done with film and film processing, bringing film to the lab again. They have tried digital, and found it to be wanting. The camera industry (Canon in this case is the lead spokesman) still wants to get away from film. They can release product after product based on exactly the same components, with minor tweaks to the software or cosmetics to give them a new model. This, they feel, will keep customers buying. The problem with this theory is that they have already trained the consumer to only look at one criteria, and they have already hit somewhat of a brick wall with improving that criteria at a price point that allows them to keep pricing where the consumer is comfortable. One thing is certain, digital is a big PITA for most consumers. They can't just point and shoot anymore. They have to think, and they aren't very good at doing that. People aren't archiving files, they make a set of prints of the files they want, and either dump the memory card or forget the files on their hard drive. The % of copy prints I make from lab prints that have a file extension on the back printing is astounding, considering how young this segment of the industry is. You wouldn't think people would have a chance to lose that many files. Batteries are still an issue with most people, as they can no longer just buy a battery off the shelf, drop it into their camera and go play for a year or two. Now, batteries are relatively expensive proprietary items that require a lot of maintenace. To a certain extent, cellular phones have gotten them used to having to do battery maintenace, but it is still one more thing that non technical consumers can, and will, screw up. One downside of digital is that we are losing the ability to make optical prints. Scanning film to print is the great quality equalizer, as it makes film look just as bad as consumer digital, sometimes much worse, depending on how the film scans. Some films scan better than others. William Robb
RE: PESO - Dimples
Hi Bruce ... Move the pic about in your browser window and see if losing about 1/2-inch or so off the top gives the photo more impact. A few years ago I noticed that the tops of heads were cut off in a lot of tight and medium head shots in movies in order to strengthen an image. It's worth considering and playing with as it sometimes does help. Shel [Original Message] From: Bruce Dayton She can be a ham at times, but is a good sport. I do like the rendering this lens has on skin - reasonably sharp, but not harsh. Any thoughts you have would be appreciated. http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_1790.htm
Re: GESO PESO : Willy Wagtail
I'm a city slicker Frank. I get a charge out of being around wild animals. Even if it's just a little birdie. :-) Glad you that you managed to stay awake long enough to fine a shot you liked g Thanks for looking. Dave S On 4/15/05, frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 4/11/05, David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: G'day Folks, snip A lot of talking, but I guess you had a right to be enthused about your birdie experience, and even moreso about your photos. They're great! My fave is the one of the little fellow atop your dad's hat. The others are good, but fairly run-of-the-mill. Close ups of birds. Yawn. Okay, not yawn, and I sure as hell can't take those types of shots (I suck at all nature and wildlife photography), but as technically proficient as they are, those are shots of a bird, doing what birds do. The one of your dad is something rare and special! Love the tight crop of his face. Even though we can't see his mouth, we can see the huge grin in his eyes. That is an award-winning photo. (I don't know what award, but surely there has to be one out there for that one vbg) cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor
I don't think that the powers that be take the total number of computers sold and divide into the population. Estimates are done with questionnaires and statistical extrapolation. (I wouldn't have any computers at all since I build my own and use many cast off parts from friends and clients if only store bought counted). IIRC the actual estimate of households with computers is closer to 75-80%. Heck even my mother has a computer, and a more unlikely soul never existed. Graywolf wrote: Yep, it is easier to send prints to grandma. It is easier to pass prints around for your friends to look at. Prints are really the only reason slides and video never became the mainstream snapshot media. Also, folks on this list, seem to forget that 1/2 the people in this country do not own computers, and 75+% of the people in the world do not have them. Come to think of it since most of us here own maybe 5 computers what does that do for that 1 computer per 2 people statistic? I took some film into Wal-Marts the other day (the local one has downsized the minilab to about 1/3 its area BTW), the nice girl there said she had a hard time getting the yellow out of my prints. She did a good job though as the tan hat in the photos came out neutral gray... graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Jostein wrote: - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Paul, it's about economics, not quality. Even more so in the consumer market, because you don't ever need to have a picture printed again. Many, many people are happy with viewing their pictures on the camera LCD. Add the ones who look at them on a computer monitor and you have the great majority of the modern camera buying public. The economic repercussions of this in the photographic marketplace have only just begun. Dunno Mike, I think if you drop the print from the consumer equation, you're basically into the realm of home video where stills will loose against moving pictures any day. I think that most of the consumers still shoot stills with a print in mind. Jostein -- 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: Pentax KX meter problem (resend)
MX is different setup isnt it? MX you don't need to pull out the wind lever no? jco -Original Message- From: John Whittingham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 8:55 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: RE: Pentax KX meter problem (resend) Based on my experience buying, using and selling these cameras, the problem is usually PIT. Photographer inducing trouble. The meter switching is weird. If you press battery button the meter always responds with a good battery but the meter does not work until you pull out the wind lever part way and then press the shutter button partially. Almost everyone gets confused by this setup. You turn meter off by pushing wind lever closed. Try it, the meter my be fully working as it is Hi, I know exactly what you're getting at here and I'd have to agree with the general comment, however I've been using an MX since 1979 and I am fully familiar with the setup. I've even tried inching the lever slightly as if to wind on etc. no response from the meter even at the moment of tripping the shutter. It got to paranoia at one point and I got the other KX out just to check my methods 8) All the best, John --- End of Forwarded Message --- John Whittingham Technician
Re: Pentax KX meter problem
I've never opened a KX but if it's like an MX it's under the bottom plate. Oh please let it be under the bottom plate, it would make life much simpler. John
FIRST PENTAX 645 DIGITAL TO BE UNVEILED AT TOKYO TRADE SHOW
http://www.pentaximaging.com/footer/news_media_article?ArticleId=6458800 GOLDEN, CO (March 15, 2005)PENTAX Imaging Company has announced that PENTAX Corporation will unveil the first PENTAX 645 Digital medium-format camera at the Photo Imaging Expo (PIE) from March 1720, 2005 in Tokyo. This latest PENTAX digital advancement will be showcased under glass at PIE 2005. The PENTAX 645 Digital camera will offer professional quality digital image reproduction. The camera will also feature: A reliable PENTAX 645 AF mount Compatibility with existing smc PENTAX 645 interchangeable lenses A Kodak developed extra-large CCD image sensor with 18.6 total megapixels.* *Design, specifications and product name are subject to change without notice. Official launch date and pricing to be announced. In addition to a legendary array of film and digital SLR camera products, PENTAX boasts a proud heritage of delivering professional quality photographic equipment. PENTAX introduced the world's first multi-mode medium-format film camera in 1984the PENTAX 645. In 1997, the manufacturer unveiled the PENTAX 645N, which was the world's first medium-format camera with a high-precision autofocus system at that time. The PENTAX 645 Digital medium-format camera will offer a new digital dimension for medium-format photographers.
