Re: Manual focus out of focus

[Don Williams]

Now this is very interesting. I've been taking pictures of very small 
birds recently and many of them
seem to be slightly out of focus. Once in a while there's a good one. In 
my case too the in-focus plane
is always a bit behind the subject. The pictures have all been taken 
wide open (f4.0) at 1/1000s.
I'll have to set up a test chart and see what's going on. Auto focus is 
impossible since the birds
move around a lot and there is a very busy background. The lens (Sigma 
70-300 Apo Macro) hunts like
crazy when I try auto focus. The same problem seems to occur with the 
Sigma 400/5.6 APO MF lens.


Don

Toine wrote:

Thanks for your comments. Since I'm not alone with this problem I
think I need to call Pentax service :(
This is the second "common" istD problem I encountered, a dead flash
circuit board was the first one: Are there any more common problems I
could check or get serviced?

Toine

On 4/19/06, Toine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  

I have noticed that many of my istD shots in manual focus are slightly
out of focus. The area in focus is "always" in the background of the
spot I focused on.
Now I'm wondering if I need to blame my eyes, the +/- slider of the
eyepiece, the mounting of the focusing screen, maybe the ccd
alignment???

Toine






  



--
Dr E D F Williams
www.kolumbus.fi/mimosa/
personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams/
41660 TOIVAKKA – Finland - +358400706616

For Boris (WAS: Question for the low light shooters)

[Fernando Terrazzino]

Hi everyone,

Last week Boris asked me to see examples of some high ISO images with
and without being noise cleaned by NeatImage.
I've been busy, my apologies for the delay, but here they are:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/sets/72057594113578363/

All of them where shot with an FA35/2, wideopen, istDS, processed to
TIFF (16 bits) with Capture One (noise reduction default parameters).
The "non-neatimaged" ones were converted to JPG with Infranview (max.
quality), and the other by NeatImage itself (max. quality).

No idea about the validity of this test, just a real world situation
using my usual workflow (AKA you don't like it, run your own tests...)

Here are the direct links to the large size images (available from the
top link as well)

ISO 1600 - No NeatImage
http://static.flickr.com/50/132714644_d514f5cc9b_o.jpg

ISO 1600 - Cleaned using  NeatImage
http://static.flickr.com/45/132714645_939a783758_o.jpg

ISO 3200 - No NeatImage
http://static.flickr.com/54/132714642_1fa11604a2_o.jpg

ISO 3200 - cleaned with NeatImage
http://static.flickr.com/48/132714643_ec7c409e13_o.jpg

Re: Manual focus out of focus

[Toine]

Thanks for your comments. Since I'm not alone with this problem I
think I need to call Pentax service :(
This is the second "common" istD problem I encountered, a dead flash
circuit board was the first one: Are there any more common problems I
could check or get serviced?

Toine

On 4/19/06, Toine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have noticed that many of my istD shots in manual focus are slightly
> out of focus. The area in focus is "always" in the background of the
> spot I focused on.
> Now I'm wondering if I need to blame my eyes, the +/- slider of the
> eyepiece, the mounting of the focusing screen, maybe the ccd
> alignment???
>
> Toine
>

Re: Way OT - Brita Water Filters

[David Mann]

On Apr 22, 2006, at 8:22 AM, Bob W wrote:

The best water I ever tasted I drew from an old-fashioned well in a  
remote

valley in northern Romania.


Artesian beer?  Why did you come back?

- Dave

Re: Picassa2

[Don Williams]

George Sinos wrote:

Don -

Check the documentation to be sure, but I'm positive it makes a point
that Picassa 2 never modifies the originals.

See you later, gs

On 4/21/06, Don Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  

 If it were not that Picassa2 alters the originals...





  
Picassa2 is a strange program and the way it displays the folders takes 
some getting used to. But
to tell you the truth until I tried using the editing tools I'd only 
used it to find things and take a first
look. It certainly doesn't alter the original and I discovered that last 
night when some of the changes
disappeared when I zoomed an image. The ability to make dramatic changes 
in any direction without

messing up any images is great.

