Moving large image files through a LAN
I place my *ist-DS's image files on a network file server at home (yup, I'm one of those guys). From there, my wife and I use our notebooks to view, edit, resize, post, email, and print our images. Our fileserver is connected to the network with cat-5 and a full duplex 100BaseT NIC. But our notebooks from which we do all our work are connected wirelessly with 802.11g wifi cards (56Mbps). We have ourselves a bottleneck, paarticularly when we're batch resizing to post online. I'm wondering if anyone here has used anything faster than 56Mbps wifi cards (standard 802.11g). I'm not sure I'm all that anxious to upgrade my router and two wifi cards, but if I can open up that network bottleneck significantly I'll consider it. Any recommendations? Dave
Re: monitor calibration
Anybody knows a software for that? Of course it wouldn't be anywhere good as a hardware thing but'd be beter than nothing heh? 2005/6/16, Frits Wthrich [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I am considering to buy a monitor calibration tool, like this one: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlistA=detailsQ=sku=324696is=REG Any opinions about this Pantone Colorplus? Alternatives? Thanks in advance, -- Frits Wthrich -- -- Thibouille -- *ist-D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX and KR-10x ...
Re: monitor calibration
- Original Message - From: Thibouille Subject: Re: monitor calibration Anybody knows a software for that? Of course it wouldn't be anywhere good as a hardware thing but'd be beter than nothing heh? Adobe Gamma is actually pretty good. It comes with Photoshop and installs itself on your Control Panel (Windows OS) William Robb
Re: monitor calibration
On 17 Jun 2005 at 0:13, William Robb wrote: Adobe Gamma is actually pretty good. It comes with Photoshop and installs itself on your Control Panel (Windows OS) It's OK but the gamma test swatch is suspect, down-load the Gamagic test patterns below as they are far better references, after I calibrate my screen using the hardware tool they all render perfectly, in fact I use the mid range one as a desk-top background tile so that I can tell when my monitor has fully warmed up. Repost follows: I've found a couple of pages that should provide a basic indication of your monitors state of calibration. The following page should show if the white and black levels are OK: http://www.ltlimagery.com/monitor_calibration.html#normankoren ...and the next page should give you an idea of the linearity and gamma point of your monitor (PCs should be g2.2 and Macs g1.8 by default) http://www.photoscientia.co.uk/Gamma.htm Click on the Gamagic test patterns down towards the end of the page. 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: Hello from Israel
Didn't want to frighten him LOL 2005/6/17, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 16/6/05, Thibouille, discombobulated, unleashed: Be prepared 'cos there's quite an amount of traffic... 50 mails/day isn't unusual. 50?? Hey Thibouille, I told you the Euro was a con - I get over 200 a day ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- -- Thibouille -- *ist-D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX and KR-10x ...
Re: monitor calibration
Thanks a lot ! 2005/6/17, Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 17 Jun 2005 at 0:13, William Robb wrote: Adobe Gamma is actually pretty good. It comes with Photoshop and installs itself on your Control Panel (Windows OS) It's OK but the gamma test swatch is suspect, down-load the Gamagic test patterns below as they are far better references, after I calibrate my screen using the hardware tool they all render perfectly, in fact I use the mid range one as a desk-top background tile so that I can tell when my monitor has fully warmed up. Repost follows: I've found a couple of pages that should provide a basic indication of your monitors state of calibration. The following page should show if the white and black levels are OK: http://www.ltlimagery.com/monitor_calibration.html#normankoren ...and the next page should give you an idea of the linearity and gamma point of your monitor (PCs should be g2.2 and Macs g1.8 by default) http://www.photoscientia.co.uk/Gamma.htm Click on the Gamagic test patterns down towards the end of the page. 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 -- -- Thibouille -- *ist-D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX and KR-10x ...
Re: Moving large image files through a LAN
Some brands do advertise up to 125Mbps but honestly, this is more marketing than anything else. It does provides a small boost but really, nothing to make anyone upgrade. We'll have to wait about 2 years IMO to get something really beter. 2005/6/17, David Oswald [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I place my *ist-DS's image files on a network file server at home (yup, I'm one of those guys). From there, my wife and I use our notebooks to view, edit, resize, post, email, and print our images. Our fileserver is connected to the network with cat-5 and a full duplex 100BaseT NIC. But our notebooks from which we do all our work are connected wirelessly with 802.11g wifi cards (56Mbps). We have ourselves a bottleneck, paarticularly when we're batch resizing to post online. I'm wondering if anyone here has used anything faster than 56Mbps wifi cards (standard 802.11g). I'm not sure I'm all that anxious to upgrade my router and two wifi cards, but if I can open up that network bottleneck significantly I'll consider it. Any recommendations? Dave -- -- Thibouille -- *ist-D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX and KR-10x ...
Update on European Pentax DSLR prices
Just looked at the shop I ordered my D (located in France) and saw following prices: ist-D: 839 euros ist-DS: 729 euros ist-DL: 809 euros So the DL is definitely suffering from the new thing symptom. -- Thibouille -- *ist-D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX and KR-10x ...
Re: Moving large image files through a LAN
Cable is the answer :-) I know wifi is nice, I have similar home setup. But to work with large files I always use wired connection. Or maybe you could use your notebook as thin client and let the server process everything.. Regards Peter Belak On 6/17/05, David Oswald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I place my *ist-DS's image files on a network file server at home (yup, I'm one of those guys). From there, my wife and I use our notebooks to view, edit, resize, post, email, and print our images. Our fileserver is connected to the network with cat-5 and a full duplex 100BaseT NIC. But our notebooks from which we do all our work are connected wirelessly with 802.11g wifi cards (56Mbps). We have ourselves a bottleneck, paarticularly when we're batch resizing to post online. I'm wondering if anyone here has used anything faster than 56Mbps wifi cards (standard 802.11g). I'm not sure I'm all that anxious to upgrade my router and two wifi cards, but if I can open up that network bottleneck significantly I'll consider it. Any recommendations? Dave
RE: Moving large image files through a LAN
Hi, Wlan at 54MBps works to some distance, but to get the 108Mbps you need to have the the both devices (access point and notebook) very close to each other. Usually I never get more than 54Mbps from my 108MB wlan gear. Typical average thruput is still only around 20Mbps. How about getting 1Gbps network cards and use wired connection when transferring a lot of big files (well, wired 100Mbps is pretty fast too)? Antti-Pekka Antti-Pekka Virjonen Estera Oy Turku www.estera.fi www.computec.fi -Original Message- From: Peter Belak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 10:41 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Moving large image files through a LAN Cable is the answer :-) I know wifi is nice, I have similar home setup. But to work with large files I always use wired connection. Or maybe you could use your notebook as thin client and let the server process everything.. Regards Peter Belak On 6/17/05, David Oswald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I place my *ist-DS's image files on a network file server at home (yup, I'm one of those guys). From there, my wife and I use our notebooks to view, edit, resize, post, email, and print our images. Our fileserver is connected to the network with cat-5 and a full duplex 100BaseT NIC. But our notebooks from which we do all our work are connected wirelessly with 802.11g wifi cards (56Mbps). We have ourselves a bottleneck, paarticularly when we're batch resizing to post online. I'm wondering if anyone here has used anything faster than 56Mbps wifi cards (standard 802.11g). I'm not sure I'm all that anxious to upgrade my router and two wifi cards, but if I can open up that network bottleneck significantly I'll consider it. Any recommendations? Dave
Re: CCD cleaning
On 17/6/05, Joaquim Carvalho, discombobulated, unleashed: With all the lens changes I've been doing lately I managed to get dust on the *ist DS CCD, any advice on hot to clean it (or not)? Har! A can(ned air) of worms... This subject will get you varied replies, anything from nanotechnology through to Aunti May's Down Home shoe polish on smoked fish bones, and ne'er the twain shall meet. I'm with the canned air brigade, but I have my own technique that I don't deviate from. Not too close with the nozzle for this: 1. Set camera to sensor cleaning mode. 2. Remove body cap. 3. Fire a couple of squirts of air just off to one side of the camera to check that it's just air being emitted and not anything else! 4. Quickly point back at camera and fire a couple of blasts. 5. Exit sensor cleaning mode (so mirror returns to rest position). 6. Repeat steps 3 and 4. 7. Quick squirt at body cap or back of lens before replacing. 8. Er, that's it. If the can is getting low, I am careful not to tip it from vertical. The worst-case scenario is that non-air material (namely freezing liquid) ejects and spews out onto the sensor. But I do like a thrill to keep the veins clear :-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: PAW PESO - Death and a Dove
Hi! Variation on an earlier upload http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/d_n_d.html Shel, I should say this is too abstract to me... Sorry. Boris
Re: PESO Jupiter the Moon
Hi! A celestial capture from moments ago: http://www.home.aone.net.au/audiobias/temp/IMGP2590.jpg Tech: *ist D, ISO200, 1/15s A300/2.8 + 1.4X-L + 1.7AF TC @ f22 Comments, questions and critiques welcome. Hey Rob. This is quite great. My daughter and I had a little yet lively chat. She seems to like it... Me too. Boris
Re: Microsoft Acrylic in Beta
On Jun 17, 2005, at 10:49 AM, Cotty wrote: That's cuz you don't use the PC anymore Dave ! I figured someone would say that ;) Nowadays it's pretty rarely that I use it - but it does have the SCSI card that my flatbed scanner needs. One of these days I'll get around to ordering one of those Adaptec USB2Xchange things, then I can get rid of that PC. In the couple of years I was using it, the only time it crashed out was when the hard drive bit the dust. Other than that it really was very reliable. Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
Re: PESO Jupiter the Moon
Hi! By the way, is there any connection with Jumping and that little circle on the top left? Boris the kidding one...