Re: Hot pixels
I took a few, but let's talk about one in particular. Lens cap in place, and covering eyepiece with my thumb Exposure 8 sec ISO 1600 Format RAW Noise reduction off. I looked at the histogram of the PEF file in PhotoshopCS The lightest pixel was at level 80; 99th percentile was 26. I ran a threshold adjustment on the file with the threshold set to 128. No white pixels I was a little surprised by this. I'll run through it again with a fresh exposure when I get a chance At 10:14 AM +1000 4/15/05, Rob Studdert wrote: On 13 Apr 2005 at 20:39, Alan P. Hayes wrote: Finding dead pixels (permanently stuck off) would presumably be similar to the procedure for looking for dirt, except that you wouldn't want to stop the lens down, just OOF picture of a uniformly bright field. I haven't hear of any dead pixels mainly I expect due to the fact that the TIFF/JPG files used for assessment have been subjected to a de-mosaic process. Anyhow, I don't seem to have *any* hot pixels on the istD, and my Oly C5050 had them and my Nikon Coolpix 800 had them in spades. I've never seen a *ist D without hot pixels, did you have NR one during the testing you undertook and were the exposures of duration less than 1/4s? A post of mine from Feb 2004: Subject:*ist D sensor noise survey Hey it's a while since we had a survey... I'm interested in making an informal survey of the noise performance of our *ist D cameras. Anyone with access to a PC who has permission to run the little test app at http://www.starzen.com/imaging/deadpixeltest.htm can participate. One exposure is all that's required for the test however in order to achieve consistency we need to make sure that each camera is set up the same. I propose that the test shot should be made as follows: 10 seconds manual exposure (lens capped) 200ISO Daylight WB NR off Saturation setting (middle) Sharpness setting (left most) Contrast setting (left most) sRGB CS TIFF L file The tiff file can then be opened and tested under the default settings of the DeadPixelTest application and the information file saved. I ran the procedure above and the results were as follows: [DeadPixelText] Version=1.0 Description= FileType=TIFF NumBadPixels=15 0=Hot,2798,135,69 1=Hot,1954,339,113 2=Hot,1809,585,64 3=Hot,726,610,112 4=Hot,726,611,192 5=Hot,726,612,112 6=Hot,2312,753,121 7=Hot,323,766,94 8=Hot,572,1365,116 9=Hot,1627,1400,64 10=Hot,2163,1958,96 11=Hot,2162,1959,113 12=Hot,2163,1959,145 13=Hot,2164,1959,112 14=Hot,2163,1960,98 The first two numbers is the pixel location and the last number is the heat, 0 being off and 255 being full on. So I have one pixel that's 3/4 on at 10 seconds. If anyone would like to mail me their results I'll collate and publish the data later down the track (I'll keep data sources anonymous if requested). 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 -- Alan P. Hayes Meaning and Form: Writing, Editing and Document Design Pittsfield, Massachusetts Photographs at http://www.ahayesphoto.com/americandead/index.htm
SIXTH PENTAX DIGITAL DA-SERIES LENS ANNOUNCED
http://www.pentaximaging.com/footer/news_media_article?ArticleId=6458799 GOLDEN, CO (March 15, 2005)...PENTAX Imaging Company has announced yet another compact, lightweight, interchangeable zoom lens for exclusive use with PENTAX digital SLR cameras including the *ist D and the *ist DS digital SLRs. The smc PENTAX-DA 12mm-24mm F4 ED AL [IF] is the sixth DA-series lens offered by the photo manufacturer. The PENTAX-DA 12mm-24mm F4 ED AL [IF] will feature: 2X zoom coverage in the ultra-wide angle range with an angle of view from 99 degrees to 61 degrees (equivalent in focal length from 18.5mm to 37mm in the 35mm format) when mounted on the PENTAX *ist D or *ist DS digital SLR camera body 13-element/11-group optical construction incorporating ED (Extra-low Dispersion) and aspherical optical elements The compact dimensions (diameter x length) of 3.3½ x 3.4½ (83.5mm x 87.5mm) With Extra-low Dispersion (ED) glass lens element and two aspherical lens elements, the lens offers more true-to-life image reproduction. The image circle in DA-series lenses is designed to perfectly match the 23.5mm x 15.7mm size of the CCD used in PENTAX digital SLRs to optimize camera performance. The new design also contributes to a drastic reduction in size, weight and production cost, compared to 35mm-format counterparts with similar specifications.
