RE: Enabled - F 24-50mm
Thanks, I try to keep them natural. Actually she's kind of "redish" - her mother (my daughter) is a red head :-) Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Markus Maurer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 13. juni 2005 03:55 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: RE: Enabled - F 24-50mm Hi Jens V e r y lovely pictures and poses. It's blond, it's a Bladt? ;-) greetings Markus >>-Original Message- >>From: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 12:24 AM >>To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net >>Subject: RE: Enabled - F 24-50mm >> >> >>I'm quite pleased with the sharpness of this inexpensive lens - even at >>moderat aperture values: >>http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p16215746.html >>http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p16215765.html >> >>Regards >> >>Jens Bladt >>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt >> >> >>-Oprindelig meddelelse- >>Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Sendt: 10. juni 2005 14:30 >>Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net >>Emne: Enabled - F 24-50mm >> >> >>Today my Pentax-F 4/24-50mm arrived all the way from California. >>It's in mint condition and truely nice and it seems to perform very well. >>It's very good for the reasonable price tag of 201,50 USD + shiopping and >>taxes. >>I'm really looking forward to using this lens as my walk around lens. It's >>very small and and not heavy, compared to my Tokina 2.6-2.8/28-70mm. I >>really like the performance and portability of Pentax-F lenses! They look >>toyish, but are actually well built - in fact better than the >>early consumer >>FA-zooms, I believe. When or if I vever get rich, I might swop it for a >>20-35mm. >> >> >>Regards >>Jens Bladt >>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt >> >> >>
Re: First *ist Ds shots
On 13 Jun 2005 at 2:15, Wigwam Jones wrote: > OK, well, just trying to help. I'll just keep doing my inferior thing, > then, and you have fun with Elements. Everybody happy. John I know has been experimenting with various RAW convertors pretty my since the the first *ist D were released, he's even written his own convertor (and a jpg extractor which I use in a batch to quickly create jpg thumbs of my RAW files) so his opinion on RAW convertors carries some weight in the PDML. Plus if you care to delve into the archives you'll find that the vast majority of RAW shooters here (including myself) have found DCRAW to be inferior to most other convertors (commercial or not) in both output quality and flexibility. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
RE: First *ist Ds shots
I thought this was commonly accepted. I'm sure the camera industry didn't just invent the RAW-format to ensure longer downloading times and larger files :-) Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Kenneth Waller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 13. juni 2005 01:16 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: First *ist Ds shots >The quality is simply better. Interesting comment. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: First *ist Ds shots > Congrats, Bob. > You realy should try out shooting RAW. > I do it all the time now. The quality is simply better. > I am a D-user, so the time it takes to write the images on to the card is a > PITA. I guess the DS works faster. > The PEF (RAW) files can be handled by various kinds of software. My rather > cheap image database software; ACDC can open them and save them as JPEGs or > what ever. However, to make the best of RAW files, you might wnat to get a > proper RAW converter that does batch conversion - like Phase One (LE), which > is not too expensive and very good (the best I believ - next to Phase One > SE, of course. > > Jens Bladt > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt > > > -Oprindelig meddelelse- > Fra: Bob Sullivan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sendt: 12. juni 2005 17:28 > Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Emne: First *ist Ds shots > > > I went to the Arboretum at 7 AM this morning. > Put the A400/5.6 on the camera. > Cranked the ASA up to 800 as it was a bit overcast. > Was quickly rewarded with this...(warning, big for dial-up readers) > > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Deer41.jpg > > This is out of the camera and simply resized to 25% in PSP. > > Also captured this trio... > > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding1.jpg > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding2.jpg > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding3.jpg > > All three are as they came out of the camera. > The first two are cropped and resized to 40% in PSP. > The last is just cropped without resizing, ie. the pixels as they came. > The 1st shot is the best, but I included the 3rd one just to show the > full size image. > > I'm still a bit puzzled about sharpening these images as my habit is > to sharpen the web image a bit to better match the slide image...but > no slide image here! > > I haven't shot anything in RAW yet. Don't I need something like > Photoshop or Photoshop Elements to handle the 12 bit color? > > Critique, comments and suggestions solicited. > > Regards, Bob S. > >
Re: PAW: GFM "S" Curve
Flatlanders! (GRIN) graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" --- Bob Sullivan wrote: Last year at GFM we drove up to the top of the mountain thru that S curve. It must be a 15-20% grade at the curve. As we reached it, a 25 or 30 foot long delivery truck, not a van but a HEAVY truck with dual rear wheels, was trying to make it up the grade. We watched him try to keep the truck on the road as he negotiated the turns. When we got to the shop at the top of the mountain, he was delivering ice cream bars! I really couldn't believe that the guy made this trip in that truck just to refill a 2 foot by 4 foot ice cream cooler in the shop. I was uncomfortable driving my van up and down the curve! Regards, Bob S. On 6/12/05, Ann Sanfedele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Kenneth Waller wrote: Check out - http://mypeoplepc.com/members/kwaller/offwallphoto/id2.html Taken during the Nature Photography Weekend sometime between rain drops. The best example of its kind I've ever personally seen outside of a race track. Comments of all kinds solicited. Thanks in advance. Kenneth Waller That sort of definesanScurve ok! - I think I drove down that one with Wheatfield at the wheel and still have the ragged fingernails to prove it :) pretty shot, Ken ann -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.9 - Release Date: 6/11/2005
RE: First *ist Ds shots
I thought this was commonly accepted. I'm sure the camera industry didn't just invent the RAW-format to ensure longer downloading times and larger files :-) Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Kenneth Waller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 13. juni 2005 01:16 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: First *ist Ds shots >The quality is simply better. Interesting comment. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: First *ist Ds shots > Congrats, Bob. > You realy should try out shooting RAW. > I do it all the time now. The quality is simply better. > I am a D-user, so the time it takes to write the images on to the card is a > PITA. I guess the DS works faster. > The PEF (RAW) files can be handled by various kinds of software. My rather > cheap image database software; ACDC can open them and save them as JPEGs or > what ever. However, to make the best of RAW files, you might wnat to get a > proper RAW converter that does batch conversion - like Phase One (LE), which > is not too expensive and very good (the best I believ - next to Phase One > SE, of course. > > Jens Bladt > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt > > > -Oprindelig meddelelse- > Fra: Bob Sullivan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sendt: 12. juni 2005 17:28 > Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Emne: First *ist Ds shots > > > I went to the Arboretum at 7 AM this morning. > Put the A400/5.6 on the camera. > Cranked the ASA up to 800 as it was a bit overcast. > Was quickly rewarded with this...(warning, big for dial-up readers) > > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Deer41.jpg > > This is out of the camera and simply resized to 25% in PSP. > > Also captured this trio... > > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding1.jpg > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding2.jpg > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding3.jpg > > All three are as they came out of the camera. > The first two are cropped and resized to 40% in PSP. > The last is just cropped without resizing, ie. the pixels as they came. > The 1st shot is the best, but I included the 3rd one just to show the > full size image. > > I'm still a bit puzzled about sharpening these images as my habit is > to sharpen the web image a bit to better match the slide image...but > no slide image here! > > I haven't shot anything in RAW yet. Don't I need something like > Photoshop or Photoshop Elements to handle the 12 bit color? > > Critique, comments and suggestions solicited. > > Regards, Bob S. > >
Re: GFM "S" Curve
I understand a lot of car comercials have been shot on GFM. The road at GFM is far from the scariest road around. But John, the section Ken shows if far from the scariest on GFM although it may be the tightest. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" --- John Coyle wrote: You guys ain't seen nuthin' till you've seen the curves on the Island of St. Helena (that's the one in the South Atlantic Ocean, BTW)! The GFM example is a pussy-cat compared with some of those. If you can look up a map of the island on the WWW, look at the double bend on Two Gun Saddle, SSE fro Jamestown: it's a 20 degree slope and a 12 foot wide carriageway at max, with rock walls each side and a 200 foot drop on one side (if you miss the turn going downhill, it's about 400 feet down after you demolish a house with a magnificent view!). I'll see if I can find a picture to illustrate in the next few days. Yes and one guy thought Auto Minis could tackle it - hah! John Coyle Brisbane, Australia - Original Message - From: "Kenneth Waller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 9:13 AM Subject: PAW: GFM "S" Curve Check out - http://mypeoplepc.com/members/kwaller/offwallphoto/id2.html Taken during the Nature Photography Weekend sometime between rain drops. The best example of its kind I've ever personally seen outside of a race track. Comments of all kinds solicited. Thanks in advance. Kenneth Waller -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.9 - Release Date: 6/11/2005
Re: First *ist Ds shots
OK, well, just trying to help. I'll just keep doing my inferior thing, then, and you have fun with Elements. Everybody happy. Best, Wiggy John Francis wrote: On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 08:23:37PM -0400, Wigwam Jones wrote: I downloaded 'dcraw' which is a batch command-line converter, it seems to work well. This is also available for free in MS-DOS format in various places on the web - it is free software. Free is nice, but sometimes it's worth little more than what you pay for it. The original version of dcraw used a rather poor Bayer reconstruction algorithm. I believe the current verson is better, but it's still nowhere near as good as the algorithms found in several other converters. (Including some other free converters, albeit not for Linux platforms). One last thing - this I am not sure anybody else knows yet. The Pentax PEF (RAW) format file DOES contain an embedded JPG file. Yes. - we've known that for a while. But it's only the lowest-quality JPG - suitable for previewing, and perhaps for small final images, but not really good enough for serious use.
Re: First *ist Ds shots
Yes and no. Perl runs under Windows, no problem - www.activestate.com is a freebie. And dcraw has also been compiled to run under Windows. But I dont think that ImageMagick has been ported to Windows yet. That's kind of a problem, since as it has been pointed out, dcraw does not do a perfect job on the image, it is too dark out of the standard conversion and needs to be massaged a bit - so I'd need something like ImageMagick that runs under Windows and has a command-line interface to use in place of ImageMagic. Then, yes, it should be do-able under Windows as well as Linux. Best, Wiggy Thibouille wrote: I'm very intersted in that and any further development you might add :) Doable under Win$ ? 2005/6/13, Wigwam Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: That's what I like about Linux/Perl and scripting - do it once, let the script do it from there on in. I dump the images in my 'raw' directory, my script runs every five minutes, looking for new files to convert. Finds one, invokes dcraw, then pipes result to imagemagick, saves as tif and jpg - jpg then is ftp'd to my website, all nice and comfy. Five minutes after I dump the day's shooting, the proofs are online for viewing. Not perfect - they're proofs! If I see one that stands out, I either go back to the TIF or the RAW and redo it by hand - works a treat. I figure I manually process one out of thirty or so - if that. Most are just dross, but that's ok. Right now, I'm just ftp'ing jpg files to my website - in the future, I hope to have all the EXIF data embedded in an XML file and shot up with the jpg, then converted to html when called by a web browser. Oooh, I get shivers just thinking about it. Very do-able, I just haven't gotten to it yet. If I have to do it once, that's one thing. If I have to do it twice, that calls for a script. Programmers are lazy, that's why we're cool. Best, Wiggy Herb Chong wrote: free has certain advantages, but if you have to put in twice as much work, how much is your time worth? Herb... - Original Message - From: "Wigwam Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2005 9:15 PM Subject: Re: First *ist Ds shots Works pretty well for me after I feed it to imagemagick, but hey, it's free. Fr. I like that part.