Re: Re: home again
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/06/17 Fri AM 03:00:24 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: home again In a message dated 6/16/2005 3:43:57 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yo Godders, Welcome home :-) http://www.cottysnaps.com/snaps/photoessays/essays/oxford.html Cheers, Cotty == Nice shots, Cotty. Hadn't seen them before. I have to get to England sometime -- what neat cobblestones! ;-) Marnie aka Doe And strange people wearing Viking hats and other things. We like to make the Vikings feel at home. And the Romans. Not the French, though. 8-) - Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/
Re: monitor calibration
SuperCal and it is free. Software calibrators are as good as or better than any calibration tool, the problem is not everybody can use them, you have to understand how they work: Software calibrators use you as the light sensor, you have to adjust the brightness of several color areas to match the brightness of another area that has some pixels ON and some other OFF, you must put your eyes out of focus so the light/darkness from adjacent pixels blends, concentrate and do it acuratelly and for several times with the three RGB colors at several brightness levels. This way the software gets to know the precise brightness curve for each light component, as seen by you, and generates a perfect color profile. Writing this made me think that doing it through an out of focus camera viewfinder will be a lot easier :) Thibouille wrote: Anybody knows a software for that? Of course it wouldn't be anywhere good as a hardware thing but'd be beter than nothing heh? 2005/6/16, Frits Wthrich [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I am considering to buy a monitor calibration tool, like this one: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlistA=detailsQ=sku=324696is=REG Any opinions about this Pantone Colorplus? Alternatives? Thanks in advance, -- Frits Wthrich
Re: WTB: Manual for (P)Z1-p
Just an update on this. I asked to buy a manual and was inundated by free offers from fellow-PDMLers (and lurkers!). The seller of the camera bought me one from http://www.pentax.co.uk, so I am sorted. But this list has quite a few nice guys and gals. Many thanks! Kostas
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005, keithw wrote: Oooo! That'll make the wallet thinner, won't it? I think it will be a good opportunity for some of us to put our money where our mouth is. Kostas
Re: Re: Moving large image files through a LAN
From: Thibouille [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/06/17 Fri AM 06:59:02 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Moving large image files through a LAN Some brands do advertise up to 125Mbps but honestly, this is more marketing than anything else. It does provides a small boost but really, nothing to make anyone upgrade. We'll have to wait about 2 years IMO to get something really beter. 2005/6/17, David Oswald [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I place my *ist-DS's image files on a network file server at home (yup, I'm one of those guys). From there, my wife and I use our notebooks to view, edit, resize, post, email, and print our images. Our fileserver is connected to the network with cat-5 and a full duplex 100BaseT NIC. But our notebooks from which we do all our work are connected wirelessly with 802.11g wifi cards (56Mbps). One of the local mags did some tests and you will be getting way less than this. I have forgotten the numbers but, for a normal home system with all the usual traffic, single figure rates were the norm. Only when the system was configured to work at its most efficient (i.e. it was basically nothing other than a file shifting mechanism) were figures approaching the alleged maxima reached. We have ourselves a bottleneck, paarticularly when we're batch resizing to post online. I'm wondering if anyone here has used anything faster than 56Mbps wifi cards (standard 802.11g). I'm not sure I'm all that anxious to upgrade my router and two wifi cards, but if I can open up that network bottleneck significantly I'll consider it. Any recommendations? Dave -- -- Thibouille -- *ist-D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX and KR-10x ... - Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/
Re: home again
On 16/6/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed: http://www.cottysnaps.com/snaps/photoessays/essays/oxford.html Cheers, Cotty == Nice shots, Cotty. Hadn't seen them before. I have to get to England sometime -- what neat cobblestones! ;-) Marnie aka Doe And strange people wearing Viking hats and other things. Thanks Marn. The cobblestones are plastic and brought in just for the summer season. They hoik em out again in September. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
I think it will be a good opportunity for some of us to put our money where our mouth is. ?? I don't understand.. I am happy to see this lens is here (there in US). Anybody knows if (or when) it is available in EU? Peter Belak
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005, David Nelson wrote: Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: I believe a FF (35mm) 50-200/4 is on the cards. You sure? I think the pentax roadmap didn't mention its speed or exact focal length (just that it would be a High-performance D FA Telephoto zoom) - personally I'd expect it to be 50-210 f/2.8 Got any other sources? I can't find the roadmap diagram anymore, so no. 210? Why? Could be a popular lens - look at how loved the canon equivalent is. How well did the FA*80-200 sell? Sorry, we would all love to have one... Pentax is a different company, with a different following. Kostas
Re: Cheap (?) Photoshop CS2 upgrade
M if you want to support your favorite software company (like M any reasonable and well behaved person would), you should Ugh Ogh. I hope you are joking... Adobe is nice but it's not charity. It's a business intent on maximising profits, by doing whatever good or bad they can do (remember the e-book case, and there were many others too). There is no damn obligation to support them. If you feel so, their branding campaigh sucked you in... They deliver the product I want, I buy it. But supporting them intentionally? Only a fool can do that. Adobe is _big_ capitalist company, they are no small family owned restaurant... Nor a coop. They maximise profits. Why oh god should you help them maximise profits by not using loopholes like the PS6 on ebay? Only a fool would not take advantage of that. Or a brand idiot. Or do you really think they need our heartful and continuing support? That we should not deprive ourselves of more money to Adobe? Frantisek
Re: Contaflex lens-to-film distance?
