Re: Have digital cameras made us better photographers?

[Cotty]

On 27/7/05, Rob Studdert, discombobulated, unleashed:

>They much be wearing HCB coloured glasses then, I have a photo book byHCB
>full 
>of very ordinary images.

Define ordinary!






Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_

Re: PESO: Simplicity

[Cotty]

On 27/7/05, Steve Jolly, discombobulated, unleashed:

>http://www.elvum.net/gallery/paw/simplicity
>
>*istDS, Tamron 28-200 f3.8-4.5, [EMAIL PROTECTED], 1/400s
>
>Taken next to Putney Bridge, in London.
>
>All comments and criticisms encouraged. :-)

Nice one Steve. Actually it's quite complicated. Very nice.




Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_

Re: Have digital cameras made us better photographers?

[Lucas Rijnders]

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 09:36:02 +0200, Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Define ordinary!


-a judge of a probate court.
-a clergyman appointed to prepare condemned prisoners for death.
-an early bicycle with a very large front wheel and small back wheel.
-a simple geometrical figure on the arms, wider than a line or division of  
the field.

-Wine consumed regularly in France.
-A complete meal provided at a fixed price or a tavern or an inn providing  
such a meal.

-Invariable or unchanging portions of the Mass.
-A public dinner where each guest pays his quota; a table d'hôte.

All nice subjects for a photgraph, but he probably meant:

-not exceptional in any way especially in quality or ability or size or  
degree; "ordinary everyday objects"; "ordinary decency"; "an ordinary  
day"; "an ordinary wine"


Hope this helps,
--
Regards, Lucas

RE: Have digital cameras made us better photographers?

[Rob Studdert]

On 27 Jul 2005 at 7:43, Bob W wrote:

> which book is it?

Man and Machine, Thames and Hudson, 1972, ISBN 0500540063

http://www.bookkoob.co.uk/book/0500540063.htm


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: Storing digital images (Was: RAW file processing)

[Tim Øsleby]

Today Markus wrote:
>There is no need to argue about that over and over for me.
>

Not for me neither ;-)

Perhaps it was your talk about fire and theft that "fired" me off (pun
intended).

There is something strange about talking security. Security discussions in
photo/data world are based on the "fear" of loosing data, and as we all know
fear does something with us. Perhaps this "fear" makes me a bit pig-headed?
Don't really know. 
But I do know that I don't want to be a pain in lower back region ;-)


Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian.)

Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds 
(Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)


-Original Message-
From: Markus Maurer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 27. juli 2005 07:16
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: RE: Storing digital images (Was: RAW file processing)

Hi Tim
as others have told you too:
You have to backup on different non rewritable mediums to be "quite" safe.
Whenever you connect and use your external hard disk, your data is at risk
and a (yet unknown) virus could do it's damage.

You see Tim, **valid** and useful backup strategies have been invented
already!
There is no need to argue about that over and over for me.

Back to Pentax topics
greetings
Markus

>>2. And that it's rather unlikely to get viruses at a disconnected drive.
>>(Perhaps Marcus can fill me in here.) Let me add that I run a pretty tight
>>antivirus regime.
>>
>

Re: Have digital cameras made us better photographers?

[Kostas Kavoussanakis]

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005, Rob Studdert wrote:


On 26 Jul 2005 at 19:31, Herb Chong wrote:


being able to operate a film camera.


Oh yeah, forgot about that, fully manual of course and with an external meter.


Crap, Rob, you don't need a meter and you know it.

Kostas

Re: K15mm for House Interiors

[Kostas Kavoussanakis]

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005, Vid Strpic wrote:


On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 09:56:33AM +0100, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005, Vid Strpic wrote:

I have one, not yet tried it on digital, but plain photos on 35mm film
look nice.  Have you also considered MIR-47 2.5/20?  I just ordered one,
it seems to be rectilinear lens...
http://rugift.com/photocameras/mir_47_k_lens.htm

Is this the one that chips mirrors?


Not so fast.  I said I just ordered it, from Russia it usually takes a
month :)

But, I have Zenitar 2.8/16 already (fisheye), no such problems.


Not sure you got what I mean, Vid: the MIR-47 is a bit too long and 
the mirror of some Pentax cameras (you may need to check which does 
so) hits it when taking a picture. The end result is that the camera 
mirror breaks. Because the filters (at the back) are part of the 
optical formula, you need to file away part of the protruding bit. 
That's if the lens interferes with your camera's mirror.


Kostas

Re: Hank & Ansel go head-to-head in desert snapper death struggle

[Juan Buhler]

On 7/27/05, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I'm not sure what HCB was trying to say, too much of the message is lost in
> the murky depths of the image, as presented.

I think he was trying to carefully frame the five "(c) Magnum Photos"
floating in the air :)

I do prefer HCB's, although it is far from his best pictures. Adams',
as most of his work, is just another postcard, a beautifully rendered,
trite image.

j


-- 
Juan Buhler
http://www.jbuhler.com
photoblog at http://photoblog.jbuhler.com

Re: I Suck.

[Tom Reese]

David Mann wrote:

I'm starting to feel inadequate as I only have one example of any  focal 
length, except 200mm (FA* 200/2.8 and M 200/4).


But at least I have a 43mm ;)


Uh-oh. And you're the guy who said he had enough lenses. 

Tom Reese

Re: PESO: NInja (Redux)

[Tom Reese]

frank theriault wrote:

As far as nicknames, no I don't have one.  


Rabbit.

Tom Reese

Re: Have digital cameras made us better photographers?

[Mark Roberts]

Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>From an aesthetic point of view, I often haven't sufficient  
>distance from the picture taking experience to be objective about the  
>results for a month or more ...

Isn't that the truth! I often take multiple versions of the same shot
with slight differences in composition and find it very difficult to
pick the best one right after the shoot. But given a month's worth of
"esthetic distance" I often find that the winner pops right out at me.
As a result, I've gotten in the habit of only deleting shots with
obvious, significant technical defects (at least immediately after the
shoot).

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: Have digital cameras made us better photographers?

[Mark Roberts]

Tom Reese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>I would add that a student of photography should also study 
>art to improve your sense of color, proportion and perspective. Study 
>the principles and techniques of composition in art. Study composition 
>as it relates to photography.

And not just as it relates to photography: There's a lot to be learned
from other art forms. Last summer I went to an exhibit of 19th century
landscape painting (mostly Hudson River School) at the Carnegie Museum.
Great educational experience. 
As Yogi Berra said, you can see a lot just by looking. :)

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: Hank & Ansel go head-to-head in desert snapper death struggle

[Cotty]

On 27/7/05, Juan Buhler, discombobulated, unleashed:

>I do prefer HCB's, although it is far from his best pictures. Adams',
>as most of his work, is just another postcard, a beautifully rendered,
>trite image.

Sacrilege!!!




Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_

Re: Storing digital images (Was: RAW file processing)

[Mark Roberts]

Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Since 1984, I've had exactly one hard drive crash out on me

I've had three go in the past 15 years...

I had a Western Digital hard drive go after only six months of use.
After going through all kinds of contortions, I got them to send a
replacement under warranty. That one lasted about six months and died.
The warranty replacement for *that* one was dead on arrival. When they
replaced the DOA unit I took it in to my local computer shop and traded
it in without even opening the package.
There's my three hard drive failures. (Yes, it seems that Western
Digital had a problem with one production run of that particular drive,
but I've still never been able to make myself buy another Western
Digital drive.)

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

A* 600 f5.6 on Ebay

[Frank Wajer]

Hi all,

just saw an A* 600 f5.6 on Ebay. This lens is mentioned as "Once in a lifetime 
used" by Boz. So I guess you should grab it now if you want it.