Re: 1/16" metal balls
Bicycle Shop graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" --- Joaquim Carvalho wrote: Anyone knows of a source for 1/16 inch metal balls? (an A 50mm lens I bought on Ebay is missing 2) -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.9 - Release Date: 6/11/2005
Re: First *ist Ds shots
On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 04:24:43PM -0500, Bob Sullivan wrote: > Jens, > > Thanks, I am going to try RAW, but I have a vague memory of some > discussion threads here that were critical of the Pentax RAW > conversion. Wasn't John Francis even working on his own software? Nowadays I mostly use Photoshop Elements 3.0
Re: First *ist Ds shots
On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 08:23:37PM -0400, Wigwam Jones wrote: > > I downloaded 'dcraw' which is a batch command-line converter, it seems > to work well. This is also available for free in MS-DOS format in > various places on the web - it is free software. Free is nice, but sometimes it's worth little more than what you pay for it. The original version of dcraw used a rather poor Bayer reconstruction algorithm. I believe the current verson is better, but it's still nowhere near as good as the algorithms found in several other converters. (Including some other free converters, albeit not for Linux platforms). > One last thing - this I am not sure anybody else knows yet. The Pentax > PEF (RAW) format file DOES contain an embedded JPG file. Yes. - we've known that for a while. But it's only the lowest-quality JPG - suitable for previewing, and perhaps for small final images, but not really good enough for serious use.
Re: Weird vignetting effect on an image
I go for the camera strap, if you weren't using a (n)ever-ready case! John Coyle Brisbane, Australia - Original Message - From: "Amita Guha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 3:41 AM Subject: Weird vignetting effect on an image I was messing around shooting my cousin at close range using the Tamron 90mm macro, and I got this weird black blur in the lower right edge of the image: http://www.sunny16.net/jennie-test.htm I posted the image that came after that that lacks this blur. The blur is only visible in that top photo, which was in the middle of a series. Does anyone have any idea what could cause that? Cousin and I were sitting in the same position the whole time, I never removed the lens, etc. Thanks in advance, Amita
Re: Pano from Milson's Pt
Nice shot Derby. A point for advice, please: I'm thinking that, to avoid exposure differences when taking the frames for a panoramic, it's better to set it to manual and thus get the same throughout each frame? I think that will avoid what I've found before, different saturation in, particularly, the sky from frame to frame. Am I right? John Coyle Brisbane, Australia - Original Message - From: "Derby Chang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax Discuss" Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 12:20 PM Subject: PESO: Pano from Milson's Pt I know this view has been done millions of times. But I thought it would be a good test for the 6x7 I recently acquired. Boy, if I'm going to be scanning many more of these negs in, I am definitely going to have to beef up my rig. The full size of this pano is 18689x6327. Love the camera. Didn't use the leaf shutter in these shots, so the normal mirror slap didn't seem to affect the sharpness that much. And I discovered I DON'T like the Photomerge function in PS. It leaves these ugly diagonal blend lines. Much better to do it by hand and adjust channels. Yes, I notice the blend around where the Opera House is could be better. This frame was a bit tricky, because I didn't want to blow out the details of the ferry wharf (which I did in any case), so the sky was under-exposed. Might have to go back and take a couple, and do an HDR blend. http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc/PDML_misc/milson.htm D -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc
Re: GFM "S" Curve
You guys ain't seen nuthin' till you've seen the curves on the Island of St. Helena (that's the one in the South Atlantic Ocean, BTW)! The GFM example is a pussy-cat compared with some of those. If you can look up a map of the island on the WWW, look at the double bend on Two Gun Saddle, SSE fro Jamestown: it's a 20 degree slope and a 12 foot wide carriageway at max, with rock walls each side and a 200 foot drop on one side (if you miss the turn going downhill, it's about 400 feet down after you demolish a house with a magnificent view!). I'll see if I can find a picture to illustrate in the next few days. Yes and one guy thought Auto Minis could tackle it - hah! John Coyle Brisbane, Australia - Original Message - From: "Kenneth Waller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 9:13 AM Subject: PAW: GFM "S" Curve Check out - http://mypeoplepc.com/members/kwaller/offwallphoto/id2.html Taken during the Nature Photography Weekend sometime between rain drops. The best example of its kind I've ever personally seen outside of a race track. Comments of all kinds solicited. Thanks in advance. Kenneth Waller
Re: PAW PESO - My Old Pipe
In a message dated 6/12/2005 10:22:52 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/oldpipe.html A little Quik-Snap made with the Sony DSC-S85 this morning. Shel = Too dark on my monitor too. So I can't tell if it's a pot pipe or not. HTH, Marnie aka Doe
Re: PAW: GFM "S" Curve
Bob Sullivan wrote: Last year at GFM we drove up to the top of the mountain thru that S curve. It must be a 15-20% grade at the curve. As we reached it, a 25 or 30 foot long delivery truck, not a van but a HEAVY truck with dual rear wheels, was trying to make it up the grade. We watched him try to keep the truck on the road as he negotiated the turns. When we got to the shop at the top of the mountain, he was delivering ice cream bars! I really couldn't believe that the guy made this trip in that truck just to refill a 2 foot by 4 foot ice cream cooler in the shop. I was uncomfortable driving my van up and down the curve! Sounds so very familiar -- I remember on my trip (late July last year) watching with fascination (and photographing, of course!) a bright red Coca-Cola truck goin' up there last summer. I do appreciate the dedication of the people who deliver those necessities up there ... :-) ERNR
Re: PAW: GFM "S" Curve
In a message dated 6/12/2005 4:14:34 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Check out - http://mypeoplepc.com/members/kwaller/offwallphoto/id2.html Taken during the Nature Photography Weekend sometime between rain drops. The best example of its kind I've ever personally seen outside of a race track. Comments of all kinds solicited. Thanks in advance. Kenneth Waller == Last year I chickened out and let Graywolf drive me and Ann to the top of the mountain. There were enough windy curves below that that had been quite exciting enough for me. I can't tell really if that shot is near the top or lower down, but it looks like one that goes to the top, just a little ways above the conference center. Coming down, actually, was the fun part. I thought I showed nice trust in someone I hadn't really ridden with before. (Okay, I closed my eyes now and then and I think I said a few things, "take it easy, don't go over the edge, etc." But I don't think I left big red impressions in Graywolf's arm, though. I was restrained. However, I lost all desire to ever go to the top again -- in this lifetime.) Nice shot. Marnie aka Doe :-)
Re: First *ist Ds shots
I'm very intersted in that and any further development you might add :) Doable under Win$ ? 2005/6/13, Wigwam Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > That's what I like about Linux/Perl and scripting - do it once, let the > script do it from there on in. I dump the images in my 'raw' directory, > my script runs every five minutes, looking for new files to convert. > Finds one, invokes dcraw, then pipes result to imagemagick, saves as tif > and jpg - jpg then is ftp'd to my website, all nice and comfy. Five > minutes after I dump the day's shooting, the proofs are online for > viewing. Not perfect - they're proofs! If I see one that stands out, I > either go back to the TIF or the RAW and redo it by hand - works a > treat. I figure I manually process one out of thirty or so - if that. > Most are just dross, but that's ok. > > Right now, I'm just ftp'ing jpg files to my website - in the future, I > hope to have all the EXIF data embedded in an XML file and shot up with > the jpg, then converted to html when called by a web browser. Oooh, I > get shivers just thinking about it. Very do-able, I just haven't gotten > to it yet. > > If I have to do it once, that's one thing. If I have to do it twice, > that calls for a script. Programmers are lazy, that's why we're cool. > > Best, > > Wiggy > > Herb Chong wrote: > > > free has certain advantages, but if you have to put in twice as much > > work, how much is your time worth? > > > > Herb... > > - Original Message - From: "Wigwam Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: > > Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2005 9:15 PM > > Subject: Re: First *ist Ds shots > > > > > >> Works pretty well for me after I feed it to imagemagick, but hey, > >> it's free. Fr. I like that part. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- -- Thibouille -- *ist-D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX and KR-10x ...
Re: 1/16" metal balls
At 04:52 PM 12/06/2005 , you wrote: > >Anyone knows of a source for 1/16 inch metal balls? >(an A 50mm lens I bought on Ebay is missing 2) There is one on my floor somewhere. I will have to vacuum some day soon though. Powell :-(
Re: PESO: Pano from Milson's Pt
Well, normally I wouldn't show how unpretty my stuff is up close, but since you asked nicely... :) http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc/PDML_misc/milson_detail.htm I must also remember to make sure the seams don't fall on somewhere important, like the Altair building (the one with the shark fin), which makes it tricky to blend. Hmm...left frame is also a touch crooked. I'm unsubbing for a while. Taking over the house of a friend and looking after her cat while she's overseas. Thought I'd detox and de-PC at the same time. But I am taking the 31mm and the LX with me. Rob, that shot is so sharp. Doesn't Jeffrey St Wharf rock with the waves? Amazing. cheerio, D Rob Studdert wrote: On 13 Jun 2005 at 12:20, Derby Chang wrote: Yes, I notice the blend around where the Opera House is could be better. This frame was a bit tricky, because I didn't want to blow out the details of the ferry wharf (which I did in any case), so the sky was under-exposed. Might have to go back and take a couple, and do an HDR blend. http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc/PDML_misc/milson.htm It's a very difficult scene to expose, a pano constructed of HDR image would be ideal I guess, not a bad effort in any case. Any chance of seeing a detail section 1:1? Whilst very recently in tour guide mode I made the following shot from the ferry wharf using *ist D, 31mm and a table top tripod. I had to lie down flat on the concrete to eliminate the piers so I smelt like bait afterwards, decent shot though, the 31mm earns its keep again :-) http://www.home.aone.net.au/audiobias/temp/IMGP1356.jpg (it's a bit big 750kB) 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 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc
Re: First *ist Ds shots
That's what I like about Linux/Perl and scripting - do it once, let the script do it from there on in. I dump the images in my 'raw' directory, my script runs every five minutes, looking for new files to convert. Finds one, invokes dcraw, then pipes result to imagemagick, saves as tif and jpg - jpg then is ftp'd to my website, all nice and comfy. Five minutes after I dump the day's shooting, the proofs are online for viewing. Not perfect - they're proofs! If I see one that stands out, I either go back to the TIF or the RAW and redo it by hand - works a treat. I figure I manually process one out of thirty or so - if that. Most are just dross, but that's ok. Right now, I'm just ftp'ing jpg files to my website - in the future, I hope to have all the EXIF data embedded in an XML file and shot up with the jpg, then converted to html when called by a web browser. Oooh, I get shivers just thinking about it. Very do-able, I just haven't gotten to it yet. If I have to do it once, that's one thing. If I have to do it twice, that calls for a script. Programmers are lazy, that's why we're cool. Best, Wiggy Herb Chong wrote: free has certain advantages, but if you have to put in twice as much work, how much is your time worth? Herb... - Original Message - From: "Wigwam Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2005 9:15 PM Subject: Re: First *ist Ds shots Works pretty well for me after I feed it to imagemagick, but hey, it's free. Fr. I like that part.
Re: Getting That Old Fashioned Glow - Coming Along
Hi Mark, Frantisek ... I recall reading about the minimum ~amount~ of chemistry suggested for full development a few years ago, and have since developed pretty much all my flim in larger tanks to get that additional amount - i.e., one roll in a two reel tank, two in a four reel tank. That got to be pretty unwieldy at some point - I don't like using large tanks - so in order to develop several rolls at a time I tried working with a few tanks simultaneously. Made for quite a sight, and it was also unwieldy in a different way. Now I just take my time ... no more than two rolls at a time. Shel > [Original Message] > From: Mark Cassino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Date: 6/12/2005 7:52:08 PM > Subject: Re: Getting That Old Fashioned Glow - Coming Along > > A CC is a cubic centimeter - same as a milliliter. Cripes, I though only us > Yanks were confused by the metric system! > > Here's a link to a discussion re the minimum amount of Rodinal needed: > > http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=005EIh > > here's a quote from an Agfa rep: > > > > in our technical data we mention that 500 ml concentrate of RODINAL will > last for 50 films (135-36). That means that you need 10 ml concentrate to > process 1 film.