Don

--
Dr E D F Williams
www.kolumbus.fi/mimosa/
personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams/
41660 TOIVAKKA – Finland - +358400706616

Re: Mamiya is history

[Gautam Sarup]

"tweet the corporation?" Indeed, let's tweet the corporations.
Tweet software too.

Cheers,
Gautam

On 4/21/06, Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?lp=ja_en&trurl=http%3a%2f%2fdc.watch.impress.co.jp%2fcda%2fother%2f2006%2f04%2f21%2f3690.html
>
>
>

about 4GB cards

[Igor Roshchin]

There was a recent thread about 4GB SD cards.
I just saw reviews of people who used Adata Turbo 4GB cards
and some of them had incompatibility problems
with various (non-camera) devices.
http://www.pricegrabber.com/rating_getprodrev.php/masterid=12217348/id_type=masterid

This is an indication that the technology is not well established yet,
and that early adopters can face compatibility problems with cards of 
various brands, and especially those that are "off brands".

I hope this would be useful to some people.

Igor

Re: Way OT - Brita Water Filters

[Rob Studdert]

On 21 Apr 2006 at 22:18, David Savage wrote:

> Interesting read about "Tea Scum"
> 
> 

Dr Karl :-)

Sydney water is neutral enough that we don't get any scum on tea and the taste 
isn't at all bad but the Britta filter system really still makes a difference, 
however I did just sell mine :-/


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

Re: ist D - PE4 questions

[Rob Studdert]

On 21 Apr 2006 at 21:08, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:

> This is a screen capture of your page with Safari, however. It's  
> rendered in sRGB:
> 
> http://homepage.mac.com/godders/rs-test-image-icc.jpg
> 
> Both the two profiled images are darn close, the unprofiled sRGB  
> deviates just a little from a "correct" rendering.

Yes, the tomato at the bottom right isn't quite as saturated.

Screen dump of IE render under W2k 4/2005:
http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio/temp/ICC_Test_dump.jpg

Screen dump of Firefox render under W2k today:
http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio/temp/ICC-test-screen-dump.jpg

And a screen dump of the page as viewed in Firefox with the two sRGB samples as 
viewed in a colour managed application below:
http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio/temp/colourspaces.jpg

My screen cal is close enough to sRGB standard that I still get away with a 
decent rendering of web images rendered with sRGB intent in either browser.


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

Re: ist D - PE4 questions

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

On Apr 21, 2006, at 8:36 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:


Maybe you could use my test images:

http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio/temp/ICC_test.html


I could if I had the colorimeter; it belongs to Ernesto and he's on  
the other side of the world at present.


This is a screen capture of your page with Safari, however. It's  
rendered in sRGB:


http://homepage.mac.com/godders/rs-test-image-icc.jpg

Both the two profiled images are darn close, the unprofiled sRGB  
deviates just a little from a "correct" rendering.


Godfrey

Re: Mamiya is history

[graywolf]

And the wise man simply enjoys his drink.

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


David Savage wrote:

To the optimist, the glass is half full.
To the pessimist, the glass is half empty.
To the engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

Dave S

On 4/22/06, Paul Ewins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Glass half empty interpretation:
MF digital is dead. 35FF is the new Medium Format and Canon owns it 100%.
The fate of Pentax rests solely on Samsung's desire to remain a player in
the DSLR segment.

Glass half full interpretation:
Now there is only Hasselblad to compete against in the MF digital niche. A
smaller company can survive quite happily with a small percentage of the
overall market. Look at Apple who have had 3-5% of the PC market for years.
Even pre iPod (but post iMac) they were doing quite well with this small
fraction. Pentax have always been a "think different" kind of company and
probably just need one "cult" camera to survive.

Other strange things in the camera market. The Chinese have embraced digital
as expected, but also Large Format cameras. Prices for premium lenses are
rising on eBay and part of this is Chinese buyers.

Paul Ewins
Melbourne, Australia

-Original Message-
From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bummer.

