Re: What is snapshot? (seriously)
Quoting Boris Liberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Tell that to Leo Tolsoy (born in 1828) and isosceles right-angled triangle > ;-). LOL. Henrik Ibsen was also born in 1828. To see if there was something slightly closer to on-topic in this, I googled the words photography 1828, and came up with one interesting link: http://www.niepce.com/pagus/invus3.html The Daguerrotype was not yet conceived, so photography was not yet born, as such. However, this year Nicephore Niepce invented a new photographic process, based on a light sensitive substance called "Judea bitumen". Interestingly, this is a negative process, and thus predates Talbot's process (which is generally considered as the first negative process) by more than a decade. Cheers, Jostein This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
RE: New Optio 60
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005, Amita Guha wrote: how are there aperture and shutter priority modes when (presumably) you can't control aperture or shutter speed? Yes, you can control the aperture and shutter speed. Apart from aperture and shutter priority, it also has full metered manual. -- --Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.vex.net/~lawrence -- --Tungsten T3 Enhanced DIA KeyboardNokia Ringtone Convertor--
Re: What is snapshot? (seriously)
Tell that to Leo Tolsoy (born in 1828) and isosceles right-angled triangle ;-). On 7/25/05, Jostein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Quoting Boris Liberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > http://2.718281828459045.com > > > That's for sale. > > In ln condition. > > Jostein > > > This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. > > -- Boris
RE: What is snapshot (conclusions)
Hi Boris I'm quite amazed how much response you got for that thread. I truly wish that the coming august PUG photographs will get the same or even more attention here. I wonder why simple terms get more reactions here than the "real thing" --> the Pentax photo? greetings Markus >>-Original Message- >>From: Boris Liberman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 6:41 AM >>To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net >>Subject: What is snapshot (conclusions) >> >> >>Hi! >> >>Having started a couple of threads that in my Thunderbird register >>together at 120+ messages (my personal record I think :-) ), I suppose I >>ought to summarize things a bit. >> >>So I am going to present you some quotes which strike a thought in me. >> >>1. Snapshot is a state of mind. (Shel) >> >>2. A photograph can be categorized by more than one word. (Godgrey) >> >>3. Snapshot: 1/30 second or less. Photograph: 1/15 second or longer. (W >>Robb) >> >>4. A simple photographic recording of a person/place at a point in time. >>(Ken Waller) >> >>5. "Snapshot" simply refers to a photograph made in a casual manner... >>(Rob Studdert) >> >>6. Perhaps a snapshot is an image made with neither significant thought >>nor previsualization. (Lewis Matthew) >> >>7. The defining property of a snapshot is the absence of >>pretension. (Bob W) >> >>I probably missed some more interesting things that could be added to >>list. However I think the conclusion is this: >> >>Snapshot is *mostly* about how oneself is thinking about their >>photograph. Snapshot is also *mostly* about how the viewer thinks about >>what they are seeing. The rest is either technique or simply irrelevant. >> >>Ladies and gentlemen, this was one amazing exchange of thoughts and >>reasoning, I am humbled. >> >>Great many thanks. >> >>Boris >>
Re: PAW PESO - Pigeons
Boris - it's not a matter of language difference. It's simply a matter of you shooting off some esoteric jargon about a subject I know nothing about. Do you really think I know anything about gas particles, thermodynamics, and Maxwell membranes. It's just a snap of a bunch of pigeons hanging out Shel > [Original Message] > From: Boris Liberman > > > Not a clue as to what you're talking about ... > > > >>It really looks like a pigeon model of Maxwell demon... But my mind is > >>warped by mathematics and some other related things... > > Hmmm... Odd, but may be I messed the language again... > > In theory of thermodynamics, it is said that gas particles are spread > evenly inside the volume that they occupy. Now, imagine a membrane that > is put exactly in the middle of the volume that allows gas particles to > go only in one direction. Then eventually all of them will be collected > in just half of the volume... > > One of the (probably humorous) names of such a membrane is a Maxwell > demon... > > Looking at the pigeons and the fence my warped mind immediately saw a > Maxwell demon... > > Boris
Re: What is snapshot? (seriously)
Quoting Boris Liberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > http://2.718281828459045.com That's for sale. In ln condition. Jostein This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
RE: GESO - Bits and Bobs From July
Hi Mark all of them are a joy to watch! very beautiful. greetings Markus > >>Here's a little gallery with different shots from the last few weeks - >> >>http://www.markcassino.com/temp/peso/July/ >> >>Mostly bugs with a couple of landscapes. "Path Near Swan Creek" is from a >>test roll of Kodak Aerographic IR film, cut down from 70mm to 120 >>
Re: PESO -- A Neighborhood
No pavement it was taken from the back of the buildings. Boris Liberman wrote: Hi! I debated a while about posting this but I've decided to after all http://www.mindspring.com/~webster26/PESO_--_aneighborhood.html No technical data I'm feeling lazy. As usual comments are welcome but may be totally ignored. I am feeling too tight here... I want it wider. To see the pavement, to see more of the buildings and trees and probably to see some people as well... Technically it is just fine of course... Boris -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Screw Mount Glass on istd Siblings
Hi Shel: Nothing terrible... I mean that they're not automatic like an F or FA lens. For example, the screw mount Fish-eye-Takumar renders as a slightly distorted 25mm when on my isDS, not enough fisheye effect for me. So, I wouldn't buy a modern Pentax fisheye just to get the AF and AE, I'll put up with the "clunky" non-auto older screw mount fisheye until Pentax comes out with something like a 10 or 11mm DA Fisheye. Jim Shel Belinkoff wrote: In what way are they "a little clunky?" Shel [Original Message] From: Jim Hemenway It's a little clunky, but they work. I've used my SM fish-eye in my isDS as well as an old 300mm sm. Jim Shel Belinkoff wrote: Just doing a quick memory check here: screw mount lenses, such as Takumars and Super Taks, plus third party lenses, will work just fine on the Pentax DSLR bodies when stopped down to taking aperture. Correct? Same thing for the SMC Taks?
Re: PESO - Raw Strength
- Original Message - From: "Bruce Dayton" Subject: Re: PESO - Raw Strength Ok, Bill, in order to calculate how much to sell my son for, approximately how much is a usable system going to cost me? You should be able to get away with a few thousand US$. If you consider selling one of your daughters rather than a son, I believe they fetch more on the market. But keep Erin, she has a good eye for pictures. William Robb
Re: digital milestone
- Original Message - From: "Rob Studdert" Subject: Re: digital milestone So if cost was a non-issue would you have shot as many film frames as you have digital or is there more to the story? Probably not. Even if cost was not an issue, there is still the matter of storing over 8000 pictures in two years. William Robb
Re: K15mm for House Interiors
- Original Message - From: "Mishka" Subject: Re: K15mm for House Interiors just curious: why not a fisheye? (i suspect the answer would be "because I have 15 !" :) I dunno, I have a fisheye too. William Robb
Re: PESO: The Chevy Show
Hi! I mentioned yesterday that I was going to shoot the 50th anniversary tri-five (55-57) Chevy show at Milford, Michigan. This isn't really a car pic, but I like it. Perhaps some car shots later. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3569814 Coolio! Boris
Re: PESO - Raw Strength
Hi! I appreciate the attempt. My current issues are, like many, time and money. When I was shooting the Pentax 67ii's, I found that the cost of film/developing was really starting to hamper my ability to shoot. For local processing/proofing along with purchase of film from B&H, the cost per frame was about $1.35. Certainly significant enough for me to shoot very sparingly unless it was a paid shoot (wedding, portrait, event). On top of that, the cost to get a large, high quality print made was very expensive. There are no non-digital pro labs left in Sacramento. So I was faced with having a drum-scan high end print made (20 inch by 30 inch) in the neighborhood of $150. Since I wasn't making any money off those type of prints, it seemed foolish for me to deal with. My local lab that does all my wedding/portrait/event work is all digital using Agfa D-Labs. The scanners on those are not very high res so I was not seeing the quality difference of the 67 negative as you would expect. I agree... The film related process is more involved and hence more costly than digital. At least so is the case as you describe it. Since shooting digital, my quanity and quality have picked up. Quantity because I can now afford to speculation shoot (events, sports). Quality because of my ability to practice and learn at a much faster pace. Likewise. I've been told that my quality improved. In fact, I may be so bold as to say that I can feel it myself. Landscape, while I thoroughly enjoy it, is not where most of my shooting ends up. It really is the portraits, events and weddings. For that stuff, digital is adequate. When I have more disposable income and time, perhaps I will delve into large format. Dealing with four kids ages 17, 15, 8 and 4 uses up most of my time and money right now. I am enabled only with 4 years old Galia this far... ;-). She's however one of the main if not *the main* reason for me to return to photography... I suppose my response to "What inspired you?" thread would be - my baby daughter. But that wouldn't be photographically correct, would it? ;-) I hope this helps explain why I am not jumping right into LF right now. I do appreciate your ideas and comments, though. Gee, hope you're not mad at my thumping on your brains... You do produce some amazing landscape that would be breathtaking if shot in larger format... We need to find a way to teleport Bill Robb to these locations... ;-) Boris
Re: PESO -- A Neighborhood
Hi! I debated a while about posting this but I've decided to after all http://www.mindspring.com/~webster26/PESO_--_aneighborhood.html No technical data I'm feeling lazy. As usual comments are welcome but may be totally ignored. I am feeling too tight here... I want it wider. To see the pavement, to see more of the buildings and trees and probably to see some people as well... Technically it is just fine of course... Boris
