Re: PESO: Bird shot with "Canon"

[Cotty]

On 28/3/06, Boris Liberman, discombobulated, unleashed:

>Totally abstract question - are all excellent English photographers 
>masochists? ;-) Well, you just admitted to be one of the latter and 
>I am of very strong opinion that you also one of the former...

I wouldn't say that I enjoy pain, but I do seem to attract it.

Now Bill's wife, well that's another matter




Cheers,
  Cotty


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

Re: GESO: Editing my show

[Cotty]

>> >I'll just get my anorak.
>> 
>> What would an anorak-spotter wear?
>>

On 27/3/06, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed: 
>
>A straitjacket

You are truly the master!!!


Cheers,
  Cotty


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

Re: Bag Question

[Cotty]

On 27/3/06, Derek, discombobulated, unleashed:

>I am looking for a messenger/briefcase type bag.  My enablement for this
>particular purchase is that I am going on a business trip overseas and
>want to take a body to shoot some pictures over the weekend. 
>Specifically, I want a bag to carry 1 body (D w/ grip for this trip, but
>maybe an LX w/ motor on another occasion), 1 or 2 lens (28-80 and/or
>80-200), maybe a flash (280 or 360), an employer issued laptop, a couple
>of books, and some other work related papers and files.  These are the
>bags I have been looking at:
>
>Tamrac 469 - Photo Messenger 9
>Tamrac 5618 - Turbo CyberPro Photo/Computer Briefcase.
>Tenba PM-17C Messenger
>
>Is it a reasonable expectation to find a bag that will meet my needs? 
>Are their any other bags that I missed?  Any comments or suggestions
>would be appreciated.
>
>Thank you in advance for your PDML expertise.

I use a LowePro Reporter 600 AW every day and it has not missed a beat.
I think Lowepro have reorganised their range but the designs are very
similar. Here are some reviews:







I settled on Lowepro a long time ago and none of the dozen or so bags
and lens cases have ever let me down or failed in any way. You get what
you pay for!

HTH




Cheers,
  Cotty


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

Re: Re: POTS

[dagt]

> fra: Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> Mark Roberts wrote:
> > Cotty wrote:
> > 
> >>On 27/3/06, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed:
> >>
> >>>The acronym I was taught for POTS in electronics school
> >>
> >>That must be the exact same electronics school that I didn't go to! ;-))
> > 
> > You didn't miss much. The girls were ugly and the parties were
> > boring...
> > :-0
> 
> You obviously didn't go to the same electronics school I went to.
> 
> At mine, the girls were good looking (but very few) and the parties were 
> outrageous. Of course, it helped that the University down the street was 
> 60% girls, which made Pub Nights and parties a lot more entertaining.

At my university in Oslo the few girls who studied physics were cute and 
intelligent, and had hobbies like mountain climbing and karate .-)

We often partied together with the chemists and biologists, because they had 
more girls

DagT

Re: Workflow (was: Bailing out.)

[Kevin Waterson]

This one time, at band camp, David J Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> For Cripkes sake.
> 
> A friggin picture is a friggin picture. Who gives a shit if its film or 
> digital.

> If you paint with light..

allow me to finish
If you paint with light.. you use an enlarger.
The painting with light does not finish with the camera exposure.
Mudh more is done in the darkroom.
This is what digital removes. Yes, you can fiddle with pixels all you like
and change iso and white balance etc but it is not light, it is binary.



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."

Good Price on 80X 1GB SD Card

[Shel Belinkoff]

Transcend makes good cards.  $31.00 for a 1GB 80X SD card seems like a
pretty good price - recently I paid about $43.00 for the same card.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820163152


Shel

Re: Bailing out.

[David Mann]

On Mar 28, 2006, at 1:13 PM, Aaron Reynolds wrote:

I also had a brilliant old Kodak ad from the 1920s that I glued to  
the side of one of my monitors (I was running three computers --  
one scanning, one doing the heavy lifting of correcting etc, and  
one running the printers) -- it had a woman sitting at a table with  
a hand-crank daylight film processor, under the legend "The Kodak  
girl at home".  Emblazoned across the bottom of the ad, in Believe- 
It-Or-Not lettering was "THE DARKROOM ABOLISHED BY THE KODAK  
DEVELOPING MACHINE!"


I guess they were partially right... just cross out "Kodak" and write  
"Adobe" :)


- Dave

Re: Bailing out.

[David Mann]

On Mar 28, 2006, at 5:30 AM, AvK wrote:

i don't want to put fuel to the fire, but i am probably crazy,  
because i am
a snapshooter of slide film and then scan the pics to have the  
posibilities

of digital postprocessing.


Nothing wrong with that... but considering that's also what I do, I  
was bound to say it.


I do wish I could afford a master digital imaging tech to scan,  
process & print my slides for me.  I'm not that good at it, and I  
already spend too long looking at this big glowing thing.


- Dave (why am I still reading this thread?)

Re: PESO: Bird shot with "Canon"

[Boris Liberman]

Hi!


I hang around here because I have Pentax gear! That and I'm a masochist.
You have those in Norway? ;-))


Totally abstract question - are all excellent English photographers 
masochists? ;-) Well, you just admitted to be one of the latter and 
I am of very strong opinion that you also one of the former...


Boris

Re: PESO: Telegraph Road

[Boris Liberman]

Hi!


Been trying to decide what to upload next while I was listening to some
old Dire Straits album and browsing through a series of pictures taken a
few weeks ago on a leisurely stroll through frosty Belgium. :-)

http://www.photosight.ru/photo.php?photoid=1344831

Someone has asked, so for the benefit of those unfamiliar with the
workings of photosight.ru, the index page with all my photos stored
there is available through...

http://fotoralf.photosight.ru

As always, comments and suggestions are most welcome.

Enjoy your sunday night, or whatever remains of it. 


Ralf, it is very strict... For some reason it reminds me of early 
photographs related to The Beatles. And whenever I looked at them I 
though of English discipline... It surely does work for me... It just does.


Boris

P.S. Why you chose photosight for displaying of your work?

Re: PAW - My Friend's Kitchen

[Boris Liberman]

Hi!


Ah, the organized chaos of those artistic types:

http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4260706&size=lg



Hope you enjoy.  Thanks in advance for any comments, good, bad or otherwise.


A-ha... Frank - yet another reason for you to come over... You should 
see our living room after Galia spent a little time playing there... ;-)


Very well seen.

Boris

Re: PESO: The Pond

[Boris Liberman]

Hi!

I set a new personal record for filter extravagance and bought an 77mm 
R72 for my DA 12-24/4. Shot a little pond this morning. It's at 12mm, 
f11, 4 second exposure.

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4260009&size=lg


Paul this is beautiful yet there is some unsettling quality about it... 
The word "liveless" comes to mind. Not as derogatory term, but rather as 
a description of what I feel when looking at your recent IR work. It 
seems that IR filtration makes the light so unusual for regular/plain 
human eye that the outcome seems devoid of life...


I wonder if you think similarly or it is just my (sick) mind...

Boris

Re: PESO: Speaking of March Madness...

[Boris Liberman]

Hi!

I had some time before the game began to crawl around the Metrodome 
looking for photo opportunities.  The stands were still only about half 
full as the prior game in D.C. hadn't finished and everyone was out in 
the hall watching the TVs.  Still, it gives you a "you are there" sort 
of feel:


 http://charles.robinsontwins.org/images/ncaa_pano2.jpg


Very interesting. Given the fact that our company has a kinda basketball 
team... I posted some pics from their sessions (I couldn't call it game 
or play really ;-) ) some months ago...


I should say I just learned something from this shot.

A question to people who know better than me: is it right that except 
the general atmosphere of *being there* there is no reasonable 
difference between sitting at home in front of big TV screen and sitting 
on those top rows?


Thanks for sharing.

Boris

Re: PESO - A Very Special Store

[Boris Liberman]

Hi!


What do you do with annoying children?  Maybe you wanted a boy and got a
girl?  Perhaps you're at your wits end and don't know what to do with the
little troublemaker ...

http://home.earthlink.net/~shel-pix/reseller.html


LOL... Shel, it is definitely good (for her) that Galia does not read 
(English in particular)... But with your permission we would use this 
shot for future reference...


Boris

Re: PESO - For Shel

[Boris Liberman]

Hi!


Shel commented he hadn't "ever knowingly seen a vertical pano before".
So here's one for Shel.

IMHO, there's a very good reason - they don't lend them self to monitor 
presentation.


Check out
http://mypeoplepc.com/members/kwaller/offwallphoto/id2.html

One of several panos I did in Denali NP in 04.

Seven images taken with the *istD, 70-210mm F, stitched with ARCSOFT 
Panoramaker 3.


Let me know what you think.


I think it is one of the best photographs I've seen on PDML in recent 
months. Ken, you definitely outdid yourself...


Boris

Re: Bailing out.

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

I only give finished work to customers, unless they contract in  
advance for unfinished work at which point I don't give them *any*  
finished work. By signing up for that option, they are committing  
themselves to finishing the work and releasing me from liability for  
that part of the process. It costs more, since I retain no further  
control over the work.


Godfrey

Re: Bailing out.

[Bruce Dayton]

I should add that he charged them an extra $300 for the cd's on top of
the wedding package price.

-- 
Bruce


Monday, March 27, 2006, 9:07:07 PM, you wrote:

BD> These files looked like many were shot in incandescent light with
BD> white balance set to daylight - not a little shot of auto levels -
BD> more serious color correction and brightness adjustment - they weren't
BD> just a little off, they were way off.  If the customer hadn't already
BD> seen some good prints, they would have gone big time ballistic.

Re: Bag Question

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

There are also the Domke Satchels and the Adorama Commander case  
(http://www.adorama.com/GBCBK.html). Also some Crumpler models that  
might be suitable.