So which way to view the remaining contenders in the market. All poised to
fail
due to a generally weak market or more opportunity to prosper due to
reduction
of competition in the market?

Re: PAW 2006 - 04 - GDG

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

Sorry if that came off a little brusque.
I'm genuinely pleased that you and others are enjoying the photo, and  
playing with it too. Gives me ideas.


Godfrey

On Apr 21, 2006, at 8:48 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:

Hey, I like it too, otherwise I'd not have downloaded it and played  
around

with various degrees of rotation in PS.  My comment that 0.04 degrees
seemed to be a good compromise was not at all tongue in cheek.

Shel




[Original Message]
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Date: 4/21/2006 7:54:22 PM
Subject: Re: PAW 2006 - 04 - GDG

I'm glad you folks are having so much fun with this one. I quite like
it. Thanks for all the interest!



   http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW6/04.htm

Re: National Wildlife Photo Winners

[Kenneth Waller]

Wendy -
Some great shots of your own.

Kenneth Waller

- Original Message - 
From: "wendy beard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Subject: Re: National Wildlife Photo Winners



On 4/21/06, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Better Link:

http://tinyurl.com/77896

or

http://www.nwf.org/nationalwildlife/article.cfm?issueID=79&articleID=1158



Some great photos there!
One of those owls buzzed me too. Only difference, I wasn't shooting
with a 500mm lens
http://www.pbase.com/wendybeard/image/38731108

they have a huge wingspan!

I saw him again on a different day. hought he might dive at me again
http://www.pbase.com/wendybeard/image/40788934
then he heard something in the field behind
http://www.pbase.com/wendybeard/image/40788959 and he left

--
Wendy Beard
Ottawa
Canada

Re: Mamiya is history

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

On Apr 21, 2006, at 8:38 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:


My local dealer was telling me that rentals of the Hasselblad H
system camera with digital back were quite strong, so there's
definitely a market for a very high end, medium format class digital
camera.


Wouldn't your local dealers experience simply indicate that there  
is a good

market for rental units?


Well, someone has to buy the rental units ... right?

Not many can afford the ~$30K investment immediately, they want to  
rent it a few times at least to be sure it does the job they need.  
Those who find themselves renting the equipment often enough spring  
for it. My dealer's comments were that their rental units were seeing  
quite a lot of action, and many repeat clients. That bodes well for  
camera sales in the long term.


Godfrey

Re: PAW 2006 - 04 - GDG

[Shel Belinkoff]

Hey, I like it too, otherwise I'd not have downloaded it and played around
with various degrees of rotation in PS.  My comment that 0.04 degrees
seemed to be a good compromise was not at all tongue in cheek.

Shel



> [Original Message]
> From: Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Date: 4/21/2006 7:54:22 PM
> Subject: Re: PAW 2006 - 04 - GDG
>
> I'm glad you folks are having so much fun with this one. I quite like  
> it. Thanks for all the interest!

>http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW6/04.htm

Re: Mamiya is history

[David Savage]

To the optimist, the glass is half full.
To the pessimist, the glass is half empty.
To the engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

Dave S

On 4/22/06, Paul Ewins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Glass half empty interpretation:
> MF digital is dead. 35FF is the new Medium Format and Canon owns it 100%.
> The fate of Pentax rests solely on Samsung's desire to remain a player in
> the DSLR segment.
>
> Glass half full interpretation:
> Now there is only Hasselblad to compete against in the MF digital niche. A
> smaller company can survive quite happily with a small percentage of the
> overall market. Look at Apple who have had 3-5% of the PC market for years.
> Even pre iPod (but post iMac) they were doing quite well with this small
> fraction. Pentax have always been a "think different" kind of company and
> probably just need one "cult" camera to survive.
>
> Other strange things in the camera market. The Chinese have embraced digital
> as expected, but also Large Format cameras. Prices for premium lenses are
> rising on eBay and part of this is Chinese buyers.
>
> Paul Ewins
> Melbourne, Australia
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Bummer.
>
> So which way to view the remaining contenders in the market. All poised to
> fail
> due to a generally weak market or more opportunity to prosper due to
> reduction
> of competition in the market?
>
>
>

Re: Mamiya is history

[Rob Studdert]

On 21 Apr 2006 at 20:28, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:

> My local dealer was telling me that rentals of the Hasselblad H  
> system camera with digital back were quite strong, so there's  
> definitely a market for a very high end, medium format class digital  
> camera.