What is snapshot (conclusions)
Hi! Having started a couple of threads that in my Thunderbird register together at 120+ messages (my personal record I think :-) ), I suppose I ought to summarize things a bit. So I am going to present you some quotes which strike a thought in me. 1. Snapshot is a state of mind. (Shel) 2. A photograph can be categorized by more than one word. (Godgrey) 3. Snapshot: 1/30 second or less. Photograph: 1/15 second or longer. (W Robb) 4. A simple photographic recording of a person/place at a point in time. (Ken Waller) 5. "Snapshot" simply refers to a photograph made in a casual manner... (Rob Studdert) 6. Perhaps a snapshot is an image made with neither significant thought nor previsualization. (Lewis Matthew) 7. The defining property of a snapshot is the absence of pretension. (Bob W) I probably missed some more interesting things that could be added to list. However I think the conclusion is this: Snapshot is *mostly* about how oneself is thinking about their photograph. Snapshot is also *mostly* about how the viewer thinks about what they are seeing. The rest is either technique or simply irrelevant. Ladies and gentlemen, this was one amazing exchange of thoughts and reasoning, I am humbled. Great many thanks. Boris
Re: What is snapshot? (seriously)
Hi! And one for Boris and other mathematically inclined: http://3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375105820974944592.com/ Applying the TinyURL algorithms one can easily get http://2.718281828459045.com Boris
Re: PAW PESO - Pigeons
Hi! Not a clue as to what you're talking about ... It really looks like a pigeon model of Maxwell demon... But my mind is warped by mathematics and some other related things... Hmmm... Odd, but may be I messed the language again... In theory of thermodynamics, it is said that gas particles are spread evenly inside the volume that they occupy. Now, imagine a membrane that is put exactly in the middle of the volume that allows gas particles to go only in one direction. Then eventually all of them will be collected in just half of the volume... One of the (probably humorous) names of such a membrane is a Maxwell demon... Looking at the pigeons and the fence my warped mind immediately saw a Maxwell demon... Boris
Re: Screw Mount Glass on istd Siblings
In what way are they "a little clunky?" Shel > [Original Message] > From: Jim Hemenway > It's a little clunky, but they work. I've used my SM fish-eye in my > isDS as well as an old 300mm sm. > > Jim > > Shel Belinkoff wrote: > > > Just doing a quick memory check here: screw mount lenses, such as Takumars > > and Super Taks, plus third party lenses, will work just fine on the Pentax > > DSLR bodies when stopped down to taking aperture. Correct? Same thing for > > the SMC Taks?
Re: K15mm for House Interiors
> just curious: why not a fisheye? (i suspect the answer would be > "because I have 15 !" :) Hi, Mishka. If that's directed at me, well, I do have both an A 15/3.5 (rectilinear) and an A 16/2.8 Fisheye. But, I don't yet have a DSLR, so I'm still left imagining what it's like to use it - . Fred
Re: Screw Mount Glass on istd Siblings
Shel: It's a little clunky, but they work. I've used my SM fish-eye in my isDS as well as an old 300mm sm. Jim Shel Belinkoff wrote: Just doing a quick memory check here: screw mount lenses, such as Takumars and Super Taks, plus third party lenses, will work just fine on the Pentax DSLR bodies when stopped down to taking aperture. Correct? Same thing for the SMC Taks? Shel
Re: GESO - Bits and Bobs From July
I especially like the sixth photo. Well done. Jim Mark Cassino wrote: Here's a little gallery with different shots from the last few weeks - http://www.markcassino.com/temp/peso/July/ Mostly bugs with a couple of landscapes. "Path Near Swan Creek" is from a test roll of Kodak Aerographic IR film, cut down from 70mm to 120 size and processed in C41. "Silver Maple" resulted from a happy accident - I thought the roll of Neopan 400 was from the Holga and on a whim stand processed it in cold (60F) Dektol. It actually was a serious roll of film shot in the 6x7, but the cold Dektol with it's nice high contrast effect really made the maple stand out from its surroundings - much better than the other rolls I shot of the same subject and developed conventionally. The rest is digital. Comments appreciated! - MCC - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Photography Kalamazoo, MI www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Re: PESO: The Chevy Show
Paul: I like your "line up the colors" composition. Brings back memories of my 57 V8, two door hardtop. Jim Paul Stenquist wrote: I mentioned yesterday that I was going to shoot the 50th anniversary tri-five (55-57) Chevy show at Milford, Michigan. This isn't really a car pic, but I like it. Perhaps some car shots later. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3569814
Re: PESO: Hares Foot
Dave: A beautiful shot, I really like the way that you captured the foreground leaves which look silvery in B&W. Jim David Savage wrote: G'Day All, I was out in the yard today and this caught my attention: http://tinyurl.com/aqx4k It's a cliche I know, but it turned out how I visualised it, so I'm happy ;-). Comments positive, negative or other always welcome. Dave
Re: Which side to scan?
Got it, William. Thanks! Jack --- William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: "Jack Davis" > Subject: Which side to scan? > > > >I must have been shown, at least once, how to > > determine the emulsion side of film. > > If you can read the edge writing, the emulsion is > facing away from you. > > William Robb > > Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Re: Some InfraRed photos
Thanks Mark. Here it is as seen now: http://www.hemenway.com/June-18_19-2005/pages/SM-IGP0913.htm http://tinyurl.com/824yd And in winter: http://www.hemenway.com/pages/Twisted%20Tree.htm ttp://tinyurl.com/3pr3q http://www.hemenway.com/Old-images/Twisted%20Tree.jpg http://tinyurl.com/ceaxo Jim Mark Cassino wrote: Nice shots - I like "Twisted Tree" in particular. - MCC - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Photography Kalamazoo, MI www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Original Message - From: "Jim Hemenway" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: ; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 5:05 PM Subject: Some InfraRed photos A friend gave me my first roll of Konica IR film... here are some photos which I shot with it last week and finally had a chance to scan today. Pentax SV with Super-Takumar f3.5/35mm and Fisheye-Takumar f4/17mm http://www.hemenway.com/InfraRed I used a red filter with the 35mm lens and the fisheye's internal orange filter. Whaddaya think? Jim
Re: Some InfraRed photos
Thanks Markus, I'll give it a try. Jim Markus Maurer wrote: Hi Jim I liked 07 Concord Field a lot. Maybe flipping it horizontally would be an option for "better reading" ? thanks for sharing. greetings Markus -Original Message- From: Jim Hemenway [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 11:05 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Some InfraRed photos A friend gave me my first roll of Konica IR film... here are some photos which I shot with it last week and finally had a chance to scan today. Pentax SV with Super-Takumar f3.5/35mm and Fisheye-Takumar f4/17mm http://www.hemenway.com/InfraRed I used a red filter with the 35mm lens and the fisheye's internal orange filter. Whaddaya think? Jim
Re: Some InfraRed photos
Thanks Mark, good to know. Jim Mark Cassino wrote: I experimented a bit with the Konica IR last summer in both 35mm and 120 format. (I think I still have a roll of 35mm in the freezer.) Assuming this is Konica IR 750, the peak sensitivity in the IR spectrum is 750 nm, with some sensitivity out to ~800nm. Kodak's HIE is sensitive to 900 nm, SFX peters out around 750 nm. The Konica IR is (was) a great film - finer grained than HIE but much much slower. Konica also had an anti-halation filter, the absence of which causes most of the handling issues with HI.E So it is easier to handle but lacks the nice 'gauzy' effect that the absence of the ant-haliation filter lends to HIE. - MCC - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Photography Kalamazoo, MI www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 8:16 PM Subject: Re: Some InfraRed photos > A friend gave me my first roll of Konica IR film... here are some photos which I shot with it last week and finally had a chance to scan today. Pentax SV with Super-Takumar f3.5/35mm and Fisheye-Takumar f4/17mm http://www.hemenway.com/InfraRed I used a red filter with the 35mm lens and the fisheye's internal orange filter. Whaddaya think? Jim Not to bad Jim. The Konica seems a bit less harsh/grainy than the Kodak HIE i use, but that can be a good thing Contrast seems a bit more smoother to, but that may be from the difference in wave lengths that the Konica and Kodak record. Is'nt the Konica a bit less sensitive.??Not sure how to put that.:-) Anyway nice work. I like # 5. Dave
Re: Some InfraRed photos
Hi Dave: Thanks for the comments. This is the first infrared that I've ever shot so I don't know the answers except that my friend doesn't like the Kodak IR film because it needs to be loaded in the dark. I don't know how it compares in sensitivity with the other infrared films but the poop sheet recommended f5.6/60th in sunny light. Jim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > A friend gave me my first roll of Konica IR film... here are some photos which I shot with it last week and finally had a chance to scan today. Pentax SV with Super-Takumar f3.5/35mm and Fisheye-Takumar f4/17mm http://www.hemenway.com/InfraRed I used a red filter with the 35mm lens and the fisheye's internal orange filter. Whaddaya think? Jim Not to bad Jim. The Konica seems a bit less harsh/grainy than the Kodak HIE i use, but that can be a good thing Contrast seems a bit more smoother to, but that may be from the difference in wave lengths that the Konica and Kodak record. Is'nt the Konica a bit less sensitive.??Not sure how to put that.:-) Anyway nice work. I like # 5. Dave
Re: Screw Mount Glass on istd Siblings
That's true, just like on a standard K body. Shel Belinkoff wrote: Just doing a quick memory check here: screw mount lenses, such as Takumars and Super Taks, plus third party lenses, will work just fine on the Pentax DSLR bodies when stopped down to taking aperture. Correct? Same thing for the SMC Taks? Shel -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Late afternoon walk