Re: PAW: GFM "S" Curve
Woah, nasty decreasing radius on the first corner, but the second one opens up nicely. :-) Late apex on the first corner, little squirt of power, brake for the second one, and get the power down through the apex of the second. I can see the line... -Mat On 6/12/05, Kenneth Waller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Check out - > > http://mypeoplepc.com/members/kwaller/offwallphoto/id2.html > > Taken during the Nature Photography Weekend sometime between rain drops. > The best example of its kind I've ever personally seen outside of a race > track. > > Comments of all kinds solicited. > > Thanks in advance. > > Kenneth Waller > >
Re: PAW: GFM "S" Curve
Last year at GFM we drove up to the top of the mountain thru that S curve. It must be a 15-20% grade at the curve. As we reached it, a 25 or 30 foot long delivery truck, not a van but a HEAVY truck with dual rear wheels, was trying to make it up the grade. We watched him try to keep the truck on the road as he negotiated the turns. When we got to the shop at the top of the mountain, he was delivering ice cream bars! I really couldn't believe that the guy made this trip in that truck just to refill a 2 foot by 4 foot ice cream cooler in the shop. I was uncomfortable driving my van up and down the curve! Regards, Bob S. On 6/12/05, Ann Sanfedele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Kenneth Waller wrote: > > > > > > > > Check out - > > > > http://mypeoplepc.com/members/kwaller/offwallphoto/id2.html > > > > Taken during the Nature Photography Weekend sometime between rain drops. > > The best example of its kind I've ever personally seen outside of a race > > track. > > > > Comments of all kinds solicited. > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > > Kenneth Waller > > That sort of definesanScurve ok! - I think I > drove down that > one with Wheatfield at the wheel and still have > the ragged fingernails > to prove it :) > > pretty shot, Ken > ann > >
Re: PAW: GFM "S" Curve
On 12 Jun 2005 at 19:13, Kenneth Waller wrote: > Check out - > > http://mypeoplepc.com/members/kwaller/offwallphoto/id2.html > > Taken during the Nature Photography Weekend sometime between rain drops. > The best example of its kind I've ever personally seen outside of a race > track. Cools shot, reminds me very much of some spots I drove in the French Alps, whilst my Porsche was at home in Oz :-( 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: PESO: Pano from Milson's Pt
On 13 Jun 2005 at 12:20, Derby Chang wrote: > Yes, I notice the blend around where the Opera House is could be better. > This frame was a bit tricky, because I didn't want to blow out the > details of the ferry wharf (which I did in any case), so the sky was > under-exposed. Might have to go back and take a couple, and do an HDR blend. > > > http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc/PDML_misc/milson.htm It's a very difficult scene to expose, a pano constructed of HDR image would be ideal I guess, not a bad effort in any case. Any chance of seeing a detail section 1:1? Whilst very recently in tour guide mode I made the following shot from the ferry wharf using *ist D, 31mm and a table top tripod. I had to lie down flat on the concrete to eliminate the piers so I smelt like bait afterwards, decent shot though, the 31mm earns its keep again :-) http://www.home.aone.net.au/audiobias/temp/IMGP1356.jpg (it's a bit big 750kB) Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: PAW: GFM "S" Curve
- Original Message - From: "Ann Sanfedele" Subject: Re: PAW: GFM "S" Curve That sort of definesanScurve ok! - I think I drove down that one with Wheatfield at the wheel and still have the ragged fingernails to prove it :) Sorry. I though you knew it's dry here and the roads are straight and flat. William Robb
Re: PAW: GFM "S" Curve
Kenneth Waller wrote: > > > > Check out - > > http://mypeoplepc.com/members/kwaller/offwallphoto/id2.html > > Taken during the Nature Photography Weekend sometime between rain drops. > The best example of its kind I've ever personally seen outside of a race > track. > > Comments of all kinds solicited. > > Thanks in advance. > > Kenneth Waller That sort of definesanScurve ok! - I think I drove down that one with Wheatfield at the wheel and still have the ragged fingernails to prove it :) pretty shot, Ken ann
Re: PAW: GFM "S" Curve
- Original Message - From: "Jon M" Subject: Re: PAW: GFM "S" Curve Yeowch... that'd be a fun curve to whip around. :) It's really fun in the rain. William (my roads are straight and flat) Robb
Re: Getting That Old Fashioned Glow - Coming Along
- Original Message - From: "Shel Belinkoff" Subject: Re: Getting That Old Fashioned Glow - Coming Along About two years ago I came across a sealed bottle of Rodinal that I purchased in 1967. Gave it a try it was just fine. No "rocks." A few years ago, I was handed an unopened bottle of HC:110 that had to be 20 years old. Sadly, it had yellowed from oxidization through the plastic, but it was still potent. Rodinal should last pretty much forever in a new sealed bottle. I expect the rocks in question would have been a sulpher precipitate, which will form when the solution is stored cold. It doesn't seem to hurt anything. William Robb
Re: Getting That Old Fashioned Glow - Coming Along
A CC is a cubic centimeter - same as a milliliter. Cripes, I though only us Yanks were confused by the metric system! Here's a link to a discussion re the minimum amount of rodinal needed: http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=005EIh here's a quote from an Agfa rep: in our technical data we mention that 500 ml concentrate of RODINAL will last for 50 films (135-36). That means that you need 10 ml concentrate to process 1 film. It does not matter what the dilution is. Important is that you are using 10 ml concentrate. For example if you are processing with a dilution of 1+50 than you need 10 ml concentrate plus 500 ml water so that you will have in total 550 ml solution to process your film. Why is it important to take 10 ml because these 10 ml contain the amount of substances which will be used to process your film correctly and with reproducible results. It can be that you will get good results with less than 10 ml as mentioned in one answer but to be sure we recommend 10 ml. I hope this will answer your question. If you have further questions please do not hesitate to contact me. My tanks take ~900 ml of fluid total. So, at 1:100, I fall short of the required 10 ml (cc) required. Probably not a problem for 24 exposure rolls of 35mm film. - MCC - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Photography Kalamazoo, MI www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Original Message - From: "Frantisek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Mark Cassino" Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2005 6:26 PM Subject: Re: Getting That Old Fashioned Glow - Coming Along MC> I have not had as much luck with Rodinal at 1:100 as with HC110. I've heard MC> that you need a minimum of 10 CC's of Rodinal per roll of film, no matter MC> what the dilution level is. With my experiments with Rodinal at 1:100 I used MC> only 6 CC, so I may have shorted the mix too much. That could have been the problem. I don't remember the exact number of "raw" Rodinal per one film, but it should be listed in Agfa's literature IIRC. And even if I remembered, I don't know what CC means - ml for me ;-)) Good light! fra
Re: Getting That Old Fashioned Glow - Coming Along
About two years ago I came across a sealed bottle of Rodinal that I purchased in 1967. Gave it a try it was just fine. No "rocks." Shel > [Original Message] > From: Frantisek > One thing I am curious about Rodinal and its copies... > > Ït's the shelf life. I have read that Rodinal in cold storage can keep > for a long long time (they found some on the frozen lost expedition > into Antartcica, after 100 years it still worked...). And that has > been my experience as well, that it kept for long. But sometimes there > form hard rocks or something inside... what is it?
Re: PAW PESO - My Old Pipe
the "munchies" - now that's a term I haven't heard since the '60's. :-) Watching the Mama's & Papa's special on PBS Regards, Bob S. On 6/12/05, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Interspersed > > Shel > > > > [Original Message] > > From: Bob Sullivan > > > I can be more precise. The entire bottom of the pipe disappears in > > the shadow it creates. > > As you've described it is pretty much as I want it. > > > > The smoking end with it's smaller diameter is > > entirely visible. > > Indeed it is (So far so good) 8-)) > > > The right edge of the bowl above and below the > > elbow has no definition as it is in the black shadow. > > Detail is there on all my screens and in all editing software, although > some of the details and definition is quite subtle. > > > I mention that this is how my laptop renders it because the laptop has > > no brightness adjustment. What you see is what you get, subject to > > some adjustment of screen angle. > > That tells me that you're using an LCD screen, not always the best choice > for image work. > > > I usually don't have any problems > > with it and think that if you desired to evoke a dark, smoking den > > mood that you could still do so with a bit more definition in the > > pipe. > > Well, I don't know what to say. The image looks good here and it looks the > way I want it to look. I will recalibrate my monitor at some point in the > not too distant future, and tomorrow I'll have a print made of the image > and see how close it comes to what's on my screen. In the past the lab has > produced results that were VERY close to the image on the screen. If > there's a problem here, I'll find out about it soon enough. > > Thanks for taking the time to describe what you're seeing. I appreciate > that very much. And now it's time for a bowl of ice cream and a cookie. > Working on that image has given me the "munchies." > > > > > >http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/oldpipe.html > > >
PESO: Pano from Milson's Pt
I know this view has been done millions of times. But I thought it would be a good test for the 6x7 I recently acquired. Boy, if I'm going to be scanning many more of these negs in, I am definitely going to have to beef up my rig. The full size of this pano is 18689x6327. Love the camera. Didn't use the leaf shutter in these shots, so the normal mirror slap didn't seem to affect the sharpness that much. And I discovered I DON'T like the Photomerge function in PS. It leaves these ugly diagonal blend lines. Much better to do it by hand and adjust channels. Yes, I notice the blend around where the Opera House is could be better. This frame was a bit tricky, because I didn't want to blow out the details of the ferry wharf (which I did in any case), so the sky was under-exposed. Might have to go back and take a couple, and do an HDR blend. http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc/PDML_misc/milson.htm D -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc
Re: First *ist Ds shots
On 12 Jun 2005 at 19:15, Kenneth Waller wrote: > >The quality is simply better. > > Interesting comment. Interesting indeed, somewhat understated given my experience. 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: OT: Sky Captain
Not sure about the history of the Argus. My first Argus (and first 35mm camera), was a C-3 I got in 1962. It looked different from an earlier C-3 in the lens and the shutter tensioning lever. Perhaps the producers couldn't find a 1930's version of the camera. Jim A. > From: Collin R Brendemuehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 16:57:00 -0400 > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Subject: OT: Sky Captain > Resent-From: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 16:53:16 -0400 > > It's my new diversion (Sunday afternoon vegetable state) movie. > Used to be Galaxy Quest. (Now I just love Polly's > blonde hair & red lipstick. But I digress...) > Her camera in the movie, looks like an Argus model. > But it the movie is set in 1938 and the camera looks like a > post WWII model. Can anyone here ascertain that? > > Collin > > >
RE: Enabled - F 24-50mm
Hi Jens V e r y lovely pictures and poses. It's blond, it's a Bladt? ;-) greetings Markus >>-Original Message- >>From: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 12:24 AM >>To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net >>Subject: RE: Enabled - F 24-50mm >> >> >>I'm quite pleased with the sharpness of this inexpensive lens - even at >>moderat aperture values: >>http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p16215746.html >>http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p16215765.html >> >>Regards >> >>Jens Bladt >>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt >> >> >>-Oprindelig meddelelse- >>Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Sendt: 10. juni 2005 14:30 >>Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net >>Emne: Enabled - F 24-50mm >> >> >>Today my Pentax-F 4/24-50mm arrived all the way from California. >>It's in mint condition and truely nice and it seems to perform very well. >>It's very good for the reasonable price tag of 201,50 USD + shiopping and >>taxes. >>I'm really looking forward to using this lens as my walk around lens. It's >>very small and and not heavy, compared to my Tokina 2.6-2.8/28-70mm. I >>really like the performance and portability of Pentax-F lenses! They look >>toyish, but are actually well built - in fact better than the >>early consumer >>FA-zooms, I believe. When or if I vever get rich, I might swop it for a >>20-35mm. >> >> >>Regards >>Jens Bladt >>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt >> >> >>
Re: First *ist Ds shots
free has certain advantages, but if you have to put in twice as much work, how much is your time worth? Herb... - Original Message - From: "Wigwam Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2005 9:15 PM Subject: Re: First *ist Ds shots Works pretty well for me after I feed it to imagemagick, but hey, it's free. Fr. I like that part.