Frank

Re: A thirst for Art

[Mark Roberts]

frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>On 7/26/05, Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> This story harks back to the thread last week about ancient water from
>> glaciers:
>> 
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/devon/4718573.stm
>
>I'm speechless - on so many levels...

>From the article:
American-born Mr Hill said the bottle was clearly a work of art. 
He said: "It looked like an ordinary bottle of water. But it was
on a plinth, labeled, described and in the programme of the whole
festival." 

Now I know how to make something into art: Put it on a plinth and label
it!

(Now I gotta go and get me some plinths...)

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: MZ-S

[Tom Reese]

Gautam Sarup wrote:

Hi,

This is my first post to PDML.

I'm thinking of getting an MZ-S and wondered how
solidly it's built.  Would it be likely to last
a few decades of weekend use?  Also, how good is
it at keeping dust out?  I travel a fair bit to
dusty places so both things are important.


Gautam,

Welcome to the PDML.

I would hate to guess about the long term durability of the MZ-S.
The camera is structurally sound but it isn't bulletproof. In my 
opinion, you're asking a lot to expect 30 years of service from any 
device with electronics. It is also an open question as to whether film 
will be around that long.


I also wouldn't want to guess about how dustproof it is. It doesn't have 
O-rings etc to completely seal the joints. There are other cameras that 
are better suited for extreme environments.


I haven't had any problems with either of my MZ-S bodies but the worst 
conditions I've exposed them to is a little rain and cold.


I hope this helps.

Tom Reese

Re: A* 600 f5.6 on Ebay

[Kostas Kavoussanakis]

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005, Frank Wajer wrote:


just saw an A* 600 f5.6 on Ebay.


Excellent. The seller thanks you, the people who were watching it 
don't quite do so.


Kostas

Re: RAW file processing

[Mark Roberts]

David Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>On Jul 27, 2005, at 3:34 AM, danilo wrote:
>
>> My forehead is also flatter now, I thrashed it on my keyboard  
>> several times.
>> I've also spent a couple of days wandering like a zombie in the city,
>> swearing to some saint. People though I was insane. Indeed I was.
>
>I remember reading about a photographer who lost his life's work when  
>the building housing it caught fire.  IIRC he went insane.  This was  
>back in the dark ages before digital came along - disaster can easily  
>strike even us film shooters.

"Even" film shooters? *Especially* film shooters, in this example,
because it's quite impractical with film to create duplicate backups and
store them in separate locations.

>At least digital files are able to be easily (and losslessly) backed up.

When I do digital photo restorations, I tell customers to make several
copies of the CD and send them to any relatives who might have an
interest in the photo (it's almost always old family photos that get the
restoration treatment). When I point out that this protects them in case
their original is damaged by fire, flood, theft, etc. it's amazing how
many of them have never even *thought* of making multiple copies for
this purpose.

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: A* 600 f5.6 on Ebay

[Fred]

>> just saw an A* 600 f5.6 on Ebay.

> Excellent. The seller thanks you, the people who were watching it 
> don't quite do so.

Yes.  Please don't mention ongoing eBay auctions.  Thanks.

Fred

Re: Storing digital images (Was: RAW file processing)

[Tom Reese]

Mark Roberts wrote:

Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



Since 1984, I've had exactly one hard drive crash out on me



I've had three go in the past 15 years...


The hard drive on my machine at work failed yesterday.

I've also had numerous hard drive failures. Anyone who trusts
their hard drive with anything important is asking for
major trouble.

Tom Reese

Re: PESO: NInja (Redux)

[Mark Roberts]

BTW Frank: This photo freaked me out a little because Ninja could be a
twin brother of my friend Roger from Rochester, NY. (Roger was shot and
killed in a robbery attempt a couple of years ago.) Spooky.

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

RE: A* 600 f5.6 on Ebay

[Don Sanderson]

Just when I thought I'd outgrown drooling on myself! ;-)

Don

> -Original Message-
> From: Frank Wajer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 6:49 AM
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: A* 600 f5.6 on Ebay
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> just saw an A* 600 f5.6 on Ebay. This lens is mentioned as "Once 
> in a lifetime used" by Boz. So I guess you should grab it now if 
> you want it.
> 
> Frank
> 

Going back to the nine seconds for advise

[brooksdj]

Hi gang.

Just thought i would run this through the collective to see if any one might 
have a
suggestion to this 
non Pentax problem.

Lately i have been shooting some nice horse show pics. Sunny day and the 
picture looks
like  it 
should,a bright picture with lots of detail bright colours and shadows etc. A 
normal
bright day shot.

Then. on the same jump in non changing light conditions,i get one that you 
can tell is
shot in sunny 
conditions but it looks like looking out of a car window that has that tint 
film on it to
keep the glare out. 
You can tell its sunny out, good strong shadows give that away.
Sometimes the aperature is 2-3 stops different than it should be, but alot of 
times its
only a few tenths 
offIE: 1000 at f4.5 then 1000 at f 4.8, but it looks way under exposed. I know 
that little
diference will 
not make that much in the shot.

Nikon does not think this is a metering problem(i have sent the D2H back) but 
something
related to it, 
maybe.

Any ideas from those that understand the proccessing better than i do.

Sorry for the non pentax content, but  this is driving me absolutly around the 
bend. I
have a fair amount 
invested in this venture and its driving me crazy.My istD id a great camera for 
sheer
keeper numbers,at 
least 99.5 %.

Dave
  

RE: Storing digital images (Was: RAW file processing)

[Don Sanderson]

Absolutely agreed.
We have the sad task of telling people that all their data
is gone everyday.
When asked if they have a backup the most common answer is:
No, didn't think I needed one, the machine is only "X"
months/years old. :-(
When told the price of (attempted) data recovery the light
in their eyes goes out completely.

Don

> -Original Message-
> From: Tom Reese [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 7:20 AM
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: Storing digital images (Was: RAW file processing)


> Anyone who trusts
> their hard drive with anything important is asking for
> major trouble.
> 
> Tom Reese
> 

Re: Have digital cameras made us better photographers?

[Mark Roberts]

Tom Reese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>My pictures are improving all the time but my percentage of keepers is 
>about the same. As I improve, I become harder to please. My bad pictures 
>are now better than my previous good ones.

Couldn't sum it up any better than that.


-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: PESO: Simplicity

[frank theriault]

On 7/26/05, Steve Jolly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://www.elvum.net/gallery/paw/simplicity
> 
> *istDS, Tamron 28-200 f3.8-4.5, [EMAIL PROTECTED], 1/400s
> 
> Taken next to Putney Bridge, in London.
> 
> All comments and criticisms encouraged. :-)
> 

Terrific photo!  Just enough of the structure to whet our appetite,
not so much that we actually know what exactly it is (for those of us
who aren't familiar with it).  The curves of the building work really
well with the wispy clouds overhead.

Love the exposure WRT the building.  About the only teensy thing I
might mention is that it would be nice if the sky were a deeper blue -
a polarizing filter might help here?  (just guessing - I don't know
for filters...).

I'm also not sure about the title - the curves and geometry of that
structure are anything but simple, but maybe the title's meant to be
somewhat ironic.

No matter:  Love this photo;  it's a great one!

cheers,
frank


-- 
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: Final assortment of Mid-Ohio photos on line

[brooksdj]

> 
http://www.robertstech.com/temp/mid-o.htm
> Quite a few updates & improvements.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Mark Roberts
> Photography and writing
> www.robertstech.com
> 
Mark super shots. It looks like lens and camera are exposing as it should(LOL)

I really like:
7d504140
7d5044217/7
7d504223

Thanks for sharing.