These are available in a variety of sizes and colors. Adorama has a  
decent listing on the web, you can at least find what you're looking  
for there and then look for other vendors carrying it as well.


Godfrey

On Mar 27, 2006, at 7:50 PM, Aaron Reynolds wrote:



Is it a reasonable expectation to find a bag that will meet my  
needs?  Are their any other bags that I missed?  Any comments or  
suggestions would be appreciated.


How big is the laptop?  I have a nice bag that doesn't look much  
like a camera bag from Kipling -- it has a slot in the front that  
comfortably fits my white iBook (but not my old blueberry iBook,  
the toilet seat lookin' kind), and an expandable main compartment  
with velcro dividers that has three long slots, each deep enough to  
hold an SLR with a 300 f4 or even something a little longer.  It  
came with flippy dividers to split each deep pocket in two, so you  
can put two shorter lenses in each, one on top of the other with a  
divider in between.


The pocket in the flap is big enough for a couple of hardcover  
books.  You'd have no trouble fitting everything you've listed into  
it, and more.


-Aaron

Re: Bailing out.

[Bruce Dayton]

These files looked like many were shot in incandescent light with
white balance set to daylight - not a little shot of auto levels -
more serious color correction and brightness adjustment - they weren't
just a little off, they were way off.  If the customer hadn't already
seen some good prints, they would have gone big time ballistic.

-- 
Bruce


Monday, March 27, 2006, 7:44:45 PM, you wrote:


AR> On Mar 27, 2006, at 10:39 PM, William Robb wrote:

>> I don't know about that. I find most complaints are generated because
>> it looked good on the customers' screen, and I can't get a good print.
>> My own experience tells me that if I can't get a good print at home,
>> taking it to work isn't going to help.

AR> It's not that you can't get a good print, it's that you can't get a
AR> good print without DOING something to it (like hitting auto levels).

AR> I'm not saying he wasn't foolish to give them uncorrected files without
AR> warning them -- he was.  I'm just saying that in 90% of cases, wedding
AR> photographers are never going to look at those files beyond ditching
AR> the bad ones before they send them to the lab for proofing.

AR> -Aaron

RE: More about birds on a budget

[Jens Bladt]

Rob wrote
>Did you experiment to find the best aperture for the combination?

No, I'm afraid I didn't.
I guess I basically shot wide open.
Reegards
Jens

Jens Bladt
http://www.jensbladt.dk

-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 27. marts 2006 23:32
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: RE: More about birds on a budget


On 27 Mar 2006 at 21:35, Jens Bladt wrote:

> Very nice. Amazingly nice. I use a similar combo for shooting the moon!
SMC
> M* 4/300mm + SMC-F AF1.7 + 2.0 Kenko or Vivitar:
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/53058902/in/set-78625/

Did you experiment to find the best aperture for the combination?


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

--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.2/293 - Release Date: 03/26/2006

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.2/293 - Release Date: 03/26/2006

SV: Bailing out.

[Jens Bladt]

True, Bruce. From my own (hard earned) experience that's right
Regards
Jens
Jens Bladt
http://www.jensbladt.dk

-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 28. marts 2006 05:21
Til: William Robb
Emne: Re: Bailing out.


For me, I wouldn't ever give out the images unless they were in a
presentable state.  The client has no clue about post processing -
their opinion will drop and subsequently their recommendation for your
services.  You either give out printable ones or don't - what this guy
did was a big mistake in my book.

--
Bruce


Monday, March 27, 2006, 6:50:47 PM, you wrote:


WR> - Original Message -
WR> From: "Mark Roberts"
WR> Subject: Re: Bailing out.



>>
>> Sorry. Typo. I meant "that's why he doesn't give out *corrected*
>> files". I wouldn't expect him to give out corrected digital files any
>> more than I would expect him to give out the negatives.
>>

WR> I dunno. If I am giving out negatives, they are readily printable at any
WR> photolab or I haven't done my job in the first place.
WR> Why shold digital be held to a lower standard?
WR> It's supposed to be better.

WR> William Robb


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.2/293 - Release Date: 03/26/2006

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.2/293 - Release Date: 03/26/2006

Totally OT... the virtual cat

[David Mann]

http://www.broenink-art.nl/maukie2.swf

- Dave

Re: GFM computer time?

[Aaron Reynolds]

On Mar 27, 2006, at 10:50 PM, Mat Maessen wrote:


576MB. As much as you can jam into the thing.


That should be alright, really.  It would run Photoshop 7 without 
trouble.


-Aaron

Re: Bailing out.

[Aaron Reynolds]

On Mar 27, 2006, at 2:35 AM, Boris Liberman wrote:


Aaron, if we get to meet, please remind me of what you just wrote. I
should be very interested to see you work.


As Frank and Dave "too bald" Chang-Sang can tell you, I behave oddly 
when people are watching me take pictures.


If you're somewhere that you get MLB baseball on TV (I'm thinking that 
you're not, but I could be wrong), watch for the Toronto Blue Jays, 
then look for the scruffy looking guy in the camera bay shooting 
Pentax.  I'm not at every game, but if you ask me a week ahead I can 
tell you what games I'll be at.


Then you can watch me work on TV!  Apparently I had a close-up last 
year when the announcers were talking about "photo day" (a promo where 
you show up early to the game and get your picture taken with a 
camera).  Sadly, no one was recording it so I didn't get to see how 
foolish I looked.


I do have a recording of nearly being nailed in the head by a foul ball 
-- I was focused on the batter and wasn't paying attention to where the 
ball had gone.  It went way up in the air and was coming down right at 
my head.  When I finally realized where it was going, I froze like a 
deer in the headlights.  Luckily for me, this gigantic shadow that 
belonged to John Olerud (who was playing for the Yankees at the time -- 
must've been 2004) suddenly appeared between the ball and me.  He 
caught the ball and saved my skull.


Watching the tape, I react much too slowly.  Olerud clearly already has 
the ball in his hands, and suddenly I duck behind the protective wall, 
bailing out of the way (aha!  On topic!) like a drunk.


-Aaron

Re: PESO: Bird shot with "Canon"

[Christian]

Tim Øsleby wrote:


Never the less, I am working on getting closer. The problem is that this is
very hard. These birds have very good sight, so it is near impossible to
sneak up on them. So, I am thinking of the opposite approach, getting them
closer to me. 


What I have done so far is go to the beach and then sit down and wait. And I
am pretty convinced that _this_ id how close I can expect them to come. 


So now, my plan A is to build a "gapahuk" - a primitive hide in English. I
will make it using some branches and some old curtains. The gapahuk will
scare them off at first, but after a while they will get used to it and come
back. That's the time for me to enter the hide, and wait, and wait, and then
wait some more.


Outside your blind, set up a perch:  a branch with nothing too 
distracting behind it would work.  Put peanut butter on the backside of 
the branch and stick bird seed in the peanut butter.  Set out some other 
"treats" out of the field of view of the camera.  This is how Artie 
Morris and Greg Downing get close to song birds and woodpeckers.  :-)


Christian
http://photography.skofteland.net

Re: Bag Question

[Aaron Reynolds]

Is it a reasonable expectation to find a bag that will meet my needs? 
 Are their any other bags that I missed?  Any comments or suggestions 
would be appreciated.


How big is the laptop?  I have a nice bag that doesn't look much like a 
camera bag from Kipling -- it has a slot in the front that comfortably 
fits my white iBook (but not my old blueberry iBook, the toilet seat 
lookin' kind), and an expandable main compartment with velcro dividers 
that has three long slots, each deep enough to hold an SLR with a 300 
f4 or even something a little longer.  It came with flippy dividers to 
split each deep pocket in two, so you can put two shorter lenses in 
each, one on top of the other with a divider in between.


The pocket in the flap is big enough for a couple of hardcover books.  
You'd have no trouble fitting everything you've listed into it, and 
more.


-Aaron

Re: GFM computer time?

[Mat Maessen]

576MB. As much as you can jam into the thing.

-Mat

On 3/27/06, Aaron Reynolds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Mar 27, 2006, at 9:26 PM, Mat Maessen wrote:
>
> > I'll have my laptop there, even though I'm not entering the
> > competition. Has a burner. Though if the idea of running Photoshop CS2
> > on a 500 MHz G3 with a 12" screen scares you, maybe there are better
> > choices... :-)
>
> How much RAM do you have?
>
> -Aaron
>
>

Re: GFM computer time?

[Aaron Reynolds]

On Mar 27, 2006, at 9:26 PM, Mat Maessen wrote:


I'll have my laptop there, even though I'm not entering the
competition. Has a burner. Though if the idea of running Photoshop CS2
on a 500 MHz G3 with a 12" screen scares you, maybe there are better
choices... :-)


How much RAM do you have?

-Aaron

Re: Bailing out.

[Aaron Reynolds]

On Mar 27, 2006, at 10:39 PM, William Robb wrote:

I don't know about that. I find most complaints are generated because 
it looked good on the customers' screen, and I can't get a good print.
My own experience tells me that if I can't get a good print at home, 
taking it to work isn't going to help.


It's not that you can't get a good print, it's that you can't get a 
good print without DOING something to it (like hitting auto levels).


I'm not saying he wasn't foolish to give them uncorrected files without 
warning them -- he was.  I'm just saying that in 90% of cases, wedding 
photographers are never going to look at those files beyond ditching 
the bad ones before they send them to the lab for proofing.


-Aaron

Re: Bailing out.

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Bruce Dayton"

Subject: Re: Bailing out.



what this guy
did was a big mistake in my book.


yup.

William Robb

Re: Bailing out.

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Aaron Reynolds"

Subject: Re: Bailing out.




On Mar 27, 2006, at 9:50 PM, William Robb wrote:

I dunno. If I am giving out negatives, they are readily printable at any 
photolab or I haven't done my job in the first place.

Why shold digital be held to a lower standard?
It's supposed to be better.