Hi Boris: It's right here in the middle of the 'burbs about 8-9 miles north west of Boston, Massachusetts, USA. I try to walk around it every other day and it's rare that I don't bring a camera with me. It used to be used for swimming and motor boating but with the leukemia problems, (John Travolta - A Civil Action) only canoeing and electric motor boat fishing are allowed... Woburn now gets half of its water from wells which tap into the water level just below Horn Pond instead of from the poisoned wells on the other side of Woburn. As a result, the Woburn Parkway on one side has been closed to vehicles for years. It's a great place to walk and bike ride because it meanders mostly through a forested area. Jim Boris Liberman wrote: Hi! From a late afternoon walk around a nearby pond: http://www.hemenway.com/HornPond-Summer2005/ Pentax isDS Jim, where is it? I mean geographically... What I should say about the pond images themselves is that I would really like to find a place such as this and spend day after day sitting there, probably doing some photography but generally relaxing and meditating... So peaceful, so tranquil. Boris
Re: What is snapshot? (Correct Answer)
On 24 Jul 2005 at 19:19, Shel Belinkoff wrote: > Right ... but according to some definitions posted here, and JCO's last > comment, it's not a snap because it was not spontaneous, was planned ahead > of time, the people involved gathered with the intent of making this and > other photographs, they waited for or moved to the right light, and so on. > > The point I'm trying to make is that a snapshot is more about what it is > than the methodology of making the photo. It's certainly not directly linked to the methodology of making the photo and methinks the "planned ahead of time" definition is flawed too. Obviously anyone who has a camera on hand either intends to shoot with it or at least wishes to look like they are. :-) Viewers seem to like to be able to pigeon-hole images. If an image isn't confirmed by the taker as a "snap-shot" then it's simply been labelled by the viewer in order for it to fit inside their preconceived order system. IOW it's a great label for an image that doesn't fit any other easily labelled image genre ;-) Strange thread. 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: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
- Original Message - From: "K.Takeshita" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax Discuss" Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2005 8:39 PM Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42% the danger is that then medium format will be the ONLY camera market they will be in at the end of 2 years, Where is the fact on which your opinion is based? when you run a business, you stay in business only by doing what consistently makes money and dropping what doesn't. if those 40% of all Japanese medium format photographers buy as many 645Ds as Pentax hopes, the camera will make money and be profitable at something resembling what their film bodies were. whether they do or not, the P&S camera profit margins are miniscule, a few percent tops because they are commodities now. DSLRs make more profit, but there is going to be about a year to two year's time before the entire market is saturated too, just like digital P&S, and then profit margins are going to disappear as well. that leaves the medium format market where they can make some money. this assumes that the imaging products division as a whole is making money. it's not. subtract the imaging products division and Pentax's revenue and profits would have grown steadily over the past decade. assuming that the 645D makes money is a dangerous assumption, and the rest of Pentax's camera business is known to be losing money. the only way out is to rise above it, literally, by having higher end products. why do you think the Japanese car manufacturers started all those premium car lines in the US? the Acura NSX may be viable, and even profitable, competition to the Italian supercars, but it makes very little difference to the bottom line for Honda. making lots and lots of Honda Civics doesn't make a lot of money for Honda compared to what they make from Accords and other mid-priced vehicles. also, what makes Pentax think that the 645D will be competitive in the medium format market when it finally ships? I don't know but I tend to think Pentax know it and they do not usually do too stupid or reckless a thing. If anything, they are always conservative and prudent, whether we like it or not. being too conservative is why they are having the problems they are having now. selling lots of low end 35mm-type bodies where they make very little money means there won't be much money around later. I do not know if they make little money or not. I have no such information. Margin might be thinner but the volume is there. So, I tend to think that's the reason why Canon is there and this is their largest market. What you do not like is the fact that Pentax are serving the entry level market but not coming up with the upgrade path. That's true, but it has nothing to do wioth your speculation that they are making little money in that particular segment of the market. If that market is so unprofitable, I tend to think that Canon would be the first one to get out of it, rather than concentrating it like now. Canon has higher end bodies to grow into that have much higher profit margin. Pentax hasn't. Canon doesn't need to make much money in the low end. they make it in the middle. Pentax hasn't got a middle, let alone a high end body. working on the 645D only delays the middle and high end bodies. I do not think sensible people will judge anything by the snapshot of the financial status, particularly when it was influenced by a one-time extraordinary event like the sudden burst of the digicam price. I am sure the real analysts must be looking at the longer term prospect too, although I am not saying that the current situation is good, but obviously Pentax have weathered this disaster with far less negative impact that anybody else but Canon who were also hit hard, mind you. It tells me that they have been fairly prudent. Oly was NOT prudent, buries in the sea of dead stock, for example. sensible business people are the ones that are saying what i have been saying here. it's sensible business people that are saying how much longer can Pentax continue to have an entire division lose money, to continue to forecast losing money, and not do something drastic. as i have said earlier, doing something drastic may mean moving to a niche market, sacrificing market share and revenue for profitability, or exiting the finished camera market entirely, producing only components for other brands. it's not a one time event. it's close to four years now. all but two of the major Japanese traditional camera manufacturers lost money last year or more. Nikon only made money last year after a couple of years of losing. Canon hasn't had a year in a very long time where its camera division lost money. it's irrelevant that the Canon, or any other brand's, consumers may be stupid and don't know good glass or cameras really are. what matters is that people aren't spending enough money where it counts to Pentax, on Pentax equipment. being different
Re: Late afternoon walk
Hi Dave: Thanks, me too, I especially liked the color of the light. Jim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > From a late afternoon walk around a nearby pond: http://www.hemenway.com/HornPond-Summer2005/ Pentax isDS Jim The first one is my favorite. Very relaxing Dave
Screw Mount Glass on istd Siblings
Just doing a quick memory check here: screw mount lenses, such as Takumars and Super Taks, plus third party lenses, will work just fine on the Pentax DSLR bodies when stopped down to taking aperture. Correct? Same thing for the SMC Taks? Shel
Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
On 7/24/05 10:09 PM, "Mishka" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > nevermind "the sky is falling" remarks. there are a few pissed people here > who wish pentax were canon. like a saying goes, "if grandma were grandpa, > she would have hairy balls". i think what P is doing makes a lot of sense > (although it doesn't really serve *my* needs). and thanks again for > informative > posts. do not shut up and don't pay too much atention to our pocket financial > analysts as well. Thanks Mishka, I am not upset or anything but was just getting tired (or bored :-). Present lineup by P on DSLR is by no means satisfactory to anyone, even to me :-). It is so obvious and not even new. Imagine the anguish KM users have been feeling until recently. I do wish grandma had a hairy ball. I share the frustration and the disgruntlement being felt by some of the veterans here. However, all in all, I don't think things are that bad now. I rather look forward to the immediate future when everybody competes with good and innovative products. Good night all, Ken
Re: What is snapshot? (seriously)
i am pretty sure *most* of what people typically consider snapshots are not, in exactly the manner you just described. i think at this point it looks like there are two very distinct meanings to "snapshot" a) what don said, a spontaneous photo b) whatever *normally* people shoot with p&s (or, with p&s mindset, again, "me and eiffel tower" kind of thing) -- what frank just described these two are very different kinds of pictures, valuable in very different ways. mishka On 7/24/05, frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Of course, the irony is that the typical "family snapshot" actually > isn't one at all, is it? "Edith, Horatio, you stand in the back, > Inez, Pierre, Moragh, you get in the front, now all of you move to the > left, so I can get the Space Needle in the frame... Okay, say > cheese!" That's not a snapshot, is it? It's staged by the > photographer, so how could it be a snapshot? > > Bottom line, a good photo is a good photo, no matter how acquired. > > cheers, > frank
Re: What is snapshot? (Correct Answer)
Right ... but according to some definitions posted here, and JCO's last comment, it's not a snap because it was not spontaneous, was planned ahead of time, the people involved gathered with the intent of making this and other photographs, they waited for or moved to the right light, and so on. The point I'm trying to make is that a snapshot is more about what it is than the methodology of making the photo. Shel > [Original Message] > From: Godfrey DiGiorgi > Sure looks like a good snapshot to me. > > Godfrey > > Shel Belinkoff wrote: > > > > >> Is this a snapshot? >> >> http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/rockaway.jpg > >>> [Original Message] > >>> From: J. C. O'Connell > Snapshots are quick handheld > photos taken quickly without much technical time spent > and on on the spur of the moment, not pre-planed > carefully designed time very consuming setup shots like this...