Re: First *ist Ds shots
Works pretty well for me after I feed it to imagemagick, but hey, it's free. Fr. I like that part. Herb Chong wrote: DCRAW doesn't seem to do the linearization correctly. it's not bad, but it's not great. Herb... - Original Message - From: "Wigwam Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2005 8:23 PM Subject: Re: First *ist Ds shots I downloaded 'dcraw' which is a batch command-line converter, it seems to work well. This is also available for free in MS-DOS format in various places on the web - it is free software.
Re: PAW: GFM "S" Curve
Yeowch... that'd be a fun curve to whip around. :) --- Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Wow! What a location. Roll film!! > Paul > On Jun 12, 2005, at 7:13 PM, Kenneth Waller wrote: > > > Check out - > > > > > http://mypeoplepc.com/members/kwaller/offwallphoto/id2.html > > > > Taken during the Nature Photography Weekend > sometime between rain > > drops. > > The best example of its kind I've ever personally > seen outside of a > > race > > track. > > > > Comments of all kinds solicited. > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > > Kenneth Waller > > > > __ Discover Yahoo! Have fun online with music videos, cool games, IM and more. Check it out! http://discover.yahoo.com/online.html
Re: PESO -- The Gang
- Original Message - From: "P. J. Alling" Subject: Re: PESO -- The Gang He seemed to be the leader and spokesdog. He would certainly be the toughest of the three.. William Robb
Re: First *ist Ds shots
DCRAW doesn't seem to do the linearization correctly. it's not bad, but it's not great. Herb... - Original Message - From: "Wigwam Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2005 8:23 PM Subject: Re: First *ist Ds shots I downloaded 'dcraw' which is a batch command-line converter, it seems to work well. This is also available for free in MS-DOS format in various places on the web - it is free software.
Re: First *ist Ds shots
The quality *is* better in RAW format on the *ist DS than in the highest quality JPG format. And it *is* a PITA, I'm afraid. Being a Linux user myself, that makes it double-hard - I can't use the software Pentax supplied with my camera. I downloaded 'dcraw' which is a batch command-line converter, it seems to work well. This is also available for free in MS-DOS format in various places on the web - it is free software. Also, for those into Perl programming...you can download 'exiftool' from the cpan.org archive. This is a stand-alone perl program that extracts all the lovely EXIF header info from Pentax RAW files - you can save them to text files, embed them in converted tif or jpg files, etc. One last thing - this I am not sure anybody else knows yet. The Pentax PEF (RAW) format file DOES contain an embedded JPG file. exiftool has a switch to extract CANON embedded jpg files from their raw format - it works for PEF files too. I've read a few reviews of the *ist DS that bemoan the fact that you can't select through the menu a way to save each shot as both PEF and JPG - well, it does it, it just doesn't tell you about it. I don't know if any tool other than exiftool can extract it, though. I tested some M42 lenses today with my Franken-Pentax *ist DS. Here's the wide-open shots (playing wth bokeh): http://www.cameramentor.com/images/m42_50mm_primes/ Best, Wiggy Kenneth Waller wrote: The quality is simply better. Interesting comment. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: First *ist Ds shots Congrats, Bob. You realy should try out shooting RAW. I do it all the time now. The quality is simply better. I am a D-user, so the time it takes to write the images on to the card is a PITA. I guess the DS works faster. The PEF (RAW) files can be handled by various kinds of software. My rather cheap image database software; ACDC can open them and save them as JPEGs or what ever. However, to make the best of RAW files, you might wnat to get a proper RAW converter that does batch conversion - like Phase One (LE), which is not too expensive and very good (the best I believ - next to Phase One SE, of course. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Bob Sullivan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 12. juni 2005 17:28 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: First *ist Ds shots I went to the Arboretum at 7 AM this morning. Put the A400/5.6 on the camera. Cranked the ASA up to 800 as it was a bit overcast. Was quickly rewarded with this...(warning, big for dial-up readers) http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Deer41.jpg This is out of the camera and simply resized to 25% in PSP. Also captured this trio... http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding1.jpg http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding2.jpg http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding3.jpg All three are as they came out of the camera. The first two are cropped and resized to 40% in PSP. The last is just cropped without resizing, ie. the pixels as they came. The 1st shot is the best, but I included the 3rd one just to show the full size image. I'm still a bit puzzled about sharpening these images as my habit is to sharpen the web image a bit to better match the slide image...but no slide image here! I haven't shot anything in RAW yet. Don't I need something like Photoshop or Photoshop Elements to handle the 12 bit color? Critique, comments and suggestions solicited. Regards, Bob S.
Re: PAW: GFM "S" Curve
Wow! What a location. Roll film!! Paul On Jun 12, 2005, at 7:13 PM, Kenneth Waller wrote: Check out - http://mypeoplepc.com/members/kwaller/offwallphoto/id2.html Taken during the Nature Photography Weekend sometime between rain drops. The best example of its kind I've ever personally seen outside of a race track. Comments of all kinds solicited. Thanks in advance. Kenneth Waller
Re: 1/16" metal balls
Joaquim Carvalho wrote: Anyone knows of a source for 1/16 inch metal balls? (an A 50mm lens I bought on Ebay is missing 2) I might have a couple. I'll report back tonight or tomorrow, early. If so, all I need is an address! keith whaley P.S. are they exactly .0625" diameter? I'll go out and measure mine now...
1/16" metal balls
Anyone knows of a source for 1/16 inch metal balls? (an A 50mm lens I bought on Ebay is missing 2)
Re: Getting That Old Fashioned Glow - Coming Along
One thing I am curious about Rodinal and its copies... Ït's the shelf life. I have read that Rodinal in cold storage can keep for a long long time (they found some on the frozen lost expedition into Antartcica, after 100 years it still worked...). And that has been my experience as well, that it kept for long. But sometimes there form hard rocks or something inside... what is it? Just now, I developed few test rolls with one Rodinal copy that was about 15 years outdated. And it came out completely clear, undeveloped (not even edge markings). Needless to say I wasn't excepting much, and I didn't even check the basicity/acidity of the Rodinal. And it was full of the "rocks". Is there anything to do with them? I have several _litres_ of that old one, and it would be a shame to just throw it away. I then tried to put a piece of film in the old one, but diluted very little, just poured some of it into a measuring cylinder with 1:1 water or so, and put film into it in full "daylight". Sure, it blackened soon enough. So it still has some strength. But I guess not so much... Good light! fra
Re: First *ist Ds shots
>The quality is simply better. Interesting comment. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: First *ist Ds shots > Congrats, Bob. > You realy should try out shooting RAW. > I do it all the time now. The quality is simply better. > I am a D-user, so the time it takes to write the images on to the card is a > PITA. I guess the DS works faster. > The PEF (RAW) files can be handled by various kinds of software. My rather > cheap image database software; ACDC can open them and save them as JPEGs or > what ever. However, to make the best of RAW files, you might wnat to get a > proper RAW converter that does batch conversion - like Phase One (LE), which > is not too expensive and very good (the best I believ - next to Phase One > SE, of course. > > Jens Bladt > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt > > > -Oprindelig meddelelse- > Fra: Bob Sullivan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sendt: 12. juni 2005 17:28 > Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Emne: First *ist Ds shots > > > I went to the Arboretum at 7 AM this morning. > Put the A400/5.6 on the camera. > Cranked the ASA up to 800 as it was a bit overcast. > Was quickly rewarded with this...(warning, big for dial-up readers) > > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Deer41.jpg > > This is out of the camera and simply resized to 25% in PSP. > > Also captured this trio... > > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding1.jpg > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding2.jpg > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding3.jpg > > All three are as they came out of the camera. > The first two are cropped and resized to 40% in PSP. > The last is just cropped without resizing, ie. the pixels as they came. > The 1st shot is the best, but I included the 3rd one just to show the > full size image. > > I'm still a bit puzzled about sharpening these images as my habit is > to sharpen the web image a bit to better match the slide image...but > no slide image here! > > I haven't shot anything in RAW yet. Don't I need something like > Photoshop or Photoshop Elements to handle the 12 bit color? > > Critique, comments and suggestions solicited. > > Regards, Bob S. > >
PAW: GFM "S" Curve
Check out - http://mypeoplepc.com/members/kwaller/offwallphoto/id2.html Taken during the Nature Photography Weekend sometime between rain drops. The best example of its kind I've ever personally seen outside of a race track. Comments of all kinds solicited. Thanks in advance. Kenneth Waller
Re: MX Screen in Z1 (and vice versa?)
Sunday, June 12, 2005, 8:41:02 PM, Thibouille wrote: T> Strange as things did fit quite nicely here. I may be mistaken about the MX screen. I remember I had problems fitting one of the older screens into a newer camera, SFXn. The older screen might have been MX, or it might have been LX. I guess probably LX... I even might have the posts with exact dimensions archived. But it's been a while, the whole Pentax Digital Mailing List revolution made the list not so much interested in fine trivia of film bodies... T> Agree about MZ-M but I'd have to pay for it. T> MX screen was for free :D LOL :-) Good. Frantisek
Re: Getting That Old Fashioned Glow - Coming Along
MC> I have not had as much luck with Rodinal at 1:100 as with HC110. I've heard MC> that you need a minimum of 10 CC's of Rodinal per roll of film, no matter MC> what the dilution level is. With my experiments with Rodinal at 1:100 I used MC> only 6 CC, so I may have shorted the mix too much. That could have been the problem. I don't remember the exact number of "raw" Rodinal per one film, but it should be listed in Agfa's literature IIRC. And even if I remembered, I don't know what CC means - ml for me ;-)) Good light! fra
Re: First *ist Ds shots
http://www.sphoto.com/techinfo/rawconverters/rawconverters.htm Shel > [Original Message] > From: Bob Sullivan > Thanks, I am going to try RAW, but I have a vague memory of some > discussion threads here that were critical of the Pentax RAW > conversion.