From: Andre Langevin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/06/16 Thu PM 07:08:39 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Contaflex lens-to-film distance? I would like to know the lens register for the Contaflex. Aprroximatively. In fact, I want to know if it is longer than K mount register (45.5mm). The information is not available on the WEB. Only stuff I can find: http://brashear.phys.appstate.edu/lhawkins/photo/flange-film.txt - Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
I can't find the roadmap diagram anymore, so no. 210? Why? Nothing terribly significant but the FL range oval on the roadmap goes deliberately past 200mm (the DA 50-200 stops obviously at 200). http://www.tekade.de/news/html/pentax-roadmap.html http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/en/lens/roadmap.pdf I just reckon that an f/4 version would be hard to market as being better than the DA unless it was well touted as being super sharp wide open (hard to imagine). I suppose there's always the FF thing. How well did the FA*80-200 sell? Sorry, we would all love to have one... Pentax is a different company, with a different following. True. Time will tell, but I don't think they'd be wanting to replicate the DA lens so much. It could always be the beginning of the supposed replacement of all the (discontinued) FA lenses with D-FA lenses that you hear so much about if you listen to the rumours. Cheers, David
Re: PESO: Klintholm Havn
This has really nice colors and the sky is great. I would probably try to take one more picture and compose it without those trees to see the difference Anyway, very nice... Peter Belak On 6/14/05, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On a cameraclub oution last weekene, I decided to give my laatest enablement a try. This is a small harbour on the south coast of Mn - an island 100 km south of Copenhagen. The weather wasw quite nice for photographing. http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p16276863.html Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
You sure? I think the pentax roadmap didn't mention its speed or exact focal length (just that it would be a High-performance D FA Telephoto zoom) - personally I'd expect it to be 50-210 f/2.8 Got any other sources? I can't find the roadmap diagram anymore, so no. 210? Why? Could be a popular lens - look at how loved the canon equivalent is. How well did the FA*80-200 sell? Sorry, we would all love to have one... Pentax is a different company, with a different following. I think an affordable constant aperture f/4 with excellent image quality would sell very well. John
Re: Update on European Pentax DSLR prices
Mon Dieu !! And I was complaining because the DL was 'only' 30EUR CHEAPER than the DS... --- Thibouille [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just looked at the shop I ordered my D (located in France) and saw following prices: ist-D: 839 euros ist-DS: 729 euros ist-DL: 809 euros So the DL is definitely suffering from the new thing symptom. -- Thibouille -- *ist-D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX and KR-10x ... Yahoo! Sports Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
John Whittingham wrote on 17.06.05 11:31: I think an affordable constant aperture f/4 with excellent image quality would sell very well. Especially with ED glass, internal focusing and removable tripod mount :-) -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005, David Nelson wrote: I just reckon that an f/4 version would be hard to market as being better than the DA unless it was well touted as being super sharp wide open (hard to imagine). I suppose there's always the FF thing. Exactly, and the constant aperture. One is clearly consumer, the other would be prosumer. Like the 16-45 and the 18-55 (if you disregard the fact that the 16-45 is not FF). Kostas
Re: Posted GFM winners and recent work, comments welcome
Hi! Thanks Boris. I liked the Sea of Galilee image that you posted recently. I think I like it better with about 1/4 cropped off of the bottom making it more of a panoramic image. There doesn't seem to be a lot of interesting subject in the bottom 1/4. How do those trees survive out there in the water? It is slightly more involved than that :). You see, Sea of Galilee is our main soft water source. Generally, the water comes from rain in the winter and snow melting in the spring. Yes we do have our own ski resort - the mount Hermon. So, past decade was most drought, so trees were growing where water sued to be. We were close to the lower red line. Past couple of years it reversed. We are just below the upper red line. So those tree now appear as if growing in the water... I really liked the Trappist Monastery image that you posted, wish I had taken that one myself. That'd be easy. You would have to come :)... Jar Boris Jar Binks... , That's made me smile : ) I think you might have missed a thread few weeks ago where I admitted the Jar Jar Binks title :)... Boris
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
Especially with ED glass, internal focusing and removable tripod mount :-) Oooh stop you're getting me all excited now 8) You only have to look at the Pentax A 70-210 f/4 reputation, people are still raving about it now and it's been around 20+ years!!! Constant aperture, reasonable filter size (58-67 would be nice) and easily hand holdable and I think you've got a top seller. John
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005, Peter Belak wrote: I think it will be a good opportunity for some of us to put our money where our mouth is. ?? I don't understand.. I mean that many people have (correctly, in my opinion) moaned for a long time that Pentax never really produced a successor to the SMC-A 70-210/4[1]. The SMC-F 70-210/4-5.6 perhaps is close, but it has been out of production for almost 15 years (!!!). All the other similar long zooms have been optically bad in one respect or another, unlike the A70-210, which was just heavy. When it comes out, it will be interesting to see how many of us who moaned actually buy it (and of course this will depend on qualities, price etc, even availability :-). Sorry I confused you with my English. Kostas p.s.: To respond to another post, internal focusing means permanently long and tripod mount spells heavy to me. I think we won't all be happy :-)) [1] I think we two have had this discussion; I was also talking to Joaquim Carvalho just yesterday about it; John Whittingham as well in the past, the list just goes on.
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
[1] I think we two have had this discussion; I was also talking to Joaquim Carvalho just yesterday about it; John Whittingham as well in the past, the list just goes on. I was actually waiting for this type of telezoom lens. I have some nice M primes (135, 200) and A70-210 but I wish to have some lightweight and at the same time AF tele lens. Regards Peter Belak
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
John Whittingham wrote on 17.06.05 11:47: Oooh stop you're getting me all excited now 8) If all that comes true, your wallet will be less excited ;-) You only have to look at the Pentax A 70-210 f/4 reputation, people are still raving about it now and it's been around 20+ years!!! So it is the highest time to replace it with somewhat newer version :-) Constant aperture, reasonable filter size (58-67 would be nice) and easily hand holdable and I think you've got a top seller. Exactly this is what I'm thinking too. Filter size should be 67 mm to match DA 16-45 and FA 24-90 zooms ;-) -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Cheap (?) Photoshop CS2 upgrade
no, i was dead serious. you either believe that one must pay for software -- then, well, it costs $600, so cough it up. or you don't give a damn about them -- then get a demo CS2 from adobe and a free s/n from somewhere else. mishka On 6/17/05, Frantisek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: M if you want to support your favorite software company (like M any reasonable and well behaved person would), you should Ugh Ogh. I hope you are joking... Adobe is nice but it's not charity. It's a business intent on maximising profits, by doing whatever good or bad they can do (remember the e-book case, and there were many others too). There is no damn obligation to support them. If you feel so, their branding campaigh sucked you in... They deliver the product I want, I buy it. But supporting them intentionally? Only a fool can do that. Adobe is _big_ capitalist company, they are no small family owned restaurant... Nor a coop. They maximise profits. Why oh god should you help them maximise profits by not using loopholes like the PS6 on ebay? Only a fool would not take advantage of that. Or a brand idiot. Or do you really think they need our heartful and continuing support? That we should not deprive ourselves of more money to Adobe? Frantisek
Re: Moving large image files through a LAN
move the fileserver somewhere close, so you can run 1Gb ethernet from it to the computer you do the editing. forget wifi if you are serving the files. best, mishka On 6/17/05, David Oswald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I place my *ist-DS's image files on a network file server at home (yup, I'm one of those guys). From there, my wife and I use our notebooks to view, edit, resize, post, email, and print our images. Our fileserver is connected to the network with cat-5 and a full duplex 100BaseT NIC. But our notebooks from which we do all our work are connected wirelessly with 802.11g wifi cards (56Mbps). We have ourselves a bottleneck, paarticularly when we're batch resizing to post online. I'm wondering if anyone here has used anything faster than 56Mbps wifi cards (standard 802.11g). I'm not sure I'm all that anxious to upgrade my router and two wifi cards, but if I can open up that network bottleneck significantly I'll consider it. Any recommendations? Dave
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005, Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: John Whittingham wrote on 17.06.05 11:47: Oooh stop you're getting me all excited now 8) If all that comes true, your wallet will be less excited ;-) How much was the A70-210/4 new? And how much was the Super-A (I don't expect 1985 money to be the same as 2005 money, so thought I could make a correlation like that). Kostas
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
Oooh stop you're getting me all excited now 8) If all that comes true, your wallet will be less excited ;-) Yes, definitely 8) You only have to look at the Pentax A 70-210 f/4 reputation, people are still raving about it now and it's been around 20+ years!!! So it is the highest time to replace it with somewhat newer version :-) Oh yes, it will have to be at least as good optically though, with reasonable build, the A was a tough act to follow. Constant aperture, reasonable filter size (58-67 would be nice) and easily hand holdable and I think you've got a top seller. Exactly this is what I'm thinking too. Filter size should be 67 mm to match DA 16-45 and FA 24-90 zooms ;-) Yes fully agree, I have a confession: If Tamron produce a stablemate to the 28-75 XR Di, say 75-200 f/2.8 OR f/3.5 *constant* with a 67mm filter size and comparable in optical quality before Pentax get there act together then Pentax will probably lose a sale to Tamron, bring it on :) John
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
How much was the A70-210/4 new? I can look it up tonight from the last price list I have. And how much was the Super-A Bloody expensive, at least 2 MX's John
Re: Moving large image files through a LAN
twice as fast isn't really that much faster. wired gigabit Ethernet is the way to go if you really want to do this. i work with and save double resolution Photoshop files and cannot imagine doing this on 100BaseT. i use a local RAID 5 array with 6 drives and a local 10K RPM scratch drive and it's still slow. Herb - Original Message - From: David Oswald [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 2:08 AM Subject: Moving large image files through a LAN I'm wondering if anyone here has used anything faster than 56Mbps wifi cards (standard 802.11g). I'm not sure I'm all that anxious to upgrade my router and two wifi cards, but if I can open up that network bottleneck significantly I'll consider it. Any recommendations?