Re: What is snapshot? (seriously)
more like "snapshot -- 28-200 zoom" mishka On 7/24/05, Kenneth Waller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Snapshot - around 50mm lens (on35mm format) > Photograph/image - more or less than 50mm > > Kenneth Waller
Re: K15mm for House Interiors
just curious: why not a fisheye? (i suspect the answer would be "because I have 15 !" :) best, mishka
RE: Which side to scan?
Look at the numbers and edge markings on the film strip. If the markings are correct, i.e, not backwards, then the opposite side is the emulsion side. Look at the film at an oblique angle to the light. The dull side is the emulsion side. Look at the film under a loupe. If there are things in the frame that are backwards, such as a street sign, then you're looking through the emulsion side. Does this help ... ? Shel > [Original Message] > From: Jack Davis < > I must have been shown, at least once, how to > determine the emulsion side of film. I've not studied > various film sides except to determine which is the > 'front'. (digital converts need not read further):-] > Must be the side facing the lens.(?) The side that > receives the light..right? When I have noticed, I > believe it was the concave side. > Image reversal properties of lenses can, of course, > provide the answer if you're familiar with the scene. > Well, whichever, wouldn't that be the side to place > 'front' down on a scanner? The image would then be > recorded after the light had passed through what must > be a greater thickness of film. > I've had "pro" (expensive) labs (digital and optical) > print frames in reverse a few times, so it must > require more than a glance. > I'd appreciate your advice.
Re: Which side to scan?
emulsion sticks to a wet finger. mishka On 7/24/05, Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I must have been shown, at least once, how to > determine the emulsion side of film.
Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
ken, nevermind "the sky is falling" remarks. there are a few pissed people here who wish pentax were canon. like a saying goes, "if grandma were grandpa, she would have hairy balls". i think what P is doing makes a lot of sense (although it doesn't really serve *my* needs). and thanks again for informative posts. do not shut up and don't pay too much atention to our pocket financial analysts as well. best, mishka On 7/24/05, K.Takeshita <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > After this, I will shut up :-); > > My thoughts in-line. > > Ken > > On 7/24/05 6:58 PM, "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Re: digital milestone
On 24 Jul 2005 at 19:58, William Robb wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: "Rob Studdert" > Subject: Re: digital milestone > > > > > And would cost have been a factor in this behaviour? > > Absolutely. So if cost was a non-issue would you have shot as many film frames as you have digital or is there more to the story? 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: K15mm for House Interiors
- Original Message - From: "Fred" Subject: Re: K15mm for House Interiors So, I guess I'm still on the lookout for some "15/3.5 on a Pentax DSLR" images... I'll get a crew on that for you. William Robb
Re: digital milestone
- Original Message - From: "Rob Studdert" Subject: Re: digital milestone And would cost have been a factor in this behaviour? Absolutely. William Robb
Re: What is snapshot? (Correct Answer)
- Original Message - From: "Tom Reese" Subject: Re: What is snapshot? (Correct Answer) Apparently, effective communication will now become even more difficult since the meaning of words must now be arbitrated ad nauseum. It's why we have more lawyers/100,000 people than doctors/100,000 people. William Robb
Re: Which side to scan?
- Original Message - From: "Jack Davis" Subject: Which side to scan? I must have been shown, at least once, how to determine the emulsion side of film. If you can read the edge writing, the emulsion is facing away from you. William Robb
Re: K15mm for House Interiors
>> Thanks, Cotty, for sharing the photos. I've been looking for a number of >> 15/3.5 shots taken on one of the Pentax DSLR's, to see just how "wide" the >> 15/3.5 is with the crop effect. (I'd say it's still pretty wide, but just >> not extremely so.) Thanks again. > Cotty's camera has a 1.3 crop factor, not 1.53 as per Pentax DSLR. > The DS has a smaller sensor than Cotty's Canon 1D, Oh, thanks for pointing that out, guys (even though I disappointed to hear it - ). So, I guess I'm still on the lookout for some "15/3.5 on a Pentax DSLR" images... Fred
RE: Which side to scan?
Don, thanks. I read your answer as a confirmation of my assumptions. Jack --- Don Sanderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On all of the 35mm films I've used if you hold the > film > in such a way that the frame numbers and edge > markings > are readable you are looking at the non-emulsion > side. > 35mm tends to curl towards the emulsion side because > that's how it's spooled in the cassette, plus the > emulsion shrinks a bit in processing. > And yes, the emulsion should face the lens. > Light should either come from the backing side, or > be > bounced off of the emulsion, depending on the > scanner > type. > If in doubt try scratching off a bit of an edge > marking, > they of course are also on the emulsion side. > > HTH > Don > > > -Original Message- > > From: Jack Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2005 7:15 PM > > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > > Subject: Which side to scan? > > > > > > I must have been shown, at least once, how to > > determine the emulsion side of film. I've not > studied > > various film sides except to determine which is > the > > 'front'. (digital converts need not read > further):-] > > Must be the side facing the lens.(?) The side that > > receives the light..right? When I have noticed, I > > believe it was the concave side. > > Image reversal properties of lenses can, of > course, > > provide the answer if you're familiar with the > scene. > > Well, whichever, wouldn't that be the side to > place > > 'front' down on a scanner? The image would then be > > recorded after the light had passed through what > must > > be a greater thickness of film. > > I've had "pro" (expensive) labs (digital and > optical) > > print frames in reverse a few times, so it must > > require more than a glance. > > I'd appreciate your advice. > > > > Thanks, Jack > > > > > > > > __ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Snapshot vs Not-Visually
Bob W wrote: Hi, www.web-options.com/WIP/Image10.jpg Where WAS the above shot taken? Interesting wall indeed. www.web-options.com/WIP/Image9.jpg Yep, got that. Two smashing shots. Now what was the question again? in answer to these questions: http://www.geocities.com/ghedani1/moldovita/moldoviteg.htm I am using these pictures to illustrate the definition that I proposed (but do not necessarily believe in) between a snapshot and a not-snapshot. Under the definition the first photograph is a snapshot because I had not intended to take that particular photograph. The opportunity came along and I took it, with the help of Valentin Donisa. I took the 2nd photo a week or so later. I had a good idea of what I had with the first photo, so when I saw the wall with the Coke mural I knew it could make an interesting counterpoint to the monastery and the nun. So I waited for several hours over several days while the light was right until a woman walked in front of it in the right place - it is not at all the 'natural' place to walk. I had hoped for another nun, of course, or for a slightly better (in some way) woman, but I would probably still be there now, and it does the trick. Given the intention, and the active seeking out of the photo, I do not consider it a snapshot under the definition I gave. No, it probably isn't, but it sure is interesting! what a history! Thanks, keith -- Cheers, Bob
Re: What is snapshot? (Correct Answer)
William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: "Tom Reese" Subject: Re: What is snapshot? (Correct Answer) Bob W wrote: I regret to inform you that you have committed the dictionary fallacy. And what might that be? Thats when you pull the definition for a word out of the dictionary. Oh. I wasn't aware that dictionaries were no longer accepted as a means of determining word definitions. I learn all kinds of things on this list. Apparently, effective communication will now become even more difficult since the meaning of words must now be arbitrated ad nauseum. Tom Reese
Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
After this, I will shut up :-); My thoughts in-line. Ken On 7/24/05 6:58 PM, "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > the danger is that then medium format will be the ONLY camera market they > will be in at the end of 2 years, Where is the fact on which your opinion is based? > also, what makes Pentax think that the 645D will be competitive in the > medium format market when it finally ships? I don't know but I tend to think Pentax know it and they do not usually do too stupid or reckless a thing. If anything, they are always conservative and prudent, whether we like it or not. > selling lots of low end > 35mm-type bodies where they make very little money means there won't be much > money around later. I do not know if they make little money or not. I have no such information. Margin might be thinner but the volume is there. So, I tend to think that's the reason why Canon is there and this is their largest market. What you do not like is the fact that Pentax are serving the entry level market but not coming up with the upgrade path. That's true, but it has nothing to do wioth your speculation that they are making little money in that particular segment of the market. If that market is so unprofitable, I tend to think that Canon would be the first one to get out of it, rather than concentrating it like now. > if the body specs aren't continually being upgraded, > even if it is just because other manufacturers are doing so, what makes > anyone think that the current bodies will continue to sell anyway. I think people are questioning how "frequently" the spec should be revised. Compared with the bodies in this hot entry market represented by the Rebel, how frequently Canon has been updating 10D, 20D or 1D etc. I know it's frequent enough but it goes by years certainly not by months. > if the > imaging products division is forever going to be subsidized by the other two > divisions, shareholders will have a thing or two to say about that. I do not think sensible people will judge anything by the snapshot of the financial status, particularly when it was influenced by a one-time extraordinary event like the sudden burst of the digicam price. I am sure the real analysts must be looking at the longer term prospect too, although I am not saying that the current situation is good, but obviously Pentax have weathered this disaster with far less negative impact that anybody else but Canon who were also hit hard, mind you. It tells me that they have been fairly prudent. Oly was NOT prudent, buries in the sea of dead stock, for example. So perhaps the sky IS indeed falling.
RE: Which side to scan?
On all of the 35mm films I've used if you hold the film in such a way that the frame numbers and edge markings are readable you are looking at the non-emulsion side. 35mm tends to curl towards the emulsion side because that's how it's spooled in the cassette, plus the emulsion shrinks a bit in processing. And yes, the emulsion should face the lens. Light should either come from the backing side, or be bounced off of the emulsion, depending on the scanner type. If in doubt try scratching off a bit of an edge marking, they of course are also on the emulsion side. HTH Don > -Original Message- > From: Jack Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2005 7:15 PM > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Subject: Which side to scan? > > > I must have been shown, at least once, how to > determine the emulsion side of film. I've not studied > various film sides except to determine which is the > 'front'. (digital converts need not read further):-] > Must be the side facing the lens.(?) The side that > receives the light..right? When I have noticed, I > believe it was the concave side. > Image reversal properties of lenses can, of course, > provide the answer if you're familiar with the scene. > Well, whichever, wouldn't that be the side to place > 'front' down on a scanner? The image would then be > recorded after the light had passed through what must > be a greater thickness of film. > I've had "pro" (expensive) labs (digital and optical) > print frames in reverse a few times, so it must > require more than a glance. > I'd appreciate your advice. > > Thanks, Jack > > > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com >
Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
ken, thanks a lot! you are making too much sense for this list. best, mishka On 7/24/05, K.Takeshita <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
On 7/24/05 6:58 PM, "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > the danger is that then medium format will be the ONLY camera market they > will be in at the end of 2 years, having no longer anything competitive in > the 35mm-type body range because they can't sell enough to make any money at > it. also, what makes Pentax think that the 645D will be competitive in the > medium format market when it finally ships? selling lots of low end > 35mm-type bodies where they make very little money means there won't be much > money around later. if the body specs aren't continually being upgraded, > even if it is just because other manufacturers are doing so, what makes > anyone think that the current bodies will continue to sell anyway. if the > imaging products division is forever going to be subsidized by the other two > divisions, shareholders will have a thing or two to say about that. I am somewhat sick and tired of this constant negative personal speculations. I do not understand why you think MF is the ONLY camera market they will be in at the end of 2 years (just an example of what you have been saying). Who said that, and why do you think so, when everything is pointing otherwise. Why 2 years? Is it not an exaggeration to scare people? What are your factual observations in forming such opinions? Frankly, it almost sounds like you DO NOT want to see Pentax being successful in any market. It seems that you know much more than Pentax do, and you should give them the advices at fee :-). I am just trying to share my small observations with the fellow list members with as many facts and as minimum of my own speculation or whining as possible. That's all. Truly. I am not trying to change anybody's opinion but this thread is becoming too much of an argument theatre (and the argument for the sake of the argument). I never said that Pentax are superior to Canon etc. Pentax is certainly slow and we thought we were trying to understand why so, but is it not the reality we have to accept? Aren't there may people who appreciate their lenses more than bodies, and that's why they have been (albeit reluctantly) staying with Pentax? There might be other reasons why people accept the compromise? And Pentax is not the only company like that. There are better known companies but in far worse situation than Pentax are. If you are so convinced that Pentax do not know what they are doing, and won't come up with what you want (and you could very well be right), perhaps it is time to jump the ship? But your other opinions are so valuable to this list so I personally do not want to see it happen. But it is becoming a bit of .. Rgds, Ken
Which side to scan?
I must have been shown, at least once, how to determine the emulsion side of film. I've not studied various film sides except to determine which is the 'front'. (digital converts need not read further):-] Must be the side facing the lens.(?) The side that receives the light..right? When I have noticed, I believe it was the concave side. Image reversal properties of lenses can, of course, provide the answer if you're familiar with the scene. Well, whichever, wouldn't that be the side to place 'front' down on a scanner? The image would then be recorded after the light had passed through what must be a greater thickness of film. I've had "pro" (expensive) labs (digital and optical) print frames in reverse a few times, so it must require more than a glance. I'd appreciate your advice. Thanks, Jack __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: digital milestone
On 24 Jul 2005 at 17:50, William Robb wrote: > Your post got me thinking, so I did the math as well. > I'm pretty much there myself, in that technically, the camera has paid for > itself. OTOH, this is just a numbers game, since I would have shot about 10% > of > the frames I have taken with the digital, had I been using film. And would cost have been a factor in this behaviour? 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: What is snapshot? (Correct Answer)
- Original Message - From: "Tom Reese" Subject: Re: What is snapshot? (Correct Answer) Bob W wrote: I regret to inform you that you have committed the dictionary fallacy. And what might that be? Thats when you pull the definition for a word out of the dictionary. William Robb
Re: digital milestone
- Original Message - From: "George Sinos" Subject: digital milestone After updating my records and checking my very scientific calculations, I have discovered that I have passed the point where the cost of my digital equipment is less than the cost of processing an equivalent number of film frames. Your post got me thinking, so I did the math as well. I'm pretty much there myself, in that technically, the camera has paid for itself. OTOH, this is just a numbers game, since I would have shot about 10% of the frames I have taken with the digital, had I been using film. William Robb
Re: digital milestone
- Original Message - From: "Jaume Lahuerta" Subject: RE: digital milestone This reminds me when, years ago, my friend bought his first CD burner. He started to borrow CDs from our favourite pub and copy them...lots of them. Then, he made an easy calculation, 'If I had bought all those records, it would have costed me much more than the cost of the burner so...I am already earning money !!'. Of course the trick was that he would have never bought even a 10% of those records in a shop. The other trick is that he would never have stolen the intellectual property he stole if he hadn't had the burner. William Robb
Re: PESO: The Chevy Show
Thanks for the comments from all who responded to this post. Paul On Jul 24, 2005, at 7:14 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote: Paul, Very cool pic! I love shots where you can get repetition like that. The different colors make it go beyond ordinary. You've put just enough context with the people sitting in front of the cars. -- Bruce Sunday, July 24, 2005, 12:31:16 PM, you wrote: PS> I mentioned yesterday that I was going to shoot the 50th anniversary PS> tri-five (55-57) Chevy show at Milford, Michigan. This isn't really a PS> car pic, but I like it. Perhaps some car shots later. PS> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3569814
Re: What inspired you?
The one that first, and still does, was HCB's shot of women on a ridge in Afghanistan. Wonderfully atmospheric, great tonal range, and a sense of stillness and waiting for something to happen. I think that shot alone wanted me to do better than snapshooting, and started me with Pentax enablement, long before this list really got me going! John Coyle Brisbane, Australia - Original Message - From: "Bob W" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 2:14 AM Subject: What inspired you? Hi, I sent an email yesterday about Cartier-Bresson being inspired by Munkacsi's photo of the boys running into the surf. I got to thinking about the photo which first made me aware of photography, and the first photographer whose name I actively sought out and remembered. In the early 1970s I was at boarding school, where we had the newspapers delivered every day. I remember seeing this photograph in, I think, the Sunday Times. I made a deliberate effort to memorise the photographer's name, and started to look out for more of his photographs: http://tinyurl.com/cn2sr. It made me aware that photography could be something beyond the prosaic. I still find this photograph very interesting, mysterious and inspiring. What photographs and photographers were your first inspiration? -- Cheers, Bob
Re: What is snapshot? (Correct Answer)
Bob W wrote: I regret to inform you that you have committed the dictionary fallacy. And what might that be? Tom Reese
Re: GESO - Bits and Bobs From July
Mark, As always, your bug shots are tremendous! My favorite this time is the Common Whitetail. Very nice job all around. -- Best regards, Bruce Sunday, July 24, 2005, 1:32:30 PM, you wrote: MC> Here's a little gallery with different shots from the last few weeks - MC> http://www.markcassino.com/temp/peso/July/ MC> Mostly bugs with a couple of landscapes. "Path Near Swan Creek" is from a MC> test roll of Kodak Aerographic IR film, cut down from 70mm to 120 size and MC> processed in C41. MC> "Silver Maple" resulted from a happy accident - I thought the roll of Neopan MC> 400 was from the Holga and on a whim stand processed it in cold (60F) MC> Dektol. It actually was a serious roll of film shot in the 6x7, but the MC> cold Dektol with it's nice high contrast effect really made the maple stand MC> out from its surroundings - much better than the other rolls I shot of the MC> same subject and developed conventionally. MC> The rest is digital. MC> Comments appreciated! MC> - MCC MC> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - MC> Mark Cassino Photography MC> Kalamazoo, MI MC> www.markcassino.com MC> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Re: non-takumar portrait lens
My Jupiter-9 performs the job of portrait lens very nicely. Has a nice smooth bokeh, though it's not the sharpest lens in the world. But for $40 (I think), I'll take it. :-) -Mat On 7/24/05, Vic Mortelmans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > I'm on the lookout for a portrait lens for my Pentax camera's > (M42-mounted). 85mm takumars on ebay tend not to go below 200$, and I'm > in doubt if this is what I should spend for just hobby photography. > > Some browsing on the web, pointed me to other portrait lenses that can > be used, especially these two are now monitored by me: > > - Jupiter 9, appearantly a lens which had many lives. I understand it's > very old design, but still produced today. Available as m42 or K-mount. > Rumours on the net are that quality is not stable, but "can" be very > satisfactory. I'm not sure if I the old editions are better than the new > ones, or vv. > > - Biometar 80/2.8, actually a medium format camera lens for P6-mount > (Kiev 60,...). Drawback: probably quite heavy, certainly compared to the > Jupiter 9. Advantage: it will probably perform quite well on 35mm, > because the image border areas are cut off (is this a good assumption?) > > The jupiter 9 is thrown at your head on ebay for ~40$; for the biometar > (including adaptor), I guess 50$ should be enough. > > Has any of you got experience with these (or other non-takumar) portrait > lenses?? > > What are your advises? > > Groeten, > > Vic > >
RE: What is snapshot? (Correct Answer)
Ooo, another of those List-God/Time-Warp thingies! ;-) Don > -Original Message- > From: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2005 3:45 AM > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Subject: RE: What is snapshot? (Correct Answer) > > > Great answer! > > Don > > > -Original Message- > > From: Bob W [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2005 2:42 AM > > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > > Subject: RE: What is snapshot? (Correct Answer) > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > OK, what would you call a "non-snapshot" photograph? > > > (Frostbite optional) > > > > > > > Pretentious. > > > > The defining property of a snapshot is the absence of pretension. > > > > -- > > Cheers, > > Bob > > >
Re: PESO: The Chevy Show
Paul, Very cool pic! I love shots where you can get repetition like that. The different colors make it go beyond ordinary. You've put just enough context with the people sitting in front of the cars. -- Bruce Sunday, July 24, 2005, 12:31:16 PM, you wrote: PS> I mentioned yesterday that I was going to shoot the 50th anniversary PS> tri-five (55-57) Chevy show at Milford, Michigan. This isn't really a PS> car pic, but I like it. Perhaps some car shots later. PS> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3569814
Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
On 7/24/05 6:33 PM, "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > However, I don't think > Pentax has a large studio pro market any more. Most of the studio pros > I've encountered have already switched to Hassy digital or Canon 1DS > Mark II. The number shooting film has decreased dramatically. So Pentax > may already have missed the window of opportunity on that one. You could very well be right. B/Rgds, Ken
RE: Snapshot vs Not-Visually
Hi, > >> > >>www.web-options.com/WIP/Image10.jpg > > Where WAS the above shot taken? Interesting wall indeed. > > > >>www.web-options.com/WIP/Image9.jpg > > > Yep, got that. Two smashing shots. Now what was the question again? in answer to these questions: http://www.geocities.com/ghedani1/moldovita/moldoviteg.htm I am using these pictures to illustrate the definition that I proposed (but do not necessarily believe in) between a snapshot and a not-snapshot. Under the definition the first photograph is a snapshot because I had not intended to take that particular photograph. The opportunity came along and I took it, with the help of Valentin Donisa. I took the 2nd photo a week or so later. I had a good idea of what I had with the first photo, so when I saw the wall with the Coke mural I knew it could make an interesting counterpoint to the monastery and the nun. So I waited for several hours over several days while the light was right until a woman walked in front of it in the right place - it is not at all the 'natural' place to walk. I had hoped for another nun, of course, or for a slightly better (in some way) woman, but I would probably still be there now, and it does the trick. Given the intention, and the active seeking out of the photo, I do not consider it a snapshot under the definition I gave. -- Cheers, Bob
Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
On 7/24/05 6:06 PM, "K.Takeshita" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I believe it has far less to do with their technical ability to > produce larger sensor SLR. At the risk of being redundant, I might add one more point. I am sure the list members here remember the infamous MZ-D. If Pentax actually produced and marketed it, they were the "first" in the FF DSLR market which was apparently their intention. This was when the DSLR market was somewhat in an infancy stage (not too long ago though). But it was also the stage where the new management was working. They were obviously ready to take the risk, spent some real dollar to develop it and going to challenge C/N, in their dream to restore the past glory of being in the forefront of the SLR technology. DSLR was the chance for their fresh start. Both Pentax and Kyocera/Contax used the same Philips sensor. Kyocera/Contax hastened the product and actually started marketing it. It was a miserable failure. Not only was the whole kit too big, but the high ISO noise was almost making the camera unusable (IIRC, too much noise beyond 400 etc). At the same time, Pentax were aware of the Kyocera's problem although they did not have that problem, and was about to market it. Well, everybody thought so. But in the last minute, I believe they essentially chickened out. But their cameras were good working models and some of them are still being used in-house for real use. It was solely a marketing decision. It was just too expensive and Pentax did not have the "paying" market. They had to create it to sell their product in any quantity. Killing the project may or may not have been a good thing to Pentax. If they ever marketed it, they either encountered an instant death caused by Canon, or may have built further on it, in spite of the challenge, simply because they made a head start. But watching the demise of Kyocera/Contax, the killing of the project was probably prudent and right. If Pentax knew what they know now about this chaotic DSLR market today, they certainly would not have even thought about making the FF DSLR. Now the sensor cost is coming down, and P might have found a good source or partner in the sensor supply (are they serious about the in-house FAB which is rumoured from time to time?). But the morale of this episode is that P always had the technical ability to produce the FF DSLR. They can certainly produce the 20D or better. I never thought that was the question. But they can never be the leader in this market, challenging Canon (and perhaps Nikon too) when they own the market. But the higher end DSLR market will begin to mature soon, and in the meantime, it is critically important for Pentax to put a strong foothold in the entry yet much larger market for now. I only hope that the new management is readier to take the (calculated) risk, and bolder in taking the new challenge. I think the current management is much better in that respect, but I do not want to see their demise caused by reckless venture either. So, the solution is somewhere in-between ? :-). Cheers, Ken
Re: What is snapshot? (seriously)
On 24 Jul 2005 at 19:05, Cotty wrote: > Which comes back to my point that a single photograph must stand on its > own merits. And hence, cannot be judged as a snapshot (or not) at all. > > Only the photographer will truly know if a photo he/she has taken, is a > snapshot. I think I made this point earlier. To my mind it's impossible for any viewer who was not privy to the intents of the photographer to make a determination as to what is or what is not a snapshot, to do so is foolhardy. 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: Major Enablement.
Bill, Nice purchase! And at 1/3 retail? What's that, about US$800? Wow, the A200 Macro is impossible to fine at $1,200. You have a great bargain on a fine lens. Bob On 7/22/05, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've hinted at this in a couple of posts, but didn't want to jinx it. > After reading a few posts by Pal and Tom R., I decided to se if I could > track down one of those FA200/4 Macro lenses that they waxed eloquent about. > My initial conversation with the store had the Pentax rep saying they were > available as a special order out of Japan, much like the A15/3.5 is (was) > available. > Fine, six weeks and I'll have it, I'm thinking. > Then the store calls me and says the rep called Japan to place the order and > found that the lens was no longer available. > Great sadness. > Then the store called me and told me the rep had found one in another reps > display sample kit in the USA and would I mind taking a demonstrator (at > about 1/3 of new price). > There was no hesitation at all on my part. > Pentax Canada will be running the lens through their refurbishing department > to ensure it is at as close to like new as possible, and I should have it > before the end of August. > Anyway, thats my story, and I'm sticking to it. > > William Robb > > >
Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
the danger is that then medium format will be the ONLY camera market they will be in at the end of 2 years, having no longer anything competitive in the 35mm-type body range because they can't sell enough to make any money at it. also, what makes Pentax think that the 645D will be competitive in the medium format market when it finally ships? selling lots of low end 35mm-type bodies where they make very little money means there won't be much money around later. if the body specs aren't continually being upgraded, even if it is just because other manufacturers are doing so, what makes anyone think that the current bodies will continue to sell anyway. if the imaging products division is forever going to be subsidized by the other two divisions, shareholders will have a thing or two to say about that. Herb... - Original Message - From: "K.Takeshita" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax Discuss" Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2005 6:06 PM Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42% 4. I believe the answer to why P create and market 645D first is rather simple. I believe it has far less to do with their technical ability to produce larger sensor SLR. It is simply because they basically own the studio pro (and nature photographers) market through 645 and 6x7, and this is a "paying" market on which they can pretty much count (and a lot of enthusiasts market too). This plus their very close relationship with this particular "pro" group is making it so much easier for P to invest in and market 645D. I know Hassy and Mamiya etc have their own market but the position of Pentax 645 in the pro market is special. P also benefits from a lot of advices from these pros. Concept of the Limited lenses was one of them. So, simply speaking, 645 pro market to P is like a PJ market to Canon. C/N have to serve their captive market and even though their FF DSLR cost so much, there is a paying segment of the market.
Re: Snapshot vs Not-Visually
Cotty wrote: On 24/7/05, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed: Buy a PC . I didn't try it in Exploder. I'm using some stuff that's not universally liked by different browsers. Let's cut out the middle man: www.web-options.com/WIP/Image10.jpg Where WAS the above shot taken? Interesting wall indeed. keith whaley www.web-options.com/WIP/Image9.jpg Yep, got that. Two smashing shots. Now what was the question again? Cheers, Cotty
Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
I agree. Very interesting and informative. However, I don't think Pentax has a large studio pro market any more. Most of the studio pros I've encountered have already switched to Hassy digital or Canon 1DS Mark II. The number shooting film has decreased dramatically. So Pentax may already have missed the window of opportunity on that one. Paul On Jul 24, 2005, at 6:16 PM, Cotty wrote: On 24/7/05, K.Takeshita, discombobulated, unleashed: Besides PDML, I only watch lists in Japan, so my info and observations are naturally biased toward what's happening in Japan, which may or may not apply directly to the rest of the world. [big snip] Ken, thanks for taking the time to write that post - it was extremely interesting, and compulsive reading. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
On 24/7/05, K.Takeshita, discombobulated, unleashed: >Besides PDML, I only watch lists in Japan, so my info and observations are >naturally biased toward what's happening in Japan, which may or may not >apply directly to the rest of the world. [big snip] Ken, thanks for taking the time to write that post - it was extremely interesting, and compulsive reading. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
On 7/22/05 4:43 AM, "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > OK I hear all you say and I can appreciate the company philosophy but how does > the 645D fit into it, it's hardly a conservative move. A camera to replace the > *ist D six months ago surely wouldn't have been too much of an imposition on > the company, far less than launching an MF DSLR I'm guessing? Besides PDML, I only watch lists in Japan, so my info and observations are naturally biased toward what's happening in Japan, which may or may not apply directly to the rest of the world. With above qualification; 1. Your question was the same one folks in Japan were asking. 2. They also asked if P intended to offer the 645D as their top of the line DSLR, particularly 35mm FF DSLR. 3. I remember a long time ago, which might have been even before the 645D was announced, when a Pentax person uttered that "there was a lot of pressure from the pros to make the 645D or a digital back for the 645". 4. I believe the answer to why P create and market 645D first is rather simple. I believe it has far less to do with their technical ability to produce larger sensor SLR. It is simply because they basically own the studio pro (and nature photographers) market through 645 and 6x7, and this is a "paying" market on which they can pretty much count (and a lot of enthusiasts market too). This plus their very close relationship with this particular "pro" group is making it so much easier for P to invest in and market 645D. I know Hassy and Mamiya etc have their own market but the position of Pentax 645 in the pro market is special. P also benefits from a lot of advices from these pros. Concept of the Limited lenses was one of them. So, simply speaking, 645 pro market to P is like a PJ market to Canon. C/N have to serve their captive market and even though their FF DSLR cost so much, there is a paying segment of the market. 5. Re whether P will enter into a FF DSLR market, I believe they certainly will, if the cost decreases to a reasonable level, consequently the size of the market increases, justifying the investment and when everybody else makes it. I just cannot see any reason why P would not make FF DSLR only because they have 645D, when there is a market and everybody else is in it. 645D and FF DSLR serve the different markets. I think it all comes down to the cost and the economics after all. I would think there is very little change in camera design itself be it a FF or an APS sized sensor. When the sensor cost comes down and crosses certain threshold, makers will start offering it and people will start buying it. Remember P now have so many software engineers (naturally). 6. But there seems to be a pause in the market contemplating whether it is really a good idea to increase the size of the sensor, or more accurately, makers may have started thinking that APS sized sensor is a new genre and can develop it further. If the sensor technology rapidly develops, then why do they have to stick to the 35mm concept, except the 35mm lenses can be used without FL conversion, granted that the larger is always 9or generally0 better. At the beginning of the DSLR, makers must have thought this was the great opportunity to make a compact kit, better (and less expensive) lenses etc. 4/3 was probably based on that idea (but when Oly came up with the products, the stuff, particularly lenses were as big as Canon's. A big disappointment from which Oly has not recovered yet. Maybe Panasonic could fix it :-). Nikon has obviously been watching the market. A lot of people thought that their mount reached the limit in more flexible lens design anyway. 7. But in the end, regardless of the competitions' wishful thinking, I believe they will be dragged into the game played by Canon, who have a large enough mount, own sensors and openly announced the shortening of the product life cycle. I personally do not at all like an unreasonably short product life cycle. If I buy a DSLR, I like to think it would be reasonably current for 2 years. But Canon spit our Rebel variations almost 6 months cycle (feel like so much shorter than that) and they do that mostly in the largest segment of the market, i.e., entry level. "Some" 20D owners are feeling they were cheated by Canon :-). They hustle competitions, who have no choice but to spit out new models in order to respond to Canon's challenge. Rebel is now 8MP (I believe) and might soon be 10 or 12MP. How many of the entry level users will truly understand the difference in the MP and dynamic range etc? How many of this intended target market understand and shoot RAW ? Are they not much better off with the 6MP but much cheaper cameras? It does not matter. This is the way Canon refresh the market and maintain the price level in this competitive market segment. Canon certainly know how to appeal to the average crowd by creating an MP myth as well as overly sharpened and high contrast images (Rebel) but that's their
Re: PAW PESO - Owen and His Sign
Really nic eshot Shel. The sign being in bold colours makes a strong statement,however i think that a B&W version could also hold that true. One of those shots that cam go either way and still be good. Dave > I met Owen this past Saturday. He was kind enough to let me photograph him > with his sign. He carries it around to different venues - Saturday he was > at a little Jesus festival in San Francisco - and he has a regular corner > in Oakland where he invited me to visit. I'll be seeing Owen again, and > probably shooting B&W. Color, I think, is too intense, certainly in bright > light. Anyway, there may be more photos and more of a story about Owen as > time progresses. > > http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/owen.html > > K Body camera, K28/3.5, Fuji Reala > > > Shel > >
Re: What is snapshot? (seriously)
On 24/7/05, Jostein, discombobulated, unleashed: >And one for Boris and other mathematically inclined: >http://3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375105820974944592.com/ ROTFLMAO!! Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: What is snapshot? (seriously)
On 24/7/05, frank theriault, discombobulated, unleashed: > "Edith, Horatio, you stand in the back, >Inez, Pierre, Moragh, you get in the front, now all of you move to the >left, so I can get the Space Needle in the frame Why Frank I don't believe you've told us about this particular trip...man Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Frozen Finch(MZ-S play)
Franks numingly said: > > I have a frozen finch. It's in my freezer. > > Really. > cheers, > frank > -- > "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson > You should see what WE keep in out freezers, north of Steeles.LOL Dave
Re: What is snapshot? (seriously)
On 24/7/05, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed: >I agree. ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: GFM camera clinic
> On 22/7/05, frank theriault, discombobulated, unleashed: > > >I wish I could. This would actually be more my thing than the Nature > >Photography Clinic, but since there's more PDML involvement in the > >latter, it's that event I choose to attend. > > > >Maybe one year I'll be able to afford both... > > What Frank Said :-) > > > > > Cheers, > Cotty What Cotty said to Frank,only i did enjoy the NPW as it was a comlete 180 from norm. I dont know why norm would care though(sorry for taking away a good comback lads:-) Dave
Re: DL & DS viewfinders compared side by side
As I said, it was a quick comparison...and I didn't perceived differences in magnification when changing between one and the other. I am sure that, with more time, I could have find it... My point is that I expected the difference to be more obvious. Anyway, there are other differences that make the Ds a more logical choice than the DL at the same price... Regards, Jaume --- Carlos Royo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió: > > > About the viewfinder, both had a Sigma 18-125 > mounted. > > Although my brain was all the time: 'remember, the > DS > > has a pentaprism and the DL a pentamirror...', my > eyes > > could't see the difference. Actually, if someone > tells > > me 'you MUST choose the brighter', I would choose > the > > DL. > > Jaume, did you notice any difference in their > magnification? Being the > DS 0.95 and the DL 0.89, I think this would be the > most noticeable > difference, not the relative brightness of the > viewfinder. > > Carlos > > __ Renovamos el Correo Yahoo! Nuevos servicios, más seguridad http://correo.yahoo.es
Re: PESO: The Chevy Show
Lovely. An automotive rainbow. John On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 20:31:16 +0100, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I mentioned yesterday that I was going to shoot the 50th anniversary tri-five (55-57) Chevy show at Milford, Michigan. This isn't really a car pic, but I like it. Perhaps some car shots later. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3569814 -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Re: Snapshot vs Not-Visually