RE: Pentax KX meter problem (resend)
MX is different setup isnt it? MX you don't need to pull out the wind lever no? IIRC you do if you want the meter to stay on, I never think when I'm using the MX it's like an extension of my mind and body, I'd have to check that. John
Re: Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor
Strange. All my non-photographer friends who shoot occasional snaps are more than happy with digital. My kids, who never could be bothered with film, are happily snapping away with digital. They e-mail a lot of pics and print a few. It works for them. Seems to work for almost everyone I know. Mini labs that are counting on a resurgence of film are doomed. Paul - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor The question that we want the answer to is What do most of the persons in the street want out of photography? because they way forward for many of us will be based on the companies' answer to it. There are quite a few answers. Some of those answers lead to dead ends. It will be interesting to see what, er, transpires in the next few years. It doesn't matter what the person on the street wants. They will be told what they want by the marketing divisions of the corporations that make photo equipment. Consequently, what they want is what is good for big business. We are seeing a bit of a bump right now, our film processing is actually up a little bit. This bodes well. I am seeing people again who assured me they were done with film and film processing, bringing film to the lab again. They have tried digital, and found it to be wanting. The camera industry (Canon in this case is the lead spokesman) still wants to get away from film. They can release product after product based on exactly the same components, with minor tweaks to the software or cosmetics to give them a new model. This, they feel, will keep customers buying. The problem with this theory is that they have already trained the consumer to only look at one criteria, and they have already hit somewhat of a brick wall with improving that criteria at a price point that allows them to keep pricing where the consumer is comfortable. One thing is certain, digital is a big PITA for most consumers. They can't just point and shoot anymore. They have to think, and they aren't very good at doing that. People aren't archiving files, they make a set of prints of the files they want, and either dump the memory card or forget the files on their hard drive. The % of copy prints I make from lab prints that have a file extension on the back printing is astounding, considering how young this segment of the industry is. You wouldn't think people would have a chance to lose that many files. Batteries are still an issue with most people, as they can no longer just buy a battery off the shelf, drop it into their camera and go play for a year or two. Now, batteries are relatively expensive proprietary items that require a lot of maintenace. To a certain extent, cellular phones have gotten them used to having to do battery maintenace, but it is still one more thing that non technical consumers can, and will, screw up. One downside of digital is that we are losing the ability to make optical prints. Scanning film to print is the great quality equalizer, as it makes film look just as bad as consumer digital, sometimes much worse, depending on how the film scans. Some films scan better than others. William Robb
RE: FIRST PENTAX 645 DIGITAL TO BE UNVEILED AT TOKYO TRADE SHOW
Duh - sorry, bit late here... Been too busy with work for the list lately! -Original Message- From: Rob Brigham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 15 April 2005 15:48 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: FIRST PENTAX 645 DIGITAL TO BE UNVEILED AT TOKYO TRADE SHOW http://www.pentaximaging.com/footer/news_media_article?ArticleId=6458800 GOLDEN, CO (March 15, 2005)PENTAX Imaging Company has announced that PENTAX Corporation will unveil the first PENTAX 645 Digital medium-format camera at the Photo Imaging Expo (PIE) from March 1720, 2005 in Tokyo. This latest PENTAX digital advancement will be showcased under glass at PIE 2005. The PENTAX 645 Digital camera will offer professional quality digital image reproduction. The camera will also feature: A reliable PENTAX 645 AF mount Compatibility with existing smc PENTAX 645 interchangeable lenses A Kodak developed extra-large CCD image sensor with 18.6 total megapixels.* *Design, specifications and product name are subject to change without notice. Official launch date and pricing to be announced. In addition to a legendary array of film and digital SLR camera products, PENTAX boasts a proud heritage of delivering professional quality photographic equipment. PENTAX introduced the world's first multi-mode medium-format film camera in 1984the PENTAX 645. In 1997, the manufacturer unveiled the PENTAX 645N, which was the world's first medium-format camera with a high-precision autofocus system at that time. The PENTAX 645 Digital medium-format camera will offer a new digital dimension for medium-format photographers.
Re: Pentax KX meter problem
I know. John Whittingham wrote: I've never opened a KX but if it's like an MX it's under the bottom plate. Oh please let it be under the bottom plate, it would make life much simpler. John -- 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: Pentax KX meter problem
Hi Don No disrespect, are you sure it's under the top plate? John -- Original Message --- From: Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 08:25:58 -0500 Subject: RE: Pentax KX meter problem Right! Don -Original Message- From: John Whittingham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 7:58 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: RE: Pentax KX meter problem If that's not it then the power switch that closes when the shutter release is pressed part way may not be contacting and need a cleaning. That would be under the top plate, yes? John --- End of Original Message ---
Re: Hot pixels
On 15 Apr 2005 at 10:39, Alan P. Hayes wrote: I was a little surprised by this. I'll run through it again with a fresh exposure when I get a chance PC CS RAW has integrated compensation for over-exposure so don't be too surprised. You're best off using a camera generated TIFF file for analysing hot pixels. 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: Hot pixels
Rob Studdert wrote: On 15 Apr 2005 at 10:39, Alan P. Hayes wrote: I was a little surprised by this. I'll run through it again with a fresh exposure when I get a chance PC CS RAW has integrated compensation for over-exposure so don't be too surprised. You're best off using a camera generated TIFF file for analysing hot pixels. Hmm, camera generated TIFF files if only the *ist-DS could do that.
