OT - The Empirical Photographer

[mike wilson]

Anyone else waiting for this?

Re: You may begin hating me now:

[mike wilson]

cbwaters wrote:
I didn't notice my typo until you pointed it out.  I'm blaming the 
band-aid on my third finger, right hand.


Camera appears to have had the "never-ready" case on for it's whole life.

Battery is dead and the camera reeks of smoke but otherwise it's a gem.

Cory
how do you de-smoke a camera?


Clean as much of it as you can with a rag dampened with meths or vodka. 
 Leave it, open, in a place where it will get air changes.  Try it 
every week to see how it goes.




- Original Message - From: "P. J. Alling" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2005 8:09 PM
Subject: Re: You may begin hating me now:



it's in VERY god shape.




Oh no, Pentax worship!

graywolf wrote:


Enjoy it.

graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



cbwaters wrote:


http://atlanta.craigslist.org/for/118195376.html

I just got back from picking it up (85 min of driving) and it's in 
VERY god shape.  I think the lens has fungus but WOO FRICKEN HOO 
anyhow!


CW







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



--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.1/206 - Release Date: 
12/16/2005

Re: PESO: Burning For You 2

[Bruce Dayton]

To give more explanation for my perception.  What it really reminded
me of was the start of a James Bond movie where they take the form of
a woman and put something inside it like fire or water or something.
It is interesting to see the shapes morph and to see new shapes, but I
think as a still image, it grabs at you for a minute and then just
sits there.

I personally didn't find it unpleasant, but it wasn't a shot that I
would want to look at over and over.

-- 
Best regards,
Bruce


Sunday, December 18, 2005, 9:51:39 PM, you wrote:

G> Hi Paul,

G> I'm not offended, just a bit puzzled. I thought I would have received one
G> definitely positive response by the time I made that post.

G> I joked about the kid and kittens shot, because I wondered if every picture
G> of a girl had to be cute to get a favorable review here. I was just
G> wondering if everyone had become so "glamour" and "traditional portrait"
G> oriented that an experimental shot which didn't glorify the beauty of the
G> subject didn't have much of a chance.

G> Remember, most people didn't say why they didn't like it. They just said
G> they didn't like it. Since they didn't explain why, my mind naturally
G> starts to speculate as to their possible reasons.  ;)

G> By all means, keep those comments on the image coming, be they positive or
G> negative... ;)


G> take care,
G> Glen


G> At 11:02 PM 12/18/2005, Paul Stenquist wrote:

>>I sense that you've taken some offense as a result of the negative 
>>comments. You shouldn't. The effort was a good one.  I just think that
>>this shot doesn't work. It's forcing an idea. Flames over a picture of a
>>girl. But the picture of the girl appears to be somewhat of a standard
>>portrait, and the flames are, well, flames. And the two shots don't really
>>meld as a composition. For me, the takeaway is  just one element over the
>>other, resulting in a rather unpleasant composition. Sorry, but that's
>>what I see here. But keep experimenting. Keep shooting. And, please, no
>>cute baby girls. I'll do those :-).
>>Paul
>>PS: I wish I was as motivated to experiment as you seem to be. That's a
>>good thing. But that puts you in the line of fire. It goes with the territory.
>>
>>
>>On Dec 18, 2005, at 10:25 PM, Glen wrote:
>>
>>>At 07:01 PM 12/18/2005, P. J. Alling wrote:
>>>
Bizarre, album cover art...

Glen wrote:

>Hi everyone,
>
>I appreciate any and all honest comments on one of my latest images:
>
>http://webpages.charter.net/glenweb/ni/Burning_For_You2.jpg
>>>
>>>
>>>Okay, out of 5 responses so far, 4 have definitely been negative, and
>>>this one I'm not certain about. I don't know for certain if P. J. would
>>>consider "bizarre album cover art" a good thing or not. I suspect the
>>>answer is probably not.  ;)
>>>
>>>Maybe I should photograph someone's cute baby girl, in her cute little
>>>holiday dress, sitting at the foot of a Christmas tree, with colorful
>>>presents all around her, while she laughs with delight at two adorable
>>>kittens playing with balls of red and green yarn in the foreground.
>>>:)
>>>
>>>
>>>take care,
>>>Glen

Re: PESO: Burning For You 3

[P. J. Alling]

I didn't see very much change from the previous version.  Yes, I didn't 
like it very much, it was clever, but unpleasant.  But clever is often 
not enough.


Glen wrote:


Hi everyone,

My recent PESO just got a little update. I wish I had uploaded this 
version first:



http://webpages.charter.net/glenweb/ni/Burning_For_You3.jpg



Of course, I don't expect to sway the minds of any people who didn't 
like it the first time, but that's okay.  ;)



take care,
Glen





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

PESO: Burning For You -- Without Flames

[Glen]

I just thought a few of you might want to see the original portrait that I 
used for the "Burning for You" image:


http://webpages.charter.net/glenweb/ni/Kim_1.jpg

I want to mention that I know the color and tonality of this image isn't 
that of a standard portrait, but that was intentional. I wanted something 
different, something that would get people's attention. I also want to add 
that this was shot on slide film, and that the "look" of the image came 
from the lighting and not from Photoshop. (For those people keeping track 
of such things.) I did use Photoshop to fix one or two minor skin 
blemishes, and a few dust spots on the scan of the slide. However, there 
was no "creative manipulation" involving Photoshop. This is how the slide 
actually looks, and it is also pretty darn close to how the scene looked to 
the naked eye when shooting.


As for the odd cropping, I had considered later adding something into the 
right half of the frame when I took this shot. The large empty black area 
was reserved for that purpose.


As always, comments are always welcome.


take care,
Glen

Re: PESO: Burning For You 2

[Glen]

Hi Paul,

I'm not offended, just a bit puzzled. I thought I would have received one 
definitely positive response by the time I made that post.


I joked about the kid and kittens shot, because I wondered if every picture 
of a girl had to be cute to get a favorable review here. I was just 
wondering if everyone had become so "glamour" and "traditional portrait" 
oriented that an experimental shot which didn't glorify the beauty of the 
subject didn't have much of a chance.


Remember, most people didn't say why they didn't like it. They just said 
they didn't like it. Since they didn't explain why, my mind naturally 
starts to speculate as to their possible reasons.  ;)


By all means, keep those comments on the image coming, be they positive or 
negative... ;)



take care,
Glen


At 11:02 PM 12/18/2005, Paul Stenquist wrote:

I sense that you've taken some offense as a result of the negative 
comments. You shouldn't. The effort was a good one.  I just think that 
this shot doesn't work. It's forcing an idea. Flames over a picture of a 
girl. But the picture of the girl appears to be somewhat of a standard 
portrait, and the flames are, well, flames. And the two shots don't really 
meld as a composition. For me, the takeaway is  just one element over the 
other, resulting in a rather unpleasant composition. Sorry, but that's 
what I see here. But keep experimenting. Keep shooting. And, please, no 
cute baby girls. I'll do those :-).

Paul
PS: I wish I was as motivated to experiment as you seem to be. That's a 
good thing. But that puts you in the line of fire. It goes with the territory.



On Dec 18, 2005, at 10:25 PM, Glen wrote:


At 07:01 PM 12/18/2005, P. J. Alling wrote:


Bizarre, album cover art...

Glen wrote:


Hi everyone,

I appreciate any and all honest comments on one of my latest images:

http://webpages.charter.net/glenweb/ni/Burning_For_You2.jpg



Okay, out of 5 responses so far, 4 have definitely been negative, and 
this one I'm not certain about. I don't know for certain if P. J. would 
consider "bizarre album cover art" a good thing or not. I suspect the 
answer is probably not.  ;)


Maybe I should photograph someone's cute baby girl, in her cute little 
holiday dress, sitting at the foot of a Christmas tree, with colorful 
presents all around her, while she laughs with delight at two adorable 
kittens playing with balls of red and green yarn in the foreground.

:)


take care,
Glen

Re: PESO - Six of one, half a dozen of another

[Glen]

At 12:27 AM 12/19/2005, Bruce Dayton wrote:


I found it almost comical how these big birds were seemingly herding
around these little birds.  Almost like they were taking them out for
a walk.

Pentax *istD, A 70-210/4, handheld
ISO 200, 1/1000 sec @ f/8.0, Manual mode, Center weighted metering
Converted from Raw using Capture One LE
Cropped for presentation

http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_2416a.htm

Comments welcome

-
Bruce


That's a really nice shot! It looks just like you said.  :)

I think it should be published somewhere.

take care,
Glen

PESO - Six of one, half a dozen of another

[Bruce Dayton]

I found it almost comical how these big birds were seemingly herding
around these little birds.  Almost like they were taking them out for
a walk.

Pentax *istD, A 70-210/4, handheld
ISO 200, 1/1000 sec @ f/8.0, Manual mode, Center weighted metering
Converted from Raw using Capture One LE
Cropped for presentation

http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_2416a.htm

Comments welcome

-
Bruce

Re: OT: Photoshop B&W Converson Tones

[Boris Liberman]

Hi!

I still run an action before saving jpeg which converts to 8bits and 
sRGB, this
way I don't forget to execute a colour space conversion  and I have a 
choice of

saving as a regular jpeg (including EXIF data) or using "save for web".