Having never shot something like this, how are you working the 80-200 f2.8. 
Hand hold and
pan or 
mono.

Dave

Re: PESO - Blissful ignorance

[frank theriault]

On 7/26/05, Jostein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I told this girl she wasn't supposed to fly away. At least she stayed
> long enough for a pose. :-)
> 
> http://www.oksne.net/paw/humle.html
> 
> Jostein

Wow!

-frank


-- 
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: Storing digital images (Was: RAW file processing)

[Mark Roberts]

"Don Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>> From: Tom Reese [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> Anyone who trusts their hard drive with anything important is asking for
>> major trouble.
>
>Absolutely agreed.
>We have the sad task of telling people that all their data
>is gone everyday.
>When asked if they have a backup the most common answer is:
>No, didn't think I needed one, the machine is only "X"
>months/years old. :-(

When I replace hard drives in my computers, I usually try to get the
*smallest* drive I can find: I want it to fill up quickly so that I'm
*forced* to offload files to CD or DVD frequently.

I read an article about a data retrieval service that's found it needs
to keep a psychologist on staff to counsel people who've lost critical
data!

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: Final assortment of Mid-Ohio photos on line

[Mark Roberts]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

>Having never shot something like this, how are you working the 80-200 f2.8. 
>Hand hold and pan or mono.

I used the 80-200 hand held. Monopod for the 300/2.8, though ;-)

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: Snapshot of a Neighborhood House - PAW PESO

[frank theriault]

On 7/24/05, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The color went out on my monitor while making adjustments to the pic.  I
> haven't a clue as to how this will appear on the screen.
> 
> http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/neighborhoodhouse.html
> 
> Comments, of course are welcome.
> 
> Pentax K-body, K55/1.8 @ 5.6, Fuji Superior 100
> 


The colours look fine to me, but my monitor's uncalibrated, so don't
take my word on that.

The shot itself is interesting.  I'm struggling to find the right
words to express myself, but it seems very unforgiving and almost
brutal.  Sort of like Peter's neighbourhood shot, but without the
neighbours or fences, if you know what I mean.

Well, you probably don't know what I mean, because it's too early in
the morning to be articulate, I think.There's a word that's on
the tip of my tongue that would perfectly express my thoughts, but
it's just not coming.  Damn!

Interesting shot, Shel.

cheers,
frank 


-- 
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: Snapshot of a Neighborhood House - PAW PESO

[frank theriault]

On 7/27/05, frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  There's a word that's on
> the tip of my tongue that would perfectly express my thoughts, but
> it's just not coming.  Damn! 

Stark!  That's it, stark.  Even with the trees and everything else
surrounding the house, it gives me a feeling of starkness...

cheers,
frank



-- 
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: Final assortment of Mid-Ohio photos on line

[frank theriault]

On 7/26/05, Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://www.robertstech.com/temp/mid-o.htm
> Quite a few updates & improvements.
> 

Can't really choose a favourite from this outstanding gallery, but
these ones jump out:

http://www.robertstech.com/temp/pages/7d503717.htm

http://www.robertstech.com/temp/pages/7d504200.htm

http://www.robertstech.com/temp/pages/7d504024.htm

Tremendous work, Mark.  Absolute top-notch professional stuff!

cheers,
frank


-- 
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: PESO: Mendocino Moon Squat

[frank theriault]

On 7/23/05, Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On the return from our recent coast drive, I hesitated
> for this "drive-by".
> The scan was conveniently done on the Epson 3170. Soft
> detail is a lot to ask of this scanner.
> 
> http://www.photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=59
> 
> Moon was just beginning its shape-distorting plunge
> into the lower atmosphere.
> 
> Comments encouraged.
> 

"ADODB.Field error '800a0bcd'

Either BOF or EOF is True, or the current record has been deleted.
Requested operation requires a current record.

/aspupload/detail.asp, line 36"

Ya gotta leave these things up for more than a couple of days, as many
of us (well, me anyway ) are behind on PAWs and PESOs, so it's
often up to a week before I look at some of them.

Your description was pretty, though...  

cheers,
frank


-- 
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: Mendocino Moon Squat(Rick)

[frank theriault]

On 7/26/05, Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rick,
> I deleted the supporting thumbnail, but now has been
> re-installed.
> 
> Jack
> 
> http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=71
> 

Just lovely!

The tree on the left and the lake (along with the moon, of course)
really make the pic.

Worth waiting for...

cheers,
frank


-- 
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: Final assortment of Mid-Ohio photos on line

[Kostas Kavoussanakis]

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005, frank theriault wrote:


http://www.robertstech.com/temp/pages/7d504200.htm

http://www.robertstech.com/temp/pages/7d504024.htm


Are the green ones Kawasaki? Are they doing well at all? And is 
Kawasaki the Pentax of the 2-wheel motorsports?


Kostas

Re: PESO - Raw Strength

[frank theriault]

On 7/24/05, Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Taken in Monument Valley in one of the less frequented areas.  When
> you can stand there in person, and see the size and majesty of some of
> these formations, it leaves you in awe.
> 
> Pentax *istD, DA 16-45/4 @ 26mm, handheld, polarizer
> ISO 400, 1/180 sec @ f/13,
> Converted from Raw using Capture One LE
> 
> http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/monumentvalley_0380.htm
> 
> Comments welcome
> 

I'm running out of superlatives to describe the photos from this series.

Another tremendous photo, Bruce!  I'm glad you're able to share these with us.

cheers,
frank


-- 
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson

question about A lens with flash on istds

[Frank Wajer]

Hi all,

I've just read the istds manual and don't understand the following:

on page 93 it says that P-TTL is possible with an A lens, however on page 144 
it says it doesn't. I think the same applies to the istd manual.
Is the manual right?

Frank

Re: PAW - On the road to Jerusalem (testing 43 Lim)

[frank theriault]

On 7/23/05, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Boris 
> 
> This is an interesting photo for me, as I've never imagined Israel with
> much forest area, even though I can remember, as a child, contributing  my
> pennies to "plant a tree in Israel."  Of course, I don't really know if the
> money went towards planting trees or elsewhere, but I do recall that a lot
> of us here in the US sent a lot of dollars to our Israeli kith and kin.
> 
> Is this a naturally forested area, or has it been planted?
> 
> It would be nice to see this, and other of your photos, larger.  This is
> true for the photos of others as well.  Sometimes these commercial sites
> have so much extraneous information on the page that the photographs seems
> almost incidental.
> 
> It's a nice snap, nothing great, although it provides a nice "feel" for the
> area.  Where exactly was this taken?  Where does the dirt road lead?  Is
> this a field ready for cultivation, or cleared for building?
> 
> Shel
> 
> 
> > [Original Message]
> > From: Boris Liberman <
> 
> > http://www.photoforum.ru/rate/photo.php?photo_id=204177

I missed the original post for this one.

Shel, I think the roundish tree,  just off centre, is yours 

Boris, this is a lovely, bucolic scene, and as Shel said,  not at all
what one thinks Israel "should" look like.

Well composed, well captured, very pleasant and relaxing.

I like it.

cheers,
frank


-- 
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: MZ-S

[Doug Franklin]

Hi Gautam,

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 23:38:25 -0700, Gautam Sarup wrote:

> This is my first post to PDML.

Welcome to the madness! :-)

> I'm thinking of getting an MZ-S and wondered how solidly it's built.

Very.