The uncorrected negatives are just like the uncorrected files -- when run 
through your standard minilab, they're averaged all over the place and 
come out looking okay-to-good.  Because there's a ton of interpretation 
being done in colour printing from negatives, even when Wal-Mart does it.


The problem is that the files, while printable at the local photolab, are 
not printable without effort at home, and don't look good on the screen. 
Just like if you held your negatives up to the light -- they don't look so 
great.


To correct them in this kind of scenario, where the lab is doing all the 
work, would be a ton of extra effort for the photographer.  (And there is 
no "corrected file" for the lab to save, either.)



I don't know about that. I find most complaints are generated because it 
looked good on the customers' screen, and I can't get a good print.
My own experience tells me that if I can't get a good print at home, taking 
it to work isn't going to help.


William Robb 

Re: Bailing out.

[Aaron Reynolds]

On Mar 27, 2006, at 9:50 PM, William Robb wrote:

I dunno. If I am giving out negatives, they are readily printable at 
any photolab or I haven't done my job in the first place.

Why shold digital be held to a lower standard?
It's supposed to be better.


The uncorrected negatives are just like the uncorrected files -- when 
run through your standard minilab, they're averaged all over the place 
and come out looking okay-to-good.  Because there's a ton of 
interpretation being done in colour printing from negatives, even when 
Wal-Mart does it.


The problem is that the files, while printable at the local photolab, 
are not printable without effort at home, and don't look good on the 
screen.  Just like if you held your negatives up to the light -- they 
don't look so great.


To correct them in this kind of scenario, where the lab is doing all 
the work, would be a ton of extra effort for the photographer.  (And 
there is no "corrected file" for the lab to save, either.)


-Aaron

Re: Bailing out.

[David J Brooks]

Quoting Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:


Bruce Dayton wrote:


Monday, March 27, 2006, 12:56:56 PM, you wrote:

MR> Bruce Dayton wrote:


Yes, you are correct.  However, this was not a low end photographer -
quite pricey for the area. I don't think he was one to ever give the
negs out.


MR> That's probably why he wouldn't give out uncorrected digital files!

But in this case, he did give out uncorrected files.


Sorry. Typo. I meant "that's why he doesn't give out *corrected*
files". I wouldn't expect him to give out corrected digital files any
more than I would expect him to give out the negatives


one of my equine services is a CDof a show nature.
I make it quite cleaer that i am giving them a CD with unadjusted files.

Sofarc no comlaints\\Dave








Equine Photography in York Region

Re: Bailing out.

[Bruce Dayton]

For me, I wouldn't ever give out the images unless they were in a
presentable state.  The client has no clue about post processing -
their opinion will drop and subsequently their recommendation for your
services.  You either give out printable ones or don't - what this guy
did was a big mistake in my book.

-- 
Bruce


Monday, March 27, 2006, 6:50:47 PM, you wrote:


WR> - Original Message - 
WR> From: "Mark Roberts"
WR> Subject: Re: Bailing out.



>>
>> Sorry. Typo. I meant "that's why he doesn't give out *corrected*
>> files". I wouldn't expect him to give out corrected digital files any
>> more than I would expect him to give out the negatives.
>>

WR> I dunno. If I am giving out negatives, they are readily printable at any
WR> photolab or I haven't done my job in the first place.
WR> Why shold digital be held to a lower standard?
WR> It's supposed to be better.

WR> William Robb 

Re: Bailing out.

[Aaron Reynolds]

On Mar 27, 2006, at 8:19 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:


According so some people, my copy of Photoshop has a "Not Wales"
filter!


Well, your ISP still doesn't love me.  E-mail me off-list.

-Aaron

Re: Bailing out.

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Mark Roberts"

Subject: Re: Bailing out.





Sorry. Typo. I meant "that's why he doesn't give out *corrected*
files". I wouldn't expect him to give out corrected digital files any
more than I would expect him to give out the negatives.



I dunno. If I am giving out negatives, they are readily printable at any 
photolab or I haven't done my job in the first place.

Why shold digital be held to a lower standard?
It's supposed to be better.

William Robb 

Re: GFM computer time?

[David J Brooks]

Bringing my ibook Cory.

Ypu probaly have more experience with it than me anyway.:-0

Dave



Quoting cbwaters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

Since the show is all Digital this year and I don't have a portable 
computer...Can I assume there will be ample PC availability among us 
to look at some photos and make a CD?  Or do I need to start priming 
the "Mistress of Finance" to work on laptop cash in addition to my 
other sixty-odd pending purchases?


FWIW, pending can take years.

Cory







Equine Photography in York Region

Re: GFM computer time?

[Mat Maessen]

I'll have my laptop there, even though I'm not entering the
competition. Has a burner. Though if the idea of running Photoshop CS2
on a 500 MHz G3 with a 12" screen scares you, maybe there are better
choices... :-)

-Mat (whose DSLR purchase is still in the "pending" category...)

On 3/27/06, cbwaters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Since the show is all Digital this year and I don't have a portable
> computer...Can I assume there will be ample PC availability among us to look
> at some photos and make a CD?  Or do I need to start priming the "Mistress
> of Finance" to work on laptop cash in addition to my other sixty-odd pending
> purchases?

Re: Workflow (was: Bailing out.)

[David J Brooks]

For Cripkes sake.

A friggin picture is a friggin picture. Who gives a shit if its film or 
digital.


If you paint with light..

Dave



Quoting Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:


frank theriault wrote:


I'm like Shel.  The word just bugs me is all.


Ah well, if it's the *word* that's the problem that's a different
matter. I *like* the word because it made me think about something I'd
never thoroughly examined before.


Whatever the hell it is I do only became called workflow since the
advent of computers and scanning and digital storage/manipulation.

What I do is "get film developed and have prints made".


You left out "shake the camera while making the exposure... :-P


You (and everyone else) can call it whatever you want.  


You're such an *artist*!







Equine Photography in York Region

Re: PESO: Telegraph Road

[Scott Loveless]

Nice composition.  I like the somber mood.

On 3/26/06, Ralf R. Radermacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Been trying to decide what to upload next while I was listening to some
> old Dire Straits album and browsing through a series of pictures taken a
> few weeks ago on a leisurely stroll through frosty Belgium. :-)
>
> http://www.photosight.ru/photo.php?photoid=1344831
>
> Someone has asked, so for the benefit of those unfamiliar with the
> workings of photosight.ru, the index page with all my photos stored
> there is available through...
>
> http://fotoralf.photosight.ru
>
> As always, comments and suggestions are most welcome.
>
> Enjoy your sunday night, or whatever remains of it.
>
> Ralf
>
> --
> Ralf R. Radermacher  -  DL9KCG  -  Köln/Cologne, Germany
> private homepage: http://www.fotoralf.de
> manual cameras and photo galleries - updated Jan. 10, 2005
> Contarex - Kiev 60 - Horizon 202 - P6 mount lenses
>
>


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

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

Re: GFM computer time?

[David J Brooks]

Cory.

My ibook is available

No worries well fix ya up,:-)

Dave

Quoting cbwaters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

Since the show is all Digital this year and I don't have a portable 
computer...Can I assume there will be ample PC availability among us 
to look at some photos and make a CD?  Or do I need to start priming 
the "Mistress of Finance" to work on laptop cash in addition to my 
other sixty-odd pending purchases?


FWIW, pending can take years.

Cory







Equine Photography in York Region

Re: GFM computer time?

[Mark Roberts]

cbwaters wrote:

>Since the show is all Digital this year and I don't have a portable 
>computer...Can I assume there will be ample PC availability among us to look 
>at some photos and make a CD?

There are always a few computers running in PDML Central. I'll have my
laptop there.
 

Re: Bag Question

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

I have a Timbuk2 Commute XL that does this duty for me. It's not the  
most convenient camera bag, but it is an excellent carryall for when  
I need to carry computer or a couple of portfolios, plus camera,  
lenses and "the usual pile" of other junk. They also make a slightly  
smaller model, the Commute. I took the larger one ... it will fit up  
to a laptop with a 17" screen ... so that I'd have the extra room  
just in case, and I'm glad I did. The bottom and back are padded, I  
usually use a couple of Domke wraps inside when carrying camera  
equipment to keep things from banging around.


The key to why this bag is so good is their excellent shoulder strap.  
It instantly adjusts from "wear it across your back with no strain  
for walking" to "wear it slung at your front/side so you can get  
things in and out quickly". That plus good compartments, pockets and  
padding for your back make the bag a winner.


See it at http://www.timbuk2.com ... I've used mine almost to the  
exclusion of all my other camera bags for the past three months. It's  
my walking office.


Godfrey


On Mar 27, 2006, at 2:27 PM, Derek wrote:

I am looking for a messenger/briefcase type bag.  My enablement for  
this particular purchase is that I am going on a business trip  
overseas and want to take a body to shoot some pictures over the  
weekend.  Specifically, I want a bag to carry 1 body (D w/ grip for  
this trip, but maybe an LX w/ motor on another occasion), 1 or 2  
lens (28-80 and/or 80-200), maybe a flash (280 or 360), an employer  
issued laptop, a couple of books, and some other work related  
papers and files.  These are the bags I have been looking at:


Tamrac 469 - Photo Messenger 9
Tamrac 5618 – Turbo CyberPro Photo/Computer Briefcase.
Tenba PM-17C Messenger

Is it a reasonable expectation to find a bag that will meet my  
needs?  Are their any other bags that I missed?  Any comments or  
suggestions would be appreciated.


Thank you in advance for your PDML expertise.

Derek

Re: Rollei

[Scott Loveless]

He was beautiful, Bill.  My condolences.

On 3/25/06, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My first attempt at a Powerpoint slide show.
> Apologies to those who can't access it. All pictures were shot with Pentax
> cameras and lenses.
>
> http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/rollei.pps
>
> William Robb
>
>
>


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

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

Re: Bailing out.