I'd like to stress the importance of colour space conversion when saving 
a file with the intention of having it printed by a photo lab. Most 
machines don't have the ability to convert every space that is out there 
to the working space, which is sRGB.


Voila! A lesson just learned...

Boris

Re: Semi-OT (but photography): Some Family History

[Boris Liberman]

Hi!

My mother died last summer at 87. As a memento, my father's Christmas 
card this year has a photo taken of her in 1935 at Dominican College, 
San Rafael, California. The posed photo shows three small groups of 
women talking in front of a college building, and one walking toward the 
door. There are nine women in the photo altogether. (Dominican was then 
a women's college. I don't know if it still is.) Why am I reporting this 
here? Because the photo was taken by Ansel Adams. In his hungry days he 
apparently had a business doing photos of students. The shot at 
Dominican was for a brochure, and was arranged by a friend of his at the 
college, Sister Thomas.


I became serious about photography over 40 years ago, and all this time 
neither of my parents told me about this.


I just talked to my father, who is still in California. He says that he 
has 2 or 3 copies of a newspaper in which the photo appeared and will 
send me one. Unfortunately all he and my mother clipped was the photo. 
My father doesn't know which newspaper it was from.


Sad, yet beautiful story, Joe...

Boris

Re: You may begin hating me now:

[cbwaters]

I didn't notice my typo until you pointed it out.  I'm blaming the band-aid 
on my third finger, right hand.


Camera appears to have had the "never-ready" case on for it's whole life.

Battery is dead and the camera reeks of smoke but otherwise it's a gem.

Cory
how do you de-smoke a camera?

- Original Message - 
From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2005 8:09 PM
Subject: Re: You may begin hating me now:



it's in VERY god shape.



Oh no, Pentax worship!

graywolf wrote:


Enjoy it.

graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



cbwaters wrote:


http://atlanta.craigslist.org/for/118195376.html

I just got back from picking it up (85 min of driving) and it's in VERY 
god shape.  I think the lens has fungus but WOO FRICKEN HOO anyhow!


CW







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



--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.1/206 - Release Date: 12/16/2005

Re: Photoshop measure tool

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

CS2 seems to hold the setting on Mac OS X v10.4.x, even through  
restarts.


Godfrey

On Dec 18, 2005, at 3:37 PM, David Savage wrote:


But it goes back to the eyedropper tool when you run the program after
rebooting.

At least it does on my machine.

On 12/19/05, Powell Hargrave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

PSCS2 Windows
Measure tool stays selected when PhotoShop is closed and re opened.
Keyboard shortcut "I" selects the Eyedropper/Measure group.
Shift I cycles through the tools

At 01:03 PM 17/12/2005 , you wrote:
Sometimes there are basic things that you realise you should, but  
don't

know.

In Photoshop, I use the measure tool all the time to straighten out
scans. Is there any way to make it stay as the default in the Tools
palette, instead of defaulting to the eyedropper? Other tools  
seem to

stay at the last tool used.

Re: PAW: Redcoats! Redux

[Boris Liberman]

Hi!


Based on some comments received WRT the original post, I've fiddled
around with it (mostly cropped a bit but also slightly different
levels adjustments):

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3958764&size=lg

For your reference, here's the "original":

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3957690&size=lg

Waddya think?  Better, worse, same, indifferent either way?  How would
you have cropped the original?  Much as I don't like to crop, this is
one that requires it, so I'd be interested to know (since I so rarely
crop, I'm not very good at it).


Frank, the cropped version is better, but just a little...

Boris

Re: PESO: Real Southwest IV

[Ann Sanfedele]

Joseph Tainter wrote:
> 
> http://www.fotocommunity.com/pc/pc/cat/3375/display/4598187
> 
> Comments welcome. Regardless of comments, I am having fun with my Real
> Southwest series.
> 
> Joe

my kinda shot, of course!

I think I'd like to see the building take up a bit
less of the frame... if
nothing else but vast expanse was in the area.  I
love Holbrook :)

ann

Re: OT: Photoshop B&W Converson Tones

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 12/18/2005 5:45:21 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I still run an action before saving jpeg which converts to 8bits and sRGB, 
this 
way I don't forget to execute a colour space conversion  and I have a choice 
of 
saving as a regular jpeg (including EXIF data) or using "save for web".


Rob Studdert
===
Oooops. That is another thing I have missed doing, converting it to sRGB from 
Adobe RGB. 

Okey, dokey, thanks for telling me. 

Amazing you guys have liked my pictures at all. ;-)

Marnie 

Re: PESO: Burning For You 2

[Bob Sullivan]

OK, you wanted honest responses, here goes...
The picture is repulsive to me.
It seems like you are trying to create a picture of a burned girl,
to what purpose?  These kind of injuries are difficult to recover from,
both physically and emotionally.  The plastic surgery would last a decade.
The emotional scars last longer.
I can't think of any reason to try and create this image,
and like Paul said, the image doesn't really work as a composite anyway.
Regards,  Bob S.

On 12/18/05, frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12/18/05, Glen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > Okay, out of 5 responses so far, 4 have definitely been negative, and this
> > one I'm not certain about. I don't know for certain if P. J. would consider
> > "bizarre album cover art" a good thing or not. I suspect the answer is
> > probably not.  ;)
> >
> > Maybe I should photograph someone's cute baby girl, in her cute little
> > holiday dress, sitting at the foot of a Christmas tree, with colorful
> > presents all around her, while she laughs with delight at two adorable
> > kittens playing with balls of red and green yarn in the foreground.   :)
>
> Well, you asked for honest responses.
>
> The bottom line is:  if you like it, that's all that really matters.
>
> cheers,
> frank
>
> --
> "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson
>
>

Re: PESO: Burning For You 3

[Bob Sullivan]

Still looks too much like a disfigured burn victim!  Bob S.

On 12/18/05, Glen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> My recent PESO just got a little update. I wish I had uploaded this version
> first:
>
> >http://webpages.charter.net/glenweb/ni/Burning_For_You3.jpg
>
> Of course, I don't expect to sway the minds of any people who didn't like
> it the first time, but that's okay.  ;)
>
>
> take care,
> Glen
>
>

Re: Pentax 645

[David Mann]

On Dec 19, 2005, at 1:07 PM, Jack Davis wrote:


"It's MLU or Nothing". (I'm considering that message for my tombstone)


"Give me MLU or give me death"

- Dave (with apologies to Patrick Henry)

Re: PESO: Burning For You 2

[frank theriault]

On 12/18/05, Glen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> Okay, out of 5 responses so far, 4 have definitely been negative, and this
> one I'm not certain about. I don't know for certain if P. J. would consider
> "bizarre album cover art" a good thing or not. I suspect the answer is
> probably not.  ;)
>
> Maybe I should photograph someone's cute baby girl, in her cute little
> holiday dress, sitting at the foot of a Christmas tree, with colorful
> presents all around her, while she laughs with delight at two adorable
> kittens playing with balls of red and green yarn in the foreground.   :)

Well, you asked for honest responses.

The bottom line is:  if you like it, that's all that really matters.

cheers,
frank

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

Re: PESO: Burning For You 3

[Glen]

Hi everyone,

My recent PESO just got a little update. I wish I had uploaded this version 
first:



http://webpages.charter.net/glenweb/ni/Burning_For_You3.jpg


Of course, I don't expect to sway the minds of any people who didn't like 
it the first time, but that's okay.  ;)



take care,
Glen

Re: Pentax 645N & NII

[Jack Davis]

Thanks, Pal! Sorry I didn't grasp the answer sooner.

Jack

--- Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Jack Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> > You used the reference "It" and then proceeded to explain the MLU
> > operation. May I assume you meant "they" in that both the "N" and
> the
> > "NII" operate in a similar way?
> 
> No. The N does not have MLU in any form. MLU and mirror-prefire
> operate in a 
> similar way on the NII. They are two positions on the drive mode
> switch. The 
> two other are single advance and continuous advance (2fps).
> 
> > One more clarification and I'll go away. Do both have cable release
> or
> > cable switch release capability? If you don't know off-hand, please
> > don't dig for an answer.
> 
> 
> You can use both a mechanical one of the standard type and electronic
> ones 
> of various types, some with added functions like timers and
> intervallometer 
> (the NII uses the latest Pentax electronic releases). 
> 
> 
> 


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

Re: PESO: Burning For You 2

[Paul Stenquist]

I sense that you've taken some offense as a result of the negative 
comments. You shouldn't. The effort was a good one.  I just think that 
this shot doesn't work. It's forcing an idea. Flames over a picture of 
a girl. But the picture of the girl appears to be somewhat of a 
standard portrait, and the flames are, well, flames. And the two shots 
don't really meld as a composition. For me, the takeaway is  just one 
element over the other, resulting in a rather unpleasant composition. 
Sorry, but that's what I see here. But keep experimenting. Keep 
shooting. And, please, no cute baby girls. I'll do those :-).

Paul
PS: I wish I was as motivated to experiment as you seem to be. That's a 
good thing. But that puts you in the line of fire. It goes with the 
territory.