RE: Enabled - F 24-50mm
I'm quite pleased with the sharpness of this inexpensive lens - even at moderat aperture values: http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p16215746.html http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p16215765.html Regards Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 10. juni 2005 14:30 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Enabled - F 24-50mm Today my Pentax-F 4/24-50mm arrived all the way from California. It's in mint condition and truely nice and it seems to perform very well. It's very good for the reasonable price tag of 201,50 USD + shiopping and taxes. I'm really looking forward to using this lens as my walk around lens. It's very small and and not heavy, compared to my Tokina 2.6-2.8/28-70mm. I really like the performance and portability of Pentax-F lenses! They look toyish, but are actually well built - in fact better than the early consumer FA-zooms, I believe. When or if I vever get rich, I might swop it for a 20-35mm. Regards Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
Re: eBay funnies
I am pretty sure I was buying from this seller. That was bad luck.. instead of mint SMC 70-210 I got non-SMC 70-200 full of fungus and elements separation. I got my money back after 5 weeks, but that was waste of time and energy.. Regards Peter Belak On 6/11/05, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Quoted directly from an e-bay auction... > > PENTAX SMC AF ZOOM 35-70MM F2.8 AUTO FOCUS LENS.WITH FRONT AND REAR > CAPS,FUNGUS IN LENS AND NOT WORKING WHEN TESTED, WITH CASE. DONT MISS > THIS ONE! > > At least it's truth in advertising... > > -- > A man's only as old as the woman he feels. > --Groucho Marx > >
Re: PAW PESO - My Old Pipe
Interspersed Shel > [Original Message] > From: Bob Sullivan > I can be more precise. The entire bottom of the pipe disappears in > the shadow it creates. As you've described it is pretty much as I want it. > The smoking end with it's smaller diameter is > entirely visible. Indeed it is (So far so good) 8-)) > The right edge of the bowl above and below the > elbow has no definition as it is in the black shadow. Detail is there on all my screens and in all editing software, although some of the details and definition is quite subtle. > I mention that this is how my laptop renders it because the laptop has > no brightness adjustment. What you see is what you get, subject to > some adjustment of screen angle. That tells me that you're using an LCD screen, not always the best choice for image work. > I usually don't have any problems > with it and think that if you desired to evoke a dark, smoking den > mood that you could still do so with a bit more definition in the > pipe. Well, I don't know what to say. The image looks good here and it looks the way I want it to look. I will recalibrate my monitor at some point in the not too distant future, and tomorrow I'll have a print made of the image and see how close it comes to what's on my screen. In the past the lab has produced results that were VERY close to the image on the screen. If there's a problem here, I'll find out about it soon enough. Thanks for taking the time to describe what you're seeing. I appreciate that very much. And now it's time for a bowl of ice cream and a cookie. Working on that image has given me the "munchies." > > > >http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/oldpipe.html
SV: First *ist Ds shots
Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Bob Sullivan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 12. juni 2005 23:25 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: First *ist Ds shots Jens, Thanks, I am going to try RAW, but I have a vague memory of some discussion threads here that were critical of the Pentax RAW conversion. Wasn't John Francis even working on his own software? I remember comments that the *ist D sensor was the same as Canon or Nikon, but the results were not as appealing. I thought Dario was the first to mention this. In any case, I am looking for how to get around this with a RAW converter from somebody else. That or maybe one of you with more experience will tell me Pentax has it all fixed. Regards, Bob S. On 6/12/05, Jens Bladt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Congrats, Bob. > You realy should try out shooting RAW. > I do it all the time now. The quality is simply better. > I am a D-user, so the time it takes to write the images on to the card is a > PITA. I guess the DS works faster. > The PEF (RAW) files can be handled by various kinds of software. My rather > cheap image database software; ACDC can open them and save them as JPEGs or > what ever. However, to make the best of RAW files, you might wnat to get a > proper RAW converter that does batch conversion - like Phase One (LE), which > is not too expensive and very good (the best I believ - next to Phase One > SE, of course. > > Jens Bladt > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt > > > -Oprindelig meddelelse- > Fra: Bob Sullivan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sendt: 12. juni 2005 17:28 > Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Emne: First *ist Ds shots > > > I went to the Arboretum at 7 AM this morning. > Put the A400/5.6 on the camera. > Cranked the ASA up to 800 as it was a bit overcast. > Was quickly rewarded with this...(warning, big for dial-up readers) > > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Deer41.jpg > > This is out of the camera and simply resized to 25% in PSP. > > Also captured this trio... > > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding1.jpg > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding2.jpg > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding3.jpg > > All three are as they came out of the camera. > The first two are cropped and resized to 40% in PSP. > The last is just cropped without resizing, ie. the pixels as they came. > The 1st shot is the best, but I included the 3rd one just to show the > full size image. > > I'm still a bit puzzled about sharpening these images as my habit is > to sharpen the web image a bit to better match the slide image...but > no slide image here! > > I haven't shot anything in RAW yet. Don't I need something like > Photoshop or Photoshop Elements to handle the 12 bit color? > > Critique, comments and suggestions solicited. > > Regards, Bob S. > > >
RE: First *ist Ds shots
I believe the critical thread about the raw files was about the Pentax SOFTWARE, that comes with the camera. The PEF files are fine. Take a look at these: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/443442/ all shot in PEF foramt, converted it Capture One LE and edited in Photoshop CS. PS: I have made it a habit to underexpose (-0.3) all the time - to prevent burned out high lights - the curse of digital photography IMO :-) If you shoot RAW it's possible to change exposure and WB, without quality loss, later. Regards Jens Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Bob Sullivan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 12. juni 2005 23:25 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: First *ist Ds shots Jens, Thanks, I am going to try RAW, but I have a vague memory of some discussion threads here that were critical of the Pentax RAW conversion. Wasn't John Francis even working on his own software? I remember comments that the *ist D sensor was the same as Canon or Nikon, but the results were not as appealing. I thought Dario was the first to mention this. In any case, I am looking for how to get around this with a RAW converter from somebody else. That or maybe one of you with more experience will tell me Pentax has it all fixed. Regards, Bob S. On 6/12/05, Jens Bladt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Congrats, Bob. > You realy should try out shooting RAW. > I do it all the time now. The quality is simply better. > I am a D-user, so the time it takes to write the images on to the card is a > PITA. I guess the DS works faster. > The PEF (RAW) files can be handled by various kinds of software. My rather > cheap image database software; ACDC can open them and save them as JPEGs or > what ever. However, to make the best of RAW files, you might wnat to get a > proper RAW converter that does batch conversion - like Phase One (LE), which > is not too expensive and very good (the best I believ - next to Phase One > SE, of course. > > Jens Bladt > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt > > > -Oprindelig meddelelse- > Fra: Bob Sullivan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sendt: 12. juni 2005 17:28 > Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Emne: First *ist Ds shots > > > I went to the Arboretum at 7 AM this morning. > Put the A400/5.6 on the camera. > Cranked the ASA up to 800 as it was a bit overcast. > Was quickly rewarded with this...(warning, big for dial-up readers) > > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Deer41.jpg > > This is out of the camera and simply resized to 25% in PSP. > > Also captured this trio... > > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding1.jpg > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding2.jpg > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding3.jpg > > All three are as they came out of the camera. > The first two are cropped and resized to 40% in PSP. > The last is just cropped without resizing, ie. the pixels as they came. > The 1st shot is the best, but I included the 3rd one just to show the > full size image. > > I'm still a bit puzzled about sharpening these images as my habit is > to sharpen the web image a bit to better match the slide image...but > no slide image here! > > I haven't shot anything in RAW yet. Don't I need something like > Photoshop or Photoshop Elements to handle the 12 bit color? > > Critique, comments and suggestions solicited. > > Regards, Bob S. > > >
Re: First *ist Ds shots
Hi Bob ... I recently uploaded details on a comparison of four RAW converters and the consensus (here at least), iirc, was that the Adobe RAW Converter was the best option. However, it's only available in PS CS2 (which seems to something of a problem laden release according to the Photoshop User-to-User forum discussions) or Photoshop Elements 3.0 and later. You can get some good deals on Elements if you look around, and a free 30-day trial is available for download from Adobe. If I were sitting where you are, I'd grab Elements and take it for a spin. Shel > [Original Message] > From: Bob Sullivan > Thanks, I am going to try RAW, but I have a vague memory of some > discussion threads here that were critical of the Pentax RAW > conversion. Wasn't John Francis even working on his own software? I > remember comments that the *ist D sensor was the same as Canon or > Nikon, but the results were not as appealing. I thought Dario was the > first to mention this. In any case, I am looking for how to get > around this with a RAW converter from somebody else. That or maybe > one of you with more experience will tell me Pentax has it all fixed.
Re: First *ist Ds shots
The Pentax RAW converter is still not a good way to go. The PhotoShop CS converter is very good, and reportedly the PS CS 2 converter is even better. Of course PhotoShop is a pricey solution. But PhotoShop Elements includes most of the converter functions and is relatively inexpensive. Paul On Jun 12, 2005, at 5:24 PM, Bob Sullivan wrote: Jens, Thanks, I am going to try RAW, but I have a vague memory of some discussion threads here that were critical of the Pentax RAW conversion. Wasn't John Francis even working on his own software? I remember comments that the *ist D sensor was the same as Canon or Nikon, but the results were not as appealing. I thought Dario was the first to mention this. In any case, I am looking for how to get around this with a RAW converter from somebody else. That or maybe one of you with more experience will tell me Pentax has it all fixed. Regards, Bob S. On 6/12/05, Jens Bladt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Congrats, Bob. You realy should try out shooting RAW. I do it all the time now. The quality is simply better. I am a D-user, so the time it takes to write the images on to the card is a PITA. I guess the DS works faster. The PEF (RAW) files can be handled by various kinds of software. My rather cheap image database software; ACDC can open them and save them as JPEGs or what ever. However, to make the best of RAW files, you might wnat to get a proper RAW converter that does batch conversion - like Phase One (LE), which is not too expensive and very good (the best I believ - next to Phase One SE, of course. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Bob Sullivan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 12. juni 2005 17:28 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: First *ist Ds shots I went to the Arboretum at 7 AM this morning. Put the A400/5.6 on the camera. Cranked the ASA up to 800 as it was a bit overcast. Was quickly rewarded with this...(warning, big for dial-up readers) http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Deer41.jpg This is out of the camera and simply resized to 25% in PSP. Also captured this trio... http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding1.jpg http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding2.jpg http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding3.jpg All three are as they came out of the camera. The first two are cropped and resized to 40% in PSP. The last is just cropped without resizing, ie. the pixels as they came. The 1st shot is the best, but I included the 3rd one just to show the full size image. I'm still a bit puzzled about sharpening these images as my habit is to sharpen the web image a bit to better match the slide image...but no slide image here! I haven't shot anything in RAW yet. Don't I need something like Photoshop or Photoshop Elements to handle the 12 bit color? Critique, comments and suggestions solicited. Regards, Bob S.