Wouldn't your local dealers experience simply indicate that there is a good 
market for rental units?


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

Re: ist D - PE4 questions

[Rob Studdert]

On 21 Apr 2006 at 20:25, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:

> 
> On Apr 21, 2006, at 8:14 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:
> 
> > On 21 Apr 2006 at 19:41, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> >
> >> The results were surprising, and quite conclusive. Consistency of
> >> rendering was always enhanced when an ICC profile was embedded. For a
> >> measly couple of  worth of data, particularly when some folks want to
> >> post 200Kbyte image files for people to browse, I don't understand
> >> the big deal about embedding them. If they're truly ignored by all
> >> but the very few applications, why not? It doesn't hurt anything and
> >> even at 28.8Kbps dialup speeds would only add 2-3 seconds per image
> >> to download. Crap that isn't color management sensitive, like all the
> >> stupid dancing whirlygigs and other nonsense that people embellish
> >> their sites with, don't have to worry about it. (I often turn the
> >> browser display of graphics off when I see that crap anyway.)
> >
> > Enhanced? It either works or it doesn't work. It's as easy to prove  
> > whether it
> > does on not by simply displaying an Adobe RGB formatted and ICC  
> > embedded image
> > on any windows browser. Inevitably the image will be rendered  
> > obviously non-
> > colour managed.
> 
> Perhaps you don't understand. The images were set to be in sRGB  
> colorspace. Each image was saved with and without an sRGB ICC embedded.
> 
> I said, again, 'the consistency of the rendering was enhanced when an  
> ICC profile was embedded'. On both platforms (Mac OS X and Windows  
> XP), in 8 different browsers we saw the same things. It was  
> measurable. That's what we were looking to test for, to see if there  
> was an observable difference in the consistency of rendering, not  
> whether the browsers would read alternative colorspace profiles.
> 
> > Send me the images that you and your associate tested to derive  
> > your results
> > and I'll use my screen colorimeter to test them and report back.
> 
> Sorry, the tests were done three years ago ... I'm pretty sure I  
> still have the files and data somewhere, but a quick search hasn't  
> brought them up. They're probably in one of my system archives as  
> they weren't a part of my regular photo work, just some testing for  
> web display.

Maybe you could use my test images:

http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio/temp/ICC_test.html


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

Re: Mamiya is history

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

On Apr 21, 2006, at 5:17 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:


Apparently.
I'll bet Hasselblad is next to go


Bummer.

So which way to view the remaining contenders in the market. All  
poised to fail
due to a generally weak market or more opportunity to prosper due  
to reduction

of competition in the market?


But we all know that film is dead already, right?
(Just thought I'd toss that out there... ]'-)

My local dealer was telling me that rentals of the Hasselblad H  
system camera with digital back were quite strong, so there's  
definitely a market for a very high end, medium format class digital  
camera.


Godfrey

Re: OT - for info - wide prime vs wide zoom / now Treo 650

[Charles Robinson]

On Apr 21, 2006, at 18:04, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:


Charles: the Seidio skin and belt clip weren't of much interest to  
me as I tend to keep my phone either in my pocket or in my bag, not  
clipped to my belt.


I carried mine in my pocket for the first couple of weeks while I  
tried to figure out what I wanted to do finally.  I hated having it  
in there!  I was worried about scratching the screen and it was  
damned inconvenient to answer it by digging it out of the pocket  
first.  Ah well, it's great that we all have choices!


And now that my brother did that with his phone, I'm not afraid to  
disassemble mine should the need arise.  Takes a T-5 torx, btw.  Not  
so 100% easy to locate!