On Dec 18, 2005, at 10:25 PM, Glen wrote:


At 07:01 PM 12/18/2005, P. J. Alling wrote:


Bizarre, album cover art...

Glen wrote:


Hi everyone,

I appreciate any and all honest comments on one of my latest images:

http://webpages.charter.net/glenweb/ni/Burning_For_You2.jpg



Okay, out of 5 responses so far, 4 have definitely been negative, and 
this one I'm not certain about. I don't know for certain if P. J. 
would consider "bizarre album cover art" a good thing or not. I 
suspect the answer is probably not.  ;)


Maybe I should photograph someone's cute baby girl, in her cute little 
holiday dress, sitting at the foot of a Christmas tree, with colorful 
presents all around her, while she laughs with delight at two adorable 
kittens playing with balls of red and green yarn in the foreground.   
:)



take care,
Glen

Re: PESO: Burning For You 2

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Glen"

Subject: Re: PESO: Burning For You 2





Maybe I should photograph someone's cute baby girl, in her cute little 
holiday dress, sitting at the foot of a Christmas tree, with colorful 
presents all around her, while she laughs with delight at two adorable 
kittens playing with balls of red and green yarn in the foreground.   :)


You just do that, and send a copy to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
WW

GESO: A day out with the Optio 60

[Juan Buhler]

Today I went out to try to do some street shooting with the Optio 60.
This isn't what I
bought it for, but I just wanted to see how much I could do with it.

I put together a little flickr gallery of the most decent pics of the day:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jbuhler/sets/1610069/

All full frame, except I cropped them vertically to get to my
preferred 3:2 aspect ratio. Shot in color, processed in the same way I
process my istD images, with Petteri's PS actions.

I uploaded the full res images, so they are available for those of you
who want to check them out.

Thanks for looking,

j

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

Re: PESO: Real Southwest IV

[Glen]

Sunday, December 18, 2005, 6:18:31 PM, you wrote:

JT> http://www.fotocommunity.com/pc/pc/cat/3375/display/4598187

JT> Comments welcome. Regardless of comments, I am having fun with my Real
JT> Southwest series.

JT> Joe


I really like this one. I've liked several of your other Southwest images 
as well.



take care,
Glen

Re: PESO: Burning For You 2

[Glen]

At 07:01 PM 12/18/2005, P. J. Alling wrote:


Bizarre, album cover art...

Glen wrote:


Hi everyone,

I appreciate any and all honest comments on one of my latest images:

http://webpages.charter.net/glenweb/ni/Burning_For_You2.jpg



Okay, out of 5 responses so far, 4 have definitely been negative, and this 
one I'm not certain about. I don't know for certain if P. J. would consider 
"bizarre album cover art" a good thing or not. I suspect the answer is 
probably not.  ;)


Maybe I should photograph someone's cute baby girl, in her cute little 
holiday dress, sitting at the foot of a Christmas tree, with colorful 
presents all around her, while she laughs with delight at two adorable 
kittens playing with balls of red and green yarn in the foreground.   :)



take care,
Glen

Re: PESO: Real Southwest IV

[Bruce Dayton]

I like this one.  The wood does seem to be in pretty good shape.  The
sign really makes it.  Nice shot.

-- 
Best regards,
Bruce


Sunday, December 18, 2005, 6:18:31 PM, you wrote:

JT> http://www.fotocommunity.com/pc/pc/cat/3375/display/4598187

JT> Comments welcome. Regardless of comments, I am having fun with my Real
JT> Southwest series.

JT> Joe

Re: OT: Photoshop B&W Converson Tones

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Rob Studdert"

Subject: Re: OT: Photoshop B&W Converson Tones



I still run an action before saving jpeg which converts to 8bits and sRGB, 
this
way I don't forget to execute a colour space conversion  and I have a 
choice of

saving as a regular jpeg (including EXIF data) or using "save for web".


I'd like to stress the importance of colour space conversion when saving a 
file with the intention of having it printed by a photo lab. Most machines 
don't have the ability to convert every space that is out there to the 
working space, which is sRGB.


William Robb 

Re: PESO: Burning For You 2

[Bruce Dayton]

For a certain effect, it is pretty good.  For a photo to look at, it
does nothing for me.

-- 
Best regards,
Bruce


Sunday, December 18, 2005, 1:27:36 PM, you wrote:

G> Hi everyone,

G> I appreciate any and all honest comments on one of my latest images:

G> http://webpages.charter.net/glenweb/ni/Burning_For_You2.jpg


G> Thanks,
G> Glen

Re: PAW: Redcoats! Redux

[Ann Sanfedele]

frank theriault wrote:
> 
> Based on some comments received WRT the original post, I've fiddled
> around with it (mostly cropped a bit but also slightly different
> levels adjustments):
> 
> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3958764&size=lg
> 
> For your reference, here's the "original":
> 
> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3957690&size=lg

LOL! - God, Frank that's hilarious...
love the guy in the shades.

I just looked at the redux first --
the crop was good, I agree it needed to be done...
now go put a nice black line around it in
photoshop :)

annsan -- skimming list -- having finished major
housecleaning


> 
> Waddya think?  Better, worse, same, indifferent either way?  How would
> you have cropped the original?  Much as I don't like to crop, this is
> one that requires it, so I'd be interested to know (since I so rarely
> crop, I'm not very good at it).
> 
> Thanks for your input!
> 
> cheers,
> frank
> --
> "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: PESO: Real Southwest IV

[Paul Stenquist]

Very nice.
On Dec 18, 2005, at 9:18 PM, Joseph Tainter wrote:


http://www.fotocommunity.com/pc/pc/cat/3375/display/4598187

Comments welcome. Regardless of comments, I am having fun with my Real 
Southwest series.


Joe

PESO: Real Southwest IV

[Joseph Tainter]

http://www.fotocommunity.com/pc/pc/cat/3375/display/4598187

Comments welcome. Regardless of comments, I am having fun with my Real 
Southwest series.


Joe

Re: Pentax 645N & NII

[Pål Jensen]

- Original Message - 
From: "Jack Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



You used the reference "It" and then proceeded to explain the MLU
operation. May I assume you meant "they" in that both the "N" and the
"NII" operate in a similar way?


No. The N does not have MLU in any form. MLU and mirror-prefire operate in a 
similar way on the NII. They are two positions on the drive mode switch. The 
two other are single advance and continuous advance (2fps).



One more clarification and I'll go away. Do both have cable release or
cable switch release capability? If you don't know off-hand, please
don't dig for an answer.



You can use both a mechanical one of the standard type and electronic ones 
of various types, some with added functions like timers and intervallometer 
(the NII uses the latest Pentax electronic releases). 

Re: You may begin hating me now:

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

Nice, same as mine. I bought mine at a garage sale down the street  
from my apartment.
It had a broken 50mm lens on it which I tossed in the garbage. Cost  
me very very little.

So I don't hate you.

Godfrey

On Dec 18, 2005, at 12:59 PM, cbwaters wrote:


http://atlanta.craigslist.org/for/118195376.html

I just got back from picking it up (85 min of driving) and it's in  
VERY god shape.  I think the lens has fungus but WOO FRICKEN HOO  
anyhow!


CW

Re: You may begin hating me now:

[John Coyle]

Apparently I am not permitted to view craigslist at all!  I can't be 
bothered with web-sites that impose that sort of stupid security.


John Coyle
Brisbane, Australia
- Original Message - 
From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 11:09 AM
Subject: Re: You may begin hating me now:



it's in VERY god shape.



Oh no, Pentax worship!

graywolf wrote:


Enjoy it.

graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



cbwaters wrote:


http://atlanta.craigslist.org/for/118195376.html

I just got back from picking it up (85 min of driving) and it's in VERY 
god shape.  I think the lens has fungus but WOO FRICKEN HOO anyhow!


CW







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

Re: Pentax Stock Sale

[John Forbes]

I didn't see any mention of the price.

John

On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 22:44:31 -, Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
wrote:



On 18 Dec 2005 at 21:15, John Forbes wrote:


I quite agree, but a higher stock price allows a company to borrow money
more cheaply; it makes it more difficult to take over, and it's a sign  
of

confidence.


Was the negotiated stock price above or below the trading price they had  
been

trading at?


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









--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

Re: OT: Photoshop B&W Converson Tones

[Paul Stenquist]

I do the same, although I do it manually. Save for Web causes a color 
shift if the file isn't first converted to sRGB.

Paul
On Dec 18, 2005, at 9:43 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:


On 18 Dec 2005 at 18:44, graywolf wrote:


If you use "save for web" your don't have to do a separate conversion,
it will save your 16 bit .psd as an 8 bit jpeg. I jugh st do a 
"bicubic

sharper" downsize, and "save for web", then delete the downsized .psd
image without saving.


I still run an action before saving jpeg which converts to 8bits and 
sRGB, this
way I don't forget to execute a colour space conversion  and I have a 
choice of

saving as a regular jpeg (including EXIF data) or using "save for web".


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 645N & NII

[Jack Davis]

Thanks, Pal,
You used the reference "It" and then proceeded to explain the MLU
operation. May I assume you meant "they" in that both the "N" and the
"NII" operate in a similar way?
One more clarification and I'll go away. Do both have cable release or
cable switch release capability? If you don't know off-hand, please
don't dig for an answer.