Re: Getting That Old Fashioned Glow - Coming Along
Hi Shel - I've mostly worked with high dilutions of HC110. I had the process worked out very well with Classic Pan 200, and in that case I rated the film a full stop slower than the nominal ISO of 200 and used a moderately dilute mixture of HC110 and very low agitation. However, I'm not sure if that really is an ISO 200 film, it looked to me to be more like ISO 160 or 125. Virtually all of my B&W shooting is in the 120 format, and I use a hand held spot meter and the 6x7 camera. I think 1/2 stop precision is about as good as you can get with the camera - the shutter speed settings are in full stops, most of the lenses let you set to the half stop (in theory the aperture can be set in 1/4 stops by setting between clicks - I really don't know how accurate that is though.) So - I come up with what the meter suggests as the appropriate exposure, if that falls between the exposure settings of the camera (usually does) I go to the nearest setting that overexposes over the meter reading. Then I bracket up and down a full stop if exposure is critical. Between the uncertainties of metering, the imprecision of camera, and the added vagaries of filters and filter-factors vis-a-vis different film's spectral sensitivities - I don't think a 1/2 to 1/3rd stop adjustment in exposure is something that can be done reliably with this setup in natural light. It would be a different scenario working in a studio with controlled lighting. I always set the exposure meter to what I believe the true ISO of the film is - and for APX 100 I take that to be 100. Then I make a deliberate decision to expose either at that setting or slightly over. The theory behind the high dilution developer / low agitation is that the developer is locally exhausted in the areas of high density, so development stops. The less dense areas of the neg exhaust the developer more slowly, so the development continues, and this bring out the shadow detail while not blowing out the highlights. So, it does make sense that some degree of overexposure would compliment the process. I have not had as much luck with Rodinal at 1:100 as with HC110. I've heard that you need a minimum of 10 CC's of Rodinal per roll of film, no matter what the dilution level is. With my experiments with Rodinal at 1:100 I used only 6 CC, so I may have shorted the mix too much. HC110 is very high energy, and the minimum per 36 exposure 35mm film, or 120 roll (surface area is about the same) is something like 3 cc. I've always used more than that, and being over that critical absolute volume threshold may be why it has worked better for me. HTH - MCC - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Photography Kalamazoo, MI www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Original Message - From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Saturday, June 11, 2005 10:29 AM Subject: Re: Getting That Old Fashioned Glow - Coming Along Hi Mark ... I'm not sure if I have another copy of "The Negative" here. I sold a copy to Boris last year. Anyway, the area is filled with book stores, so it'll be easy enough to check his comments. When you use high dilutions of Rodinal, or the water bath system with APX 100, do you compensate at all with your exposure? Generally I've given anywhere between 2/3 and a stop of additional exposure when using Rodinal 1:100, which is what Agfa suggested, but that was with APX 25. As for R09, I figure I'll wait a little with that, and use some of the regular, contemporary Rodinal first, as it's already in stock at Casa Belinkoff, and that way I'd have a point of comparison. Shel [Original Message] From: Mark Cassino You might want to check out pages 226 and 229 in Adam's _The Negative_. He discusses using very dilute HC110 (1:119) with very minimal agitation (15 seconds every 3 minutes.) I did a lot of my development with Classic Pan using a similar approach and liked the results. Earlier today I tried the "water-bath" process that Adams describes, using APX 100. He cautions that it is not as effective with thin emulsion films, and I can't say that the result I got was much different than just a high dilution / low agitation approach to developing, but the negs came out with excellent shadow detail in a very high contrast scene - so it did seem to work. I've found HC110, diluted 1:100, works great with APX - 14 minutes @ 20C. I stumbled into that somewhere on the internet - it's the only time I've seen HC 110 used at 1:100, but it works well with gentle, one per minute agitation. I'd be interested to hear your impressions of R09 if you give it a try. Good luck! - MCC - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Photography Kalamazoo, MI www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Original Message - From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Friday, June 10, 2005 12:31 PM Subject: Re: Getting That Old Fas
Re: First *ist Ds shots
Jens, Thanks, I am going to try RAW, but I have a vague memory of some discussion threads here that were critical of the Pentax RAW conversion. Wasn't John Francis even working on his own software? I remember comments that the *ist D sensor was the same as Canon or Nikon, but the results were not as appealing. I thought Dario was the first to mention this. In any case, I am looking for how to get around this with a RAW converter from somebody else. That or maybe one of you with more experience will tell me Pentax has it all fixed. Regards, Bob S. On 6/12/05, Jens Bladt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Congrats, Bob. > You realy should try out shooting RAW. > I do it all the time now. The quality is simply better. > I am a D-user, so the time it takes to write the images on to the card is a > PITA. I guess the DS works faster. > The PEF (RAW) files can be handled by various kinds of software. My rather > cheap image database software; ACDC can open them and save them as JPEGs or > what ever. However, to make the best of RAW files, you might wnat to get a > proper RAW converter that does batch conversion - like Phase One (LE), which > is not too expensive and very good (the best I believ - next to Phase One > SE, of course. > > Jens Bladt > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt > > > -Oprindelig meddelelse- > Fra: Bob Sullivan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sendt: 12. juni 2005 17:28 > Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Emne: First *ist Ds shots > > > I went to the Arboretum at 7 AM this morning. > Put the A400/5.6 on the camera. > Cranked the ASA up to 800 as it was a bit overcast. > Was quickly rewarded with this...(warning, big for dial-up readers) > > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Deer41.jpg > > This is out of the camera and simply resized to 25% in PSP. > > Also captured this trio... > > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding1.jpg > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding2.jpg > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding3.jpg > > All three are as they came out of the camera. > The first two are cropped and resized to 40% in PSP. > The last is just cropped without resizing, ie. the pixels as they came. > The 1st shot is the best, but I included the 3rd one just to show the > full size image. > > I'm still a bit puzzled about sharpening these images as my habit is > to sharpen the web image a bit to better match the slide image...but > no slide image here! > > I haven't shot anything in RAW yet. Don't I need something like > Photoshop or Photoshop Elements to handle the 12 bit color? > > Critique, comments and suggestions solicited. > > Regards, Bob S. > > >
Re: PAW PESO - My Old Pipe
Shel, I can be more precise. The entire bottom of the pipe disappears in the shadow it creates. The smoking end with it's smaller diameter is entirely visible. The right edge of the bowl above and below the elbow has no definition as it is in the black shadow. I mention that this is how my laptop renders it because the laptop has no brightness adjustment. What you see is what you get, subject to some adjustment of screen angle. I usually don't have any problems with it and think that if you desired to evoke a dark, smoking den mood that you could still do so with a bit more definition in the pipe. Regards, Bob S. On 6/12/05, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It's supposed to be dark, detail in some of the shadows should be > non-existent, highlights should be subtle. Of course, not seeing what you > see, I have no way of knowing if you're seeing the pic as it's meant to be > seen. I've looked at it on two monitors here, and through four different > viewers, and all look dark, rich, and full of detail where detail was > desired.I effin' HATE the web for displaying pics!!! > > Shel > > > > [Original Message] > > From: P. J. Alling > > > It looks a bit dark on my monitor. Very rich textures but hard to see > > the detail. > > > > Shel Belinkoff wrote: > > > > >http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/oldpipe.html > > >
OT: Sky Captain
It's my new diversion (Sunday afternoon vegetable state) movie. Used to be Galaxy Quest. (Now I just love Polly's blonde hair & red lipstick. But I digress...) Her camera in the movie, looks like an Argus model. But it the movie is set in 1938 and the camera looks like a post WWII model. Can anyone here ascertain that? Collin
Re: Professional Courtesy
Boris Liberman wrote: There is a word in Hebrew that sounds exactly this - "interesant" - I hope its meaning is self-evident. Our age is that of interesants, nothing more, nothing less... In English, the first word that comes to my mind to describe your coworker is "jackass" -- however, there are many other words also available that I might also think of, given some more time. You do have my sympathy. ERNR
RE: First *ist Ds shots
Congrats, Bob. You realy should try out shooting RAW. I do it all the time now. The quality is simply better. I am a D-user, so the time it takes to write the images on to the card is a PITA. I guess the DS works faster. The PEF (RAW) files can be handled by various kinds of software. My rather cheap image database software; ACDC can open them and save them as JPEGs or what ever. However, to make the best of RAW files, you might wnat to get a proper RAW converter that does batch conversion - like Phase One (LE), which is not too expensive and very good (the best I believ - next to Phase One SE, of course. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Bob Sullivan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 12. juni 2005 17:28 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: First *ist Ds shots I went to the Arboretum at 7 AM this morning. Put the A400/5.6 on the camera. Cranked the ASA up to 800 as it was a bit overcast. Was quickly rewarded with this...(warning, big for dial-up readers) http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Deer41.jpg This is out of the camera and simply resized to 25% in PSP. Also captured this trio... http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding1.jpg http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding2.jpg http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding3.jpg All three are as they came out of the camera. The first two are cropped and resized to 40% in PSP. The last is just cropped without resizing, ie. the pixels as they came. The 1st shot is the best, but I included the 3rd one just to show the full size image. I'm still a bit puzzled about sharpening these images as my habit is to sharpen the web image a bit to better match the slide image...but no slide image here! I haven't shot anything in RAW yet. Don't I need something like Photoshop or Photoshop Elements to handle the 12 bit color? Critique, comments and suggestions solicited. Regards, Bob S.
RE: PAW PESO - My Old Pipe
Just what you'd want for a Three-Pipe Problem. Three of those, no more problem. -- Cheers, Bob > -Original Message- > From: Jack Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 12 June 2005 20:20 > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Subject: Re: PAW PESO - My Old Pipe > > Shel, > Evokes a somber, rather 'dark' mood. > To enjoy rich wood grains and allow the play of object > shadows to be a part of a reaction, it needs more definition. > The peace of a quiet darkened study heavy with the aroma of > exotic tobaccos, is easily conveyed.
Re: PAW PESO - My Old Pipe
It's supposed to be dark, detail in some of the shadows should be non-existent, highlights should be subtle. Of course, not seeing what you see, I have no way of knowing if you're seeing the pic as it's meant to be seen. I've looked at it on two monitors here, and through four different viewers, and all look dark, rich, and full of detail where detail was desired.I effin' HATE the web for displaying pics!!! Shel > [Original Message] > From: P. J. Alling > It looks a bit dark on my monitor. Very rich textures but hard to see > the detail. > > Shel Belinkoff wrote: > > >http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/oldpipe.html
Re: *ist D discontinued ?
I'd accept a slight fall-off in quality - say equivalent to the quality of 800 ISO, which is pretty good. But I take the point that if you lower the native speed you will also lower the quality acvhievable at higher speeds, and that is not a trade-off the majority would wish to make. It would be nice if they made a chip that could have any sensitivity you wanted (at best quality) just by regulating the working voltage. John On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 19:04:00 +0100, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Good point. I have no problem focusing manually with a 4XND, and my DA 16-45 autofocuses nicely with that filter as well. 200 is a good number for native speed. It's about where most wold prefer to optimize quality. On Jun 12, 2005, at 11:45 AM, Bruce Dayton wrote: The real trick here is that there is a single native speed of the CCD. If you lower it or raise it, you introduce noise/quality problems. Minolta offers a 100 ISO setting for their D7D which uses the same basic chip as the Pentax and Nikon. However, image quality is lower at ISO 100 than 200, which is the native speed. Unlike film, which gets better quality the slower you go, digital doesn't get any better once you go below the native speed. So I guess a follow on question would be - would you accept lower quality for slower speed or prefer ND's and better quality? I suppose it could always be an option. Perhaps the Minolta choice is a good one. -- Best regards, Bruce Sunday, June 12, 2005, 8:29:14 AM, you wrote: SB> I'd agree with John here in terms of using a filter. Adding and removing SB> filters throughout a day of shooting can be a bit of a PITA, and digi is SB> supposed to make things easier for the photog. It would be great to have a SB> 50 ISO setting - even 100 would be an improvement. As I've said about film, SB> lower speeds means wider apertures and more creative opportunities. SB> Shel [Original Message] From: John Forbes As William said, why put a filter on a lens if you don't have to? - Original Message - From: "Paul Stenquist" Subject: Re: *ist D discontinued ? Why would you want ISO 50 sensitivity? At 200, noise is virtually unnoticable, and ND filters can be used when slower shutter speeds are required. I can understand it. I like limited DOF, but tossing an ND filter on SB> can really bugger up AF, and these things don't have the best viewfinders for manual focus. It's not high on my list of wants, but it would be nice to have. William Robb -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.9 - Release Date: 11/06/2005
Re: PAW PESO - My Old Pipe
Shel, Evokes a somber, rather 'dark' mood. To enjoy rich wood grains and allow the play of object shadows to be a part of a reaction, it needs more definition. The peace of a quiet darkened study heavy with the aroma of exotic tobaccos, is easily conveyed. Jack --- Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/oldpipe.html > > A little Quik-Snap made with the Sony DSC-S85 this > morning. > > > > > Shel > > > __ Discover Yahoo! Get on-the-go sports scores, stock quotes, news and more. Check it out! http://discover.yahoo.com/mobile.html
Re: PAW PESO - My Old Pipe
It's supposed to be dark, but not seeing your laptop image, I can't comment on whether you're seeing it as it's meant to be seen or otherwise. It is, indeed, a ceremonial pipe which came originally from San Francisco and which was used frequently in many rituals over the years. Shel > [Original Message] > From: Bob Sullivan > Nice composition, but very dark on my laptop. > I note the pipe has a very unusual shape, and no traditional stem. > Does this mean it is a ceremonial pipe of some sort native to Berkley? > > On 6/12/05, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/oldpipe.html > > > > A little Quik-Snap made with the Sony DSC-S85 this morning.
Re: PAW PESO - My Old Pipe
Or something like that... Bob Sullivan wrote: Shel, Nice composition, but very dark on my laptop. I note the pipe has a very unusual shape, and no traditional stem. Does this mean it is a ceremonial pipe of some sort native to Berkley? Regards, Bob S. On 6/12/05, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/oldpipe.html A little Quik-Snap made with the Sony DSC-S85 this morning. Shel -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Re: MX Screen in Z1 (and vice versa?)