[Paul Stenquist]

I've always thought of my RAW processing as the funflow. Especially, 
when I have a few fingers of scotch whiskey to help keep the fun 
flowing.

Paul
On Mar 27, 2006, at 8:13 PM, Aaron Reynolds wrote:


Doesn't "workflow" come from the corporate world?

I've only ever called it workflow here on the list while responding to 
someone else who had called it workflow -- my digital darkroom 
actually was in my old colour darkroom, still said COLOUR DARKROOM on 
the door (though I added an Apple logo sticker), and I usually closed 
the door and turned off the lights when I went in.


I also had a brilliant old Kodak ad from the 1920s that I glued to the 
side of one of my monitors (I was running three computers -- one 
scanning, one doing the heavy lifting of correcting etc, and one 
running the printers) -- it had a woman sitting at a table with a 
hand-crank daylight film processor, under the legend "The Kodak girl 
at home".  Emblazoned across the bottom of the ad, in 
Believe-It-Or-Not lettering was "THE DARKROOM ABOLISHED BY THE KODAK 
DEVELOPING MACHINE!"


-Aaron

-Original Message-

From:  "frank theriault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subj:  Re: Bailing out.
Date:  Mon Mar 27, 2006 3:48 pm
Size:  2K
To:  pentax-discuss@pdml.net

I'm like Shel.  The word just bugs me is all.

Whatever the hell it is I do only became called workflow since the
advent of computers and scanning and digital storage/manipulation.

What I do is "get film developed and have prints made".

You (and everyone else) can call it whatever you want.  

cheers,
frank




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

Re: Bailing out.

[Mark Roberts]

Aaron Reynolds wrote:

>You have to use the de-heart, de-art or de-soul filters.  
>Just opening it in Photoshop isn't enough.

According so some people, my copy of Photoshop has a "Not Wales"
filter!
 

RE: Bob Carlos Clarke dead at 55

[Tim Øsleby]

I have never seen his pictures before. At first glance I think of Trewor
Watson and his companions. But, giving it more time, I realise these
pictures has a lot more satirical and emotional depth. 


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: Bob W [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 27. mars 2006 22:31
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: RE: Bob Carlos Clarke dead at 55
> 
> Being hit by a train doesn't make any sense.
> 
> He more-or-less invited a certain type of classic erotic photography,
> which
> was very distinctive.
> 
> http://www.bobcarlosclarke.com/
> 
> Coincidentally, a photographer friend of mine used to live on White Hart
> Lane in Barnes, and we occasionally went drinking at a pub near to that
> railway crossing. Nice place.
> 
> --
> Cheers,
>  Bob
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Bob Shell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: 27 March 2006 21:09
> > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> > Subject: Bob Carlos Clarke dead at 55
> >
> > I've just heard this very sad news.  One of my favorite
> > photographers, and one I had hoped to meet someday, Bob
> > Carlos Clarke was killed Saturday when he was hit by a train
> > in London.  Sparse details here:
> >
> > http://www.amateurphotographer.com/news/
> > Carlos_Clarke_hit_by_Londonbound_train_news_82171.html
> >
> > Hopefully we'll hear more to make sense of this very odd death.
> >
> > Bob
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 

Re: GFM computer time?

[Scott Loveless]

I'm bringing mine, and you're welcome to use it, but it has no cd
burner.  I suppose I'll have to dump my images onto a usb drive and
bum some burner time off someone else.

On 3/27/06, cbwaters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Since the show is all Digital this year and I don't have a portable
> computer...Can I assume there will be ample PC availability among us to look
> at some photos and make a CD?  Or do I need to start priming the "Mistress
> of Finance" to work on laptop cash in addition to my other sixty-odd pending
> purchases?
>
> FWIW, pending can take years.
>
> Cory
>
>
>


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

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

Re: Bailing out.

[Mark Roberts]

Bruce Dayton wrote:

>Monday, March 27, 2006, 12:56:56 PM, you wrote:
>
>MR> Bruce Dayton wrote:
>
>>>Yes, you are correct.  However, this was not a low end photographer -
>>>quite pricey for the area. I don't think he was one to ever give the
>>>negs out.  
>
>MR> That's probably why he wouldn't give out uncorrected digital files!
>
>But in this case, he did give out uncorrected files.

Sorry. Typo. I meant "that's why he doesn't give out *corrected*
files". I wouldn't expect him to give out corrected digital files any
more than I would expect him to give out the negatives.

Re: Bailing out.

[Aaron Reynolds]

You have to use the de-heart, de-art or de-soul filters.  Just opening it in 
Photoshop isn't enough.

-Aaron

-Original Message-

From:  "Perry Pellechia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subj:  Re: Bailing out.
Date:  Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:04 pm
Size:  778 bytes
To:  pentax-discuss@pdml.net

Actually you are probably a good person to make comments.  Do your
photos stop being art when they enter the scanner?  Do they suddenly
become soul-less when they are converted into bits??  Or does it
happen when they are loaded into Photoshop?

Just wondering...

Re: Bailing out.

[Aaron Reynolds]

Doesn't "workflow" come from the corporate world?

I've only ever called it workflow here on the list while responding to someone 
else who had called it workflow -- my digital darkroom actually was in my old 
colour darkroom, still said COLOUR DARKROOM on the door (though I added an 
Apple logo sticker), and I usually closed the door and turned off the lights 
when I went in.

I also had a brilliant old Kodak ad from the 1920s that I glued to the side of 
one of my monitors (I was running three computers -- one scanning, one doing 
the heavy lifting of correcting etc, and one running the printers) -- it had a 
woman sitting at a table with a hand-crank daylight film processor, under the 
legend "The Kodak girl at home".  Emblazoned across the bottom of the ad, in 
Believe-It-Or-Not lettering was "THE DARKROOM ABOLISHED BY THE KODAK DEVELOPING 
MACHINE!"

-Aaron

-Original Message-

From:  "frank theriault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subj:  Re: Bailing out.
Date:  Mon Mar 27, 2006 3:48 pm
Size:  2K
To:  pentax-discuss@pdml.net

I'm like Shel.  The word just bugs me is all.

Whatever the hell it is I do only became called workflow since the
advent of computers and scanning and digital storage/manipulation.

What I do is "get film developed and have prints made".

You (and everyone else) can call it whatever you want.  

cheers,
frank




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

GFM computer time?

[cbwaters]

Since the show is all Digital this year and I don't have a portable 
computer...Can I assume there will be ample PC availability among us to look 
at some photos and make a CD?  Or do I need to start priming the "Mistress 
of Finance" to work on laptop cash in addition to my other sixty-odd pending 
purchases?


FWIW, pending can take years.

Cory

Re: PAW - My Friend's Kitchen

[Scott Loveless]

That's just gorgeous.  I like the tonality.

On 3/26/06, frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ah, the organized chaos of those artistic types:
>
> http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4260706&size=lg
>
> 
>
> Hope you enjoy.  Thanks in advance for any comments, good, bad or otherwise.
>
> cheers,
> frank
>
>
> --
> "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson
>
>


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

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

RE: PESO: Bird shot with "Canon"

[Tim Øsleby]

I've been advised to use dark shades. Should be worth a try. 


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: 28. mars 2006 02:13
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: RE: PESO: Bird shot with "Canon"
> 
> Hi Tim
> I found some very good books on bird photography, one is from 1955.
> Birds will see your eyes very well so never look at them directly if
> possible and don't walk straight in their direction,
> Move very slowly once you are near and get down on your knees to look
> smaller.
> 
> greetings
> Markus
> 
> 
>  stop or two of speed.
> >>
> >>Never the less, I am working on getting closer. The problem is
> >>that this is
> >>very hard. These birds have very good sight, so it is near impossible to
> >>sneak up on them. So, I am thinking of the opposite approach, getting
> them
> >>closer to me.
> >
> >>
> 

Re: Bailing out.

[Mishka]

i have one pots in my office, but i am trying to not
pay attention to him.

best,
mishka

On 3/27/06, Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 27/3/06, Bob Shell, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
> > I have POTS in my office, but rarely use it.
>
> I have pots in my kitchen but use them all the time. For the benefit of
> those of us less astute at understand American abbreviations, could you
> please enlighten me?
>
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>   Cotty
>

RE: PESO: Bird shot with "Canon"

[Markus Maurer]

Hi Tim
I found some very good books on bird photography, one is from 1955.
Birds will see your eyes very well so never look at them directly if
possible and don't walk straight in their direction,
Move very slowly once you are near and get down on your knees to look
smaller.

greetings
Markus


 stop or two of speed.
>>
>>Never the less, I am working on getting closer. The problem is
>>that this is
>>very hard. These birds have very good sight, so it is near impossible to
>>sneak up on them. So, I am thinking of the opposite approach, getting them
>>closer to me.
>
>>

Re: Bailing out.

[Mishka]

an excellent summary!

best,
mishka

On 3/27/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The art of photography is the same, and is separate from the
> technology of capture or rendering. If you don't understand that, you
> don't understand the art of photography.
>...

Re: Bailing out.

[David Savage]

On 3/28/06, frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm like Shel.  The word just bugs me is all.

Workflow doesn't bother me. But closure, argh, I want to hit
something whenever I hear someone utter it.

> Whatever the hell it is I do only became called workflow since the
> advent of computers and scanning and digital storage/manipulation.
>
> What I do is "get film developed and have prints made".
>
> You (and everyone else) can call it whatever you want.  

I like to think of it a  Maximilian

Dave


--
"All I ask is the chance to prove that money can't make me happy." -
Spike Milligan

RE: PESO: Bird shot with "Canon"

[Tim Øsleby]

> soft as a baby's bum.
Actually I am pretty impressed. In the second shoot they where 75-100 meters
away! 

> ... get closer.  Close enough to lose the converters and 
> gain the stop or two of speed.