One of the things I like about the Covertec is that the belt clip  
business is removable so that the case is smooth and slides into my  
pocket handily. (Funny, but the Treo 650 reminds me of carrying a  
Minox 35GT-E in my pocket... ;-)




It does have a nice, compact, solid feel not unlike a camera.

 -Charles

--
Charles Robinson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Minneapolis, MN
http://charles.robinsontwins.org

Re: Picassa2

[Rob Studdert]

On 21 Apr 2006 at 19:50, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:

> Of the solutions mentioned there, beyond the iView MediaPro  
> application that I use, I'd buy Extensis Portfolio. That's what  
> several other friends of mine here are using and they're very happy  
> with it. I'll probably go that way soon.

It looks interesting, I'll find out just how so after the 100+MB download 
completes.

> ThumbsPlus is only available on Windows so it is not a solution for  
> about half to two-thirds the photographic community, nor is it useful  
> in a cross platform environment.

:-)

> Don't know why CS File Browser would lock your system up, unless you  
> have some other problems with the install. With CS2, the File Browser  
> is ripped out of Photoshop in its entirety and replaced with a  
> standalone application, Bridge.

It's very poorly written, it's a resource hungry hog only second to the Pentax 
Photo Browser.


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

Re: ist D - PE4 questions

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

On Apr 21, 2006, at 8:14 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:


On 21 Apr 2006 at 19:41, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:


The results were surprising, and quite conclusive. Consistency of
rendering was always enhanced when an ICC profile was embedded. For a
measly couple of  worth of data, particularly when some folks want to
post 200Kbyte image files for people to browse, I don't understand
the big deal about embedding them. If they're truly ignored by all
but the very few applications, why not? It doesn't hurt anything and
even at 28.8Kbps dialup speeds would only add 2-3 seconds per image
to download. Crap that isn't color management sensitive, like all the
stupid dancing whirlygigs and other nonsense that people embellish
their sites with, don't have to worry about it. (I often turn the
browser display of graphics off when I see that crap anyway.)


Enhanced? It either works or it doesn't work. It's as easy to prove  
whether it
does on not by simply displaying an Adobe RGB formatted and ICC  
embedded image
on any windows browser. Inevitably the image will be rendered  
obviously non-

colour managed.


Perhaps you don't understand. The images were set to be in sRGB  
colorspace. Each image was saved with and without an sRGB ICC embedded.


I said, again, 'the consistency of the rendering was enhanced when an  
ICC profile was embedded'. On both platforms (Mac OS X and Windows  
XP), in 8 different browsers we saw the same things. It was  
measurable. That's what we were looking to test for, to see if there  
was an observable difference in the consistency of rendering, not  
whether the browsers would read alternative colorspace profiles.


Send me the images that you and your associate tested to derive  
your results

and I'll use my screen colorimeter to test them and report back.


Sorry, the tests were done three years ago ... I'm pretty sure I  
still have the files and data somewhere, but a quick search hasn't  
brought them up. They're probably in one of my system archives as  
they weren't a part of my regular photo work, just some testing for  
web display.


Godfrey

Re: ist D - PE4 questions

[Rob Studdert]

On 21 Apr 2006 at 19:41, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:

> The results were surprising, and quite conclusive. Consistency of  
> rendering was always enhanced when an ICC profile was embedded. For a  
> measly couple of  worth of data, particularly when some folks want to  
> post 200Kbyte image files for people to browse, I don't understand  
> the big deal about embedding them. If they're truly ignored by all  
> but the very few applications, why not? It doesn't hurt anything and  
> even at 28.8Kbps dialup speeds would only add 2-3 seconds per image  
> to download. Crap that isn't color management sensitive, like all the  
> stupid dancing whirlygigs and other nonsense that people embellish  
> their sites with, don't have to worry about it. (I often turn the  
> browser display of graphics off when I see that crap anyway.)

Enhanced? It either works or it doesn't work. It's as easy to prove whether it 
does on not by simply displaying an Adobe RGB formatted and ICC embedded image 
on any windows browser. Inevitably the image will be rendered obviously non-
colour managed.