Strange as things did fit quite nicely here. Agree about MZ-M but I'd have to pay for it. MX screen was for free :D LOL That said, MZ-M itself from Ebay would probably cost the same as a new screen.. Excellent idea, thanks Frantisek !! 2005/6/12, Frantisek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > You know, you can buy MZ-M screen as repair part. It fits other > cameras perfectly, unlike the LX (and maybe even MX?) screens. Maybe > it was just LX screens, but these didn't fit into any other cameras > (except into MX, but tightly). > > Good light! >fra > > -- -- Thibouille -- *ist-D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX and KR-10x ...
Re: PAW PESO - My Old Pipe
It looks a bit dark on my monitor. Very rich textures but hard to see the detail. Shel Belinkoff wrote: http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/oldpipe.html A little Quik-Snap made with the Sony DSC-S85 this morning. Shel -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Re: PAW PESO - My Old Pipe
Shel, Nice composition, but very dark on my laptop. I note the pipe has a very unusual shape, and no traditional stem. Does this mean it is a ceremonial pipe of some sort native to Berkley? Regards, Bob S. On 6/12/05, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/oldpipe.html > > A little Quik-Snap made with the Sony DSC-S85 this morning. > > > > > Shel > > >
Re: Weird vignetting effect on an image
Probably your hand or the camera strap. On Jun 12, 2005, at 1:41 PM, Amita Guha wrote: I was messing around shooting my cousin at close range using the Tamron 90mm macro, and I got this weird black blur in the lower right edge of the image: http://www.sunny16.net/jennie-test.htm I posted the image that came after that that lacks this blur. The blur is only visible in that top photo, which was in the middle of a series. Does anyone have any idea what could cause that? Cousin and I were sitting in the same position the whole time, I never removed the lens, etc. Thanks in advance, Amita
Re: Weird vignetting effect on an image
How about a finger in front of the lens?Bob S. On 6/12/05, Amita Guha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I was messing around shooting my cousin at close range using the Tamron 90mm > macro, and I got this weird black blur in the lower right edge of the image: > > http://www.sunny16.net/jennie-test.htm > > I posted the image that came after that that lacks this blur. The blur is > only visible in that top photo, which was in the middle of a series. Does > anyone have any idea what could cause that? Cousin and I were sitting in the > same position the whole time, I never removed the lens, etc. > > Thanks in advance, > Amita > > >
Re: *ist D discontinued ?
Good point. I have no problem focusing manually with a 4XND, and my DA 16-45 autofocuses nicely with that filter as well. 200 is a good number for native speed. It's about where most wold prefer to optimize quality. On Jun 12, 2005, at 11:45 AM, Bruce Dayton wrote: The real trick here is that there is a single native speed of the CCD. If you lower it or raise it, you introduce noise/quality problems. Minolta offers a 100 ISO setting for their D7D which uses the same basic chip as the Pentax and Nikon. However, image quality is lower at ISO 100 than 200, which is the native speed. Unlike film, which gets better quality the slower you go, digital doesn't get any better once you go below the native speed. So I guess a follow on question would be - would you accept lower quality for slower speed or prefer ND's and better quality? I suppose it could always be an option. Perhaps the Minolta choice is a good one. -- Best regards, Bruce Sunday, June 12, 2005, 8:29:14 AM, you wrote: SB> I'd agree with John here in terms of using a filter. Adding and removing SB> filters throughout a day of shooting can be a bit of a PITA, and digi is SB> supposed to make things easier for the photog. It would be great to have a SB> 50 ISO setting - even 100 would be an improvement. As I've said about film, SB> lower speeds means wider apertures and more creative opportunities. SB> Shel [Original Message] From: John Forbes As William said, why put a filter on a lens if you don't have to? - Original Message - From: "Paul Stenquist" Subject: Re: *ist D discontinued ? Why would you want ISO 50 sensitivity? At 200, noise is virtually unnoticable, and ND filters can be used when slower shutter speeds are required. I can understand it. I like limited DOF, but tossing an ND filter on SB> can really bugger up AF, and these things don't have the best viewfinders for manual focus. It's not high on my list of wants, but it would be nice to have. William Robb
Re: First *ist Ds shots
Thanks Bob W., I can't claim any steadyness records like Paul with the 400mm. I've got to practice more with this fast feedback from a digital. The Morton Arboretum where the photos were taken is a few miles away. Mr. Morton had his home there and was one of the industrial magnets of the past century. Morton Salt is still the table salt in our grocery stores, and Morton-Thiocaull does our rocket boosters. Regards, Bob S. On 6/12/05, Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Those are very enjoyable photos, well taken. I know how difficult it is to > use a 400 lens with 1.4X and 2X converters; I guess the difficulties with > the small sensor must be similar. > > You obviously live in a very nice place, too. > > -- > Cheers, > Bob > > > -Original Message- > > From: Bob Sullivan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 12 June 2005 16:28 > > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > > Subject: First *ist Ds shots > > > > I went to the Arboretum at 7 AM this morning. > > Put the A400/5.6 on the camera. > > Cranked the ASA up to 800 as it was a bit overcast. > > Was quickly rewarded with this...(warning, big for dial-up readers) > > > > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Deer41.jpg > > > > This is out of the camera and simply resized to 25% in PSP. > > > > Also captured this trio... > > > > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding1.jpg > > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding2.jpg > > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding3.jpg > > > > All three are as they came out of the camera. > > The first two are cropped and resized to 40% in PSP. > > The last is just cropped without resizing, ie. the pixels as > > they came. > > The 1st shot is the best, but I included the 3rd one just to > > show the full size image. > > > > I'm still a bit puzzled about sharpening these images as my > > habit is to sharpen the web image a bit to better match the > > slide image...but no slide image here! > > > > I haven't shot anything in RAW yet. Don't I need something > > like Photoshop or Photoshop Elements to handle the 12 bit color? > > > > Critique, comments and suggestions solicited. > > > > Regards, Bob S. > > > > > > > > > >
Weird vignetting effect on an image
I was messing around shooting my cousin at close range using the Tamron 90mm macro, and I got this weird black blur in the lower right edge of the image: http://www.sunny16.net/jennie-test.htm I posted the image that came after that that lacks this blur. The blur is only visible in that top photo, which was in the middle of a series. Does anyone have any idea what could cause that? Cousin and I were sitting in the same position the whole time, I never removed the lens, etc. Thanks in advance, Amita
Re: Professional Courtesy
Collin R Brendemuehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Rethinking ... >Even if the young pro thought the request was out of place >there is little place for such rudeness. Mr. Nail meet Mr. Hammer. (Right on the head.) Bravo Collin! -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Professional Courtesy
Rethinking ... Even if the young pro though the request was out of place there is little place for such rudeness. Thinking back, some of the people whom I remember most fondly are those who showed me grace when I spoke or behaved in a very stupid or thoughtless manner. Grace goes a long way to resolve issues. Collin
PAW PESO - My Old Pipe
http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/oldpipe.html A little Quik-Snap made with the Sony DSC-S85 this morning. Shel
Re: Minor *ist D Surgery
No it fits In mine at least ... 2005/6/12, Frantisek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Not possible, IIRC. MX/LX screens are incompatible with AF cameras > (because they are slightly larger), but the slightly smaller screen of > AF cameras fits right in MX/LX. Thus only one-way. > > Good light! >fra > > -- -- Thibouille -- *ist-D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX and KR-10x ...
Re: *ist D discontinued ?
The *ist D is still for sale on the Japan site. Here's the production strategy for many companies: 1.Tool up for new production, product 1. 2.Start limited production. No sales yet. 3.Check quality, production flow etc. 4.Tweak production. 5.Start production & sales: a.Production behind current demand.Many customers wait. b.Production matches current demand. Some customers still wait due to backlog, but for shorter time. c.Production exceeds current demand. No customer wait, remaining back orders filled. d.Production exceeds current demand until inventory meets projected *future* demand (cameras for sale & spare parts). No customer wait. 6.Production of product 1 terminated. Tooling stored against future repair demand (spare parts) Sales continue. Customers still order, no wait. 7.Back to step 1 for product 2... Sales stop for product 1 when the inventory left is needed for warranty/repairs. Can be tooled up again in the happy event that the product is a great hit and the demand far exceeds the original projected demand - usually with some tweaks (update to the original design) added from perhaps lessons learned ala the LX production. This way, a company can have more products than it has assembly facilities and need not attempt to adjust pace of production to changing demand. In other words, because a model goes "out of (current) production" does not mean it's not available or not a current product from the manufacturer. Regards, Bob... - "The art of taxation consists in so plucking the goose as to obtain the largest possible amount of feathers with the smallest possible amount of hissing." - Jean-Baptiste Colbert, minister of finance to French King Louis XIV From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Hmmm ... what would be the reason for Pentax discontinuing or curtailing production of the istD? I think this may have been discussed before, but I wasn't paying attention, not being too interested in the camera at the time. Shel [Original Message] From: Paul Stenquist I think Pentax may have stopped producing the *istD. It's available new from B&H in New York.
Re: Getting That Old Fashioned Glow - Coming Along
SB> When you use high dilutions of Rodinal, or the water bath system with APX SB> 100, do you compensate at all with your exposure? Generally I've given SB> anywhere between 2/3 and a stop of additional exposure when using Rodinal SB> 1:100, which is what Agfa suggested, but that was with APX 25. I have found out it depends a lot on the film. Some just don't like 1+100, and need to be shot at slower speed. Some work almost fine. I don't have my notes here sadly so can't tell more :( Frantisek
Re: Professional Courtesy
I can easily see two side in this case. As others have mentioned, the photographer and hosting club may have entered into an exclusive contract; she may have seen this as taking money out of her purse, and she may indeed be carrying a heavy debt. This would justify a refusal, but on the other hand, there she can still be tactful about it. It sounds as though she was rude in how she turned you down, and that strikes me as unprofessional. I got bitten by the other side of this a while back. I was offered an opportunity to shoot at an agility trial by the head organizer who knew I shot seriously, and though I understood that I wasn't functioning as the photographer-of-record, I was intending to submit shots to "Clean Run" as a way of establishing some credibility with a broader audience. I had in- vested in an fast tele prime to use along with my 80-200/2.8. This same organizer later left me a message that I could shoot only for my own photo album for contract reasons, but not for sale; though she did not specific- ally state this, the prohibition would exclude any photo in the magazine since they pay though not that much. At this point, this organizer is on my permanent s--- list. -- Christopher Oliver, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Inside every good dog is a terrier trying to get out.
Re: MX Screen in Z1 (and vice versa?)
You know, you can buy MZ-M screen as repair part. It fits other cameras perfectly, unlike the LX (and maybe even MX?) screens. Maybe it was just LX screens, but these didn't fit into any other cameras (except into MX, but tightly). Good light! fra
Re: Minor *ist D Surgery
Not possible, IIRC. MX/LX screens are incompatible with AF cameras (because they are slightly larger), but the slightly smaller screen of AF cameras fits right in MX/LX. Thus only one-way. Good light! fra
Re: *ist D discontinued ?