> Would it be likely to last a few decades of weekend use?

Most likely, physically, at least.  I don't know about the electronics
as none have been around that long.

> Also, how good is it at keeping dust out?  I travel a fair bit to
> dusty places so both things are important.

It does not seem to be as well sealed as the LX, but it's better sealed
than most.

TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ

Re: PESO: Others 2005 - 25p - GDG

[frank theriault]

On 7/27/05, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I bought one of the Zenitar-K 16mm f/2.8 fish eye lenses, based on
> the wonderful work that I've seen John Bean and others produce with
> it. It's truly a delightful toy ... It *doesn't* replace the Pentax
> DA14 lens at all, but it is simply FUN to shoot pictures with it ...
> 
>http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/25p.htm
> 
> Comments and critique always appreciated.

As you may recall, I used my Zenitar fisheye on Cesar's *istD at GFM,
and my feelings were the same as yours:  A really fun lens!

You've certainly used it to capture a "fun" moment here, Godfrey! 
Love this shot:  great feel to it.

Thanks for posting it.

cheers,
frank

-- 
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson

contrast control flash question

[Frank Wajer]

Hi all,

simple question: how does the body (specifically MZ-5n) know that you want 
contrast control flash and therefore use a flash speed of 1/60 instead of 1/100.

Frank

Re: Hank & Ansel go head-to-head in desert snapper death struggle

[Pål Jensen]

Juan wrote: 

> I do prefer HCB's, although it is far from his best pictures. Adams',
> as most of his work, is just another postcard, a beautifully rendered,
> trite image.


It is purely in the eye of the beholder. I have no interest whatsoever in any 
other type of photography other than nature photography. Mind you, in nature 
photography I include pictures of women with very few cloths on. 
I do see than HBC is a great photographer but his images doesn't give me 
anything...


Pål

Re: MZ-S

[Pål Jensen]

Gautam wrote: 

> I'm thinking of getting an MZ-S and wondered how
> solidly it's built.  Would it be likely to last
> a few decades of weekend use?  Also, how good is
> it at keeping dust out?  I travel a fair bit to
> dusty places so both things are important.


It is very well built. It is the structurally stiffest Pentax body ever (that 
says a lot). It can take the weight of a 600/4 lens without flexing the mount 
or the body (the Nikon F90 mount will flex with a 80-200/2.8 lens! So will the 
tripod socket). 
The shutter of the MZ-S is a unit with 1/8000s max speed. It has been detuned 
to 1/6000s in order to increase durability. The camera is not weather sealed 
but it has less openings where dust can come in than bodies with two command 
wheels, except for pro bodies from Nikon and Canon. 
It is certainly the best AF choice from Pentax in terms of built quality and 
durability. It's long term survival rate is hard to judge at this stage.


Pål

Re: PAW PESO - Pigeons

[Bob Sullivan]

Shel,
Some of us geeks spend a lifetime trying to catch up with you 'literati'.
Boris just turned the tables on you.  Welcome to our world...
Regards,  Bob S.

On 7/25/05, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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: Have digital cameras made us better photographers?

[Rob Studdert]

On 27 Jul 2005 at 10:23, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:

> Crap, Rob, you don't need a meter and you know it.

True, but only after I've been travelling with the same camera and same film 
and generally using the same lens for three months or so. It was refreshing.


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: MZ-S

[frank theriault]

On 7/27/05, Gautam Sarup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> This is my first post to PDML.
> 
> I'm thinking of getting an MZ-S and wondered how
> solidly it's built.  Would it be likely to last
> a few decades of weekend use?  Also, how good is
> it at keeping dust out?  I travel a fair bit to
> dusty places so both things are important.
> 
> Regards,
> Gautam

Welcome to PDML!  You're now in for life - you can never unsub from
this place, no matter how hard you try!  

Just in case you haven't seen it (maybe you've been lurking for a
while, so you may be aware of this), here's a little informal FAQ that
Tom Rittenhouse compiled with the input of many list members:

http://graywolfphoto.com/pentax/pdml-faq.html

Not so much rules as guidelines and helpful hints to make your stay an
enjoyable one.

He, of course, did not mention the most important rules:

1)  Never believe anything Cotty says, and,

2)  Never believe anything Mark Roberts says.

As for the MZ-S I don't have one, but they seem to be very sturdily
built, and for weekend use, I bet that 30 years isn't out of the
question (as long as the electronics last that long).

Not sealed like an LX, they're still one of the better sealed cameras
available, IMHO.

cheers,
frank




-- 
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: contrast control flash question

[Kostas Kavoussanakis]

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005, Frank Wajer wrote:


simple question: how does the body (specifically MZ-5n) know that you want 
contrast control flash and therefore use a flash speed of 1/60 instead of 1/100.


The user sets the flash to that setting.

Kostas

Re: Have digital cameras made us better photographers?

[Rick Womer]

This is both a blessing and a curse.  A blessing,
because I am happier with what I shoot.  A curse,
because I take out the slides from a trip 10 years
ago, and my favorite pix don't please me as much
anymore.

Rick

--- Tom Reese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> My pictures are
> improving all the 
> time but my percentage of keepers is about the same.
> As I improve, I 
> become harder to please. My bad pictures are now
> better than my previous 
> good ones.
> 


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: MZ-S

[Rob Studdert]

On 27 Jul 2005 at 14:52, Pål Jensen wrote:

> It is very well built. It is the structurally stiffest Pentax body ever (that
> says a lot). It can take the weight of a 600/4 lens without flexing the mount 
> or
> the body (the Nikon F90 mount will flex with a 80-200/2.8 lens! So will the
> tripod socket).

You actually cantilever a 600/4 off a body?


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: Mendocino Moon Squat(Rick)

[Jack Davis]

Thanks! Frank.
The "lake" is a fog filled canyon (note the fog layer
covering the valley in the background) that we had
just driven out of.
Scanned on a 'wimp' premium flatbed which worked OK
with such a soft, subdued image.

Jack

--- frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On 7/26/05, Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Rick,
> > I deleted the supporting thumbnail, but now has
> been
> > re-installed.
> > 
> > Jack
> > 
> >
>
http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=71
> > 
> 
> Just lovely!
> 
> The tree on the left and the lake (along with the
> moon, of course)
> really make the pic.
> 
> Worth waiting for...
> 
> cheers,
> frank
> 
> 
> -- 
> "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri
> Cartier-Bresson
> 
> 


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: Storing digital images (Was: RAW file processing)

[danilo]

> 
> When I replace hard drives in my computers, I usually try to get the
> *smallest* drive I can find: I want it to fill up quickly so that I'm
> *forced* to offload files to CD or DVD frequently.
> 

uahahh

> I read an article about a data retrieval service that's found it needs
> to keep a psychologist on staff to counsel people who've lost critical
> data!
> 

uuahahahhahahahauahuhauahuahahhahahauahauh

LOL

Re: Have digital cameras made us better photographers?

[Mark Roberts]

Rick Womer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>This is both a blessing and a curse.  A blessing,
>because I am happier with what I shoot.  A curse,
>because I take out the slides from a trip 10 years
>ago, and my favorite pix don't please me as much
>anymore.

True. But oddly enough, every once in a while I'm looking through old
slides from years ago and thinking what crap they are when I find one
that's just brilliant. "What the &$%@@?! How did I not notice how good
that shot was years ago?!"

Not very often, though...

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: Final assortment of Mid-Ohio photos on line

[Mark Roberts]

Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>On Wed, 27 Jul 2005, frank theriault wrote:
>
>> http://www.robertstech.com/temp/pages/7d504200.htm
>>
>> http://www.robertstech.com/temp/pages/7d504024.htm
>
>Are the green ones Kawasaki? 