Send me the images that you and your associate tested to derive your results 
and I'll use my screen colorimeter to test them and report back.


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

RE: Mamiya is history

[Rob Studdert]

On 22 Apr 2006 at 12:55, Paul Ewins wrote:

> Other strange things in the camera market. The Chinese have embraced digital
> as expected, but also Large Format cameras. Prices for premium lenses are
> rising on eBay and part of this is Chinese buyers. 

Aside from emerging markets Sony Alpha could also alter Pentax's fortunes over 
the next few years being now in the same position as Canon WRT major component 
manufacturing.


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

Re: PAW 2006 - 04 - GDG

[Unca Mikey]

First, I like the photo, it's quite appealing, esp in the larger 
image.  I am impressed one can read the NO DOGS sign.  Second,  this 
is one of the most entertaining discussions of a photo I've read on 
PDML in a long time.


Discussions of a half degree this way or that way made me larf -- 
when I decided a few years ago to start playing with photography 
again, the biggest problem I had was getting the darn snaps straight! 
And to this day I get so tickled when a shot is lined up just the way 
I want it. 


*>UncaMikey

On Apr 21, 2006, at 6:43 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:

  From last Sunday morning's visit to the Santa Cruz wharf:

 http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW6/04.htm

RE: Mamiya is history

[Paul Ewins]

Glass half empty interpretation:
MF digital is dead. 35FF is the new Medium Format and Canon owns it 100%.
The fate of Pentax rests solely on Samsung's desire to remain a player in
the DSLR segment.

Glass half full interpretation:
Now there is only Hasselblad to compete against in the MF digital niche. A
smaller company can survive quite happily with a small percentage of the
overall market. Look at Apple who have had 3-5% of the PC market for years.
Even pre iPod (but post iMac) they were doing quite well with this small
fraction. Pentax have always been a "think different" kind of company and
probably just need one "cult" camera to survive.

Other strange things in the camera market. The Chinese have embraced digital
as expected, but also Large Format cameras. Prices for premium lenses are
rising on eBay and part of this is Chinese buyers. 

Paul Ewins
Melbourne, Australia

-Original Message-
From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Bummer.

So which way to view the remaining contenders in the market. All poised to
fail 
due to a generally weak market or more opportunity to prosper due to
reduction 
of competition in the market?

Re: PAW 2006 - 04 - GDG

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

I'm glad you folks are having so much fun with this one. I quite like  
it. Thanks for all the interest!


Godfrey

On Apr 21, 2006, at 6:48 PM, David Savage wrote:


:-)

Glad to see the humor was reciprocated.

Dave S.

On 4/22/06, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Dave,

Sometimes photography requires precision.  I have to laugh at your  
comment

;-))

Shel




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



Maybe it because I just woke up, but when I read people saying  
rotate

it 0.04 degrees I start laughing. This is photography people, not
precision engineering. :-)




   http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW6/04.htm

Re: Picassa2

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

On Apr 21, 2006, at 5:12 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:

There is a thread at dpreview discussing image file management at  
the moment,

it's worth a read:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=18107756


Of the solutions mentioned there, beyond the iView MediaPro  
application that I use, I'd buy Extensis Portfolio. That's what  
several other friends of mine here are using and they're very happy  
with it. I'll probably go that way soon.


ThumbsPlus is only available on Windows so it is not a solution for  
about half to two-thirds the photographic community, nor is it useful  
in a cross platform environment.


Don't know why CS File Browser would lock your system up, unless you  
have some other problems with the install. With CS2, the File Browser  
is ripped out of Photoshop in its entirety and replaced with a  
standalone application, Bridge.


Godfrey

Re: ist D - PE4 questions

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

On Apr 21, 2006, at 6:05 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:


Godders didn't say accurate rendering, just consistent.  Maybe he can
elaborate further.


Exactly.