Re: Hot pixels
On 15 Apr 2005 at 8:11, David Oswald wrote: Hmm, camera generated TIFF files if only the *ist-DS could do that. A minimum compression jpg will suffice :-) I forgot. 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
Nice ebay find
I just picked up a Vivitar Series 1 70-210/3.5 constant aperture zoom on ebay. $95 buy it now. It wasn't advertised as a Series 1, but the pictures reveal that it is exactly that. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemcategory=48558item=7508644266rd=1
6x7 Eyepiece Correction Lenses
Hello, Can anyone help me to decide if I would benefit from a correction lens in my 6x7 eyepiece? (It's a 6x7 MLU with plain prism). On my LX I have the FA-1 set to mid-range, so assuming a linear scale that's about -0.75 diopters. This is the viewing experience that I would like to duplicate on the 6x7. The 6x7, bought used, came with what seems to be a piece of flat glass in the eyepiece. Is this the standard eyepiece that gives the overall -1D listed in the manual? Can I compare the -0.75D value from the LX with the -1D of the 6x7? Or, should I read the LX setting as some built in value minus a further 0.75? If my two viewfinders are -0.75 and -1.0, then the difference is only 0.25. That doesn't seem much. Should I expect to feel that the 6x7 needs correction if it is only out by that far? Or, is the overall diopter of the LX something larger, say -1.75D? In that case I might expect a -1D correction to get me closer than I am at present. Is it worth guessing at an appropriate correction, or do I need to take my camera to the optician and actually try some lenses? Thanks in advance for any suggestions. Steve.
Re: Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor
On 15 Apr 2005 at 14:52, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Strange. All my non-photographer friends who shoot occasional snaps are more than happy with digital. My kids, who never could be bothered with film, are happily snapping away with digital. They e-mail a lot of pics and print a few. It works for them. Seems to work for almost everyone I know. Mini labs that are counting on a resurgence of film are doomed. Paul The reality here is that for the mainstream it's getting difficult to find film let alone a film camera. Even the camera store brochures only have a half page or a page dedicated to film cameras these days. I know we aren't quite third world here but film has pretty much had it, there are sufficient digital print facilities around the place that people don't need computers to make prints. Even the little cheapo ink-jets have card readers with direct printing these days and they are becoming more idiot resistant with each incarnation. Also I hardly see a tourist with a film camera these days either, lots of them even seem quite content to use phone cams for their holiday snaps. Digital imaging obviously isn't mature but it isn't utter crap either, who here has dumped their DSLR to go back to shooting 35mm film? 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
Capture One Pro vs Adobe RAW converter
Do you get more accurate colors, better sharpness and shadow/highlight detail with Capture One than with Adobe RAW converter ? Or the difference is only in speed, ease of use, etc.. What justifies the price of Capture One Pro ?
RE: Capture One Pro vs Adobe RAW converter
I've used both. Capture One Pro has the edge with batch processing. That's something that you can't do with Adobe RAW. So, if the shots are under similar conditions and you have a lot of them, you can basically set your parameters up on the first image in Capture One and transfer those parameters across to the other images as you're post processing them - this is handy if you're shooting events/weddings etc. Just my opinion and as always, ymmv :) Cheers Dave Original Message: - From: David Zaninovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 11:31:59 -0400 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Capture One Pro vs Adobe RAW converter Do you get more accurate colors, better sharpness and shadow/highlight detail with Capture One than with Adobe RAW converter ? Or the difference is only in speed, ease of use, etc.. What justifies the price of Capture One Pro ? mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ .
Re: Hot pixels
I'll give that a try. I've got access to a PC right now so I may be able to try the program you've mentioned. Of course the question is, If you can't see 'em, does it matter? I'll run something from the C5050 through it, too. Too bad the coolpix doesn't do RAW, I can always recognize low key shots from that one by that big green blob in one quadrant! What about my miracle batteries? Do you think I should expect Pentax enthusiasts to start maintaining a vigil outside my door? :-) At 1:02 AM +1000 4/16/05, Rob Studdert wrote: On 15 Apr 2005 at 10:39, Alan P. Hayes wrote: I was a little surprised by this. I'll run through it again with a fresh exposure when I get a chance PC CS RAW has integrated compensation for over-exposure so don't be too surprised. You're best off using a camera generated TIFF file for analysing hot pixels. 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 -- Alan P. Hayes Meaning and Form: Writing, Editing and Document Design Pittsfield, Massachusetts Photographs at http://www.ahayesphoto.com/americandead/index.htm
More Battery Stuff
It seems to be my morning for reporting miraculous events. I just finished running through the second set of emergency alkaline batteries that I'd mentioned in an earlier post. These were the eveready E2 titanium alkalines. I appear to have gotten about 350 frames per set. I'm going to play with this some more and report. -- Alan P. Hayes Meaning and Form: Writing, Editing and Document Design Pittsfield, Massachusetts Photographs at http://www.ahayesphoto.com/americandead/index.htm
RE: Pentax KX meter problem
No. ;-) I'm pretty sure it is but I don't have a KX to check. Sometimes I don't remember so good. :-/ Considering the bottom plate comes off in about 15 seconds that would certainly be the first place to check. You have to get under the bottom to check out the wiring anyway. Don -Original Message- From: John Whittingham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 10:06 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: RE: Pentax KX meter problem Hi Don No disrespect, are you sure it's under the top plate? John -- Original Message --- From: Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 08:25:58 -0500 Subject: RE: Pentax KX meter problem Right! Don -Original Message- From: John Whittingham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 7:58 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: RE: Pentax KX meter problem If that's not it then the power switch that closes when the shutter release is pressed part way may not be contacting and need a cleaning. That would be under the top plate, yes? John --- End of Original Message ---