Yes.

>Are they doing well at all? 

Not in the major class (Superbike), but very well in 600cc Supersport
and pretty well in some of the other support classes.

>And is Kawasaki the Pentax of the 2-wheel motorsports?

Apparently :)

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Totally, completely OT but too good to pass up

[Mark Roberts]

Acts of Gord
http://www.actsofgord.com/index.html
Don't go there unless you have some time to spare...

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: A* 600 f5.6 on Ebay

[pnstenquist]

Yep. I saw it four or five days ago. Been watching it all week. Please don't 
mention ebay auctions on the list.
Paul


> Hi all,
> 
> just saw an A* 600 f5.6 on Ebay. This lens is mentioned as "Once in a 
> lifetime 
> used" by Boz. So I guess you should grab it now if you want it.
> 
> Frank
> 

Re: PESO -- A Neighborhood

[P. J. Alling]

Actually I was traveling light, (well not real light, FA 20-35mm and FA 
28-200), and it was taken with the much maligned 28-200, as I've 
mentioned before, with film this lens is a disappointment, with digital 
it really comes into it's own.


frank theriault wrote:


On 7/24/05, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 


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 like it.

A lot.

Well composed, lovely colours, I like the trees on the left and the right.

But, it's those fences that do it for me.  Completely isolating one
house from another, and one presumes, on family from another.  No
people present, in fact (other than clothes on a clothesline peeking
over a fence) no evidence of humans anywhere.  The windows and doors
seem to be shut tight.

It's actually pretty eerie, when you think about it.

Did the rapture come and someone forgot to tell me?  Come to think of
it, I don't think I'd be one of the ones called...  

Maybe it's a devout neighbourhood.  

Seriously, a terrific photo, Peter.  I think you took it with your VS1
f2.8 35-85 varifocal...  

cheers,
frank

 




--
When you're worried or in doubt, 
	Run in circles, (scream and shout).

Re: K15mm for House Interiors

[Bertil Holmberg]

Thank you again for all the tips and links relating to wide lenses :-)

Bob Atkins has written a nice introduction called: "Wide angle lenses  
for small sensor APS-C Digital SLRs" that compares the new lenses  
from Tamron, Tokina, Canon, and Sigma. A second page adds thoughts on  
fisheyes. He also offers a review of the Zenitar with example photos!


http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/wide-angle-lenses.html

Not many of the new APS-sized wide lenses are actually available yet,  
especially not in a Pentax mount. This includes the Pentax 12-24mm  
that was announced in March (I was wrong there).


Does 1-2mm matter? I don't know, I guess other things will influense  
your choice more than whether the lens is 10, 11 or 12mm at its  
widest. What do you think?

Re: Have digital cameras made us better photographers?

[Alan P. Hayes]

A more serious  response to this thread-

Whatever technique one uses to make art is likely to become 
intimately a part of what you end up making.
The Portraits of the American Dead are tied to digital methods in a 
number of ways and it seems to me unlikely that I would have come up 
with this particular work or even anything all that like it if it 
were not for the certain particularities of digital photography.
First, I took literally thousands of pictures of a non-subject, which 
I kept in an easily accessible form and then looked at, some tens of 
thousands of frames, over the course of several months. It was fairly 
obsessive and time consuming, but much, much easier than pursuing a 
similar course with film. I suppose if I were using film I might have 
come up with some similarly painstaking task, but it would have been 
something else entirely and the result would have been different.


This may be risky in this particular forum, but one of photography's 
salient characteristics as a medium for expression is that it *does 
not* require an enormous amount of technical expertise to allow one 
to create interesting pictures. And digital photography requires even 
less than film. Brute force *is* an option!


***
New gallery here:

--
Alan P. Hayes
Meaning and Form: Writing, Editing and Document Design
Pittsfield, Massachusetts

Photographs at
http://www.ahayesphoto.com/americandead/index.htm

http://del.icio.us/ahayes

Re: K15mm for House Interiors

[Cory Papenfuss]

Bob Atkins has written a nice introduction called: "Wide angle lenses for 
small sensor APS-C Digital SLRs" that compares the new lenses from Tamron, 
Tokina, Canon, and Sigma. A second page adds thoughts on fisheyes. He also 
offers a review of the Zenitar with example photos!


http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/wide-angle-lenses.html

Not many of the new APS-sized wide lenses are actually available yet, 
especially not in a Pentax mount. This includes the Pentax 12-24mm that was 
announced in March (I was wrong there).


Does 1-2mm matter? I don't know, I guess other things will influense your 
choice more than whether the lens is 10, 11 or 12mm at its widest. What do 
you think?



	The other thing to note (that the atkins article mentions) is that 
the conversion from fisheye-rectiliner isn't a simple geometric 
transformation.  The fisheye is effectively wider (i.e. will cover 
more angle of view) than an equivalent rectilinear lens, although it won't 
do so consistently throughout the frame.  In other words, converting to 
rectilinear loses a lot of image in the corners of the fisheye image.


	In other words, they're completely different.  If you can get away 
with the barrel distortion from a fisheye, you'll tend to get better 
results than trying to defish it all the time.


-Cory

--

*
* Cory Papenfuss*
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student   *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University   *
*

Re: Totally, completely OT but too good to pass up

[Tom Reese]

Mark Roberts wrote:

Acts of Gord
http://www.actsofgord.com/index.html
Don't go there unless you have some time to spare...


Lucky for me I had some time. Absolutely hilarious.

Re: Totally, completely OT but too good to pass up

[Mark Roberts]

Tom Reese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Mark Roberts wrote:
>> Acts of Gord
>> http://www.actsofgord.com/index.html
>> Don't go there unless you have some time to spare...
>
>Lucky for me I had some time. Absolutely hilarious.

...and Canadian! ;-)

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: K15mm for House Interiors

[Carlos Royo]

Kostas Kavoussanakis escribió:




Not sure you got what I mean, Vid: the MIR-47 is a bit too long and the 
mirror of some Pentax cameras (you may need to check which does so) hits 
it when taking a picture. The end result is that the camera mirror 
breaks. Because the filters (at the back) are part of the optical 
formula, you need to file away part of the protruding bit. That's if the 
lens interferes with your camera's mirror.




I had one of the MC Mir-47K 20 mm. 2.5 you mention. I have been told 
that the filters that come with the newer versions (mine was built in 
2001), have less thick mounts and don't interfere with the mirror. Mine 
was a unit with the thick filters, they got in the way of the mirror of 
some smaller bodies (such as the MZ-5), but they didn't actually chip or 
damage the mirror.


Carlos

Re: PESO: NInja (Redux)

[E.R.N. Reed]

frank theriault wrote:



As far as nicknames, no I don't have one.  




You don't use knarf for anybody but us?

Re: Totally, completely OT but too good to pass up

[Christian]

- Original Message - 
From: "Mark Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 9:55 AM
Subject: Totally, completely OT but too good to pass up


> Acts of Gord
> http://www.actsofgord.com/index.html
> Don't go there unless you have some time to spare...

Damn you Mark Roberts  I didn't have any time to spare today... but what
time I have is being wasted now :-)

Christian

Re: Have digital cameras made us better photographers?