All sensors have one "native" iso speed. You can "push" it to higher EI but you get more noise and less dynamic range. Withing a range of EI though the difference is small. You can't "pull" it though, because the highlights will get blown out. (At least without some magickry like combining many superfast exposures like Kodak DSLR does at ISO 6 - yes iso six). Basically, the Sony sensor has native speed of 200 and the Canon sensor has native speed of 100. Thus the Canon models have iso 100 as the lowest, while the models using sony's chip have iso 200 as the lowest. Yes, there is "EI 50" setting at some Canons, but it is out of the normal range, and it is actually _worse_ than the lowest native 100. It's about the same as shooting at 100, overexposing one stop and cutting back in the "development" of RAW processing. Gaining you nothing. thus, don't look for low isos. It ain't gonna happen soon. There are low iso chips, but they don't have high sensitivity for pushing... The medium format chips who have even iso 25 as their native are pretty noisy at iso 400... Good light! fra
Re: PESO: Cold & Forlorn
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 11:17:55 +0800, David Savage wrote: > I was shooting pretty much straight into the sun (which I cropped > out), so, as Jack Davis suggested It's not over sharpening, but back > light haloing that your seeing. Down sizing for the web is maybe > making it look as though it's over sharpened. Personally, David, I really like the shot. I just assumed that the "halo" was a sort of "hair light" effect from the sun. I feel like it makes the subject stand out from the background, and it helps draw my eye to the subject. All in all, one of the better bird-and-scenery shots I've seen lately. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: *ist D discontinued ?
we accept lower quality for ISO 1600 and 3200. the Canon 1Ds Mk2 is noticeably worse at ISO 50 than 100. Herb... - Original Message - From: "Bruce Dayton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Shel Belinkoff" Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2005 11:45 AM Subject: Re: *ist D discontinued ? The real trick here is that there is a single native speed of the CCD. If you lower it or raise it, you introduce noise/quality problems. Minolta offers a 100 ISO setting for their D7D which uses the same basic chip as the Pentax and Nikon. However, image quality is lower at ISO 100 than 200, which is the native speed. Unlike film, which gets better quality the slower you go, digital doesn't get any better once you go below the native speed. So I guess a follow on question would be - would you accept lower quality for slower speed or prefer ND's and better quality? I suppose it could always be an option. Perhaps the Minolta choice is a good one.
Re: *ist D discontinued ?
How about a ND over the sensor? graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" --- Bruce Dayton wrote: The real trick here is that there is a single native speed of the CCD. If you lower it or raise it, you introduce noise/quality problems. Minolta offers a 100 ISO setting for their D7D which uses the same basic chip as the Pentax and Nikon. However, image quality is lower at ISO 100 than 200, which is the native speed. Unlike film, which gets better quality the slower you go, digital doesn't get any better once you go below the native speed. So I guess a follow on question would be - would you accept lower quality for slower speed or prefer ND's and better quality? I suppose it could always be an option. Perhaps the Minolta choice is a good one. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.9 - Release Date: 6/11/2005
Re: *ist D discontinued ?
I don't think I knew that. I suppose the amount of lower quality would be a determining factor. istD users are always saying how good the quality is at higher ISO ratings, so how bad could things get if the rating was lower? Don't other cameras besides Minolta offer lower ISO speeds? Maybe a trip through DPreview is in order. Shel > [Original Message] > From: Bruce Dayton > The real trick here is that there is a single native speed of the CCD. > If you lower it or raise it, you introduce noise/quality problems. > Minolta offers a 100 ISO setting for their D7D which uses the same > basic chip as the Pentax and Nikon. However, image quality is lower > at ISO 100 than 200, which is the native speed. Unlike film, which > gets better quality the slower you go, digital doesn't get any better > once you go below the native speed. > > So I guess a follow on question would be - would you accept lower > quality for slower speed or prefer ND's and better quality? I suppose > it could always be an option. Perhaps the Minolta choice is a good > one. > > -- > Best regards, > Bruce > > > Sunday, June 12, 2005, 8:29:14 AM, you wrote: > > SB> I'd agree with John here in terms of using a filter. Adding and removing > SB> filters throughout a day of shooting can be a bit of a PITA, and digi is > SB> supposed to make things easier for the photog. It would be great to have a > SB> 50 ISO setting - even 100 would be an improvement. As I've said about film, > SB> lower speeds means wider apertures and more creative opportunities.
Re: *ist D discontinued ?
The real trick here is that there is a single native speed of the CCD. If you lower it or raise it, you introduce noise/quality problems. Minolta offers a 100 ISO setting for their D7D which uses the same basic chip as the Pentax and Nikon. However, image quality is lower at ISO 100 than 200, which is the native speed. Unlike film, which gets better quality the slower you go, digital doesn't get any better once you go below the native speed. So I guess a follow on question would be - would you accept lower quality for slower speed or prefer ND's and better quality? I suppose it could always be an option. Perhaps the Minolta choice is a good one. -- Best regards, Bruce Sunday, June 12, 2005, 8:29:14 AM, you wrote: SB> I'd agree with John here in terms of using a filter. Adding and removing SB> filters throughout a day of shooting can be a bit of a PITA, and digi is SB> supposed to make things easier for the photog. It would be great to have a SB> 50 ISO setting - even 100 would be an improvement. As I've said about film, SB> lower speeds means wider apertures and more creative opportunities. SB> Shel >> [Original Message] >> From: John Forbes >> As William said, why put a filter on a lens if you don't have to? >> > - Original Message - From: "Paul Stenquist" >> > Subject: Re: *ist D discontinued ? >> > >> > >> >> Why would you want ISO 50 sensitivity? At 200, noise is virtually >> >> unnoticable, and ND filters can be used when slower shutter speeds are >> >> required. >> > >> > I can understand it. I like limited DOF, but tossing an ND filter on SB> can >> > really bugger up AF, and these things don't have the best viewfinders >> > for manual focus. >> > It's not high on my list of wants, but it would be nice to have. >> > >> > William Robb
RE: First *ist Ds shots
Those are very enjoyable photos, well taken. I know how difficult it is to use a 400 lens with 1.4X and 2X converters; I guess the difficulties with the small sensor must be similar. You obviously live in a very nice place, too. -- Cheers, Bob > -Original Message- > From: Bob Sullivan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 12 June 2005 16:28 > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Subject: First *ist Ds shots > > I went to the Arboretum at 7 AM this morning. > Put the A400/5.6 on the camera. > Cranked the ASA up to 800 as it was a bit overcast. > Was quickly rewarded with this...(warning, big for dial-up readers) > > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Deer41.jpg > > This is out of the camera and simply resized to 25% in PSP. > > Also captured this trio... > > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding1.jpg > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding2.jpg > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding3.jpg > > All three are as they came out of the camera. > The first two are cropped and resized to 40% in PSP. > The last is just cropped without resizing, ie. the pixels as > they came. > The 1st shot is the best, but I included the 3rd one just to > show the full size image. > > I'm still a bit puzzled about sharpening these images as my > habit is to sharpen the web image a bit to better match the > slide image...but no slide image here! > > I haven't shot anything in RAW yet. Don't I need something > like Photoshop or Photoshop Elements to handle the 12 bit color? > > Critique, comments and suggestions solicited. > > Regards, Bob S. > > > >
Re: *ist D discontinued ?
I'd agree with John here in terms of using a filter. Adding and removing filters throughout a day of shooting can be a bit of a PITA, and digi is supposed to make things easier for the photog. It would be great to have a 50 ISO setting - even 100 would be an improvement. As I've said about film, lower speeds means wider apertures and more creative opportunities. Shel > [Original Message] > From: John Forbes > As William said, why put a filter on a lens if you don't have to? > > - Original Message - From: "Paul Stenquist" > > Subject: Re: *ist D discontinued ? > > > > > >> Why would you want ISO 50 sensitivity? At 200, noise is virtually > >> unnoticable, and ND filters can be used when slower shutter speeds are > >> required. > > > > I can understand it. I like limited DOF, but tossing an ND filter on can > > really bugger up AF, and these things don't have the best viewfinders > > for manual focus. > > It's not high on my list of wants, but it would be nice to have. > > > > William Robb
First *ist Ds shots
I went to the Arboretum at 7 AM this morning. Put the A400/5.6 on the camera. Cranked the ASA up to 800 as it was a bit overcast. Was quickly rewarded with this...(warning, big for dial-up readers) http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Deer41.jpg This is out of the camera and simply resized to 25% in PSP. Also captured this trio... http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding1.jpg http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding2.jpg http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Feeding3.jpg All three are as they came out of the camera. The first two are cropped and resized to 40% in PSP. The last is just cropped without resizing, ie. the pixels as they came. The 1st shot is the best, but I included the 3rd one just to show the full size image. I'm still a bit puzzled about sharpening these images as my habit is to sharpen the web image a bit to better match the slide image...but no slide image here! I haven't shot anything in RAW yet. Don't I need something like Photoshop or Photoshop Elements to handle the 12 bit color? Critique, comments and suggestions solicited. Regards, Bob S.
RE: Professional Courtesy
William, I saw this thread warming up this morning but had to go and do family stuff. I was interested to see how it panned out. What you wrote here capture what I was feeling, that is, if there had been even the remotest professional relationship present, then the asking of such a favour would be perfectly acceptable in the spirit of mutual backscratching. However, for this to work there must be a genuine possibility of reciprocal favours being honoured if ever requested. You've been fortunate if your professional community has been so mutually obliging in the past. But I have to agree with those who point out that the favour you asked of the official doggie portrait photographer would have seemed like asking for money from her purse, because she would rationalise that you were poaching a prospective client from her. She may even have paid a fee to the show organizers for the exclusive rights to provide portraits, and may have felt indignant over your request. And consider that the "little tweeb" may have her life mortgaged to the hilt to get her photo business established. Little things like creditors can inhibit a person's generous spirit. I'm sure you gave the dog-owner some fine shots anyway, whatever the lighting you had to use. regards, Anthony Farr > -Original Message- > From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - Original Message - > From: "Graywolf" > Subject: Re: Professional Courtesy > > > > > > > > So without knowing the exact situation we can not make a valid decision on > > whether she was just being a shit or acting properly. > > A little bit of both. > I've been on both sides of that one. My reaction is to help the other guy > out, especially if it will cost me nothing to do so, and will build up some > good will in the process. > It's the way the community that I grew up in operates, and to a great > extent, still does. > I suppose it comes from being in a small market, where you really need to > have a network of people to get things done sometimes. > > William Robb
Re: *ist D discontinued ?
As William said, why put a filter on a lens if you don't have to? I shoot quite a lot indoors with flash, and usually find I have too much light. I suppose putting ND filters over the flash heads might be another solution, but the best would be 50 ISO on the camera. John On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 01:44:57 +0100, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: - Original Message - From: "Paul Stenquist" Subject: Re: *ist D discontinued ? Why would you want ISO 50 sensitivity? At 200, noise is virtually unnoticable, and ND filters can be used when slower shutter speeds are required. I can understand it. I like limited DOF, but tossing an ND filter on can really bugger up AF, and these things don't have the best viewfinders for manual focus. It's not high on my list of wants, but it would be nice to have. William Robb -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.9 - Release Date: 11/06/2005
Re: PESO -- Stony Creek Congregational Church
Actually I was doing some interior shots, nice exposures, lousy composition, well at least uninteresting composition, and forgot to change to a more appropriate ISO. keithw wrote: P. J. Alling wrote: A couple more shots from my walk in the Village of Stony Creek. I like them I hope someone else might. PESO -- "Stony Creek Congregational Church Roofline" http://www.mindspring.com/~webster26/PESO_--_scchrl01.html Technical Information: Pentax *ist-D iso-1600 @ 1/3000sec. smc Pentax-FA 28-200 f38~5.6AL[IF] @ f9.5 28mm Stony Creek Congregational Church Bell Tower This image was rather heavily corrected for perspective. http://www.mindspring.com/~webster26/PESO_--_scchpc1.html Technical Information: Pentax *ist-D iso-1600 @ 1/3000sec. smc Pentax-FA 28-200 f38~5.6AL[IF] @ f9.5 28mm I like both of them. But...tell me, why did you choose a hi ISO and corresponding hi speed exposure. It's not as tho' the building was going anywhere, or moving around. Was it to compensate for hand-holding he exposure? Just curious... keith whaley -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