Re: PAW PESO - The Conversation (Redux)
Yeah, that's better. Ensures that I know she is talking to the wall. Very nice photo! -- Best regards, Bruce Friday, April 15, 2005, 2:36:46 AM, you wrote: SB Bruce suggested a slightly wider crop, so here it is. I think he was right SB about the pic needing a little more space. Thanks, Bruce! SB http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/convers3.html SB Shel [Original Message] From: Bruce Dayton I do wish that I could see just a bit more wall in front of her, to strengthen the impression of her talking to seemingly nobody. The tonality of the BW is quite nice - technically well done. Overall a thumbs up. Nice job. -- Best regards, Bruce ... To my surprise, I found this woman having a conversation with a wall ... or was she? Today one never knows to whom or what people are talking. http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/convers.html
Re: Pentax Sf-1
Kenneth Waller wrote: Ann, I've had an SF1 since 1988 have run thousands of rolls thru it. Still have it but since I got the MZ-S *ist D, it doesn't get much use. It did require a little maintained, but given the usage I believe it has performed well. Built like a tank. Doesn't have all the current bells whistles that later cameras have but I'd recommend it. Kenneth Waller Ohoh - sounds too good for me to sell it for her on ebay - maybe I'll take it for myself as my commission for selling other stuff :) built like a tank required for the way I treat cameras otoh I need to unload some stuff so I can upgrade to a better digital Thanks, Ken ann - Original Message - From: Ann Sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2005 5:03 PM Subject: Pentax Sf-1 PRos, cons and age range please :) A friend of mine has one - i'll see it next week but wondered what I'll be looking at would like opinions from folks I know rather than some website T I A annsan
Re: PESO - Dimples
Hello Shel, I have tried your suggestion and cropped some off the top and the bottom. I do believe the image is improved. Here is the new crop: http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_1790a.htm Here is the original: http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_1790.htm Thanks for the suggestion. -- Best regards, Bruce Friday, April 15, 2005, 7:33:41 AM, you wrote: SB Hi Bruce ... SB Move the pic about in your browser window and see if losing about 1/2-inch SB or so off the top gives the photo more impact. A few years ago I noticed SB that the tops of heads were cut off in a lot of tight and medium head shots SB in movies in order to strengthen an image. It's worth considering and SB playing with as it sometimes does help. SB Shel [Original Message] From: Bruce Dayton She can be a ham at times, but is a good sport. I do like the rendering this lens has on skin - reasonably sharp, but not harsh. Any thoughts you have would be appreciated. http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_1790.htm
RE: Impulse Buy, 24/2.8 Sigma AF
Har! The noise was from a corner of the flexible circuit board inside catching on a screw head when you focused. A dab of contact cement and no more noise. This thing's built like a tank! I'm surprised it had any mechanical problems at all. All brass gears, very few plastic parts. After a CLA it makes almost no noise when focusing. It has *NO* dust seals however, I'll bet this caused most of the reported problems. And macro to boot! Can't wait to try it out. ;-) Don -Original Message- From: Frantisek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2005 11:53 AM To: Don Sanderson Subject: Re: Impulse Buy, 24/2.8 Sigma AF DS Anyone have any experience with this one? DS Of course it's 'broken' (AF noise), but that's what I do, I fix stuff! ;-) Yep I had one in Nikon AF mount. The mechanics are horrible (but you already saw it yourself, probably). It makes a grinding sound during AF even when new, and the focus helicoid or AF gears can get torn down pretty fast. OTOH, it was very sharp. Not that flare resistant, so use a hood. Interestingly, the second sample I had came from a friend photojournalist, who abused it in Middle East and Russia and elsewhere for about 8 years. Most of the paint came off, the AF was sluggish, it had fallen on stones many many times, but it still worked, and even resolved details well! The extruding rear element metal baffle was completely dinged from all the falls, but it did protect the glass well. So apart from the AF gears, it's a pretty tough lens. I didn't use it in AF because I feared it could damage the camera's motor. Yep, even the lens barrel is completely metal (although it is coated with black rubber coating, this coating was almost nonexistend on my lens g). The only bad quality issue with this lens is the AF, in my opinion. Some here on the list said that it resolves better than the FA*2/24mm (even on film). Good light! fra
Re: OT: BreezeBrowser Pro Raw conversion
Did Camera RAW for PS 7 ever do Pentax PEF files? I was told by Adobe support that it did, but I can't confirm it. It was the same guy that told me before I purchased PS 7.0 last August, that I could get the plug in from Adobe - since confirmed as not true. Kenneth Waller -Original Message- From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Apr 14, 2005 9:01 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: OT: BreezeBrowser Pro Raw conversion Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] I have PS 7.0 but can no longer get the RAW plug in that was available for it. Why not? Cause Adobe no longer sells it. Anyone out there got a copy they want to get rid of? Did Camera RAW for PS 7 ever do Pentax PEF files? -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: OT: BreezeBrowser Pro Raw conversion
I know I couldn't get half as much work done per day if I had to work with 8 year old hardware. I guess it depends on what you want/expect your system to do. My 8 year old system is only used for photoshop. I know I will/should update but at the moment its hard to justify. Kenneth Waller -Original Message- From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Apr 14, 2005 8:57 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: OT: BreezeBrowser Pro Raw conversion On Apr 14, 2005, at 5:13 PM, Kenneth Waller wrote: Might be time for a new system.. Yes, if I want to do RAW, otherwise its hard for me to justify the cost of a new system just to pick up some speed. I dunno ... Between 1997 and 2005 systems, you're not just picking up some speed. There's a world of difference between computer systems that old and current ones, whether Windows or Mac OS. But you know better than I what you want to deal with. I know I couldn't get half as much work done per day if I had to work with 8 year old hardware. Godfrey PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: 6x7 Eyepiece Correction Lenses