On 24/7/05, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed: >Buy a PC . I didn't try it in Exploder. > >I'm using some stuff that's not universally liked by different browsers. >Let's cut out the middle man: > >www.web-options.com/WIP/Image10.jpg >www.web-options.com/WIP/Image9.jpg Yep, got that. Two smashing shots. Now what was the question again? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: PESO: The Chevy Show
On 24/7/05, Paul Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed: >I mentioned yesterday that I was going to shoot the 50th anniversary >tri-five (55-57) Chevy show at Milford, Michigan. This isn't really a >car pic, but I like it. Perhaps some car shots later. >http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3569814 Nice one Steady Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: DL & DS viewfinders compared side by side
I'd check the focusing ability which is easier. I'd bet the Ds... Carlos Royo wrote: About the viewfinder, both had a Sigma 18-125 mounted. Although my brain was all the time: 'remember, the DS has a pentaprism and the DL a pentamirror...', my eyes could't see the difference. Actually, if someone tells me 'you MUST choose the brighter', I would choose the DL. Jaume, did you notice any difference in their magnification? Being the DS 0.95 and the DL 0.89, I think this would be the most noticeable difference, not the relative brightness of the viewfinder. Carlos -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: PAW PESO - Urban Picnic
On 24/7/05, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed: > http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/urban1.html GREAT shot. Love it. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Paw: GFM Pic #11. IR #3.The final walk
Thanks Scott. Now i have an idea of what things look like in IR at the mountain, i;ll try somemore next year. I would like to take a trip a long the parkway and try some there. Maybe at the big old house (again i forget the name) were GFM #1 was shot. Dave > On 7/22/05, Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Dave, > > > > Another thing that comes > > across to me is that it kind of looks like an old, turn of the century > > type of photograph. Nice shot - you're pretty good with that IR > > stuff! > > Those were exactly my first thoughts upon seeing this photo. Nice > shot. I really like the feel and mood. > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Bruce > > > > > > Friday, July 22, 2005, 5:09:50 PM, you wrote: > > > > bcin>Hey gang. > > > > bcin> IR photo number three. This is the swing bridge. I was > > bcin> trying to do two things here. Get > > bcin> some decent > > bcin> light and not have people on it. One out of two ain't bad i > > suppose. > > > > bcin> Anyway. I looked at this shot a few times and its > > bcin> starting to grow on me. Sort of looks > > bcin> like the > > bcin> final walk into oblivian. > > > > bcin> > > http://photobucket.com/albums/v408/divad_b/?action=view¤t=GFM_BRIDGE.jpg > > > > bcin> Anyway comments welcome, > > > > > > bcin> Dave > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Scott Loveless > http://www.twosixteen.com > > -- > "You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman >
Re: DL & DS viewfinders compared side by side
About the viewfinder, both had a Sigma 18-125 mounted. Although my brain was all the time: 'remember, the DS has a pentaprism and the DL a pentamirror...', my eyes could't see the difference. Actually, if someone tells me 'you MUST choose the brighter', I would choose the DL. Jaume, did you notice any difference in their magnification? Being the DS 0.95 and the DL 0.89, I think this would be the most noticeable difference, not the relative brightness of the viewfinder. Carlos
Re: PESO: The Chevy Show
Sort of an abstract really, very nice use of repetition. Paul Stenquist wrote: I mentioned yesterday that I was going to shoot the 50th anniversary tri-five (55-57) Chevy show at Milford, Michigan. This isn't really a car pic, but I like it. Perhaps some car shots later. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3569814 -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: What is snapshot? (seriously)
- Original Message - From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Yeah - I'm changing my domain name right away. www.cottystudiousandconsideredprecconceivedphotographicdigitalimages.com (just to avoid confusion ;-) :-) Here's one, especially for Mark Roberts: http://www.llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwyll-llantysiliogogogoch.com/ And one for Boris and other mathematically inclined: http://3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375105820974944592.com/ And a free mail service for those who still lack gmail invitations: http://www.abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzabcdefghijk.com/ :-) Cheers Jostein
RE: digital milestone
This reminds me when, years ago, my friend bought his first CD burner. He started to borrow CDs from our favourite pub and copy them...lots of them. Then, he made an easy calculation, 'If I had bought all those records, it would have costed me much more than the cost of the burner so...I am already earning money !!'. Of course the trick was that he would have never bought even a 10% of those records in a shop. ;-) Jaume --- George Sinos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió: > After updating my records and checking my very > scientific > calculations, I have discovered that I have passed > the point where the > cost of my digital equipment is less than the cost > of processing an > equivalent number of film frames. > > I am now 42 cents (U.S.) ahead of the game. I think > I'll go shoot a > few hundred frames and save even more more. > > see you later, gs > http://www.georgesphotos.net > > __ Renovamos el Correo Yahoo! Nuevos servicios, más seguridad http://correo.yahoo.es
Re: What is snapshot? (seriously)
"Snapshot is a state of mind." Chant -- uhmmm.. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: "Bob W" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: What is snapshot? (seriously) > I would like to offer a definition which does not imply anything about the > quality of the picture, or any kind of value judgement, and does not depend > on the type of equipment use. > > Other people have mentioned intention, then gone on to talk about > previsualisation, attention to detail etc. I agree that intention is the > key, but I don't necessarily agree about previsualisation etc. > > I think that if you go out with the intention of taking a specific > photograph, then it is not a snapshot. For example, if I walk out of my > house now and take a photograph of the front of it, then that is not a > snapshot. It doesn't matter whether it's good or bad, handheld or supported > on the back of a phoenix, or whether it's APS or 10x8". > > Everything else is a snapshot. > > So if, while I'm outside my house, I see a giraffe on a unicycle, and I > photograph it, that is a snapshot. > > That is why I consider 'Moonrise, Hernandez' to be a snapshot. If you read > 'Examples: the Making of 40 Photographs' you will see that Adams had gone to > the Charna Valley to make a particular set of photographs, which he thought > were unsuccessful. Successful or not, I would not consider these to be > snapshots. But on the way back he saw the famous moonrise, and worked > quickly to capture it as best he could. To me this is a snapshot. > > Intentionality versus opportunism. > > By contrast, HCB would prowl the streets, waiting to see what came along, > operating with, as far as possible, no expectation or intention. Waiting for > opportunities, and having the skill both to recognise and to capture them, > as Adams did with the moonrise. > > By further contrast, consider some of the most famous photos by Doisneau, > such the Le Baiser de l'Hotel de Ville. These have the quality we often > associate with snapshots, but in many cases they were carefully planned and > executed - perhaps as carefully as anything that Ansel Adams ever > photographed - so by my definition they are not snapshots. > > -- > Cheers, > Bob > > > -Original Message- > > From: Boris Liberman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 24 July 2005 15:45 > > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > > Subject: Re: What is snapshot? (seriously) > > > > Hi! > > > > Larry, Shel, to clarify this issue further. What I was asking > > the question of this thread I did not mean it as a reaction > > to what Shel said... > > > > It simply was a sum of few ingredients - Shel's use of words, > > my memory as to how I approached the shot (and many others > > that I presented here) and general curiosity of my mind... > > > > Again, I did not try to react to Shel's very comment about > > that very image... An independent, a tangential thought > > occurred to me and I decided to ask my question... > > > > Gee, it is not easy to put into words this kind of reasoning... > > > > -- > > Boris > > > > > > > > >
Re: What is snapshot? (seriously)
Snapshot - around 50mm lens (on35mm format) Photograph/image - more or less than 50mm Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2005 10:41 AM Subject: Re: What is snapshot? (seriously) > Snapshot: 1/30 second or less. > Photograph: 1/15 second or longer. > > HAR!! > > William Robb > > >
GESO - Bits and Bobs From July
Here's a little gallery with different shots from the last few weeks - http://www.markcassino.com/temp/peso/July/ Mostly bugs with a couple of landscapes. "Path Near Swan Creek" is from a test roll of Kodak Aerographic IR film, cut down from 70mm to 120 size and processed in C41. "Silver Maple" resulted from a happy accident - I thought the roll of Neopan 400 was from the Holga and on a whim stand processed it in cold (60F) Dektol. It actually was a serious roll of film shot in the 6x7, but the cold Dektol with it's nice high contrast effect really made the maple stand out from its surroundings - much better than the other rolls I shot of the same subject and developed conventionally. The rest is digital. Comments appreciated! - MCC - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Photography Kalamazoo, MI www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Re: What is snapshot? (seriously)
Kenneth Waller wrote: The term "nice family snap ..." is certainly not derogatory. Depends on the image to which it is applied. I think it depends on who says it and whether he thinks it should be a derogatory term ...
RE: What is snapshot? (Correct Answer)
>Is this a snapshot? > >http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/rockaway.jpg > >Shel Yes. Unless the tripod is crooked. Powell