[William Robb]

I've given this some thought over the past couple of days, and honestly, I
think digital has, if anything, made me a worse photographer, rather than a
better one.
I find myself making a dozen exposures when I only need to make one. I find
myself taking pictures of things that are inherently unphotogenic.
One of the skills I have spent years developing in myself is an efficiency
of process. One thing I really don't like to waste is my time (this mail
list is the exception).
Digital wastes my time.
Too many exposures made, too many exposures to look at to be meaningful
anymore.
The product of a mind becoming less disciplined, less thoughtful, more
willing to take a mad bomber approach to photography.
This is a complete change from my work in large format, where every exposure
made was at a cost, both in money and time, but also in ability to make
another exposure later that session.
When one is limited to making no more than a few dozen exposures before
taking a time out to reload film holders, which may not be conveniently
done, one looks hard before tripping the shutter.
When one is putting out a couple of dollars every time he trips the shutter,
he thinks a bit about doing it.
When every frame has to be put into a tank and processed, one thinks about
how much time will be spent doing the mundane task of film processing, and
thinks about how many tanks of film are ahead of him.

Digital is a tempting little whore, and it is easy to talk oneself into
thinking it makes us better by applying outdated criteria to what we are
doing, but I have my doubts, based on my own experience, as to whether there
is any truth or not to it making us better photographers.
It enforces nothing on us, it requires no discipline in approach, and no
skill in operation; the two main ingredients in becoming a better
photographer are missing.

William Robb

Re: "Why Bumblebees Can't Fly"

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Anthony Farr"

Subject: RE: "Why Bumblebees Can't Fly"





IOW: binary film is a bullshit argument.


There was an article in DCCT a couple of years or so ago, the writer was 
spouting the same thing.

I think Mikey probably read it and decided to regurgitate it.





It's amazing to think that a format half the

size of Minox can hold its own against 35mm in many situations.



Thats mostly due to lens limitations than anything else.

William Robb 

Re: MZ-S

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Gautam Sarup" 
Subject: MZ-S




Hi,

This is my first post to PDML.

I'm thinking of getting an MZ-S and wondered how
solidly it's built.  Would it be likely to last
a few decades of weekend use?  Also, how good is
it at keeping dust out?  I travel a fair bit to
dusty places so both things are important.


It'll certainly last as long as you can still get film for it

William Robb

Re: very OT: Air Force Twice :)

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Bob Blakely" 
Subject: Re: very OT: Air Force Twice :)




And?


Self explanatory Bob.
Go back to sleep now.

William Robb

Re: contrast control flash question

[E.R.N. Reed]

Frank Wajer wrote:


Hi all,

simple question: how does the body (specifically MZ-5n) know that you want 
contrast control flash and therefore use a flash speed of 1/60 instead of 1/100.

Frank


 

You tell the flash that you want it, and the flash in some mysterious 
electronic manner informs the camera.


ERNR
feeling very helpful

Re: Going back to the nine seconds for advise

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


Subject: Going back to the nine seconds for advise



Any ideas from those that understand the proccessing better than i do.


I get the same thing if I am shooting too fast, especially with jpegs.
I think the sensor is overheating (not per se, but I do think it is a flaw 
in the capture device when it is too busy).


William Robb 

Re: Hank & Ansel go head-to-head in desert snapper death struggle

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Cotty"

Subject: Re: Hank & Ansel go head-to-head in desert snapper death struggle



On 27/7/05, Juan Buhler, discombobulated, unleashed:


I do prefer HCB's, although it is far from his best pictures. Adams',
as most of his work, is just another postcard, a beautifully rendered,
trite image.


Sacrilege!!!


We're not allowed to make pictures for the joy of having something nice on 
the wall anymore. The times have changed, if that's all you want, buy a 
cheap velvet art piece, preferably of either Elvis or Marylin.
Photographs have to have a message, they have to be socially relevent and 
important to be valid.
At their very least, they have to be taken by an over rated Gallic 
predecessor to Kenny boy to make the grade.


William Robb 

Re: A thirst for Art

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Mark Roberts"

Subject: Re: A thirst for Art




http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/devon/4718573.stm


I'm speechless - on so many levels...


From the article:
   American-born Mr Hill said the bottle was clearly a work of art.
   He said: "It looked like an ordinary bottle of water. But it was
   on a plinth, labeled, described and in the programme of the whole
   festival."

Now I know how to make something into art: Put it on a plinth and label
it!

(Now I gotta go and get me some plinths...)


I howled when I read that. The whole concept of the piece was so pompous, I 
can't believe the guy didn't go and get a bottle of Evian, strip the label 
and put it on his plinth.

Of course that wouldn't have made the news.

William Robb 

Re: Storing digital images (Was: RAW file processing)

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Mark Roberts" 
Subject: Re: Storing digital images (Was: RAW file processing)





There's my three hard drive failures. (Yes, it seems that Western
Digital had a problem with one production run of that particular drive,
but I've still never been able to make myself buy another Western
Digital drive.)


The people that do my builds for me won't touch the things.
They like Maxtors well enough, and really like Seagates and Fujitsus.

William Robb

Re: very OT: Air Force Twice :)

[Bob Blakely]

The word "And" is not looking for explanation, little Willie. It asks for 
more...


THAT's self explanatory.

Go back to your stupor.

Regards,
Bob...
-
"The art of taxation consists in so plucking the goose
as to obtain the largest possible amount of feathers
with the smallest possible amount of hissing."
- Jean-Baptiste Colbert,
  minister of finance to French King Louis XIV

From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



From: "Bob Blakely"

And?


Self explanatory Bob.
Go back to sleep now.

Re: Have digital cameras made us better photographers?

[pnstenquist]

Bill opined:
> It enforces nothing on us, it requires no discipline in approach, and no
> skill in operation; the two main ingredients in becoming a better
> photographer are missing.
> 

However, if one has enough self discipline to continue to approach photography 
in a mindful fashion, the immediate feedback and post processing flexibility 
can take one's work to another level. To say that digital photography requires 
no skill in operation is cow doo-doo. Exacting exposures, thoughtful framing 
and composition, and careful consideration of the light are as important in 
digital photography as they are in film photography. When I have to work under 
the pressure of meeting a client's needs, I'm thankful for the extra assistance 
that digital provides, but I would never shortchange the process.
Paul

Re: Going back to the nine seconds for advise

[brooksdj]

> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> Subject: Going back to the nine seconds for advise
> 
> >
> > Any ideas from those that understand the proccessing better than i do.
> 
> I get the same thing if I am shooting too fast, especially with jpegs.
> I think the sensor is overheating (not per se, but I do think it is a flaw 
> in the capture device when it is too busy).
> 
> William Robb 
> 
> 
Possible, but with these i'm just shooting a fence about every 20-30 seconds,1 
shot,no
rapid fire.

Thanks Bill

Dave

Re: Storing digital images (Was: RAW file processing)

[Mark Roberts]

"William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>From: "Mark Roberts" 
>> 
>> There's my three hard drive failures. (Yes, it seems that Western
>> Digital had a problem with one production run of that particular drive,
>> but I've still never been able to make myself buy another Western
>> Digital drive.)
>
>The people that do my builds for me won't touch the things.
>They like Maxtors well enough, and really like Seagates and Fujitsus.

Wow, thanks for letting me know I'm not just being superstitious. Been
using Maxtors and Seagates ever since.

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: PAW PESO - Pigeons

[Shel Belinkoff]

Literati?  Moi?

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: Bob Sullivan 

> Shel,
> Some of us geeks spend a lifetime trying to catch up with you 'literati'.
> Boris just turned the tables on you.  Welcome to our world...
> Regards,  Bob S.