- Original Message - From: Steve Morphet Subject: 6x7 Eyepiece Correction Lenses Hello, Can anyone help me to decide if I would benefit from a correction lens in my 6x7 eyepiece? (It's a 6x7 MLU with plain prism). On my LX I have the FA-1 set to mid-range, so assuming a linear scale that's about -0.75 diopters. This is the viewing experience that I would like to duplicate on the 6x7. The 6x7, bought used, came with what seems to be a piece of flat glass in the eyepiece. Is this the standard eyepiece that gives the overall -1D listed in the manual? Can I compare the -0.75D value from the LX with the -1D of the 6x7? Or, should I read the LX setting as some built in value minus a further 0.75? If my two viewfinders are -0.75 and -1.0, then the difference is only 0.25. That doesn't seem much. Should I expect to feel that the 6x7 needs correction if it is only out by that far? Or, is the overall diopter of the LX something larger, say -1.75D? In that case I might expect a -1D correction to get me closer than I am at present. Is it worth guessing at an appropriate correction, or do I need to take my camera to the optician and actually try some lenses? Thanks in advance for any suggestions. Find out from your optometrist what your glasses correction is, and try to find a diopter in the same range. William Robb
Re: Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor
- Original Message - From: Rob Studdert Subject: Re: Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor On 15 Apr 2005 at 14:52, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Strange. All my non-photographer friends who shoot occasional snaps are more than happy with digital. My kids, who never could be bothered with film, are happily snapping away with digital. They e-mail a lot of pics and print a few. It works for them. Seems to work for almost everyone I know. Mini labs that are counting on a resurgence of film are doomed. Paul Minilabs are doomed anyway. Print counts from digital won't keep them open, and while I am seeing a blip at the moment, I am sure that is all it is. As much as i would like it to be otherwise The reality here is that for the mainstream it's getting difficult to find film let alone a film camera. Even the camera store brochures only have a half page or a page dedicated to film cameras these days. I know we aren't quite third world here but film has pretty much had it, there are sufficient digital print facilities around the place that people don't need computers to make prints. We aren't quite that bad off yet, film is still available, it just isn't being stocked in the quantities it used to be maintained at. Even the little cheapo ink-jets have card readers with direct printing these days and they are becoming more idiot resistant with each incarnation. Also I hardly see a tourist with a film camera these days either, lots of them even seem quite content to use phone cams for their holiday snaps. Digital imaging obviously isn't mature but it isn't utter crap either, who here has dumped their DSLR to go back to shooting 35mm film? I'm close. I expect to be building my new darkroom this winter, and by a year from now, I will be back to shooting film for good. I'll keep shooting digital for colour prints and the net, but I expect to go back to film for a lot of what I do, though it won't be 35mm. The shine has kinda worn of the old istD William Robb
Re: Re: DA 50-200/4-5.6 ED, Any news?
Don, it is scheduled to appear in June. If history is any guide it will be in Europe well before it is available in the U.S. Here's a couple of recent comparisons: DA 14 appeared in Europe last June. I got mine in October. DA 40 appeared in Europe in January. I got mine yesterday. So most likely you will have to wait. I would wait, though. It will almost certainly be better than the Sigma. Joe
24/2.8 Sigma AF Tested!
I think I like it!! OK, for $45.00 shipped, I love it! http://www.donsauction.com/pdml/Sigma24_2.8.htm Don
RE: Re: DA 50-200/4-5.6 ED, Any news?
Thanks Joe, I'll try to be patient. ;-/ don -Original Message- From: jtainter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 12:00 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Re: DA 50-200/4-5.6 ED, Any news? Don, it is scheduled to appear in June. If history is any guide it will be in Europe well before it is available in the U.S. Here's a couple of recent comparisons: DA 14 appeared in Europe last June. I got mine in October. DA 40 appeared in Europe in January. I got mine yesterday. So most likely you will have to wait. I would wait, though. It will almost certainly be better than the Sigma. Joe
RE: Capture One Pro vs Adobe RAW converter
You can batch process with the PSCS Raw Converter. Just dial in the first shot, choose those settings as your default and fire off the rest of them. Simple and efficient. Paul I've used both. Capture One Pro has the edge with batch processing. That's something that you can't do with Adobe RAW. So, if the shots are under similar conditions and you have a lot of them, you can basically set your parameters up on the first image in Capture One and transfer those parameters across to the other images as you're post processing them - this is handy if you're shooting events/weddings etc. Just my opinion and as always, ymmv :) Cheers Dave Original Message: - From: David Zaninovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 11:31:59 -0400 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Capture One Pro vs Adobe RAW converter Do you get more accurate colors, better sharpness and shadow/highlight detail with Capture One than with Adobe RAW converter ? Or the difference is only in speed, ease of use, etc.. What justifies the price of Capture One Pro ? mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ .
Re: Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor
I'm not sure about here, but I do recall a few people mentioning that they've either returned to film or are using more film rather than shooting all digital. Of course, that changes nothing: crap is crap, good work is still good work, and digital is going to be around a long time. I'd just like to see a higher level of quality produced, regardless of the format. Shel [Original Message] From Rob Studdert Digital imaging obviously isn't mature but it isn't utter crap either, who here has dumped their DSLR to go back to shooting 35mm film?