'preciate it,

Jack




--- Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> - Original Message - 
> 
> 
> > How is the MLU activated with the 645N and 645NII? Pre-lock or
> separate
> > lever requiring cable release?
> 
> It has both mirror lock and mirror prefire. No need to use remote
> releases 
> for either. Set via the switch around the release level. One position
> is 
> mirror pre-fire (2s) if the self timer is programmed that way
> (otherwise 
> 12s). Another position is mirror lock. One press on the shutter
> release 
> flips up the mirror. Another open the shutter. 
> 
> 
> 


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

Re: OT: Photoshop B&W Converson Tones

[Rob Studdert]

On 18 Dec 2005 at 18:44, graywolf wrote:

> If you use "save for web" your don't have to do a separate conversion, 
> it will save your 16 bit .psd as an 8 bit jpeg. I just do a "bicubic 
> sharper" downsize, and "save for web", then delete the downsized .psd 
> image without saving.

I still run an action before saving jpeg which converts to 8bits and sRGB, this 
way I don't forget to execute a colour space conversion  and I have a choice of 
saving as a regular jpeg (including EXIF data) or using "save for web".


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

Re: OT: Photoshop B&W Converson Tones

[graywolf]

Well there are always different ways to do things. Manually I tend to 
oversharpen. Bicubic sharper has been a god send for me. The smaller 
your image the more USM it needs, bicubic sharper does it pretty well 
and I don't have to fiddle with it. Unless there is a pressing reason 
for doing it otherwise, I will always do it the easy way. Just lazy, I 
guess.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

In a message dated 12/18/2005 3:46:53 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you use "save for web" your don't have to do a separate conversion, 
it will save your 16 bit .psd as an 8 bit jpeg. I just do a "bicubic 
sharper" downsize, and "save for web", then delete the downsized .psd 
image without saving.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---

Yeah, I usually save for web now to create jpegs. I started doing this when I 
realized it left the PDF file alone and still active in the window.


I generally use bicubic straight, unadorned, vanilla flavor, whatever. Is 
sharper better? 

Actually, come to think of it, most times now I resize and then sharpen 
first. Then I save for web with no resizing/sharpening at the time. (I can undo the 
changes to the pdf before saving it.)  I usually do my own sharpening now, 
using the high pass filter option that Boris explained to me. I guess I prefer 
to know how much sharpening is going on. Not sure one has any control over that 
in the automatic options.


Maybe I going through too many steps.

Marnie aka Doe ;-)


 

Re: You may begin hating me now:

[P. J. Alling]

it's in VERY god shape. 



Oh no, Pentax worship!

graywolf wrote:


Enjoy it.

graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



cbwaters wrote:


http://atlanta.craigslist.org/for/118195376.html

I just got back from picking it up (85 min of driving) and it's in 
VERY god shape.  I think the lens has fungus but WOO FRICKEN HOO anyhow!


CW







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

Re: Another DAM book

[Butch Black]

In a message dated 12/18/2005 12:00:28 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Does this mean we can stop calling ourselves photographers now, and start
calling ourselves digital asset managers?


Dam imagers.

William Robb

There's got to be a way that a N can be added to that acronym.

Marnie aka Doe 



Digital Asset Managers Nuveau

Re: Pentax 645N & NII

[Pål Jensen]

- Original Message - 




How is the MLU activated with the 645N and 645NII? Pre-lock or separate
lever requiring cable release?


It has both mirror lock and mirror prefire. No need to use remote releases 
for either. Set via the switch around the release level. One position is 
mirror pre-fire (2s) if the self timer is programmed that way (otherwise 
12s). Another position is mirror lock. One press on the shutter release 
flips up the mirror. Another open the shutter. 

Re: OT: Photoshop B&W Converson Tones

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 12/18/2005 3:46:53 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you use "save for web" your don't have to do a separate conversion, 
it will save your 16 bit .psd as an 8 bit jpeg. I just do a "bicubic 
sharper" downsize, and "save for web", then delete the downsized .psd 
image without saving.

graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---

Yeah, I usually save for web now to create jpegs. I started doing this when I 
realized it left the PDF file alone and still active in the window.

I generally use bicubic straight, unadorned, vanilla flavor, whatever. Is 
sharper better? 

Actually, come to think of it, most times now I resize and then sharpen 
first. Then I save for web with no resizing/sharpening at the time. (I can undo 
the 
changes to the pdf before saving it.)  I usually do my own sharpening now, 
using the high pass filter option that Boris explained to me. I guess I prefer 
to know how much sharpening is going on. Not sure one has any control over that 
in the automatic options.

Maybe I going through too many steps.

Marnie aka Doe ;-)

Re: You may begin hating me now:

[Gautam Sarup]

All right, you're top of the list for today.
Have fun though.

Cheers,
Gautam

On 12/18/05, cbwaters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://atlanta.craigslist.org/for/118195376.html
>
> I just got back from picking it up (85 min of driving) and it's in VERY god
> shape.  I think the lens has fungus but WOO FRICKEN HOO anyhow!
>
> CW
>
>

Pentax 645N & NII

[Jack Davis]

How is the MLU activated with the 645N and 645NII? Pre-lock or separate
lever requiring cable release?
I just sold a Mamiya 6 outfit for reasons of problematic focus
(especially with the 150mm), awkward filter handling and the need to
fiddle with a hand-held meter to help guarantee exposure.
Thought I'd better sell it before I threw it.

Thanks again,

Jack

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

Re: Dear Santa

[Gautam Sarup]

Arax.  Not the best perhaps but it tilts and it shifts.

Merry Christmas,
Gautam

On 12/18/05, Kenneth Waller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >He brought a nice Tilt-shift lens.
>
> Made by ?
>
> Kenneth Waller
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Gautam Sarup" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2005 8:32 PM
> Subject: Re: Dear Santa
>
>
> > No more list here.  Santa's (that's right, Santa and not the holiday
> > gift-person)
> > been.  He brought a nice Tilt-shift lens and the PZ-1p has already made
> > friends
> > with it.  Tomorrow I'll introduce it to the MZ-S.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Gautam
> >
> > On 12/9/05, Mat Maessen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Dear Santa:
> >>
> >> I have been a very good boy this year. I always ate my vegetables, and
> >> I even cleaned my room. Please leave me one or more of the following
> >> this year:
> >>
> >> 1. *istDS2. No need for the kit lens, just the body please.
> >> 2. 2GB SD cards. Two of them, please.
> >> 3. FA31/1.8 Limited. I've been VERY good.
> >> 4. Manfrotto carbon fiber tripod. Or a gym membership so I can carry my
> >> Tiltall.
> >> 5. Zenitar 16mm fisheye lens.
> >> 6. Peace on earth, and good will to men.
> >>
> >> Sincerely,
> >>
> >> Mat Maessen
> >>
> >>
> >> (hey, I can dream, can't I?)
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>

Re: You may begin hating me now:

[graywolf]

Enjoy it.

graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



cbwaters wrote:


http://atlanta.craigslist.org/for/118195376.html

I just got back from picking it up (85 min of driving) and it's in 
VERY god shape.  I think the lens has fungus but WOO FRICKEN HOO anyhow!


CW

Re: Semi-OT (but photography): Some Family History

[graywolf]

Sorry to hear about your mother's death, Joe.

Ansel Adams ran a commercial photo studio through most of his life. The 
reality of that is he did whatever was needed to make a buck. A lot of 
the work that is vernerated so highly was done after he retired as a 
commercal photographer and was done more as a paying hobby.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Joseph Tainter wrote:

My mother died last summer at 87. As a memento, my father's Christmas 
card this year has a photo taken of her in 1935 at Dominican College, 
San Rafael, California. The posed photo shows three small groups of 
women talking in front of a college building, and one walking toward 
the door. There are nine women in the photo altogether. (Dominican was 
then a women's college. I don't know if it still is.) Why am I 
reporting this here? Because the photo was taken by Ansel Adams. In 
his hungry days he apparently had a business doing photos of students. 
The shot at Dominican was for a brochure, and was arranged by a friend 
of his at the college, Sister Thomas.


I became serious about photography over 40 years ago, and all this 
time neither of my parents told me about this.


I just talked to my father, who is still in California. He says that 
he has 2 or 3 copies of a newspaper in which the photo appeared and 
will send me one. Unfortunately all he and my mother clipped was the 
photo. My father doesn't know which newspaper it was from.


Joe

Re: Pentax 645

[Jack Davis]

"It's MLU or Nothing". (I'm considering that message for my tombstone)

Jack

--- Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Sylwester Pietrzyk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> > But anyway both 645N/NII have so greatly damped mirror, that MLU 
> under 
> > normal circumstances gives nothing. And that was proved by  Michael
> 
> > Reichmann (who loved 67II/645 a few years ago) in short test  here:
> > http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/645-mlu.shtml
> 
> 
> The problem with these kinds of tests is that they are performed
> under ideal 
> conditions. I have no doubt that Pentax mirror damping is good enough
> if you 
> use the largest tripod you can find and place it on flat tarmac in a
> parking 
> lot. Unfortunately, most outdoor photographers put their tripods on
> less 
> than ideal surfaces such as soft moss or in the middle of a bog
> 
> 
> Pål 
> 
> 
> 


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

Re: You may begin hating me now:

[frank theriault]

On 12/18/05, cbwaters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://atlanta.craigslist.org/for/118195376.html
>
> I just got back from picking it up (85 min of driving) and it's in VERY god
> shape.  I think the lens has fungus but WOO FRICKEN HOO anyhow!
>
> CW

Until now, I only had an intense dislike for you...