He worked on a Windows system, I worked on Mac OS X, and we both  
applied the same colorimeter to several reference images in 8  
different browsers on each. I did the statistics on them. We then  
moved to a different pair of monitors and did it again.


The results were surprising, and quite conclusive. Consistency of  
rendering was always enhanced when an ICC profile was embedded. For a  
measly couple of  worth of data, particularly when some folks want to  
post 200Kbyte image files for people to browse, I don't understand  
the big deal about embedding them. If they're truly ignored by all  
but the very few applications, why not? It doesn't hurt anything and  
even at 28.8Kbps dialup speeds would only add 2-3 seconds per image  
to download. Crap that isn't color management sensitive, like all the  
stupid dancing whirlygigs and other nonsense that people embellish  
their sites with, don't have to worry about it. (I often turn the  
browser display of graphics off when I see that crap anyway.)


G

Re: ist D - PE4 questions

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

On Apr 21, 2006, at 5:24 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:


In extensive testing with one of my good buddies from another list,
we found that embedding an sRGB profile in an sRGB rendered image
helped consistent color rendering even on the brain-dead-with- 
respect-

to-color-management Windows browsers...


I really don't know how this conclusion was reached as neither  
Explorer or
Firefox or any other current Internet Browser that I've tested  
under Windows

2000 or XP is remotely colour aware.


Absolutely true, it surprised both of us. But the colorimeter didn't  
lie.


Godfrey

Re: ist D - PE4 questions

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

Sorry, George, but I disagree you and with this guy. My testing  
demonstrated otherwise.
Of course, it must be true because you got it from the internet.
LOL !!!


Who is the author anyway? I don't find an author's name or credential  
anywhere. He badmouths Bruce Fraser, who credentials in color  
management recognized all over the world. That doesn't make these  
articles very credible to me.


Godfrey

Re: Way OT - Brita Water Filters

[Mishka]

c'mon! after 6 vodka-tastings, i doubt one would notice
any aftertaste in brake fluid. not until the morning, anyway.

although, i have to admit, there was vodka once in my life that,
even being 20 and really eager to get wasted no matter what, in a good
company, we actually ended up pouring  it down the toilet (polluting the
dorm sewer system).

best,
mishka

On 4/21/06, Charles Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Apr 21, 2006, at 14:42, Juan Buhler wrote:
>
> > http://www.ohmygoditburns.com/wordpress/index.php?p=4
>
> Mythbusters (a show on the Discovery Channel here in the U.S.) just
> covered this "filtered vodka" thing and came to the conclusion that
> it made precious little difference.
>
>   -Charles
>
> --
> Charles Robinson
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Minneapolis, MN
> http://charles.robinsontwins.org
>
>

Re: PAW 2006 - 04 - GDG

[David Savage]

:-)

Glad to see the humor was reciprocated.

Dave S.

On 4/22/06, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dave,
>
> Sometimes photography requires precision.  I have to laugh at your comment
> ;-))
>
> Shel
>
>
>
> > [Original Message]
> > From: David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> > Maybe it because I just woke up, but when I read people saying rotate
> > it 0.04 degrees I start laughing. This is photography people, not
> > precision engineering. :-)
> >
>
>  >http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW6/04.htm

WTB - A*200/4 Macro

[Jim King]

I've lost out on my last several attempts to buy this lens for a  
number of reasons, but hope springs eternal...  Anybody out there  
with an A*200mm f4 Macro who is willing to sell to someone who will  
give it a good home?


Please contact me off-list at <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  Thanks!

Regards, Jim

Re: PAW 2006 - 04 - GDG

[Shel Belinkoff]

Dave,

Sometimes photography requires precision.  I have to laugh at your comment
;-))

Shel



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


> Maybe it because I just woke up, but when I read people saying rotate
> it 0.04 degrees I start laughing. This is photography people, not
> precision engineering. :-)
>

 >http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW6/04.htm

Re: Paper for printing

[David Savage]

Not Godfrey, but in a word: Yes.

Dave S.

On 4/22/06, Juan Buhler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Godfrey,
>
> Would you recommend the R2400 for just B&W printing?