RE: Pentax KX meter problem
No. ;-) I'm pretty sure it is but I don't have a KX to check. Sometimes I don't remember so good. :-/ Considering the bottom plate comes off in about 15 seconds that would certainly be the first place to check. You have to get under the bottom to check out the wiring anyway. Cheers Don, my memory is not what it used to either. It's worth taking the bottom plate off for a look anyway. John
Re: 24/2.8 Sigma AF Tested!
I think I like it!! OK, for $45.00 shipped, I love it! Very nice the 24mm manual focus version was and still is one of my favourite lenses. John
RE: Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor
William Robb wrote: Minilabs are doomed anyway. Print counts from digital won't keep them open, and while I am seeing a blip at the moment, I am sure that is all it is. As much as i would like it to be otherwise The bulk of the people I mix with are camera owners and make no pretence of having any real interest in photography as an interest in its own right. I don't know anyone who has had any digital images from the lab. The whole reason to get a digital camera for most was the instant access to their own images, e-mail and their own printer. In well over a year with the istD I have never had any lab prints, but that was never the intention. I'm close. I expect to be building my new darkroom this winter, and by a year from now, I will be back to shooting film for good. I'll keep shooting digital for colour prints and the net, but I expect to go back to film for a lot of what I do, though it won't be 35mm. The shine has kinda worn of the old istD I feel increasingly isolated as a hobby photographer as I am no ones target for marketing. I bought into Pentax digital to use my old lenses and replace colour print film. This it has done. The istD is brilliant for all the things for which an instant picture is useful and can be printed off at home; but by far the biggest use is for e-mail attachments to letters for family and friends. If I want a shot to keep, it is out with the slide film and the LX and pictures you hand about at gatherings I find B W ideal for. I can't image going fully digital, but I wouldn't like to go back to colour print film. Malcolm
Re: Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor
One thing that I've noticed that surprised me is that the LEG (one of the Leica lists) has a substantial number of photographers shooting more digital than I'd have expected, and from what I can see, the cameras of choice are Canon and ... Pentax! Canon has been chosen because a lot of Leica lenses can be used with the bodies, plus a lot of the Leica photogs are pros of one sort or another and use the Canons in their day jobs quite a bit. Pentax has been chosen because either the user has a lot of old pentax glass remember, almost everyone learned photography on a Spotmatic or K1000 ;-)) or, upon trying one, loved the ergonomics and small size. While I've not really kept a tally, it seems that more people on the Leica list are shooting other branded digital than Leica cameras film cameras these days. Some people have given up their Leica M bodies the very same people who just a year or so back argued so strongly for the strengths of the camera. However, there's another interesting trend, and that is subject matter. More and more I'm seeing flower pictures and snaps of the back yard and the neighborhood instead of what used to be the more prevalent people pics, architectural and found object studies. Well, maybe it's not a trend in the true sense of the word, but still, flowers are appearing with greater regularity by more and more people posting PAWs and pics to the list. Finally, as here, some photogs using digital are posting greater numbers of pics, which is, of course, understandable. However, just like here and in other venues, more pics does not equate with greater quality. Is it just me, or do others see the quality of the photos posted here diminishing. I don't necessarily mean technical quality, but subject matter and choice of images posted seem to be of less impact and deliver less meaning. Would some photogs be choosing their subjects and framing with a better eye towards composition if they's be shooting film where they'd be paying per exposure, and perhaps limited in the number of exposures they could make on a walk about? Again, I don't know the answers to all these questions, but I did want to share what may be some valid observations. Shel [Original Message] From: Shel Belinkoff I'm not sure about here, but I do recall a few people mentioning that they've either returned to film or are using more film rather than shooting all digital. Of course, that changes nothing: crap is crap, good work is still good work, and digital is going to be around a long time. I'd just like to see a higher level of quality produced, regardless of the format. Shel [Original Message] From Rob Studdert Digital imaging obviously isn't mature but it isn't utter crap either, who here has dumped their DSLR to go back to shooting 35mm film?
Re: Nice ebay find
You forgot to mention, iti's also macro-focusing! Very nice find indeed! keith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just picked up a Vivitar Series 1 70-210/3.5 constant aperture zoom on ebay. $95 buy it now. It wasn't advertised as a Series 1, but the pictures reveal that it is exactly that. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemcategory=48558item=7508644266rd=1
Re: Re: Hurrah for Shel Disrobing the Emperor
Shel opined: More and more I'm seeing flower pictures Shel! It's Spring! Get out there and smell the roses vbg. Seriously, for those of us in northern climes that may well be a seasonal phenomenon. Would some photogs be choosing their subjects and framing with a better eye towards composition if they's be shooting film where they'd be paying per exposure, and perhaps limited in the number of exposures they could make on a walk about? Yes. Although I think the shoot everything in sight digital mindset is a temporary thing. I now shoot about the same as I do with film. I've gone out for walkarounds with the *istD and returned without exposing a single frame -- or I should say -- without recording a single image. However, since I don't pay for film, I will tend to experiment more with digital. That's a good thing. And I confess to having posted a few things that were more on the order of experiments than work of which I was proud. But sometimes input on those experiments is a good thing, and it sometimes leads to interesting conversations here and on other venues. Again, I don't know the answers to all these questions, but I did want to share what may be some valid observations. Duly noted and appreciated. Paul [Original Message] From: Shel Belinkoff I'm not sure about here, but I do recall a few people mentioning that they've either returned to film or are using more film rather than shooting all digital. Of course, that changes nothing: crap is crap, good work is still good work, and digital is going to be around a long time. I'd just like to see a higher level of quality produced, regardless of the format. Shel [Original Message] From Rob Studdert Digital imaging obviously isn't mature but it isn't utter crap either, who here has dumped their DSLR to go back to shooting 35mm film?