Never the less, I am working on getting closer. The problem is that this is
very hard. These birds have very good sight, so it is near impossible to
sneak up on them. So, I am thinking of the opposite approach, getting them
closer to me. 

What I have done so far is go to the beach and then sit down and wait. And I
am pretty convinced that _this_ id how close I can expect them to come. 

So now, my plan A is to build a "gapahuk" - a primitive hide in English. I
will make it using some branches and some old curtains. The gapahuk will
scare them off at first, but after a while they will get used to it and come
back. That's the time for me to enter the hide, and wait, and wait, and then
wait some more.

I also have another plan. Using a canoe, and let the tide drift me towards
tem. My theory is that they don't scare off as easily by boats at sea, they
are used to that. But this is plan B. Canoes are not the steadiest thing on
earth, so I will have to fight against camera shakings again. Most likely I
will loose the same steps I will gain by getting closer. I'm not too
enthusiastic about falling out of the canoe either, with a sea temperature
close to zero. My *istDS don't fancy a bath at this time of year either (the
camera whispered me this in my ear in Japanese the other day). 
BTW. Today I used the camera in the rain, no harm done, it purred just as
pleased as always. I think it was happy to show what it is made for, use.
But tomorrow I will bring a hankie to cower it, just in case. 

As you probably have read between the lines, this is really fun. And
educative, now I am able identify some of the seagulls. The ducks are next.
It is also very interesting studying their behaviour. I have borrowed a book
that has given me a lot of tips on what to look for. The seagull a Svartbak
(lanus marinus in latin) made an amusing act when another svartbak came
along, it seemed to pretend "I have no fish". It even flew away. After a
while it came back, and continued the meal. Then it was more aggressive,
saying "go and get your own fish, you lazy bone" ;-)


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: mike wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 28. mars 2006 00:02
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: PESO: Bird shot with "Canon"
> 
> Tim Øsleby wrote:
> 
> 
> > This is shot with the AF 1,7x TC thingy, and my new zoom.
> >
> > http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildegalleri/vis_bilde.cgi?id=227413
> > *istDS 400 ISO raw, at tripod, with Tokina AT-X LD 150-500/5,6 and
> AF1,7x,
> > @500mm, f:16, 1/400s. Converted, sharpened and cropped in RSP.
> 
> 
> I like the first one
> (http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildegalleri/vis_bilde.cgi?id=227325) for its
> almost monochromatic look.  I don't like the fact that I can't make out
> what's in it beak.  Just not quite the decisive moment for me.  I would
> have preferred an empty beak.
> 
> The second one is a bit better for seeing what's going on but it's as
> soft as a baby's bum.
> 
> If these pictures had been taken in 1956, they would be of National
> Geographic standard, technically.  In 2006, they just don't make it.
> Mainly, I suspect, because people have come to expect more from a picture.
> 
> The only answer I can suggest is to improve your field skills so that
> you can get closer.  Close enough to lose the converters and gain the
> stop or two of speed.  Ultimately, this will possibly give you more
> satisfaction trying to deal with the problem by throwing money (whatever
> size the sum)at it.
> 
> mike
> 

Re: More about birds on a budget

[Paul Stenquist]

I find that it's good to have a flash and Xtender attached when 
shooting birds. It can be turned off if you get a clear shot in good 
light. But those are few and far between. I look for birds in the woods 
and frequently there's either insufficient light, extreme back light or 
patchy light. In those cases, the flash is switched on. If I confined 
my bird shooting to those rare situations where the available light is 
perfect, the hits would be few and far between.

Paul
On Mar 27, 2006, at 5:47 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:


On 27 Mar 2006 at 17:41, Christian wrote:


I guess.  I normally won't shoot birds in mid-day sun.  If I do, I'll
use flash to fill in harsh shadows and make it look like it wasn't 
shot
at mid-day.  Likewise, if the bird is perched on a branch and there 
is a
shadow crossing its body or whatever, I'll use fill flash to lighten 
it

up.  I'm not talking about blasting it with flash, just enough to even
out the lighting.  I'll find some examples and show you and you tell 
me

if they don't look right.


That would be good.

BTW, without me mentioning it, did you know the woodpecker was done 
with

flash?


Yes actually, I could see it in his eyes :-)

Cheers,


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

RE: point and shoots

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

I had three XAs. They're in the same class of camera as the Minox 35GT-E, 
not the Yashica T series, as they are not AF point and shoots. Decent 
cameras but the minox and Rollei 35 have much better lenses.

G
___
Sent with SnapperMail
www.snappermail.com

.. Original Message ...
On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 00:34:16 +0200 "Markus Maurer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>Hi Godfrey
>have you really used an Oly XA?
>I can not see the limitations you mentioned with that Olympus series and I
>made some great shots with the original XA and now with the XA4 macro. I
>miss the manual F-stop setting on the XA4 macro of course, you can only set
>a distance zone and the camera does the rest and you can not underexpose.
>The first and original XA let's you control all that.
>The design of the XA series is one of the best and most beautiful ever for
>me (beside the bulky flash).
>
>greetings
>Markus
>
>>
>>>Like all the automated compact cameras I've owned, regardless of
>>>whether they were film or digital capture, I ultimately find them too
>>>limiting due to responsiveness constraints of shutter lag and
>>>exposure systems, and the controls are awkward due to poor
>>>ergonomics. My personal favorite pocket sized compact cameras have
>>>been the Rollei 35S,  Minox 35GT-E and several of the Minox
>>>subminiatures, as they leave me in control, are as responsive as any
>>>SLR, and don't get in the way of taking photographs.
>>>
>>>Godfrey
>>>
>

Re: POTS (was: Bailing out.)

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Cotty" 
Subject: Re: POTS (was: Bailing out.)




On 27/3/06, William Robb, discombobulated, unleashed:

Any time I try to phone my friend in Birmingham, I wonder if there is a 
phone system at all in Britain.


It's a well-known fact that Brummies are not fussy who they befriend.


That would be why one of them married a Canadian girl..

William Robb

Re: PESO: Bird shot with "Canon"

[Scott Loveless]

On 3/27/06, Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 27/3/06, Tim Øsleby, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
> >As I've said before. The Canon in the title is a subtle way (that's my
> >intentions at least) to tell that this shot is made by a "crappy" lens.
> >It's a submission for the very informal "Crappy lens, bird shot"
> >competition.
>
> Why would one associate Canon with crap?

Why wouldn't one?


Kidding.Put the torch away.

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

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

RE: PESO - Tel Aviv (some more)

[Tim Øsleby]

A well captured/taken/shot view. I like.


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: Boris Liberman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 27. mars 2006 21:05
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: PESO - Tel Aviv (some more)
> 
> Hi!
> 
> Tel Aviv is indeed very interesting city... Here is one of my first (one
> thousand) shots with *istD:
> 
> http://not.contaxg.com/document.php?id=12772
> 
> As usual, please click on the image in order to have it open in full size.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Boris
> 

RE: PESO: Bird shot with "Canon"

[Markus Maurer]

Hi Tim
I would not crop shots like that, leaving some air and showing the
surrounding environment is a lot better IMHO.
If you feel a need to crop so much, you need a longer lens or have to go
nearer ;-)
The "Canon" title is indee funny for a Pentaxian ;-)


greetings
Markus

>>As I've said before. The Canon in the title is a subtle way (that's my
>>intentions at least) to tell that this shot is made by a "crappy" lens.
>>It's a submission for the very informal "Crappy lens, bird shot"
>>competition.
>>
>>This is shot with the AF 1,7x TC thingy, and my new zoom.
>>
>>http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildegalleri/vis_bilde.cgi?id=227413
>>*istDS 400 ISO raw, at tripod, with Tokina AT-X LD 150-500/5,6 and AF1,7x,
>>@500mm, f:16, 1/400s. Converted, sharpened and cropped in RSP.
>>
>>The original (before cropping) is also there (thumb below picture).
>>
>>This is a totally new area for me, so I am in desperate need for feedback.
>>Is the cropping any good? Other comments, please.
>
>>

Re: More about birds on a budget

[Rob Studdert]

On 27 Mar 2006 at 17:41, Christian wrote:

> I guess.  I normally won't shoot birds in mid-day sun.  If I do, I'll 
> use flash to fill in harsh shadows and make it look like it wasn't shot 
> at mid-day.  Likewise, if the bird is perched on a branch and there is a 
> shadow crossing its body or whatever, I'll use fill flash to lighten it 
> up.  I'm not talking about blasting it with flash, just enough to even 
> out the lighting.  I'll find some examples and show you and you tell me 
> if they don't look right.

That would be good.
 
> BTW, without me mentioning it, did you know the woodpecker was done with 
> flash?

Yes actually, I could see it in his eyes :-)

Cheers,


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

Re: GESO: Editing my show

[mike wilson]

Cotty wrote:


On 27/3/06, mike wilson, discombobulated, unleashed:



I'll just get my anorak.



What would an anorak-spotter wear?


I'll just get my Barbour jacket.

Re: More about birds on a budget

[Christian]

Rob Studdert wrote:

On 27 Mar 2006 at 17:27, Christian wrote:


When done poorly, for sure.  When done "right" you can't tell except 
that the shot looks well lit i.e.: no harsh shadows, etc.



I guess it depends how well the viewer knows and appreciates the look of 
natural lighting?


I guess.  I normally won't shoot birds in mid-day sun.  If I do, I'll 
use flash to fill in harsh shadows and make it look like it wasn't shot 
at mid-day.  Likewise, if the bird is perched on a branch and there is a 
shadow crossing its body or whatever, I'll use fill flash to lighten it 
up.  I'm not talking about blasting it with flash, just enough to even 
out the lighting.  I'll find some examples and show you and you tell me 
if they don't look right.


BTW, without me mentioning it, did you know the woodpecker was done with 
flash?



--

Christian
http://photography.skofteland.net

RE: point and shoots

[Markus Maurer]

Hi Godfrey
have you really used an Oly XA?
I can not see the limitations you mentioned with that Olympus series and I
made some great shots with the original XA and now with the XA4 macro. I
miss the manual F-stop setting on the XA4 macro of course, you can only set
a distance zone and the camera does the rest and you can not underexpose.
The first and original XA let's you control all that.
The design of the XA series is one of the best and most beautiful ever for
me (beside the bulky flash).

greetings
Markus

>
>>Like all the automated compact cameras I've owned, regardless of
>>whether they were film or digital capture, I ultimately find them too
>>limiting due to responsiveness constraints of shutter lag and
>>exposure systems, and the controls are awkward due to poor
>>ergonomics. My personal favorite pocket sized compact cameras have
>>been the Rollei 35S,  Minox 35GT-E and several of the Minox
>>subminiatures, as they leave me in control, are as responsive as any
>>SLR, and don't get in the way of taking photographs.
>>
>>Godfrey
>>

Re: More about birds on a budget

[Rob Studdert]

On 27 Mar 2006 at 17:27, Christian wrote:

> When done poorly, for sure.  When done "right" you can't tell except 
> that the shot looks well lit i.e.: no harsh shadows, etc.

I guess it depends how well the viewer knows and appreciates the look of 
natural lighting?


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: GESO: Editing my show

[Bob W]

> 
> On 27/3/06, mike wilson, discombobulated, unleashed:
> 
> >I'll just get my anorak.
> 
> What would an anorak-spotter wear?
> 

A straitjacket

Bob

Bag Question

[Derek]

I am looking for a messenger/briefcase type bag.  My enablement for this 
particular purchase is that I am going on a business trip overseas and want to 
take a body to shoot some pictures over the weekend.  Specifically, I want a 
bag to carry 1 body (D w/ grip for this trip, but maybe an LX w/ motor on 
another occasion), 1 or 2 lens (28-80 and/or 80-200), maybe a flash (280 or 
360), an employer issued laptop, a couple of books, and some other work related 
papers and files.  These are the bags I have been looking at:

Tamrac 469 - Photo Messenger 9
Tamrac 5618 – Turbo CyberPro Photo/Computer Briefcase.
Tenba PM-17C Messenger

Is it a reasonable expectation to find a bag that will meet my needs?  Are 
their any other bags that I missed?  Any comments or suggestions would be 
appreciated.

Thank you in advance for your PDML expertise.

Derek

Re: More about birds on a budget

[Christian]

Rob Studdert wrote:
 >
I'm not too sure if I really like the look of flash photos in a wild-life 
folio, of course sometimes it's necessary for the shot but it often reduces the 
impact of the image for me.


When done poorly, for sure.  When done "right" you can't tell except 
that the shot looks well lit i.e.: no harsh shadows, etc.



--

Christian
http://photography.skofteland.net

Re: GESO: Editing my show

[Cotty]

On 27/3/06, mike wilson, discombobulated, unleashed:

>I'll just get my anorak.

What would an anorak-spotter wear?




Cheers,
  Cotty


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

Re: Bailing out.

[Cotty]

On 28/3/06, Rob Studdert, discombobulated, unleashed:

>You should get out more :-)

LOL

I deserved that




Cheers,
  Cotty


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

Re: POTS (was: Bailing out.)

[Cotty]

On 27/3/06, William Robb, discombobulated, unleashed:

>Any time I try to phone my friend in Birmingham, I wonder if there is a 
>phone system at all in Britain.

It's a well-known fact that Brummies are not fussy who they befriend.




Cheers,
  Cotty


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

Re: More about birds on a budget

[Rob Studdert]

On 27 Mar 2006 at 17:07, Christian wrote:

> most of the shots on my website were done without flash.  I'm no pro, 
> but I know that flash is not required.  It DOES help in some situations 
> and is an asset but it is not needed in ALL shots.  My flash is is the 
> relatively inexpensive Sigma EX500DG.

I'm not too sure if I really like the look of flash photos in a wild-life 
folio, of course sometimes it's necessary for the shot but it often reduces the 
impact of the image for me.


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: Much improved (WAS: Testing a Tamron Adaptall 6.9 200-500mm (not SP))

[Markus Maurer]

Hi Jens
thanks for the work with the test.
This time the Tamron looks a lot better at F 6.9 200mm than before, enough
light seems to be everything ;-)
At 300mm it starts looking to be quite unsharp and not very good on the
sign. I do not see what shutter time
you used and I assume everything was set on a tripod? The Tamron shots are
often a lot brighter than the Pentax
M* 300 and therefore a bit hard to compare for me.

Why not participate in our little competition with some shots from the Zoo
(you asked), frankly I enjoy any living subject so
much more than the brick walls ;-)

greetings
Markus


>>-Original Message-
>>From: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Sent: Monday, March 27, 2006 6:40 PM
>>To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
>>Subject: OT: Much improved (WAS: Testing a Tamron Adaptall 6.9 200-500mm
>>(not SP))
>>
>>
>>Hello list.
>>The relative bright weather today allowed me to improve my brick wall test
>>significantly.
>>It's a Tamron (adaptall) 6.9 200-500mm  vs. SMC Pentax FA 2.8/80-200mm
>>ED(IF) and vs. SMC Pentax M* 4/300mm.
>>Please take a look at: http://www.jensbladt.dk/Test/newfile1.html
>>
>>Regards
>>Jens
>>
>>Jens Bladt
>>http://www.jensbladt.dk
>>
>>-Oprindelig meddelelse-
>>Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Sendt: 27. marts 2006 07:44
>>Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
>>Emne: RE: Tersting a Tamron Adaptall 6.9 200-500mm (not SP)
>>
>>
>>Having fun is still the most improtant thing, Tim ;-)
>>Does photographs from the Zoo count?
>>I'm afraid they took all the birds indoors because of the current
>>bird flue
>>thing ;-(
>>
>>Regards
>>Jens Bladt
>>http://www.jensbladt.dk
>>
>>-Oprindelig meddelelse-
>>Fra: Tim Øsleby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Sendt: 26. marts 2006 14:53
>>Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
>>Emne: RE: Tersting a Tamron Adaptall 6.9 200-500mm (not SP)
>>
>>
>>I havn't done a "formal" test with my lens, but so far it looks
>>like that me
>>too, has to shoot at f:8 or more with my Tokina AT-X 150-500 f:5,6. I also
>>have a impression that I have to shoot at 15 meter or closer.
>>Yesterday was
>>a very bright day, with snow, bright sun, and reflections from
>>the sea. When
>>shooting at longer distance I had a lot of contrast problems. I'm not sure
>>it is contrast problems, but that’s my "diagnose" at this stage. I haven't
>>shoot any keepers yet. But, it is fun.
>>
>>Hi Thibouille. I don't know where you live.
>>But I guess if you look around you most likely will find some spots where
>>you can get bird photos without messy backgrounds. Have a walk in
>>a park, go
>>to a lonely sport stadium, try getting on top of some roofs etc.
>>My point is
>>that I'm pretty sure you will find good spots for shooting city
>>birds if you
>>go looking.
>>This is just some ideas up from my sleeve. Have fun.
>>
>>
>>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: Thibouille [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> Sent: 26. mars 2006 13:44
>>> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
>>> Subject: Re: Tersting a Tamron Adaptall 6.9 200-500mm (not SP)
>>>
>>> Sure but it even more dificult to get an interesting picture: the bird
>>> could be very nice but the background often a bit too... messy ? (and
>>> I'm kind ;)
>>>
>>> On 3/26/06, Jens Bladt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> > Hmmm...
>>> > Ther must be some birds in the city - doves, perhaps ;-)
>>> > Not to mention the birds can can watch go by ;-)
>>> > Regards
>>> > jens
>>> >
>>> > Jens Bladt
>>> > http://www.jensbladt.dk
>>> >
>>> > -Oprindelig meddelelse-
>>> > Fra: Thibouille [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> > Sendt: 26. marts 2006 11:18
>>> > Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
>>> > Emne: Re: Tersting a Tamron Adaptall 6.9 200-500mm (not SP)
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > I'm interested too.
>>> > Will be dificult for me to shoot much (living in plain center of the
>>> > city) but I'm very curious of what I could do with my stuff too ;)
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Thibouille
>>> > --
>>> > *ist-D,Z1,SFXn,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ...
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>> > Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.1/292 - Release Date:
>>> 03/24/2006
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > No virus found in this outgoing message.
>>> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>> > Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.1/292 - Release Date:
>>> 03/24/2006
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> --
>>> Thibouille
>>> --
>>> *ist-D,Z1,SFXn,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ...
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>No virus found in this incoming message.
>>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.1/292 - Release Date: 03/24/2006
>>
>>--
>>No virus found in this outgoing message.
>>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.1/292 - Rele

Re: PESO: Bird shot with "Canon"

[Cotty]

On 27/3/06, Tim Øsleby, discombobulated, unleashed:

>I don't. I just made a cheap joke on a Pentax list.

Arr. Actually there are quite a few crappy Canon lenses so don't worry ;-)

>
>My new lens is also huge, like a, guess what, a cannon. I don't know if the
>phrase "Shooting sparrow with cannons" is common in the rest of the world,
>but here in Viking land it is. 
>
>To make it totally clear: I respect Canon users. I also believe Canon
>equipment is pretty good. What I don't respect is Canon and Nikon users who
>believe their tools are the only proper tools. 
>But you don't belong in the last category. If you did, you would hang around
>here (unless, you are here only for the free beer).

I hang around here because I have Pentax gear! That and I'm a masochist.
You have those in Norway? ;-))

BTW nice shot of the shite-hawk.




Cheers,
  Cotty


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

Re: Bailing out.

[Rob Studdert]

On 27 Mar 2006 at 23:11, Cotty wrote:

> When I was in training (nearly 30 years ago :-(  we used many terms and
> acronyms but it is pointless me repeating them here as they would mean
> nothing to someone not involved in film production. I have never been in
> the telephone industry (whatever that is) nor the electronics industry.
> I have never heard of POTS until today. That doesn't mean that it has
> not been used here in the UK, obviously it has. I was curious because I
> do have a broad knowledge about most things - goes with the job - but I
> can tell you that POTS is not a term that is in general use by the vast
> majority of the general public here in Britain.

You should get out more :-)


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: More about birds on a budget

[Cotty]

On 27/3/06, Christian, discombobulated, unleashed:

>hahaha  I'm actually working on mounting Pentax lenses on my Canon 
>body... s  don't tell cotty.

Wonders never cease!




Cheers,
  Cotty


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

Re: GESO: Editing my show

[mike wilson]

Cotty wrote:


On 27/3/06, mike wilson, discombobulated, unleashed:



You _really_ need to visit Central Europe; that's a tram. 8-)



Bloody tram spotters!



I'll just get my anorak.

Re: Bailing out.

[Cotty]

On 28/3/06, Rob Studdert, discombobulated, unleashed:

>When I was in training 20 years ago here in Oz we also used the POTS
acronym, 
>the telecoms industry is powered by acronyms and the POTS term simply
meant a 
>wired voice telephone service.

When I was in training (nearly 30 years ago :-(  we used many terms and
acronyms but it is pointless me repeating them here as they would mean
nothing to someone not involved in film production. I have never been in
the telephone industry (whatever that is) nor the electronics industry.
I have never heard of POTS until today. That doesn't mean that it has
not been used here in the UK, obviously it has. I was curious because I
do have a broad knowledge about most things - goes with the job - but I
can tell you that POTS is not a term that is in general use by the vast
majority of the general public here in Britain.




Cheers,
  Cotty


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

RE: First "Canon" bird shot (on topic ;-))

[Markus Maurer]

Hi Tim
The Tokina fits for me because it is my understanding that John (?) got it
really cheap in a bundle with other lenses and a body ($200) too. It's the
cost/quality ratio and the "not being member of the noble Pentax FA, *, and
others family)
that counts for me.
I would not tell my SP 500 Tamron mirror lens "crappy" so far, the build
quality is excellent and I hope
the shots will be good enough to keep it if I look over the limitations of a
mirror lens in general.

greetings
Markus


>
>>
>>After seeing the results the Tokina makes, I am not sure it qualifies for
>>the "crappy lens, bird shoot competition" When used within the
>>limititations
>>it performs pretty good, IMO.
>
>>

Re: PESO: The Pond

[Paul Stenquist]

Thanks Frank. I didn't go out to shoot the pond. I was looking for 
birds and had my 400/5.6 and flash mounted.. (I did get a nice lady 
Cardinal.) But I saw the pier covered with snow and some snow topping 
the branches in the pond, and I went back to my car for the wide lens, 
filter and tripod. It ended up being what I consider my best shot of 
the day. Which only goes to show that it's always a good idea to bring 
as much equipment as you can.

Paul
On Mar 27, 2006, at 4:36 PM, frank theriault wrote:


On 3/25/06, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I set a new personal record for filter extravagance and bought an 77mm
R72 for my DA 12-24/4. Shot a little pond this morning. It's at 12mm,
f11, 4 second exposure.
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4260009&size=lg


Your extravagence paid off, Paul.

That's a beautiful shot.  Mind you, all the filters in the world won't
get the composition right (as you did).

Terrific!

cheers,
frank


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

Re: Bailing out.

[Bruce Dayton]

But in this case, he did give out uncorrected files.  I'm not sure if
he was thinking too much - not realizing how much work the lab does,
or just didn't care or what...

-- 
Bruce


Monday, March 27, 2006, 12:56:56 PM, you wrote:

MR> Bruce Dayton wrote:

>>Yes, you are correct.  However, this was not a low end photographer -
>>quite pricey for the area. I don't think he was one to ever give the
>>negs out.  

MR> That's probably why he wouldn't give out uncorrected digital files!

Re: More about birds on a budget

[Christian]

Markus Maurer wrote:

Hi Christian
That's interesting, thanks for the test. Must have been a heavy lens/flash
combo to carry...


Weight is really never an issue for me.  Except for getting to a 
location, the lens is on a tripod, and I'll gladly deal with extra 
weight if it gives me an advantage in image quality.



It's really a pretty bird. If you mount your Canon combo on a Pentax, you
can participate in the
"crappy lens competition" as well  - only joking ;-)


hahaha  I'm actually working on mounting Pentax lenses on my Canon 
body... s  don't tell cotty.




I tried to get some bird photos today but after more than 2 hours walk I
returned with only 3 photos ;-)


That's not bad!  I was out for about an hour and a half for my field 
experiment and besides freezing my ass off I got nothing I'd consider good.




I really have to forget using the mirror lens in the forest, it is simply
too dark for a F8 lens without a
huge flash + extender. 


I only started using flash for bird shots last September.  flash is not 
a required item.  I only lament at slow lenses (or lenses made slow with 
TCs) because it is dark in the viewfinder to focus.  I usually try to 
stop down as much as possible to get as much depth of field as possible.


I seems to me that birds are most active in the

morning and later in the evening, when the light is  again nearly
insufficient for such a slow lens? 


The number one rule of nature photography.  Mornings and late afternoons 
are best.  Not only are the birds more active, the light is much better.


So it is really a challenge to get some

good shots without a professional
flash.


most of the shots on my website were done without flash.  I'm no pro, 
but I know that flash is not required.  It DOES help in some situations 
and is an asset but it is not needed in ALL shots.  My flash is is the 
relatively inexpensive Sigma EX500DG.



--

Christian
http://photography.skofteland.net

Re: PESO: Bird shot with "Canon"

[mike wilson]

Tim Øsleby wrote:


This is shot with the AF 1,7x TC thingy, and my new zoom. 


http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildegalleri/vis_bilde.cgi?id=227413
*istDS 400 ISO raw, at tripod, with Tokina AT-X LD 150-500/5,6 and AF1,7x,
@500mm, f:16, 1/400s. Converted, sharpened and cropped in RSP. 



I like the first one 
(http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildegalleri/vis_bilde.cgi?id=227325) for its 
almost monochromatic look.  I don't like the fact that I can't make out 
what's in it beak.  Just not quite the decisive moment for me.  I would 
have preferred an empty beak.


The second one is a bit better for seeing what's going on but it's as 
soft as a baby's bum.


If these pictures had been taken in 1956, they would be of National 
Geographic standard, technically.  In 2006, they just don't make it. 
Mainly, I suspect, because people have come to expect more from a picture.


The only answer I can suggest is to improve your field skills so that 
you can get closer.  Close enough to lose the converters and gain the 
stop or two of speed.  Ultimately, this will possibly give you more 
satisfaction trying to deal with the problem by throwing money (whatever 
size the sum)at it.


mike

RE: First "Canon" bird shots. On Topic ;-)

[Markus Maurer]

Hi Tim
Using the word "Canon" in this context is of course f u n for a Pentaxian
;-)
Maybe we should define "crappy" here. To me it only means that the lens was
a cheap buy and is maybe an old and manual one and not a perfect fit for
wildlife/bird photography.
It does not say anything quality wise, that's what I would like to see as a
result of the "competition". So, you could very well just have made a very
good buy with your lens then.

For example, my SP Tamron 500mm is about $480 (400 Euro) suggested new
price,  I got it from an auction slightly used
for $85 (110 Swiss francs) including post tax.


Wouldn't it be interesting to tell us with every presented "crappy shot" how
much the lens in question was new and/or used
in dollars so we can take the cost/quality ratio into consideration too?

Tell us about the limitation of the used equipment too, what kind of shot
did you not get for example because the lens was too slow or too heavy.



What do you think?
greetings
Markus



>>-Original Message-
>>From: Tim Øsleby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Sent: Monday, March 27, 2006 6:04 PM
>>To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
>>Subject: First "Canon" bird shots. On Topic ;-)
>>
>>
>>I have been adviced not to use the word crap in the headline. I found the
>>word Canon an appropriate synonym. In a way the Tokina lens _is_ a Canon.
>>
>>After seeing the results the Tokina makes, I am not sure it qualifies for
>>the "crappy lens, bird shoot competition" When used within the
>>limititations
>>it performs pretty good, IMO.
>>
>>
>>This first shot is not a stunning picture. But thinking of my
>>limited skills
>>and the cropping I am surprised by the quality. There is a tighter cropped
>>version there to (simply click on the thumb below the picture). I
>>could need
>>some help on the cropping. I find it hard to make a good composition.
>>
>>http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildegalleri/vis_bilde.cgi?id=227325
>>Tripod, lightly tighted (my spellchecker doesn't like this word, is it
>>correct?).
>>istDS, 400 ISO raw, Tokina AT-X SD 150-500/5,6 @500mm, f:11, 1/500s.
>>Adjusted contrast, saturation, and sharpened plus cropped in RSE.
>>
>>What do you think?
>>
>>BTW: I will probably add another with later tonight. I find that shot more
>>interesting.
>>
>>
>>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)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

Re: More about birds on a budget

[Rob Studdert]

On 27 Mar 2006 at 16:48, Christian wrote:

> Rob Studdert wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Did you experiment to find the best aperture for the combination?
> 
> Um, no.  I shot mostly one stop down.

Sorry I was directing the question to Jens, in a relatively static situation 
like moon shots I've found that there is a very narrow band of best performance 
using any stacked TC lens combos. I was guessing that you needed all the speed 
you could get :-)

Cheers,


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

Re: POTS

[Adam Maas]

We were sort of a special case. Lots of students from the Maritimes (The 
East Coast of Canada) which is unusual for a college in Toronto, ON. The 
girls were typically rural girls from the Maritimes and husband hunting 
more than getting an education (Although, since it was typically easier 
to get into a university than the college I went to, the girls in 
question were typically bright, and got an education).


Unfortunately, they were still 10% of the student body, and more 
interested in guys who wanted to move back to the maritimes.


I spent my time chasing University Girls.

-Adam



Rob Studdert wrote:

On 27 Mar 2006 at 16:29, Adam Maas wrote:



You obviously didn't go to the same electronics school I went to.

At mine, the girls were good looking (but very few) and the parties were 
outrageous. Of course, it helped that the University down the street was 
60% girls, which made Pub Nights and parties a lot more entertaining.



Me neither, when I was studying electronics (obviously before engineering 
become trendy) the only females that I can recall were more butch than the guys 
(truth).



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: Bailing out.

[Rob Studdert]

On 27 Mar 2006 at 13:53, John Francis wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 06:57:20AM -0500, Paul Stenquist wrote:
> > 
> > I've gone for walkarounds with my *istD and never recorded a single 
> > image. I find I'm now shooting just as I did with film.
> 
> It's taken you long enough :-)
> 
> That's pretty much where I've been since day one.  When I was still
> using film I'd shoot perhaps 7-10 rolls of film on a motorsports
> weekend - call it 200 frames.  I might shoot a few more frames on
> the *ist-D, but even on my most profligate weekend I doubt if I've
> got up to double the number of frames I would have shot on film.

I now shoot the number of frames that I should have when I used film (but for 
the financial constraints).


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: Bailing out.

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

On Mar 27, 2006, at 12:33 PM, Adam Maas wrote:


Oops... linked to the film version.  Here's the digi:
http://www.letsgodigital.org/html/review/ricoh/gr/ 
digital_camera_EN1.html

Yummy!
Indeed. Now how to get one here in Canada, with no Ricoh  
distributor. Not cheap either, but it's what I'm looking for.


CEID is carrying them in Canada:
  

or
  http://tinyurl.com/qe2n3

I considered the Ricoh GRD when I was looking at this class of camera  
last Fall, but found the LX1 to be a superior performer (better image  
quality and faster responsiveness). The Ricoh's hotshoe and wide- 
converter accessories, however, are pretty darn neat if pricey.


Godfrey

Re: More about birds on a budget

[Christian]

Rob Studdert wrote:



Did you experiment to find the best aperture for the combination?


Um, no.  I shot mostly one stop down.

--

Christian
http://photography.skofteland.net

RE: First "Canon" bird shots. On Topic ;-)

[Tim Øsleby]

Thanks. Jens. I was lucky, getting it _nearly_ in focus. 


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: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 27. mars 2006 23:17
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: RE: First "Canon" bird shots. On Topic ;-)
> 
> Very nice, Tim. I am a little impressed!
> Regards
> jens
> 
> Jens Bladt
> http://www.jensbladt.dk
> 
> -Oprindelig meddelelse-
> Fra: Tim Øsleby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sendt: 27. marts 2006 18:04
> Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Emne: First "Canon" bird shots. On Topic ;-)
> 
> 
> I have been adviced not to use the word crap in the headline. I found the
> word Canon an appropriate synonym. In a way the Tokina lens _is_ a Canon.
> 
> After seeing the results the Tokina makes, I am not sure it qualifies for
> the "crappy lens, bird shoot competition" When used within the
> limititations
> it performs pretty good, IMO.
> 
> 
> This first shot is not a stunning picture. But thinking of my limited
> skills
> and the cropping I am surprised by the quality. There is a tighter cropped
> version there to (simply click on the thumb below the picture). I could
> need
> some help on the cropping. I find it hard to make a good composition.
> 
> http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildegalleri/vis_bilde.cgi?id=227325
> Tripod, lightly tighted (my spellchecker doesn't like this word, is it
> correct?).
> istDS, 400 ISO raw, Tokina AT-X SD 150-500/5,6 @500mm, f:11, 1/500s.
> Adjusted contrast, saturation, and sharpened plus cropped in RSE.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> BTW: I will probably add another with later tonight. I find that shot more
> interesting.
> 
> 
> 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)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.2/293 - Release Date: 03/26/2006
> 
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.2/293 - Release Date: 03/26/2006
> 

RE: More about birds on a budget

[Markus Maurer]

Hi Christian
That's interesting, thanks for the test. Must have been a heavy lens/flash
combo to carry...
It's really a pretty bird. If you mount your Canon combo on a Pentax, you
can participate in the
"crappy lens competition" as well  - only joking ;-)

I tried to get some bird photos today but after more than 2 hours walk I
returned with only 3 photos ;-)
I used a cheap Braun 38m flash and the mirror lens for a reach of about 10
meters fill flash at ISO 400 and wonder if the
125/sec synchronization will get any sharp takes at all. That's part of the
experiment and fun.
I really have to forget using the mirror lens in the forest, it is simply
too dark for a F8 lens without a
huge flash + extender. I seems to me that birds are most active in the
morning and later in the evening, when the light is  again nearly
insufficient for such a slow lens? So it is really a challenge to get some
good shots without a professional
flash.

greetings
Markus




>>-Original Message-
>>From: Christian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Sent: Monday, March 27, 2006 5:11 PM
>>To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
>>Subject: More about birds on a budget
>>
>>
>>Thinking about the latest thread on what lens for bird photography
>>without breaking the bank, I went out and did a quick field test.
>>
>>Here is a 300/4 with 1.4x extender AND 2x extender for a total of 840mm
>>f11 equivalent.  I used a Sigma flash with Kirk flash x-tender for a bit
>>of extra light.  The bird was about 50 feet away and this is quite a
>>crop and resized for the web, etc, etc. (It's crappy composition; I hate
>>the looking-up-perspective, but it's a pretty bird: a Northern
>>"yellow-shafted" flicker (Colaptes auratus) a type of woodpecker common
>>around here).
>>
>>http://ww2.xian.us:8080/flicker_IMG_4798.jpg
>>
>>~200k
>>
>>As a test I'm happy with the sharpness, color and lack of any obvious
>>lens artifacts.  The combination of lens and 2 TCs was a bit difficult
>>to focus due to so much loss of light, but definitely doable.
>>
>>--
>>
>>Christian
>>http://photography.skofteland.net
>>

RE: Much improved (WAS: Testing a Tamron Adaptall 6.9 200-500mm (not SP))

[Tim Øsleby]

Correction: By Moose Peterson, not Patterson.


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: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 27. mars 2006 23:32
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: RE: Much improved (WAS: Testing a Tamron Adaptall 6.9 200-500mm
> (not SP))
> 
> On 27 Mar 2006 at 21:41, Tim Øsleby wrote:
> 
> > Does your lens have a tripod mount? If so, have a look at this
> > http://www.moosepeterson.com/techtips/longlens.html
> > Very good tips.
> 
> That site locks up my Firefox Browser.
> 
> 
> 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: POTS

[Rob Studdert]

On 27 Mar 2006 at 16:29, Adam Maas wrote:

> You obviously didn't go to the same electronics school I went to.
> 
> At mine, the girls were good looking (but very few) and the parties were 
> outrageous. Of course, it helped that the University down the street was 
> 60% girls, which made Pub Nights and parties a lot more entertaining.

Me neither, when I was studying electronics (obviously before engineering 
become trendy) the only females that I can recall were more butch than the guys 
(truth).


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: Much improved (WAS: Testing a Tamron Adaptall 6.9 200-500mm (not SP))

[Tim Øsleby]

For Rob and other who has trouble getting into that page
-
Proper Long Lens technique is not something I invented, but I was taught
long ago. This age old technique assures the sharpest possible image when
using any lens that attaches to a tripod via its tripod collar.Used with
proper Handholding Technique, you will capture the sharpest possible images!

First and foremost -you must rest your hand on the lens barrel above the
tripod head! (you can also put your hand on the bottom of the lens barrel if
you're pointing the lens down) You rest your hand on the lens just like
you'd rest it in your lap. Vibrations are what causes images to be out of
focus, vibrations that normally start at the camera. These vibrations travel
as a wave to the front element and if they are not stopped, they travel back
through the lens to the film plane, causing images to be out of focus. The
simple resting of a hand on the lens barrel stops this wave before it
reaches the front. No, a bean bag resting in the place of the hand is not a
good idea for many reasons.

Second - use an eyecup and press you eye against it! This again is another
way to minimize or eliminate any vibration that might start with the taking
of the photograph. If you can't remember to press against the eyecup like I
did in the beginning, put a sticky note on the back of the camera to remind
you.

Third - roll you finger when firing! Too many photographers poke at their
shutter release to fire the camera, causing all sorts of unwanted movement.
You want to rest your finger on the shutter release at all times and then
slightly roll it unto the shutter release to actually fire the camera. This
takes practice, but makes a big difference!

Fourth - practice, practice, practice! You can't expect to have this become
second nature or remain second nature if you don't do it all the time.
Whether shooting for real or just staying in shape, take the gear out and
practice so you don't have to think about it when you're out shooting.
By Moose Patterson
--
This might be regular shooting procedure for many PDML'ers, but for me it
was helpful.

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: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 27. mars 2006 23:32
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: RE: Much improved (WAS: Testing a Tamron Adaptall 6.9 200-500mm
> (not SP))
> 
> On 27 Mar 2006 at 21:41, Tim Øsleby wrote:
> 
> > Does your lens have a tripod mount? If so, have a look at this
> > http://www.moosepeterson.com/techtips/longlens.html
> > Very good tips.
> 
> That site locks up my Firefox Browser.
> 
> 
> 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: The Pond

[frank theriault]

On 3/25/06, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I set a new personal record for filter extravagance and bought an 77mm
> R72 for my DA 12-24/4. Shot a little pond this morning. It's at 12mm,
> f11, 4 second exposure.
> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4260009&size=lg

Your extravagence paid off, Paul.

That's a beautiful shot.  Mind you, all the filters in the world won't
get the composition right (as you did).

Terrific!

cheers,
frank


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