Re: Storing digital images (Was: RAW file processing)

[pnstenquist]

I had a Western Digital firewire drive fail several years ago. Lost quite a few 
photo files. I still use large firewire drives for storage, but I back up 
religiously to DVD. Important shots are backed up to two DVDs and a second 
drive. I still agonize over some of the work I lost. Fortunately, they were all 
scans, and I still have the negs  -- somewhere. But now that I'm shooting 
digital, I'm extremely cautious.
Paul


> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Mark Roberts" 
> Subject: Re: Storing digital images (Was: RAW file processing)
> 
> 
> > 
> > There's my three hard drive failures. (Yes, it seems that Western
> > Digital had a problem with one production run of that particular drive,
> > but I've still never been able to make myself buy another Western
> > Digital drive.)
> 
> The people that do my builds for me won't touch the things.
> They like Maxtors well enough, and really like Seagates and Fujitsus.
> 
> William Robb
> 

Re: PESO: NInja (Redux)

[P. J. Alling]

Maybe he doesn't consider it a nickname.

E.R.N. Reed wrote:


frank theriault wrote:



As far as nicknames, no I don't have one.  





You don't use knarf for anybody but us?





--
When you're worried or in doubt, 
	Run in circles, (scream and shout).

RE: A* 600 f5.6 on Ebay

[Malcolm Smith]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Yep. I saw it four or five days ago. Been watching it all 
> week. Please don't mention ebay auctions on the list.

This is similar to the 'how to unsubscribe' thing about how other lists
work. There are some lists which actively encourage telling all and sundry
about live listings (which has just cost me cash because someone blabbed
about a rarity being up elsewhere I had been watching for ten days) and I'm
really not sure who this benefits - other than the seller. I really don't
understand why some other lists allow it.  Fine if it's a bloke selling a
wedding dress etc in a bizarre listing, not so hot when it's a piece of
glass as above.

OK, rant over, I'm done.

Malcolm 

reflective flash metering with spot meter

[Kevin Waterson]

Has anybody tried successfully to spot meter
a background with a 1 degree spot meter and if
so, how did you go about it and what were your 
results.

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."

Re: Storing digital images (Was: RAW file processing)

[P. J. Alling]

It really doesn't matter, no manufacturer makes all of their drives, 
they are a commodity item.  To fill their lines manufactures
just buy the size's they don't make from someone else and slap their 
label on them.


William Robb wrote:



- Original Message - From: "Mark Roberts" Subject: Re: Storing 
digital images (Was: RAW file processing)





There's my three hard drive failures. (Yes, it seems that Western
Digital had a problem with one production run of that particular drive,
but I've still never been able to make myself buy another Western
Digital drive.)



The people that do my builds for me won't touch the things.
They like Maxtors well enough, and really like Seagates and Fujitsus.

William Robb





--
When you're worried or in doubt, 
	Run in circles, (scream and shout).

Re: Storing digital images (Was: RAW file processing)

[Rob Studdert]

On 27 Jul 2005 at 9:10, William Robb wrote:

> The people that do my builds for me won't touch the things.
> They like Maxtors well enough, and really like Seagates and Fujitsus.

Hmm, if I didn't touch all the drive brands that I've seen fail I would never 
touch a hard drive. I'm currently running seven WD SATA drives and two large 
and expensive IBM SCSI drives, the WDs are perfect however one of the IBMs 
occasionally howls like two cats in a stand-off.


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: Going back to the nine seconds for advise

[Shel Belinkoff]

Dave ... it's digital photography - whoops, image capture.  Do you expect
rational explanations for the way all the electrons and electronic bits
interact with one another?  Just think of the problems various "operating
systems" have had in the past, and still have.  Why should you expect more,
or more logic, from your camera?  

Just a suggestion - can you shoot in all manual mode, setting the ap and
the shutter.  As long as the light doesn't change much you should get more
consistent results.

Shel


> [Original Message]
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


> > I get the same thing if I am shooting too fast, especially with jpegs.
> > I think the sensor is overheating (not per se, but I do think it is a
flaw 
> > in the capture device when it is too busy).
> > 
> > William Robb 
> > 
> > 
> Possible, but with these i'm just shooting a fence about every 20-30
seconds,1 shot,no
> rapid fire.

Re: A* 600 f5.6 on Ebay

[Frank Wajer]

> Yep. I saw it four or five days ago. Been watching it all week. Please don't 
> mention ebay auctions on the list.
> Paul

sorry, I didn't know this was pdml policy.

Frank

> 
> 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > just saw an A* 600 f5.6 on Ebay. This lens is mentioned as "Once in a 
> > lifetime 
> > used" by Boz. So I guess you should grab it now if you want it.
> > 
> > Frank
> > 
> 

Re: PAW PESO - Pigeons

[Tom Reese]

Shel Belinkoff wrote:


Literati?  Moi?


Yeah. Why the hell would Shel want and Italian sports car.

Tom Reese

Re: Have digital cameras made us better photographers?

[Tom C]

I agree.  It doesn't have to be this way if we don't let it, though.  OTOH, 
one can think of the syndrome you're describing as simply a really easy way 
of bracketing.


I think the term 'better photographer' as used in the orginal post is a 
loaded phrase.   Does it help one produce *better photographs* may be a more 
pertinent question.


The answer to that is not definitive either because it depends on 'better 
for what'.  I think it can help one produce better results but does not do 
so necessarially,


For me, as said earlier, it has created a change in mindset where I think I 
finally recognized what many already realized.  I needn't tie myself in 
chains to *THE* recorded image.  Within the bounds of my conscience I can 
adjust, crop, saturate, destaurate, etc., in order to produce a better image 
than what was recorded originally, the same way as a skilled darkroom person 
can.


For me, it's been liberating in that respect and I can now apply the same 
mindset to film images.


Tom C.




From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: "Pentax Discuss" 
Subject: Re: Have digital cameras made us better photographers?
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 08:39:45 -0600





Too many exposures made, too many exposures to look at to be meaningful 
anymore. The product of a mind becoming less disciplined, less thoughtful, 
more willing to take a mad bomber approach to photography.
This is a complete change from my work in large format, where every 
exposure made was at a cost, both in money and time, but also in ability to 
make another exposure later that session.
When one is limited to making no more than a few dozen exposures before 
taking a time out to reload film holders, which may not be conveniently 
done, one looks hard before tripping the shutter.
When one is putting out a couple of dollars every time he trips the 
shutter, he thinks a bit about doing it.
When every frame has to be put into a tank and processed, one thinks about 
how much time will be spent doing the mundane task of film processing, and 
thinks about how many tanks of film are ahead of him.





It enforces nothing on us, it requires no discipline in approach, and no 
skill in operation; the two main ingredients in becoming a better

photographer are missing.

William Robb

Re: Have digital cameras made us better photographers?

[Alan P. Hayes]

Interesting, and I love that "digital is a tempting little whore" line!
I wasn't really talking about the same thing in my previous post, I'd guess.

But you're describing a particular approach here, and the fact that 
digital works against that approach doesn't mean that it necessarily 
makes one a worse photographer.


I think that digital has allowed a democratization of photography, 
somewhat akin to the movement of typography from Monotype machines to 
the desktop. Lotsa crap, for sure, but also fresh minds and tools in 
the arena.


I don't think that digital invalidates traditional photographic 
forms, but it offers different possibilities and won't be used in the 
same ways. For instance, I use my camera as much as a means of 
assembling an environment to work in as to produce work per se. 
That's not new to digital, but it is a much more feasible approach 
with digital.