Re: Nice ebay find
Yes, you're right. A good flower shooter vbg. I'm looking forward to playing with it. You forgot to mention, iti's also macro-focusing! Very nice find indeed! keith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just picked up a Vivitar Series 1 70-210/3.5 constant aperture zoom on ebay. $95 buy it now. It wasn't advertised as a Series 1, but the pictures reveal that it is exactly that. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemcategory=48558item=7508644266rd= 1
Re: One more BBPro question
Many up load problems last night, connection kept crashing,but here is the site i made,about 3/4 loaded up. go to: http://www.caughtinmotion.com\paecwinter\index.htm for the page itself. Just delete the index and folder to get to ,main page. The problem: No file numbers in larger pictuyre I cannot sem to get the code in to link back to the site. (btw i just notice the link in my main page is wrong.I'll fix that.One to many www.caughtinmotion.com's in there. Any advice is appr. Dave(happy that Boo came back after getting out and wondering streets for a day)Brooks Godfrey saif: If you post the pages somewhere, I can look at the source. Godfrey On Apr 13, 2005, at 3:03 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi
Re: 6x7 Eyepiece Correction Lenses
On Fri Apr 15 16:32 , 'William Robb' [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent: Find out from your optometrist what your glasses correction is, and try to find a diopter in the same range. Thanks Bill. I will pay them a visit tomorrow and see what they can do. I'm sure they'll be able to find me something that works. I am, however, an incorrigible nerd, so I may not be completely happy until I understand the numbers too. Steve.
Re: Nice ebay find
It wasn't advertised as a Series 1, but the pictures reveal that it is exactly that. Yes, indeed. It's the original version of the VS1 70-210/3.5. A sturdy classic... Fred
Re: Capture One Pro vs Adobe RAW converter
On Apr 15, 2005, at 8:39 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: David Zaninovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] Do you get more accurate colors, better sharpness and shadow/highlight detail with Capture One than with Adobe RAW converter ? Or the difference is only in speed, ease of use, etc.. What justifies the price of Capture One Pro ? Capture One Pro has the edge with batch processing. That's something that you can't do with Adobe RAW. So, if the shots are under similar conditions and you have a lot of them, you can basically set your parameters up on the first image in Capture One and transfer those parameters across to the other images as you're post processing them - this is handy if you're shooting events/weddings etc. You do the same thing with Photoshop CS and Camera Raw using the File Browser, actions, automate and batch features. I prefer the control and rendering provided by Photoshop and Camera Raw. Godfrey
Re: OT: BreezeBrowser Pro Raw conversion
That's most of what I use my desktop computer for too, other than noodling about in these forums and such. I want [EMAIL PROTECTED] editing, so Photoshop 7 is only really half-way there for me, and such editing takes a lot of system power and resources. Godfrey On Apr 15, 2005, at 9:51 AM, Kenneth Waller wrote: I know I couldn't get half as much work done per day if I had to work with 8 year old hardware. I guess it depends on what you want/expect your system to do. My 8 year old system is only used for photoshop. I know I will/should update but at the moment its hard to justify.
Re: Capture One Pro vs Adobe RAW converter
So why does the Capture One Pro costs almost as much as the whole Photoshop ? :) - Original Message - From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 2:35 PM Subject: Re: Capture One Pro vs Adobe RAW converter On Apr 15, 2005, at 8:39 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: David Zaninovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] Do you get more accurate colors, better sharpness and shadow/highlight detail with Capture One than with Adobe RAW converter ? Or the difference is only in speed, ease of use, etc.. What justifies the price of Capture One Pro ? Capture One Pro has the edge with batch processing. That's something that you can't do with Adobe RAW. So, if the shots are under similar conditions and you have a lot of them, you can basically set your parameters up on the first image in Capture One and transfer those parameters across to the other images as you're post processing them - this is handy if you're shooting events/weddings etc. You do the same thing with Photoshop CS and Camera Raw using the File Browser, actions, automate and batch features. I prefer the control and rendering provided by Photoshop and Camera Raw. Godfrey
Re: Capture One Pro vs Adobe RAW converter
Ok. So I'm obviously not using my Photoshop CS as much as I used to since using Capture One. Personally.. that's my preference currently - as to why - well.. maybe because I had used it back when I had the 10D and Photoshop never offered an integrated RAW converter before CS (it was offered as a separate downloadable iirc). Like I said in my original response: ymmv Cheers Dave Original Message: - From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 11:35:40 -0700 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Capture One Pro vs Adobe RAW converter On Apr 15, 2005, at 8:39 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: David Zaninovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] Do you get more accurate colors, better sharpness and shadow/highlight detail with Capture One than with Adobe RAW converter ? Or the difference is only in speed, ease of use, etc.. What justifies the price of Capture One Pro ? Capture One Pro has the edge with batch processing. That's something that you can't do with Adobe RAW. So, if the shots are under similar conditions and you have a lot of them, you can basically set your parameters up on the first image in Capture One and transfer those parameters across to the other images as you're post processing them - this is handy if you're shooting events/weddings etc. You do the same thing with Photoshop CS and Camera Raw using the File Browser, actions, automate and batch features. I prefer the control and rendering provided by Photoshop and Camera Raw. Godfrey mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ .