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
it may not have sold well, but it was constantly out of stock and is definitely an excellent lens. Herb - Original Message - From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 5:13 AM Subject: Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here! How well did the FA*80-200 sell? Sorry, we would all love to have one... Pentax is a different company, with a different following.
OT: Canon Powershot Pro-1 RAW files
I've been trying to convert some Canon Powershot Pro-1 RAW files for Ann. The Adobe site shows RAW support for this camera going all the way back to Camera RAW 2.2. I have 2.4 installed, but the browser can't see her files. What could cause this kind of problem? Does anyone know if CTG is the correct suffix for this version of Canon RAW. Does anyone want to try dissecting one of these files to see if it's truly a RAW image? Paul
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
How does one do street shooting with a 200mm lens? You get out on the street and trip the shutter vbg. Yes, I frequently shoot on the street with a 35/2, but I don't always like intimacy in street shooting. Sometimes I like to catch people unawares. Here's a shot with the VS1 70-210/3.5 at 210 mm. It may not fit your definition of street shooting, which is a fuzzy term to begin with, but it's on the street, and it's a shot. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3322436 Paul On Jun 17, 2005, at 12:24 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On Jun 16, 2005, at 7:28 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: I ordered one from BH. It's a little slow at the long end, but if it performs as well as the DA 16-45, I can live with the small ap. Should be a lot of fun for street shooting since it's so compact and inconspicuous. And teamed with the aforementioned lens, it should make a nice travel kit. I received a notification that it was in stock at BH yesterday. I just looked (search for pentax 50-200) ... it's there. While it's likely a nice lens, I don't think I'll be needing one. It is short and inconspicuous at the 50mm focal length setting, but it's as long as an A200/4 at the 200mm setting. I don't see how you do street shooting with a 200mm lens on 16x24mm format anyway ... even a 50mm lens on the DS is a portrait telephoto, a 200mm lens is the equivalent of a 300mm field of view in 35mm film camera terms ... WAY too long for any of the sense of intimacy which I feel is the hallmark of street shooting. I use a 24mm or 28mm lens for street shooting with the *ist DS, a 35-40mm lens with a 35mm film camera. :-) Godfrey
Re: OT: Canon Powershot Pro-1 RAW files
You can try emailing me one of those so i can try to convert it with some other progs Paul Stenquist wrote: I've been trying to convert some Canon Powershot Pro-1 RAW files for Ann. The Adobe site shows RAW support for this camera going all the way back to Camera RAW 2.2. I have 2.4 installed, but the browser can't see her files. What could cause this kind of problem? Does anyone know if CTG is the correct suffix for this version of Canon RAW. Does anyone want to try dissecting one of these files to see if it's truly a RAW image? Paul
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005, John Whittingham wrote: How much was the A70-210/4 new? I can look it up tonight from the last price list I have. And how much was the Super-A Bloody expensive, at least 2 MX's And how much is that in MZ-5ns? Thanks John! Kostas (if I knew how much the MX was, I would probably know about the Super-A too :-)))
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
Paul Stenquist wrote: Sometimes I like to catch people unawares. Here's a shot with the VS1 70-210/3.5 at 210 mm. It may not fit your definition of street shooting, which is a fuzzy term to begin with, but it's on the street, and it's a shot. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3322436 Paul Great picture. Now there is the internet and there cameras everywhere isn't it getting more difficult to take pictures like that one, even at 210mm? How did that guy react when he heard the noise of your mirror slapping? I'd love to take pictures like that. I don't do it much because just holding the -DS on the street makes me feel unconfortable. Joaquim P.S. I'm waiting for a Minox I bought on Ebay but then film size is only 9mm so quality is not so good.
Re: Update on European Pentax DSLR prices
Thibouille [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just looked at the shop I ordered my D (located in France) and saw following prices: ist-D: 839 euros ist-DS: 729 euros ist-DL: 809 euros So the DL is definitely suffering from the new thing symptom. A person in the know whom I spoke to recently suggested that the price of the DL is being kept artificially high for a while to protect dealers and distributors who have a lot of the DS and need to move them out before stocking the DL. Nikon is doing the same thing with the D50 - it's generally priced substantially *more* than the D70. As soon as existing stock of the D70 is thinned out, the price structure will become more rational. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
I don't know if he heard the mirror. But I stopped him when he came out of a store and showed him the pic. I then gave him a card with my e-mail address and told him I'd be happy to send it to him. Never heard from him, which is typical in my experience. Paul On Jun 17, 2005, at 7:23 AM, Joaquim Carvalho wrote: Paul Stenquist wrote: Sometimes I like to catch people unawares. Here's a shot with the VS1 70-210/3.5 at 210 mm. It may not fit your definition of street shooting, which is a fuzzy term to begin with, but it's on the street, and it's a shot. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3322436 Paul Great picture. Now there is the internet and there cameras everywhere isn't it getting more difficult to take pictures like that one, even at 210mm? How did that guy react when he heard the noise of your mirror slapping? I'd love to take pictures like that. I don't do it much because just holding the -DS on the street makes me feel unconfortable. Joaquim P.S. I'm waiting for a Minox I bought on Ebay but then film size is only 9mm so quality is not so good.
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
And how much is that in MZ-5ns? Err dunno 8) I'd guess the Super A when released c.1983 would be equivalent to what the MZ- S costs now (New!) IIRC it was somewhere in the region of 250-300 GBP for the body in the UK. My first MX body c.1979 cost me 89.00 but it was discounted slightly I think Pentax official RRP was 120. To put things into perspective I bought a new Ducati 900SS desmo in 1980 (bevel drive) it was very expensive only the Laverda Jota was more expensive in the UK, cost me 1865. 250-300 for a semi-pro camera was expensive, especially when you could have the jewel like MX for so much less! John
Re: Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
From: John Whittingham [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/06/17 Fri AM 11:38:21 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here! And how much is that in MZ-5ns? Err dunno 8) I'd guess the Super A when released c.1983 would be equivalent to what the MZ- S costs now (New!) IIRC it was somewhere in the region of 250-300 GBP for the body in the UK. My first MX body c.1979 cost me 89.00 but it was discounted slightly I think Pentax official RRP was 120. To put things into perspective I bought a new Ducati 900SS desmo in 1980 (bevel drive) it was very expensive only the Laverda Jota was more expensive in the UK, cost me 1865. That being just a downpayment, of course 8-) 250-300 for a semi-pro camera was expensive, especially when you could have the jewel like MX for so much less! John - Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/
Re: OT: Canon Powershot Pro-1 RAW files
Paul Stenquist wrote: Does anyone know if CTG is the correct suffix for this version of Canon RAW. Paul, As I recall from my short Dark Side time, the .ctg files are NOT the raw data - they are small files with some additional information. The RAW files should be .CRW, or something like .CR2 for newer cameras. cheers, Tomasz.
Updated Contest page
If you would like to add a contest please contact me and give me the Name of the contest The URL The closing Date A little Blurb about it http://www.wildcherry.com.au/index.php?p=contest Kind regards Kevin -- Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.
645 enabled
Hi all, just unpacked my new Pentax 645, and wondering about meaning of life :D Any websites where i can download some docs? Gasha
Re: 645 enabled
G'day Gasha, Manuals from the pentax USA site: http://tinyurl.com/aujw9 Dave On 6/17/05, Gasha [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, just unpacked my new Pentax 645, and wondering about meaning of life :D Any websites where i can download some docs? Gasha
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
What does it look like? It's not a style typical of Pentax. Tokina? Tamron? Sincerely, Collin Sent via the WebMail system at mail.safe-t.net
Re: 645 enabled
Hi! just unpacked my new Pentax 645, and wondering about meaning of life :D Any websites where i can download some docs? The life is especially beautiful if viewed from 645 viewfinder... Boris
Re: Back from GFM and Manaus
On 6/16/05, Cesar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip I see that you enjoy the Canadian Connection (Frank, is it the Canada Connection) at least for their libations :-) snip We were giving him American beer. I don't think Normie particularly cared where the beer was from... vbg -frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Back from GFM and Manaus
frank theriault wrote: On 6/16/05, Cesar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip I see that you enjoy the Canadian Connection (Frank, is it the Canada Connection) at least for their libations :-) snip We were giving him American beer. I don't think Normie particularly cared where the beer was from... vbg Norm the beer s**t. Pot, kettle, black, eh Cesar? Tom Reese
Re: PAW PESO - Death and a Dove
On 6/16/05, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Variation on an earlier upload http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/d_n_d.html Shel I agree with Paul. I like this a lot more. The first one was just not quite abstract enough to be abstract, but not representational enough to allow me to know what it was (sorry for the lousy art-speak; I'm just not well-versed in it). This is a pretty cool shot! It reminds me of the statues of the Blessed Virgin we had in our classes when I was a kid in Catholic grade school, the ones where she draws her robes open to reveal her heart which is surrounded by gold. Except yours is like a spector or something. Still, it's very a very evocative image. I still think a series of these would look amazing. This image would compliment the earlier one really well, IMHO. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Back from GFM and Manaus
On 6/17/05, Tom Reese [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Norm the beer s**t. Pot, kettle, black, eh Cesar? BTW, a couple of my Toronto buds and I enjoyed finishing off the Yeung-Ling (sp?) that you and Susan left in our cooler. We couldn't let it go to waste now, could we? vbg Nice beer. thanks, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
OT: Info on the right to take photographs
This looks like an interesting resource: http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
How much was the A70-210/4 new? I can look it up tonight from the last price list I have. And how much was the Super-A Bloody expensive, at least 2 MX's Super A body (1983) 249 SMC Pentax A 24mm f2.8 (1984) 110 SMC Pentax-A 35-70 f4 (1984) 110 SMC Pentax-A 70-210 f4 (1984) 150 Motor Drive A = battery pack (1984) 125 Were these prices pre VAT (Value Added Thatcher)? John
FS: Pentax MZ-S Lens
Still on the chopping block... Pentax MZ-S w/ BG-10 grip MZ-S body with BG-10 battery grip and accessories, including: Pentax strap FG, body cap, hot shoe cover, finder cover, eye cup, owner's manual, 2 CR-2 lithium batteries, and original packaging. The body and grip are very clean with no scratches or scuffs. About the only noticeable wear is around the battery door on the body. These have been used very gently! Everything is in excellent shape. $625 Also... Sigma 17-35/2.8-4 EX ASP Pentax AF Excellent condition: no dust, scratches, or fungus on the glass; no scratches or dirt on the body. Includes front and rear caps, tulip hood (reversible for storage), soft case, and original box. Very clean lens, yours for $300. Please let me know directly via email at [EMAIL PROTECTED] if you're interested. Pictures at: http://www.sherb.org/forsale Thanks, Tim
Photography hassles
Hi gang -- On Thursday, 16 June, National Public Radio's Morning Edition did an extended piece on the problems of post-9/11 photography: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4705698 There are also a couple of good related links off their site. Could bringing it (the problem) to the attention of a wider audience help ease things a bit, or simply lead to more confrontations? Regards, Stephen
Re: PESO: Klintholm Havn
On 6/14/05, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On a cameraclub oution last weekene, I decided to give my laatest enablement a try. This is a small harbour on the south coast of Mn - an island 100 km south of Copenhagen. The weather wasw quite nice for photographing. http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p16276863.html The dark, foreboding clouds make the shot. Nice one! cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: PESO: Klintholm Havn
On 6/17/05, frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The dark, foreboding clouds make the shot. Nice one! Having now read the other comments, I can say I like the trees. Gives the whole thing a better sense of place and context, IMHO. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
RE: strange AF lens for K-mount man focus bodies (a bit OT)
This monster brings out memories in me, turning me into old fart mode. Never actually had one, but I was near, very near. This is slightly off topic, but I have never introduced myself to this list. First thing I did here was to scare people off with a steaming (very steaming) descrition of my relation with my new camera :-) The lists response on this first introduction was a roaring silence. Wonder why ;-) But I do believe that one or two members (besides Cotty), had fun. I bought my first SLR in 86. It was a Chinon CG-5, a half automatic box, with a 35-85mm zoom. A simple, but pretty good combo. A year later I realized AF was the big thing. I didn't have a lot of money then (still don't). So guess what my wet dreams were about? Correct, this lens. There was another version too, a zoom, with a range of something like 35-70mm. I never saw one in real life, but guess it was huge, and heavy. Instead of this lenses I bought a regular normal lens f:1,4. It was a lot cheaper and made a better balanced combo. Later I added a Vivitar 28/2, a Chinon 70-200/3,8 and Now my Chinon is nearly retired, but still working faithfully. A solid workhorse. I used it, taking about 10 rolls a year, until last yea. Then I bough myself a PS, a second hand Olympus 5050. A pretty good camera, with nice features, but it turned out to be way tooo slw. A few weeks ago I bought a second hand Ds. Turning me into a Pentaxian. To have a great time using my old lenses was my idea. In real life, I find it to mush trouble, using the all manual lenses. So I find myself gradually building up a range of KA and AF lenses. Anyway, now I'm in heaven. My eldest son picks the Chinon up and does some BW with it now and then :-) Tim Another Norwegian. -Original Message- From: Gonz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 15. juni 2005 17:10 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: strange AF lens for K-mount man focus bodies http://tinyurl.com/bcv59 Anyone ever seen one of these before? Its got its own power source and AF circuitry. rg
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
Bounced for enhanced text (!!), so I am deleting the pound marks and trying again. On Fri, 17 Jun 2005, John Whittingham wrote: Super A body (1983) 249 SMC Pentax A 24mm f2.8 (1984) 110 SMC Pentax-A 35-70 f4 (1984) 110 SMC Pentax-A 70-210 f4 (1984) 150 Motor Drive A = battery pack (1984) 125 Thanks. I would guess a D-FA 50-200/4 could be around the 300GBP mark, then. That's 30% above the FA28-105/3.2-4.5 price and 25% below the 50/2.8 Macro. Reasonable? Kostas (I would have to sell loads to buy it)
Re: Moving large image files through a LAN
Unless you're willing to wire up for gigabit ethernet and a totally dedicated server, best thing to do is pull the files over to a local drive, edit, than push them back to the server. That also has the bonus of always leaving a backup copy of the original file on the server. Godfrey On Jun 16, 2005, at 11:08 PM, David Oswald wrote: I place my *ist-DS's image files on a network file server at home (yup, I'm one of those guys). From there, my wife and I use our notebooks to view, edit, resize, post, email, and print our images. Our fileserver is connected to the network with cat-5 and a full duplex 100BaseT NIC. But our notebooks from which we do all our work are connected wirelessly with 802.11g wifi cards (56Mbps). We have ourselves a bottleneck, paarticularly when we're batch resizing to post online. I'm wondering if anyone here has used anything faster than 56Mbps wifi cards (standard 802.11g). I'm not sure I'm all that anxious to upgrade my router and two wifi cards, but if I can open up that network bottleneck significantly I'll consider it. Any recommendations? Dave
How to make Good Pictures (Let's Free the Captured Images)
Yesterday, while waiting for a client, I parked my butt in a comfortable chair at the local mega book seller and settled in to read a couple of photo magazines. One - it may have been Amateur Photography - had an article about making good photos. Such articles are always fun to read if for no other reason than to see how many times the same old crap can be recycled and reiterated. This article, however, was different. It dealt mainly with how a photo (whoops! sorry - a captured image) could be manipulated in Photoshop. I don't mean tweaks, like sharpening, color adjustment, and the like, but changing backgrounds, focus, and major alterations. The rationale seemed to be that what you'd like to see as a final result may not always be in the scene. IMO, this type of article is a blasphemous shame, and is one of the things that's destroying photography and making it more about image processing than seeing and creating in the viewfinder. Now, just to be clear, there's nothing wrong with heavily manipulating an image, and making it into something other than a straight photo, but I don't really call that photography. I've done it myself, but I don't consider the results to be a photograph, and I usually make the photo with thoughts of using it as a basis for something else. So, at what point does photography become something other ... if you change the background in Photoshop, add or remove an object, manipulate the color substantially, alter skin tone, remove blemishes, lines, and wrinkles at some point there's more Photoshop than photograph. I'm reminded of the fellow who bought the original ax George Washington used to cut down the proverbial cherry tree. It had the handle replaced five time and a new head installed an equal number of times. Is it still George Washington's original axe? Shel
Re: Moving large image files through a LAN
- Original Message - From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unless you're willing to wire up for gigabit ethernet and a totally dedicated server, best thing to do is pull the files over to a local drive, edit, than push them back to the server. That also has the bonus of always leaving a backup copy of the original file on the server. That was going to be my suggestion too. Obviously the bottleneck still exists with the transfer to and back but the only way to solve that is wired 100Mb or 1Gb. Christian
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
Thanks. I would guess a D-FA 50-200/4 could be around the 300GBP mark, then. That's 30% above the FA28-105/3.2-4.5 price and 25% below the 50/2.8 Macro. Reasonable? 300GBP, yes please put me down for one of those :) John -- Original Message --- From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 14:49:37 +0100 (BST) Subject: Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here! Bounced for enhanced text (!!), so I am deleting the pound marks and trying again. On Fri, 17 Jun 2005, John Whittingham wrote: Super A body (1983) 249 SMC Pentax A 24mm f2.8 (1984) 110 SMC Pentax-A 35-70 f4 (1984) 110 SMC Pentax-A 70-210 f4 (1984) 150 Motor Drive A = battery pack (1984) 125 Thanks. I would guess a D-FA 50-200/4 could be around the 300GBP mark, then. That's 30% above the FA28-105/3.2-4.5 price and 25% below the 50/2.8 Macro. Reasonable? Kostas (I would have to sell loads to buy it) --- End of Original Message ---
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
Paul, That's a nice tele-portrait of a man and child, but street shooting to me captures the environmental context of the street and the people who populate it. The perspective in such a tele-portrait is not intimate, nor does it capture the context of the street at all. Photos like these two from my PAW: People Portaits 2005 series are a little closer to the notion of street shooting as I see it: http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/13.htm http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/15.htm There's nothing wrong with portraits on the street like the one you display, but that's certainly nothing like the established aesthetic of street photography as I have seen it characterized in the work of Robert Frank, HCB and others. Godfrey On Jun 17, 2005, at 3:57 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote: How does one do street shooting with a 200mm lens? You get out on the street and trip the shutter vbg. Yes, I frequently shoot on the street with a 35/2, but I don't always like intimacy in street shooting. Sometimes I like to catch people unawares. Here's a shot with the VS1 70-210/3.5 at 210 mm. It may not fit your definition of street shooting, which is a fuzzy term to begin with, but it's on the street, and it's a shot. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3322436
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
Some of us look for intimacy and some of us look for voyeurism. vbg I don't see how you do street shooting with a 200mm lens on 16x24mm format anyway ... even a 50mm lens on the DS is a portrait telephoto, a 200mm lens is the equivalent of a 300mm field of view in 35mm film camera terms ... WAY too long for any of the sense of intimacy which I feel is the hallmark of street shooting. I use a 24mm or 28mm lens for street shooting with the *ist DS, a 35-40mm lens with a 35mm film camera. :-) Godfrey Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
At 7:32 AM -0400 6/17/05, Paul Stenquist wrote: I don't know if he heard the mirror. But I stopped him when he came out of a store and showed him the pic. I then gave him a card with my e-mail address and told him I'd be happy to send it to him. Never heard from him, which is typical in my experience. Most of the time when I've had people *ask* me to take their pictures, and given them my contact info, I don't hear from them. I don't get it! What's the point? Is it some weird inversion of voyeurism? Paul On Jun 17, 2005, at 7:23 AM, Joaquim Carvalho wrote: Paul Stenquist wrote: Sometimes I like to catch people unawares. Here's a shot with the VS1 70-210/3.5 at 210 mm. It may not fit your definition of street shooting, which is a fuzzy term to begin with, but it's on the street, and it's a shot. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3322436 Paul Great picture. Now there is the internet and there cameras everywhere isn't it getting more difficult to take pictures like that one, even at 210mm? How did that guy react when he heard the noise of your mirror slapping? I'd love to take pictures like that. I don't do it much because just holding the -DS on the street makes me feel unconfortable. Joaquim P.S. I'm waiting for a Minox I bought on Ebay but then film size is only 9mm so quality is not so good. -- Alan P. Hayes Meaning and Form: Writing, Editing and Document Design Pittsfield, Massachusetts Photographs at http://www.ahayesphoto.com/americandead/index.htm
Re: home again
On Jun 16, 2005, at 3:42 PM, Cotty wrote: Yo Godders, Welcome home :-) http://www.cottysnaps.com/snaps/photoessays/essays/oxford.html Heya Cotty! Thanks, that's a great set of pages. And it was a splendid day!!! Thanks really go to Amita for suggesting a mini get-together in Oxford. :-) Richard Day's camera is a Pentax *ist D; he was working with the FA24/2 much of the time that day. I just stepped through the photo thumbnails from days one and two of my trip ... selection and processing is going to take a wee bit more time as I have to arrange my system drives for some more working space. Godfrey
Re: OT: Info on the right to take photographs
On 17/6/05, Daniel J. Matyola, discombobulated, unleashed: This looks like an interesting resource: http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm Excellent, thanks. There's a link at the bottom for a UK version (the above link is for a USA version). Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: How to make Good Pictures (Let's Free the Captured Images)
Shel Belinkoff wrote: I don't mean tweaks, like sharpening, color adjustment, and the like, but changing backgrounds, focus, and major alterations. The rationale seemed to be that what you'd like to see as a final result may not always be in the scene. IMO, this type of article is a blasphemous shame, and is one of the things that's destroying photography and making it more about image processing than seeing and creating in the viewfinder. Now, just to be clear, there's nothing wrong with heavily manipulating an image, and making it into something other than a straight photo, but I don't really call that photography. I've done it myself, but I don't consider the results to be a photograph, and I usually make the photo with thoughts of using it as a basis for something else. FWIW, Shel, I completely agree with your points above. Photography is photography, and making-another-picture-out-of-bits-and-pieces-of-photos isn't photography, it's something else. It probably needs a name, and it too can be a valid form of art (whatever art is -- I don't want to get into defining it) but it is NOT photography. It's whatever-it-is that uses photography as part of the process. The one thing you wrote to which I can't say Me too! is the last sentence, and it's not a matter of opinion but simply the difference between your experience and mine: On the very rare occasions that I've done this sort of composite-manufacturing myself, I've usually used stuff from my files that was not originally taken with the intention of using it for something else. (Hope you recover from the shock of me agreeing with you ... ;-) ERNR
MXness
Ok, so while my computer system is being configured for more work space so I can get digital image processing up and rolling, I pulled out the $30 MX I bought shortly before leaving on this trip. The matte focusing screen (SE20, from the LX model) I found used dropped in without a hitch ... it's used and not perfect, but good enough ... no more of that distracting prism gobbledegook in the middle of the viewfinder ... and I scavenged up a set of fresh S76 batteries from deep in my fridge. Also fitted an A50/1.7 lens. My gosh, everything works fine. The 50mm snaps in and out of focus crisply and easily. I tried the A24/2.8 and A35/2.8 too, and they look grand: focus easily. The viewfinder is so close to my old favorite, customized Nikon FM I feel like I've just gone home again. I guess I should defrost a roll of that funny gelatin covered plastic storage medium and see how it works, eh? ];-) Godfrey
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
I've heard all the narrow, pretentious definitions of street shooting before. I think anything that defines a genre too narrowly is merely limiting. Yes, HCB shot with normal lenses, and I frequently shoot with normal to wide lenses as well. But that's not all I do. I care not a hoot for definitions. By the way, I find nothing intimate about shooting people with their backs turned to the camera. But that's just me. Each to his own. Paul Paul, That's a nice tele-portrait of a man and child, but street shooting to me captures the environmental context of the street and the people who populate it. The perspective in such a tele-portrait is not intimate, nor does it capture the context of the street at all. Photos like these two from my PAW: People Portaits 2005 series are a little closer to the notion of street shooting as I see it: http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/13.htm http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/15.htm There's nothing wrong with portraits on the street like the one you display, but that's certainly nothing like the established aesthetic of street photography as I have seen it characterized in the work of Robert Frank, HCB and others. Godfrey On Jun 17, 2005, at 3:57 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote: How does one do street shooting with a 200mm lens? You get out on the street and trip the shutter vbg. Yes, I frequently shoot on the street with a 35/2, but I don't always like intimacy in street shooting. Sometimes I like to catch people unawares. Here's a shot with the VS1 70-210/3.5 at 210 mm. It may not fit your definition of street shooting, which is a fuzzy term to begin with, but it's on the street, and it's a shot. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3322436
Re: Opinions wanted, ebay item condition
In a message dated 6/16/2005 12:49:57 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You can call me dishonest for demanding things like that, I think I was VERY reasonable. I always try to be reasonable and understand the other person's point of view. I only gave bad feedback once; I never received bad feedback; one other time I just accepted a faulty item and resold it on Ebay as faulty because of feedback revenge fear. == Unfortunately, the truth is, a fair number of people selling camera equipment on Ebay don't know the first thing about it. Unless they are a power seller who sells it all the time. Marnie aka Doe
Re: RAW v JPEG
Wouldn't it be similar to e.g. RGBRGBRGB tiff vs. RRGGBB tiff? These two flavours exist already... I think somebody even mentioned storing floating point photo data (for HDR photos) in the tiff format...? Good light! fra I don't think so. A Bayer RAW file has *holes* in the individual R, G, and B images. 50% of the G is empty, and 75% of the R and B are empty. I don't think TIFF can deal with that... especially not in an efficient manner. I think what you're describing is how the data is written out. You can scan through the individual pixels of an RGB image in just about any permutation of one row at a time, one collumn at a time, one color at a time A chunky planar section at a time in one of the above methods, ... etc -Cory -- * * Cory Papenfuss* * Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student * * Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University * *
Re: How to make Good Pictures (Let's Free the Captured Images)
This is a photo I took last year: http://www.dariobonazza.com/provv/es01.jpg This is another photo: http://www.dariobonazza.com/provv/es02.jpg The hardware I used to take them, and the little usual PC processing (optimization) won't make them less photos than In case I took them on a daguerreotype, or any other known photographic technology. This is the use someone made of those pictures: http://www.dariobonazza.com/provv/es03.jpg Of course, this is not a photo, despite so much of the original images is still there (more than in case of Washington's ax), That's an illustration, purposedly made for such use. If I did the same for my own pleasure, I could call it either an image, or (probably) a picture. Not sure, since I'm afraid I can misunderstand nuances of English, which is not my language. However, such kind of tricks has not been invented nowadays, hence both the question and the answer are as old as photography. Is a double exposure on film a photo? All the best, Dario Shel Belinkoff wrote: So, at what point does photography become something other ... if you change the background in Photoshop, add or remove an object, manipulate the color substantially, alter skin tone, remove blemishes, lines, and wrinkles at some point there's more Photoshop than photograph. I'm reminded of the fellow who bought the original ax George Washington used to cut down the proverbial cherry tree. It had the handle replaced five time and a new head installed an equal number of times. Is it still George Washington's original axe?
Re: OT: Info on the right to take photographs
In a message dated 6/17/2005 7:38:49 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On 17/6/05, Daniel J. Matyola, discombobulated, unleashed: This looks like an interesting resource: http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm Thanks! I want to photograph some weird things, like the local oil refinery. Marnie aka Doe
Re: OT: Canon Powershot Pro-1 RAW files
In a message dated 6/17/2005 3:52:45 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've been trying to convert some Canon Powershot Pro-1 RAW files for Ann. The Adobe site shows RAW support for this camera going all the way back to Camera RAW 2.2. I have 2.4 installed, but the browser can't see her files. What could cause this kind of problem? Does anyone know if CTG is the correct suffix for this version of Canon RAW. Does anyone want to try dissecting one of these files to see if it's truly a RAW image? Paul = CRW is the extension my files have. Sorry can't be of more help. Marnie aka Doe
Re: How to make Good Pictures (Let's Free the Captured Images)
- Original Message - From: E.R.N. Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 10:44 AM Subject: Re: How to make Good Pictures (Let's Free the Captured Images) Shel Belinkoff wrote: I don't mean tweaks, like sharpening, color adjustment, and the like, but changing backgrounds, focus, and major alterations. The rationale seemed to be that what you'd like to see as a final result may not always be in the scene. IMO, this type of article is a blasphemous shame, and is one of the things that's destroying photography and making it more about image processing than seeing and creating in the viewfinder. Now, just to be clear, there's nothing wrong with heavily manipulating an image, and making it into something other than a straight photo, but I don't really call that photography. I've done it myself, but I don't consider the results to be a photograph, and I usually make the photo with thoughts of using it as a basis for something else. FWIW, Shel, I completely agree with your points above. Photography is photography, and making-another-picture-out-of-bits-and-pieces-of-photos isn't photography, it's something else. It probably needs a name, and it too can be a valid form of art (whatever art is -- I don't want to get into defining it) but it is NOT photography. It's whatever-it-is that uses photography as part of the process. With the risk of getting into a dumb definition argument If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck, what is it? photographers have been manipulating images to the same extent as today since the first picture was made. changing backgrounds, adding elements, removing elements etc has all been done in the darkroom before the advent of digital photography/processing. If the final result is something that includes many pieces and most of those pieces were made with a camera (and perhaps manipulated in a PC or a darkroom ) and it is printed either digitally or in a darkroom, it must be a photograph and the process of producing it must be photography. Photography is an art, whether it is snapshots of your kids or street photography, journalism, nature photography or heavily manipulated collages. They are all done by painting with light and there are many ways of producing and interpreting said art. Really what Shel and E. are saying is that they don't like this FORM of photography; purists that they are. Honestly, as a graphic art, I think it has a place but I don't pursue it as an art form because I'm not interested in the process. But to me, heretic that I am, it's still photography. Christian
Re: How to make Good Pictures (Let's Free the Captured Images)
On 17/6/05, E.R.N. Reed, discombobulated, unleashed: FWIW, Shel, I completely agree with your points above. Photography is photography, and making-another-picture-out-of-bits-and-pieces-of-photos isn't photography, it's something else. It probably needs a name, and it too can be a valid form of art (whatever art is -- I don't want to get into defining it) but it is NOT photography. It's whatever-it-is that uses photography as part of the process. In traditional photography, cutting and pasting (literally) photographs and other artwork is referred to as collage. This kind of work in Photoshop merits the same designation IMO. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: PESO Jupiter the Moon
A simple WOW! Regards Albano --- Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Team, A celestial capture from moments ago: http://www.home.aone.net.au/audiobias/temp/IMGP2590.jpg Tech: *ist D, ISO200, 1/15s A300/2.8 + 1.4X-L + 1.7AF TC @ f22 Comments, questions and critiques welcome. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 Albano Garcia Photography Graphic Design http://www.albanogarcia.com.ar http://www.flaneur.albanogarcia.com.ar __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: OT: Info on the right to take photographs
If this topic interests you, don't miss http://www.photopermit.org/ Kevin Bjorke's site has quickly become one of the best places to look for up to date and anecdotal info on photographer's rights, at least for North America. At 11:10 AM -0400 6/17/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 6/17/2005 7:38:49 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On 17/6/05, Daniel J. Matyola, discombobulated, unleashed: This looks like an interesting resource: http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm Thanks! I want to photograph some weird things, like the local oil refinery. Marnie aka Doe -- Alan P. Hayes Meaning and Form: Writing, Editing and Document Design Pittsfield, Massachusetts Photographs at http://www.ahayesphoto.com/americandead/index.htm
PAW: Alessandro and Brenda
Taken at a show at Toronto's Rex a couple of weeks ago. I'm not tremendously happy with it; looked better on the neg that it did blown up. But, since it's the best from the roll (I only took one roll that night), and I haven't submitted a PAW since pre-GFM, I figured I'd post it anyway: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3462115 Comments may be made, but I'm not expecting much. I do, however, expect you to be honest and (if necessary) brutal. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: 3rd GFM picture. My Lady Slipper
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 19:42:15 US/Eastern, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://photobucket.com/albums/v408/divad_b/?action=viewcurrent=slipper2048.jpg I shot this from several angles, and my SO like this one, so, i submit for your viewing pleasure the single flower. Fiddled in PS with this for a bit. Not sure i like the final outcome. Seems a bit to bright. Any way, have a peak and comments are most welcome. Oh and BTW the drop was there when i got there.LOL Quite beautiful, Dave! Love the drop - I believe you when you say it was there when you got there. Thousands wouldn't, but I do. Now if it had a deep red velvety background I might be less accepting of your exhortation LOL. Seriously, this is a terrific photograph. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: How to make Good Pictures (Let's Free the Captured Images)
Shel Belinkoff wrote: Yesterday, while waiting for a client, I parked my butt in a comfortable chair at the local mega book seller and settled in to read a couple of photo magazines. One - it may have been Amateur Photography - had an article about making good photos. Editor's reply: So, what's the problem? Wasn't that article about MAKING good photos? So I think the contents to be perfectly on topic. Maybe you really wanted an article about how to TAKE a good picture. Hey, that article has already been published previously. Please contact our subscription dept to order back issues. Dear all, please don't reply to this silly message, I'm not serious here :-) Dario
Re: Look kids, the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED is here!
On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 14:13, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: Photos like these two from my PAW: People Portaits 2005 series are a little closer to the notion of street shooting as I see it: http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/13.htm http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/15.htm Great pictures. Suddenly you started using the -DS every time. What happened to your other cameras?
DIY repair on a jamed ME-super?
My oldest son, the one I mentioned in a post an hour ago, has bought himself a second hand ME-super in London. It seemed ok in the store, but it failed shortly after leaving the shop. We had to go home to Norway before the shop opened again. We tried to send a mail to the shop telling about the problem, but got no reply. I know, it was a stupid mistake to by a second hand camera abroad, but we did. When winding the camera, nothing happens. The winder simply goes back to neutral position, and the camera isn't prepared for shooting. Other times it seems to work ok. After a few exposures, it tends to jam, with the mirror in open position. Looking inside the house, from front, I see small spots of rust on top near the screen, and something looking like a bug in a small hole at the tap the screen rests at (in lower position). In shorts, the house is full of dirt. My guess is that?s the course off the errors. I took it to a well reputed shop here in Norway. They said I'd better let it be. A repair might be expensive, more than the house was worth, they said. They are probably right. But this irritates me. I don?t like the idea of just storing it like a museum object. I want the thing to work. Being a rather handy person, I wonder about doing it myself. I know there are resourceful people on this list, with loads of know how. I have noticed one funny thing. When winding with no lens attached it works ok, most of the times trying. With a lens on, error is more frequent. So. What's the do and don't? How do I open the thing? And what do I do after opening it? (Besides scratching myself in my forehead). Anybody who feels a strong urge to help me, or to point me in the right direction? Tim Another Norwegian.
Re: Moving large image files through a LAN
David, I'd suggest you look into installing the image editing software on the server, and use Remote Desktop or similar to connect from the laptop. Then you don't have to move the files at all. Jostein - Original Message - From: David Oswald [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 8:08 AM Subject: Moving large image files through a LAN I place my *ist-DS's image files on a network file server at home (yup, I'm one of those guys). From there, my wife and I use our notebooks to view, edit, resize, post, email, and print our images. Our fileserver is connected to the network with cat-5 and a full duplex 100BaseT NIC. But our notebooks from which we do all our work are connected wirelessly with 802.11g wifi cards (56Mbps). We have ourselves a bottleneck, paarticularly when we're batch resizing to post online. I'm wondering if anyone here has used anything faster than 56Mbps wifi cards (standard 802.11g). I'm not sure I'm all that anxious to upgrade my router and two wifi cards, but if I can open up that network bottleneck significantly I'll consider it. Any recommendations? Dave
Re: How to make Good Pictures (Let's Free the Captured Images)
I never considered adding and removing elements to a photograph as photography. That was all done later, after the photo was taken or made, using a variety of techniques that only sometimes took place in a darkroom. There was physically pasting and cutting of different elements into and out of a photograph (making a collage) and then rephotographing the result, air brushing , masking and painting on negatives (done that myself), tinting or colorizing a photograph, and so on. None of these are photographic techniques, and none required a darkroom. I'm not saying they are not valid ways of expression, but I just don't see them as part of photography, or the photographic process, per se. They are all manipulations done TO a photograph after the photograph has been made. The point of the article, as I understood it, is that it doesn't matter what you capture, you can always change it later in Photoshop. Instead of relying on your eye for framing properly and good exposure techniques, or seeking out a good subject and waiting for good light, Photoshop will allow you to make something that wasn't there. The article suggested that this is consistent with making a good photograph. May I suggest that it should more correctly called something other. I don't hear any quacking coming from my computer when using Photoshop. Perhaps I need to turn the sound up. Using Shel [Original Message] From: Christian If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck, what is it? photographers have been manipulating images to the same extent as today since the first picture was made. changing backgrounds, adding elements, removing elements etc has all been done in the darkroom before the advent of digital photography/processing. If the final result is something that includes many pieces and most of those pieces were made with a camera (and perhaps manipulated in a PC or a darkroom ) and it is printed either digitally or in a darkroom, it must be a photograph and the process of producing it must be photography. Photography is an art, whether it is snapshots of your kids or street photography, journalism, nature photography or heavily manipulated collages. They are all done by painting with light and there are many ways of producing and interpreting said art. Really what Shel and E. are saying is that they don't like this FORM of photography; purists that they are. Honestly, as a graphic art, I think it has a place but I don't pursue it as an art form because I'm not interested in the process. But to me, heretic that I am, it's still photography. Christian
Re: monitor calibration
On 17 Jun 2005 at 10:01, Joaquim Carvalho wrote: SuperCal and it is free. Software calibrators are as good as or better than any calibration tool, the problem is not everybody can use them, you have to understand how they work: Software calibrators use you as the light sensor, you have to adjust the brightness of several color areas to match the brightness of another area that has some pixels ON and some other OFF, you must put your eyes out of focus so the light/darkness from adjacent pixels blends, concentrate and do it acuratelly and for several times with the three RGB colors at several brightness levels. This way the software gets to know the precise brightness curve for each light component, as seen by you, and generates a perfect color profile. WOW, the money I could have saved. I suggest that you do just a tiny bit of research before you go misleading the good folks here. Visual calibration is useful to a point i.e. gamma adjustment but it cannot be used to set colour temperature or absolute black and white levels to pre-set standards. 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: Update on European Pentax DSLR prices
Which proves that DL is supposed to replace the DS rather than complement it IMHO. 2005/6/17, Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Thibouille [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just looked at the shop I ordered my D (located in France) and saw following prices: ist-D: 839 euros ist-DS: 729 euros ist-DL: 809 euros So the DL is definitely suffering from the new thing symptom. A person in the know whom I spoke to recently suggested that the price of the DL is being kept artificially high for a while to protect dealers and distributors who have a lot of the DS and need to move them out before stocking the DL. Nikon is doing the same thing with the D50 - it's generally priced substantially *more* than the D70. As soon as existing stock of the D70 is thinned out, the price structure will become more rational. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com -- -- Thibouille -- *ist-D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX and KR-10x ...