Damn you, Waters!  Damn you!

Seriously, that's a nice score.  Woo fricken hoo indeed, my friend!



cheers,
frank

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

Re: PESO: Burning For You 2

[frank theriault]

On 12/18/05, Glen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I appreciate any and all honest comments on one of my latest images:
>
> http://webpages.charter.net/glenweb/ni/Burning_For_You2.jpg

Did you post the "marble woman" with the mottled skin?  I thought she
looked like a burn victim and really didn't like that rendition.

Given my squeamishness about (what I perceive to be) burn victims,
imagine my thoughts about this one!  

Not my cuppa, I'm afraid...

cheers,
frank

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

Re: OT: Photoshop B&W Converson Tones

[graywolf]

I keep the rawfile as sort of a negative, eventually burning them to 
DVD. I save a 16 bit .psd as a working file usually a 256ppi at 
10x7.5in. Then as a last step to print or web I resize and save as 
appropriate mostly a 10x7.5 330ppi for printing or a 800x600 jpeg for 
the web. Pease note that except for resampling using either bicubic 
smoother (upsize for printing) or bicubic sharper (downsize for the web) 
I now skip all those intermediate steps. Often I do not even save the 
printfile, because I can redo it in moments. So I normally have the 
rawfile, a finished .psd and possibly a jpeg in my webpages folder. Now 
that I think of it, I really should be archiving the finished .psd's as 
well as the rawfiles.


A note here: if you print a 16 bit file it is automatically converted to 
8 bit. And SFW also automatically converts the file to 8 bit, so you do 
not have to bother with that step.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

In a message dated 12/18/2005 1:22:49 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

I believe you can get better resultant tonality when working in 16-bit
because you're starting with more information and are often loosing less of
it.  So the 8-bit conversion has more info than if you worked on it as an
8-bit file from the beginning.  Plus - and this is important to consider -
although rare, there are some printers that will work in greater than 8-bit
mode right now, and at some point that will probably be more common.  When
that happens it might be nice to have a 16-bit file to print from.

Shel 

Good pt. Thanks Shel. 

I never alter the original RAW, but must admit I don't have a logical system 
yet for the PDF/JPEG variations. I probably should have some sort of work 
folders. I tend to just save them along with the RAWs in their folders. But it 
does mean that sometimes I can't find the version I especially liked. I also have 
the same problem with some my scans from slides. For instance, I can't find 
the barn version I liked -- still one of my favorite photos to date.


Call me stupid, or call me Marnie. :-)


 

Re: PEOW - UW Women's Volleyball NCAA Champions

[frank theriault]

On 12/18/05, Jay Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Congratulations to the University  of Washington women's volleyball
> team in capturing the Division 1 national championship today. They
> remained unbeaten throughout the entire tournament and swept the No. 1
> ranked Nerbraska Cornhuskers in three straight games today.
> Managed to snap a few photos of the team earlier in the season with my
> then new FA 80-200 F/2.8 and the *istDS.
> Comments and critique welcome as usual. Thanks for looking.
> JayT
>
> http://i.pbase.com/o4/87/63987/1/53671110.UW.jpg
>
> Handheld 1/750s f/4.0 at 170.0mm iso1600

I like it a lot, for the same reasons as everyone else who has
commented.  NIce one!

670k is a big file for those of us on dialup with older computers - it
did take a long time to load...

cheers,
frank

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

Re: PESO: Burning For You 2

[P. J. Alling]

Bizarre, album cover art...

Glen wrote:


Hi everyone,

I appreciate any and all honest comments on one of my latest images:

http://webpages.charter.net/glenweb/ni/Burning_For_You2.jpg


Thanks,
Glen





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

Re: PESO - Start the day (or Coffee, Juice, Sigarette)

[frank theriault]

On 12/18/05, Dave Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Now i can see it.
>
> Thnaks for the updated link Boris.
>
> Nice candid shot. Colours are very vibrant
>

Now that I can see it, it's a wonderful photo!  One of your best
candid people shots ever, in fact.  I really like the
framing/composition.  You caught her ~just~ at the right moment.

Well done!  My only nit to pick is that I think it might be even
better in B&W.  Mind you, her orange juice would look like milk...

cheers,
frank
--
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: OT: Photoshop B&W Converson Tones

[graywolf]

If you use "save for web" your don't have to do a separate conversion, 
it will save your 16 bit .psd as an 8 bit jpeg. I just do a "bicubic 
sharper" downsize, and "save for web", then delete the downsized .psd 
image without saving.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Adam Maas wrote:

I never work in any other mode than 16 bit, it preserves data and 
prevents 'hstogram jaggies' that cause posterization. I convert to 8 
bit as the last step before saving the final jpeg.


-Adam


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

On the last set of Mom hands I showed (where most liked them, not her 
hand and mine, the one where I asked if the thumb was too light), 
someone sent me a variation that I liked.

He said he used 16 bit to get more subtle variation in tones.
I notice when one imports a RAW into PS one can import it as 16 bit.

So I am wondering how many of you do that? Specifically when making a 
B&W conversion. But also with color.
Does it make a difference if you later save it as a JPEG (8-bit)? Can 
you get sublter tonal values for B&W? (And maybe subtler color ranges 
for color?)

Or is it all lost again when one saves it later as an 8-bit?

Probably someone has asked this before, I vaguely remember that they 
have. But I wasn't paying attention then. :-)


TIA, Marnie  

Re: PAW: Redcoats! Redux

[P. J. Alling]

Warn a guy when you post something like that will ya!  My sides still 
hurt from laughing and my butt's sore from falling of my chair.


Bob W wrote:


...and then some:

http://uhura.cc.rochester.edu/~jg001g/hassel.htm

--
Cheers,
Bob 

 


-Original Message-
From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 18 December 2005 19:56

To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: PAW: Redcoats! Redux

Excellent! But we need the Hasselhof head. Do you have it?
   




 


On Dec 18, 2005, at 2:49 PM, Bob W wrote:

   

Another 5 minutes work and you could make 'em all look like David 
Hasselhof.


--
Cheers,
Bob

 


-Original Message-
From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 18 December 2005 19:32
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: PAW: Redcoats! Redux

As I said earlier, I like this new version much better. 
   

But because I 
   

have no problem either cropping or doing anything else 
   

necessary to 
   

get the result I want, I would have taken this a step further and 
cloned out the remainder of the redcoat on the far right of frame. 
It's a simple PhotoShop job. About five minutes work.

Paul
   




   




 




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

Re: Semi-OT (but photography): Some Family History

[Paul Stenquist]

Sorry to hear about your loss of a parent. That's always so tough. But 
this is a fascinating story. I look forward to seeing the photo.

Paul
On Dec 18, 2005, at 6:32 PM, Joseph Tainter wrote:

My mother died last summer at 87. As a memento, my father's Christmas 
card this year has a photo taken of her in 1935 at Dominican College, 
San Rafael, California. The posed photo shows three small groups of 
women talking in front of a college building, and one walking toward 
the door. There are nine women in the photo altogether. (Dominican was 
then a women's college. I don't know if it still is.) Why am I 
reporting this here? Because the photo was taken by Ansel Adams. In 
his hungry days he apparently had a business doing photos of students. 
The shot at Dominican was for a brochure, and was arranged by a friend 
of his at the college, Sister Thomas.


I became serious about photography over 40 years ago, and all this 
time neither of my parents told me about this.


I just talked to my father, who is still in California. He says that 
he has 2 or 3 copies of a newspaper in which the photo appeared and 
will send me one. Unfortunately all he and my mother clipped was the 
photo. My father doesn't know which newspaper it was from.


Joe

Re: Photoshop measure tool

[David Savage]

But it goes back to the eyedropper tool when you run the program after
rebooting.

At least it does on my machine.

Dave

On 12/19/05, Powell Hargrave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> PSCS2 Windows
> Measure tool stays selected when PhotoShop is closed and re opened.
> Keyboard shortcut "I" selects the Eyedropper/Measure group.
> Shift I cycles through the tools
>
> HTH
> Powell
>
>
> At 01:03 PM 17/12/2005 , you wrote:
> >
> >
> >Sometimes there are basic things that you realise you should, but don't
> >know.
> >
> >In Photoshop, I use the measure tool all the time to straighten out
> >scans. Is there any way to make it stay as the default in the Tools
> >palette, instead of defaulting to the eyedropper? Other tools seem to
> >stay at the last tool used.
> >
> >D
> >
> >--
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc
> >
>
>

Semi-OT (but photography): Some Family History

[Joseph Tainter]

My mother died last summer at 87. As a memento, my father's Christmas 
card this year has a photo taken of her in 1935 at Dominican College, 
San Rafael, California. The posed photo shows three small groups of 
women talking in front of a college building, and one walking toward the 
door. There are nine women in the photo altogether. (Dominican was then 
a women's college. I don't know if it still is.) Why am I reporting this 
here? Because the photo was taken by Ansel Adams. In his hungry days he 
apparently had a business doing photos of students. The shot at 
Dominican was for a brochure, and was arranged by a friend of his at the 
college, Sister Thomas.


I became serious about photography over 40 years ago, and all this time 
neither of my parents told me about this.


I just talked to my father, who is still in California. He says that he 
has 2 or 3 copies of a newspaper in which the photo appeared and will 
send me one. Unfortunately all he and my mother clipped was the photo. 
My father doesn't know which newspaper it was from.


Joe

Re: Another DAM book

[P. J. Alling]

Don't take this the wrong way, but isn't asset the diminutive of...

Bob W wrote:


Does this mean we can stop calling ourselves photographers now, and start
calling ourselves digital asset managers?

--
Cheers,
Bob 

 


-Original Message-
From: George Sinos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 18 December 2005 18:23

To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Another DAM book

Not really, this is a new book devoted to Digital Asset 
Management from the viewpoint of the photographer.




I picked it up yesterday at the local Barnes and Noble and 
have been using it as an excuse to not finish those Christmas Cards.


Chapter 1 is downloadable from the web site as a PDF.  I bet 
a bunch of you guys buy this book.


See you later, gs





   




 




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

Re: You may begin hating me now:

[E.R.N. Reed]

Mat Maessen wrote:


On 12/18/05, cbwaters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 


http://atlanta.craigslist.org/for/118195376.html
   



Grr it's even black...

 


I just got back from picking it up (85 min of driving) and it's in VERY god
shape.  I think the lens has fungus but WOO FRICKEN HOO anyhow!
   



Is that an M50/1.4 on it? Might be worth cleaning if it's not too bad...

-Mat (now where's my bargain of a lifetime?)


 


Good grief!
Yeah, I could see the reason for hating you.

Re: Another DAM book

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: 
Subject: Re: Another DAM book






Dam imagers.



There's got to be a way that a N can be added to that acronym.



Buy a Nikon.
We're just a little wet.
WW

Re: PAW: Redcoats! Redux

[P. J. Alling]

Better.

frank theriault wrote:


Based on some comments received WRT the original post, I've fiddled
around with it (mostly cropped a bit but also slightly different
levels adjustments):

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3958764&size=lg

For your reference, here's the "original":

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3957690&size=lg

Waddya think?  Better, worse, same, indifferent either way?  How would
you have cropped the original?  Much as I don't like to crop, this is
one that requires it, so I'd be interested to know (since I so rarely
crop, I'm not very good at it).

Thanks for your input!

cheers,
frank
--
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson


 




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

Re: Photoshop measure tool

[Powell Hargrave]

PSCS2 Windows
Measure tool stays selected when PhotoShop is closed and re opened.
Keyboard shortcut "I" selects the Eyedropper/Measure group.
Shift I cycles through the tools

HTH
Powell


At 01:03 PM 17/12/2005 , you wrote:
>
>
>Sometimes there are basic things that you realise you should, but don't 
>know.
>
>In Photoshop, I use the measure tool all the time to straighten out 
>scans. Is there any way to make it stay as the default in the Tools 
>palette, instead of defaulting to the eyedropper? Other tools seem to 
>stay at the last tool used.
>
>D
>
>-- 
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc
>

Re: PESO - Start the day (or Coffee, Juice, Sigarette)

[Dave Brooks]

Now i can see it.

Thnaks for the updated link Boris.

Nice candid shot. Colours are very vibrant

Dave Brooks

Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 14:39:26 EST
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: PESO - Start the day (or Coffee, Juice, Sigarette)
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 12/16/2005 9:26:37 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi!

>> I think this is one of your best, Boris.  Well done!

Thanks... Though I didn't receive your reply in my mailbox... Very
strange... As you can see it is a citation from another person's response...

Please try this URL:

http://www.photo-forum.ru/photo/242720/index.en.html

PhotoForum is hickupping.

Sorry. 

__
David J Brooks
Equine Photography in York Region
www.caughtinmotion.com
Pentax istD, Nikon D2H

Re: You may begin hating me now:

[Cotty]

On 18/12/05, cbwaters, discombobulated, unleashed:

>http://atlanta.craigslist.org/for/118195376.html
>
>I just got back from picking it up (85 min of driving) and it's in VERY god 
>shape.  I think the lens has fungus but WOO FRICKEN HOO anyhow!

Har, nice one Ceeb.




Cheers,
  Cotty


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

Re: PESO: On the Subject of Chins...

[Powell Hargrave]

On Dec 16, 2005, at 5:34 PM, Glen wrote:

>What could I have done as a photographer to make her jaw less
>prominent, and make her look more idealistic?

To make a too prominent feature less so it is usually best to shoot
straight at it.  You could shoot up at her chin or have her tilt her head
back.  Watch the lighting for shadows that give away your cover up.

Powell

Re: AA bis

[Mark Roberts]

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

>From: "Jack Davis"
>
>> The "preparation" was applied while spending endless hours in the
>> darkroom agonizing over printing "Hernandez" the way He saw it.
>> Hard to believe the time He spent printing that particular image.
>> Purportedly, His most sought after. In fact, one of His books
>> identified it as the main reasons He finally decided to stop providing
>> personally done prints.
>
>Much of that preparation was also knowing his film, equipment and light. 

That's exactly what I was getting at.


>I saw an original Moonrise, signed by St. Ansel in a gallery in Santa Fe 
>some years ago. He hadn't quite secured the depth of field required, and if 
>you look carefully, you can see the crosses in the graveyard are slighly 
>soft.
>They wanted $15,000 for the print, and had I been able to afford it, I would 
>have bought it. It was a lovely photograph.
>Being able to hold an original AA print in my hands was quite a nice 
>experience as well.

If you're ever anywhere near Rochester, NY you should stop in at the
George Eastman House. With a little advance notice they'll let you see
any print in their collection personally. 

They have a pretty amazing collection :)
 
 
-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: Pentax 645

[Jostein]

From: "Pål Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/645-mlu.shtml



The problem with these kinds of tests is that they are performed 
under ideal conditions. I have no doubt that Pentax mirror damping 
is good enough if you use the largest tripod you can find and place 
it on flat tarmac in a parking lot. Unfortunately, most outdoor 
photographers put their tripods on less than ideal surfaces such as 
soft moss or in the middle of a bog


I suspect that soft peat dampen vibrations better than do tarmac, 
given the same tripod. :-)


But I see your point, by all means...

I found the MLU very welcome indeed when I went from 645 to 645 Nii. 
Especially when working with my only tele lens; the A*300/4.


Jostein 

Re: PESO: Burning For You 2

[Paul Stenquist]

Sorry. I don't like it. The superimposed flames make the woman look 
disfigured. The takeaway is unpleasant.

Paul
On Dec 18, 2005, at 4:27 PM, Glen wrote:


Hi everyone,

I appreciate any and all honest comments on one of my latest images:

http://webpages.charter.net/glenweb/ni/Burning_For_You2.jpg


Thanks,
Glen

RE: PESO: Burning For You 2

[Shel Belinkoff]

I don't generally care for such photos, and this one's no exception. 
However, some - when carefully worked - can be very interesting photos. 
This, IMO and for my taste, is not one of them.  

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: Glen 

> I appreciate any and all honest comments on one of my latest images:
>
> http://webpages.charter.net/glenweb/ni/Burning_For_You2.jpg

Re: OT: Photoshop B&W Converson Tones

[Shel Belinkoff]

I got the idea for the separate folders from Katrin Eismann.  Over time the
setup has saved a lot of grief.

The other thing I do is save folders and files by name, not numbers or
dates.  So, for example, the main folder containing the original RAW files
or scans might be called San Francisco with Marnie, March 22 1985.  A sub
folder might be called Man With Cane on Stockton Street.  Below that is the
Original Man With Cane (moved from the upper level folder), WIP files, and
Finals.  Since starting that system, nothing gets lost.  There are some
variations, such as when there may be several frames of the Man With Cane -
in those instances I'll add a number corresponding with the frame number on
the film or the image number from the Digi.

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Date: 12/18/2005 1:31:49 PM
> Subject: Re: OT: Photoshop B&W Converson Tones
>
> In a message dated 12/18/2005 1:22:49 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I believe you can get better resultant tonality when working in 16-bit
> because you're starting with more information and are often loosing less
of
> it.  So the 8-bit conversion has more info than if you worked on it as an
> 8-bit file from the beginning.  Plus - and this is important to consider -
> although rare, there are some printers that will work in greater than
8-bit
> mode right now, and at some point that will probably be more common.  When
> that happens it might be nice to have a 16-bit file to print from.
>
> Shel 
> 
> Good pt. Thanks Shel. 
>
> I never alter the original RAW, but must admit I don't have a logical
system 
> yet for the PDF/JPEG variations. I probably should have some sort of work 
> folders. I tend to just save them along with the RAWs in their folders.
But it 
> does mean that sometimes I can't find the version I especially liked. I
also have 
> the same problem with some my scans from slides. For instance, I can't
find 
> the barn version I liked -- still one of my favorite photos to date.
>
> Call me stupid, or call me Marnie. :-)

Re: Pentax Stock Sale

[Rob Studdert]

On 18 Dec 2005 at 21:15, John Forbes wrote:

> I quite agree, but a higher stock price allows a company to borrow money  
> more cheaply; it makes it more difficult to take over, and it's a sign of 
> confidence.

Was the negotiated stock price above or below the trading price they had been 
trading at?


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

Re: PESO: Burning For You 2

[Bob Sullivan]

no...

On 12/18/05, Glen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I appreciate any and all honest comments on one of my latest images:
>
> http://webpages.charter.net/glenweb/ni/Burning_For_You2.jpg
>
>
> Thanks,
> Glen
>
>

Re: Pentax 645

[Pål Jensen]

- Original Message - 
From: "Sylwester Pietrzyk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


But anyway both 645N/NII have so greatly damped mirror, that MLU  under 
normal circumstances gives nothing. And that was proved by  Michael 
Reichmann (who loved 67II/645 a few years ago) in short test  here:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/645-mlu.shtml



The problem with these kinds of tests is that they are performed under ideal 
conditions. I have no doubt that Pentax mirror damping is good enough if you 
use the largest tripod you can find and place it on flat tarmac in a parking 
lot. Unfortunately, most outdoor photographers put their tripods on less 
than ideal surfaces such as soft moss or in the middle of a bog



Pål 

Re: You may begin hating me now:

[Mat Maessen]

On 12/18/05, cbwaters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://atlanta.craigslist.org/for/118195376.html

Grr it's even black...

> I just got back from picking it up (85 min of driving) and it's in VERY god
> shape.  I think the lens has fungus but WOO FRICKEN HOO anyhow!

Is that an M50/1.4 on it? Might be worth cleaning if it's not too bad...

-Mat (now where's my bargain of a lifetime?)

Re: OT: Photoshop B&W Converson Tones

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 12/18/2005 1:22:49 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I believe you can get better resultant tonality when working in 16-bit
because you're starting with more information and are often loosing less of
it.  So the 8-bit conversion has more info than if you worked on it as an
8-bit file from the beginning.  Plus - and this is important to consider -
although rare, there are some printers that will work in greater than 8-bit
mode right now, and at some point that will probably be more common.  When
that happens it might be nice to have a 16-bit file to print from.

Shel 

Good pt. Thanks Shel. 

I never alter the original RAW, but must admit I don't have a logical system 
yet for the PDF/JPEG variations. I probably should have some sort of work 
folders. I tend to just save them along with the RAWs in their folders. But it 
does mean that sometimes I can't find the version I especially liked. I also 
have 
the same problem with some my scans from slides. For instance, I can't find 
the barn version I liked -- still one of my favorite photos to date.

Call me stupid, or call me Marnie. :-)

PESO: Burning For You 2

[Glen]

Hi everyone,

I appreciate any and all honest comments on one of my latest images:

http://webpages.charter.net/glenweb/ni/Burning_For_You2.jpg


Thanks,
Glen

RE: You may begin hating me now:

[Don Sanderson]

Why? It's very nice.

The family says hi:
http://donsauction.com/pdml/Family.jpg

Don ;-)


> -Original Message-
> From: cbwaters [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2005 2:59 PM
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: You may begin hating me now:
> 
> 
> http://atlanta.craigslist.org/for/118195376.html
> 
> I just got back from picking it up (85 min of driving) and it's 
> in VERY god 
> shape.  I think the lens has fungus but WOO FRICKEN HOO anyhow!
> 
> CW 
> 

Re: Another DAM book

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 12/18/2005 12:00:28 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Does this mean we can stop calling ourselves photographers now, and start
> calling ourselves digital asset managers?

Dam imagers.

William Robb

There's got to be a way that a N can be added to that acronym.

Marnie aka Doe 

RE: OT: Photoshop B&W Converson Tones

[Shel Belinkoff]

Hi aka Doe ...

All my work, including B&W, is done in in 16-bit until the final flattened
save for the web or for printing.  Originals are ~never~ touched, there's a
WIP (work in progress folder) for each photo in which the image in its
various iterations are saved (along with layers and saved profiles for
curves, hue/sat, levels, etc), a slot for the final layered version, and a
place for the final output files, whether JPEG for the web or 8-bit TIFF
for printing.

I believe you can get better resultant tonality when working in 16-bit
because you're starting with more information and are often loosing less of
it.  So the 8-bit conversion has more info than if you worked on it as an
8-bit file from the beginning.  Plus - and this is important to consider -
although rare, there are some printers that will work in greater than 8-bit
mode right now, and at some point that will probably be more common.  When
that happens it might be nice to have a 16-bit file to print from.

Shel 

> I notice when one imports a RAW into PS one can import it as 16 bit.
>
> So I am wondering how many of you do that? Specifically when making a B&W 
> conversion. But also with color. 
>
> Does it make a difference if you later save it as a JPEG (8-bit)? Can you
get 
> sublter tonal values for B&W? (And maybe subtler color ranges for color?) 
>
> Or is it all lost again when one saves it later as an 8-bit?

Re: You may begin hating me now:

[Paul Stenquist]

A black beauty. Congratulations.
Paul
On Dec 18, 2005, at 3:59 PM, cbwaters wrote:


http://atlanta.craigslist.org/for/118195376.html

I just got back from picking it up (85 min of driving) and it's in 
VERY god shape.  I think the lens has fungus but WOO FRICKEN HOO 
anyhow!


CW

Re: Pentax Stock Sale

[John Forbes]

I quite agree, but a higher stock price allows a company to borrow money  
more cheaply; it makes it more difficult to take over, and it's a sign of  
confidence.



JOhn



On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 19:53:55 -, graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Buying big chunks of existing stock does not help the company much.  
Buying a new issue provides them with working funds. 20%+ of existing  
stock looks like the start of a hostile takeover. Of course it could  
just be that they see Pentax as a good investment right now.


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Mark Erickson wrote:


Sometimes purchases like this are a good thing.  For example, the Texas
Pacific Group, a private investment firm, purchased a large stake in  
Ducati
back in 1996.  Ducati used the money as working capital and TPG got  
them to
tighten up their operation, improve their quality control, and get back  
on

their feet.

We're on (or maybe just past) the cusp of a big shift from film to  
digital.
Pentax is a player, so maybe these guys see opportunity.  Or maybe  
they're

hoping to turn a quick buck by selling Pentax to Samsung.  We'll see

--Mark



Joe,
Most corporations that have somebody else buy 20% of their stock start
looking over their shoulders at what the investor has in mind.  Are
they buying to force the company to split up or merge with another
corporation?  But I know nothing about Japanese corporate culture...
Regards,  Bob S.

On 12/17/05, Joseph Tainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=16312496

Maybe someone who knows more about corporate stuff can than I do can
tell us what this means.

Joe

















--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

Re: You may begin hating me now:

[Scott Loveless]

There's a word for people like you.




On 12/18/05, cbwaters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://atlanta.craigslist.org/for/118195376.html
>
> I just got back from picking it up (85 min of driving) and it's in VERY god
> shape.  I think the lens has fungus but WOO FRICKEN HOO anyhow!
>
> CW
>
>


--
Scott Loveless
http://www.twosixteen.com

--
"You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman

Re: PAW: Redcoats! Redux

[Paul Stenquist]

That'll work.

On Dec 18, 2005, at 3:40 PM, Bob W wrote:


...and then some:

http://uhura.cc.rochester.edu/~jg001g/hassel.htm

--
Cheers,
 Bob


-Original Message-
From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 18 December 2005 19:56
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: PAW: Redcoats! Redux

Excellent! But we need the Hasselhof head. Do you have it?




On Dec 18, 2005, at 2:49 PM, Bob W wrote:


Another 5 minutes work and you could make 'em all look like David
Hasselhof.

--
Cheers,
 Bob


-Original Message-
From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 18 December 2005 19:32
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: PAW: Redcoats! Redux

As I said earlier, I like this new version much better.

But because I

have no problem either cropping or doing anything else

necessary to

get the result I want, I would have taken this a step further and
cloned out the remainder of the redcoat on the far right of frame.
It's a simple PhotoShop job. About five minutes work.
Paul

Re: Pentax 645

[Sylwester Pietrzyk]

On 2005-12-18, at 21:20, Pål Jensen wrote:

I disagree. There are several instances when you cannot put a  
camera on a ideal surface where the small difference with or  
without mirror lock actually makes a difference. However, for  
ordinary shooting condition the lack of mirror lock is a non-issue.
The mirror pre-fire function is also nice elimination the need for  
a remote release.


But anyway both 645N/NII have so greatly damped mirror, that MLU  
under normal circumstances gives nothing. And that was proved by  
Michael Reichmann (who loved 67II/645 a few years ago) in short test  
here:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/645-mlu.shtml

--
Best regards
Sylwek

Re: OT: Photoshop B&W Converson Tones

[Adam Maas]

I actually do both, save as 16bit PSD in ProPhotoRGB for archive and 
JPEG in sRGB for display and printing. I've got an action that does all 
this for me when I'm done editing.


-Adam


Paul Stenquist wrote:


Ditto. But I rarely save as jpeg. I save full-size files as tiffs.
Paul
On Dec 18, 2005, at 3:29 PM, Adam Maas wrote:

I never work in any other mode than 16 bit, it preserves data and 
prevents 'hstogram jaggies' that cause posterization. I convert to 8 
bit as the last step before saving the final jpeg.


-Adam


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

On the last set of Mom hands I showed (where most liked them, not 
her hand and mine, the one where I asked if the thumb was too 
light), someone sent me a variation that I liked.

He said he used 16 bit to get more subtle variation in tones.
I notice when one imports a RAW into PS one can import it as 16 bit.

So I am wondering how many of you do that? Specifically when making 
a B&W conversion. But also with color.
Does it make a difference if you later save it as a JPEG (8-bit)? 
Can you get sublter tonal values for B&W? (And maybe subtler color 
ranges for color?)

Or is it all lost again when one saves it later as an 8-bit?

Probably someone has asked this before, I vaguely remember that they 
have. But I wasn't paying attention then. :-)


TIA, Marnie

Re: Pentax 645

[Sylwester Pietrzyk]

On 2005-12-18, at 21:07, Dario Bonazza wrote:

No it doesn't, and the 645N demonstrated that there is no  
difference between using the MLU or not using it with a well damped  
mirror like the one of the 645.
I'm not sure of what you said. My friends who use the oldest 645  
report that it has quite noticable mirror shock. But much different  
story is with 645N, which I tried and was really surprised of how  
well this big mirror is.


MLU on the 645N was only added for marketing reasons, since so many  
asked for it.

??? I thought it was added on 645NII :-)


And someone wrote that Pentax has no marketing!

As we can see it has. But only in professional market ;-)

--
Best regards
Sylwek

RE: Bill Owens update

[Manuel Magalhães]

Also my words,

Manuel from Portugal

-Mensagem original-
De: Dario Bonazza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Enviada: sábado, 17 de Dezembro de 2005 16:23
Para: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Assunto: Re: Bill Owens update

Ditto. 
Dario from Italy

- Original Message - 
From: "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2005 2:18 PM
Subject: Re: Bill Owens update


>I haven't met Bill either, but he's been an important part of the PDML 
> for many years, and I've enjoyed his on-line company very much. Please 
> send him my best.
> Paul

Re: OT: Photoshop B&W Converson Tones

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 12/18/2005 12:39:19 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ditto. But I rarely save as jpeg. I save full-size files as tiffs.
Paul
On Dec 18, 2005, at 3:29 PM, Adam Maas wrote:

> I never work in any other mode than 16 bit, it preserves data and 
> prevents 'hstogram jaggies' that cause posterization. I convert to 8 
> bit as the last step before saving the final jpeg.
>
> -Adam

Well, I use JPEGs on web pages, but I actually usually print from a resized 
RAW. When I print which isn't that often. At least, that's what I remember 
doing, but it's been a while. :-)Maybe I've printed from a PDF.

Thanks, I've never imported a RAW as 16-bit. 

Obviously, I could be doing it better.

Marnie 

Re: Pentax 645

[Jack Davis]

Yes, Pal I do agree.
It's forever been a deal breaker when I learn a body does not allow
such. Auto pre-flash or the manual ability to lock up the mirror and
then set the self-timer, is ideal.
Too much hyper-focus work, using 100 ISO film, to do without it.



--- Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Dario Bonazza" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> 
> 
> > No it doesn't, and the 645N demonstrated that there is no
> difference 
> > between using the MLU or not using it with a well damped mirror
> like the 
> > one of the 645.
> > MLU on the 645N was only added for marketing reasons, since so many
> asked 
> > for it.
> 
> 
> I disagree. There are several instances when you cannot put a camera
> on a 
> ideal surface where the small difference with or without mirror lock 
> actually makes a difference. However, for ordinary shooting condition
> the 
> lack of mirror lock is a non-issue.
> The mirror pre-fire function is also nice elimination the need for a
> remote 
> release.
> 
> Pål 
> 
> 
> 


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

Re: PAW: Redcoats! Redux

[Cotty]

On 18/12/05, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed:

>...and then some:
>
>http://uhura.cc.rochester.edu/~jg001g/hassel.htm

ROTFL!!!




Cheers,
  Cotty


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

Re: OT: Photoshop B&W Converson Tones

[Paul Stenquist]

Ditto. But I rarely save as jpeg. I save full-size files as tiffs.
Paul
On Dec 18, 2005, at 3:29 PM, Adam Maas wrote:

I never work in any other mode than 16 bit, it preserves data and 
prevents 'hstogram jaggies' that cause posterization. I convert to 8 
bit as the last step before saving the final jpeg.


-Adam


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

On the last set of Mom hands I showed (where most liked them, not her 
hand and mine, the one where I asked if the thumb was too light), 
someone sent me a variation that I liked.

He said he used 16 bit to get more subtle variation in tones.
I notice when one imports a RAW into PS one can import it as 16 bit.

So I am wondering how many of you do that? Specifically when making a 
B&W conversion. But also with color.
Does it make a difference if you later save it as a JPEG (8-bit)? Can 
you get sublter tonal values for B&W? (And maybe subtler color ranges 
for color?)

Or is it all lost again when one saves it later as an 8-bit?

Probably someone has asked this before, I vaguely remember that they 
have. But I wasn't paying attention then. :-)


TIA, Marnie

RE: PAW: Redcoats! Redux

[Bob W]

...and then some:

http://uhura.cc.rochester.edu/~jg001g/hassel.htm

--
Cheers,
 Bob 

> -Original Message-
> From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: 18 December 2005 19:56
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: PAW: Redcoats! Redux
> 
> Excellent! But we need the Hasselhof head. Do you have it?


> On Dec 18, 2005, at 2:49 PM, Bob W wrote:
> 
> > Another 5 minutes work and you could make 'em all look like David 
> > Hasselhof.
> >
> > --
> > Cheers,
> >  Bob
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Sent: 18 December 2005 19:32
> >> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> >> Subject: Re: PAW: Redcoats! Redux
> >>
> >> As I said earlier, I like this new version much better. 
> But because I 
> >> have no problem either cropping or doing anything else 
> necessary to 
> >> get the result I want, I would have taken this a step further and 
> >> cloned out the remainder of the redcoat on the far right of frame. 
> >> It's a simple PhotoShop job. About five minutes work.
> >> Paul
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: OT: Photoshop B&W Converson Tones

[Adam Maas]

I never work in any other mode than 16 bit, it preserves data and 
prevents 'hstogram jaggies' that cause posterization. I convert to 8 bit 
as the last step before saving the final jpeg.


-Adam


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

On the last set of Mom hands I showed (where most liked them, not her hand 
and mine, the one where I asked if the thumb was too light), someone sent me a 
variation that I liked. 

He said he used 16 bit to get more subtle variation in tones. 


I notice when one imports a RAW into PS one can import it as 16 bit.

So I am wondering how many of you do that? Specifically when making a B&W 
conversion. But also with color. 

Does it make a difference if you later save it as a JPEG (8-bit)? Can you get 
sublter tonal values for B&W? (And maybe subtler color ranges for color?) 


Or is it all lost again when one saves it later as an 8-bit?

Probably someone has asked this before, I vaguely remember that they have. 
But I wasn't paying attention then. :-)


TIA, Marnie 
 

Re: Pentax 645

[Pål Jensen]

- Original Message - 
From: "Dario Bonazza" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>




No it doesn't, and the 645N demonstrated that there is no difference 
between using the MLU or not using it with a well damped mirror like the 
one of the 645.
MLU on the 645N was only added for marketing reasons, since so many asked 
for it.



I disagree. There are several instances when you cannot put a camera on a 
ideal surface where the small difference with or without mirror lock 
actually makes a difference. However, for ordinary shooting condition the 
lack of mirror lock is a non-issue.
The mirror pre-fire function is also nice elimination the need for a remote 
release.


Pål 

OT: Photoshop B&W Converson Tones

[Eactivist]

On the last set of Mom hands I showed (where most liked them, not her hand 
and mine, the one where I asked if the thumb was too light), someone sent me a 
variation that I liked. 

He said he used 16 bit to get more subtle variation in tones. 

I notice when one imports a RAW into PS one can import it as 16 bit.

So I am wondering how many of you do that? Specifically when making a B&W 
conversion. But also with color. 

Does it make a difference if you later save it as a JPEG (8-bit)? Can you get 
sublter tonal values for B&W? (And maybe subtler color ranges for color?) 

Or is it all lost again when one saves it later as an 8-bit?

Probably someone has asked this before, I vaguely remember that they have. 
But I wasn't paying attention then. :-)

TIA, Marnie 

Re: Pentax 645

[Dario Bonazza]

No it doesn't, and the 645N demonstrated that there is no difference between 
using the MLU or not using it with a well damped mirror like the one of the 
645.
MLU on the 645N was only added for marketing reasons, since so many asked 
for it.

And someone wrote that Pentax has no marketing!

Dario

- Original Message - 
From: "Jack Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2005 8:58 PM
Subject: Pentax 645



Can anyone, please, tell me if the manual 645 body provides mirror
lockup?

Thanks,

Jack

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