At 8:39 AM -0600 7/27/05, William Robb wrote:

I've given this some thought over the past couple of days, and honestly, I
think digital has, if anything, made me a worse photographer, rather than a
better one.
I find myself making a dozen exposures when I only need to make one. I find
myself taking pictures of things that are inherently unphotogenic.
One of the skills I have spent years developing in myself is an efficiency
of process. One thing I really don't like to waste is my time (this mail
list is the exception).
Digital wastes my time.
Too many exposures made, too many exposures to look at to be meaningful
anymore.
The product of a mind becoming less disciplined, less thoughtful, more
willing to take a mad bomber approach to photography.
This is a complete change from my work in large format, where every exposure
made was at a cost, both in money and time, but also in ability to make
another exposure later that session.
When one is limited to making no more than a few dozen exposures before
taking a time out to reload film holders, which may not be conveniently
done, one looks hard before tripping the shutter.
When one is putting out a couple of dollars every time he trips the shutter,
he thinks a bit about doing it.
When every frame has to be put into a tank and processed, one thinks about
how much time will be spent doing the mundane task of film processing, and
thinks about how many tanks of film are ahead of him.

Digital is a tempting little whore, and it is easy to talk oneself into
thinking it makes us better by applying outdated criteria to what we are
doing, but I have my doubts, based on my own experience, as to whether there
is any truth or not to it making us better photographers.
It enforces nothing on us, it requires no discipline in approach, and no
skill in operation; the two main ingredients in becoming a better
photographer are missing.

William Robb



--
Alan P. Hayes
Meaning and Form: Writing, Editing and Document Design
Pittsfield, Massachusetts

Photographs at
http://www.ahayesphoto.com/americandead/index.htm

http://del.icio.us/ahayes

Re: contrast control flash question

[Frank Wajer]

> > simple question: how does the body (specifically MZ-5n) know that you want 
> > contrast control flash and therefore use a flash speed of 1/60 instead of 
> > 1/100.
> 
> The user sets the flash to that setting.

yes, I know that you set the flash (i.e. the second flash, not the in body 
flash) to contrast control flash. Oh wait, I guess the off body flash sends a 
signal to the body to lower the sync speed?!

Frank

> 
> Kostas

RE: reflective flash metering with spot meter

[Shel Belinkoff]

I frequently use a spot meter.  I'm quite good with it.  I'm not sure I
understand your question?  Could you elaborate some?

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: Kevin Waterson 

> Has anybody tried successfully to spot meter
> a background with a 1 degree spot meter and if
> so, how did you go about it and what were your 
> results.
>
> Kind regards
> Kevin

Re: K15mm for House Interiors

[Rob Studdert]

On 27 Jul 2005 at 10:22, Cory Papenfuss wrote:

> The other thing to note (that the atkins article mentions) is that 
> the conversion from fisheye-rectiliner isn't a simple geometric 
> transformation.  The fisheye is effectively wider (i.e. will cover 
> more angle of view) than an equivalent rectilinear lens, although it won't do 
> so
> consistently throughout the frame.  In other words, converting to rectilinear
> loses a lot of image in the corners of the fisheye image.

Yes data from the very corners is discarded in the conversion of a fisheye to 
rectilinear conversion but there is very little loss of quality if at all. And 
a 16mm fisheye converted to rectilinear view still provides a wider AOV that a 
15mm rectilinear on the same camera.
 
> In other words, they're completely different.  If you can get away 
> with the barrel distortion from a fisheye, you'll tend to get better 
> results than trying to defish it all the time.

Not in my experience.


Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998

Re: A* 600 f5.6 on Ebay

[Tom Reese]

Malcolm Smith wrote:

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


Yep. I saw it four or five days ago. Been watching it all 
week. Please don't mention ebay auctions on the list.



This is similar to the 'how to unsubscribe' thing about how other lists
work. There are some lists which actively encourage telling all and sundry
about live listings (which has just cost me cash because someone blabbed
about a rarity being up elsewhere I had been watching for ten days) and I'm
really not sure who this benefits - other than the seller. I really don't
understand why some other lists allow it.  Fine if it's a bloke selling a
wedding dress etc in a bizarre listing, not so hot when it's a piece of
glass as above.


I just don't buy this argument. eBay has enough people looking at their 
auctions that a few PDMLers won't make any difference.


That lens isn't mislisted under Kowa medium format or something where 
it's hard to find. Anyone who does a 600mm lens search is going to see it.


Tom Reese

RE: A* 600 f5.6 on Ebay

[Malcolm Smith]

Tom Reese wrote:

> I just don't buy this argument. eBay has enough people 
> looking at their auctions that a few PDMLers won't make any 
> difference.
> 
> That lens isn't mislisted under Kowa medium format or 
> something where it's hard to find. Anyone who does a 600mm 
> lens search is going to see it.

No, that's precisely it. If you're out looking for (whatever item) fair
enough, you'll find it. But what if you weren't, read the e-mail on list and
think, I'll give that a bid then

Malcolm

Re: Storing digital images (Was: RAW file processing)

[Rob Studdert]

On 26 Jul 2005 at 19:02, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:

> The 'retract and lock' of the head mechanism that I've seen is to  
> lift the heads several thousandths of an inch from the surface of the  
> platter. Platter rotation will do nothing to them. Vertical movement  
> of the platters could bang the heads, but generally they're  
> constrained to less than .001" vertical movement unless you subject  
> them to several Gs shock load.

I've got a 1" multi-platter drive next to me with it's guts exposed at the 
moment and it's got no such facility. I'll rip the top off a smaller dodgy 
drive tomorrow and see what I can find. I might even break out a macro lens :-)


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: A* 600 f5.6 on Ebay

[Gonz]

Frank Wajer wrote:

Yep. I saw it four or five days ago. Been watching it all week. Please don't 
mention ebay auctions on the list.
Paul



sorry, I didn't know this was pdml policy.



Now go say 10 Hail MX's and 10 Our FA85*'s.


Frank





Hi all,

just saw an A* 600 f5.6 on Ebay. This lens is mentioned as "Once in a lifetime 
used" by Boz. So I guess you should grab it now if you want it.


Frank

Re: PESO: Others 2005 - 25p - GDG

[Bruce Dayton]

This is a rather fun photo.  I like the nice tight shot, helps bring
out the characteristics of the lens (fisheye).

-- 
Best regards,
Bruce


Tuesday, July 26, 2005, 11:50:57 PM, you wrote:

GD> I bought one of the Zenitar-K 16mm f/2.8 fish eye lenses, based on
GD> the wonderful work that I've seen John Bean and others produce with
GD> it. It's truly a delightful toy ... It *doesn't* replace the Pentax
GD> DA14 lens at all, but it is simply FUN to shoot pictures with it ...

GD>http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/25p.htm

GD> Comments and critique always appreciated.

GD> enjoy
GD> Godfrey

Re: K15mm for House Interiors

[Cory Papenfuss]

In other words, they're completely different.  If you can get away
with the barrel distortion from a fisheye, you'll tend to get better
results than trying to defish it all the time.


Not in my experience.


	Of course it's subjective on what an individual likes.  I guess 
what I was trying to say is for a "mild" fisheye (e.g. Zenitar on APS 
sensor), the loss of image content in the corner and the resulting stretch 
on the edges may or may not be worth "defishing."  YMMV, to each their 
own.


	One other intersting thing (and the main reason I got the Zenitar) 
is for stitching panoramas.  The panotools *already* correct for lens 
distortions, so it takes less shots to get more panorama with a fisheye. 
Whether it be a little or a lot of barrel distortion, it doesn't matter 
much to the software.  It maps everything to an absolute reference frame 
anyway.


-Cory

--

*
* Cory Papenfuss*
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student   *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University   *
*