> j
>
> --
> Juan Buhler
> Water Molotov: http://photoblog.jbuhler.com
> Slippery Slope: http://color.jbuhler.com
>
>

Re: ist D - PE4 questions

[Shel Belinkoff]

Hi, Rob ...

Good to see you back on the list.

Godders didn't say accurate rendering, just consistent.  Maybe he can
elaborate further.

Shel



> [Original Message]
> From: Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Date: 4/21/2006 5:29:43 PM
> Subject: Re: ist D - PE4 questions
>
> On 21 Apr 2006 at 15:58, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
>
> > In extensive testing with one of my good buddies from another list,  
> > we found that embedding an sRGB profile in an sRGB rendered image  
> > helped consistent color rendering even on the brain-dead-with-respect- 
> > to-color-management Windows browsers...
>
> I really don't know how this conclusion was reached as neither Explorer
or 
> Firefox or any other current Internet Browser that I've tested under
Windows 
> 2000 or XP is remotely colour aware.

Re: PAW 2006 - 04 - GDG

[Paul Stenquist]

I would rotate to straighten the deck and then use "transform" to 
straighten the light pole.

Paul
On Apr 21, 2006, at 7:59 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:


I'd have been the first had I seen the pic before Paul 

I played around a bit with the rotation and settled on a 0.04 degree
rotation, which looks pretty good to these old eyes.  At 0.05 degrees 
I'm

starting to see, or feel, the lamp tilting the other way.

Shel




[Original Message]
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Date: 4/21/2006 4:28:49 PM
Subject: Re: PAW 2006 - 04 - GDG

LOL ... I was wondering who would be the first to suggest rotation. 
;-)


It's hard to judge. I've used the edge of the wharf as a reference
line and Photoshop suggests -.09 degree rotation. If I use the
horizon, it suggests -.2 degrees. Problem is that when I do the
rotation, it looks like it's leaning the other way as the lamp and
bench fool the eye.

G

On Apr 21, 2006, at 4:04 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:


Interesting in its minimalism. But this is such a geometric
composition that I think it requires complete accuracy. It appears
to need a counterclockwise rotation of about half a degree.



  http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW6/04.htm

Re: PAW 2006 - 04 - GDG

[David Savage]

Nice one Godfrey.

It looks fine to me but I can see what the others mean.

Maybe it because I just woke up, but when I read people saying rotate
it 0.04 degrees I start laughing. This is photography people, not
precision engineering. :-)

Dave S

On 4/22/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  From last Sunday morning's visit to the Santa Cruz wharf:
>
>http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW6/04.htm
>
> It works best in a large print. I've included a 1000x1500 pixel
> rendering to see it better, if you have the bandwidth and display space.
>
> Comments, critique, all appreciated.
>
> best,
> Godfrey
>
>

RE: PESO - "You won't believe me"

[Trevor Bailey]

G'day Boris.
Mate, The tilt doesn't do it any favours.
Other than that, A great slice of life.

Hooroo.
Regards, Trevor
Grafton, OZ 

-Original Message-
From: Boris Liberman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Saturday, 22 April 2006 12:35 AM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: PESO - "You won't believe me"

Hi!

http://not.contaxg.com/document.php?id=13178

Be brutal and honest, as usual.

Boris

Re: ist D - PE4 questions

[Rob Studdert]

On 21 Apr 2006 at 15:58, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:

> In extensive testing with one of my good buddies from another list,  
> we found that embedding an sRGB profile in an sRGB rendered image  
> helped consistent color rendering even on the brain-dead-with-respect- 
> to-color-management Windows browsers...

I really don't know how this conclusion was reached as neither Explorer or 
Firefox or any other current Internet Browser that I've tested under Windows 
2000 or XP is remotely colour aware.


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

Re: Mamiya is history

[Rob Studdert]

On 21 Apr 2006 at 21:06, Pål Jensen wrote:

> Apparently.
> 
> I'll bet Hasselblad is next to go

Bummer.

So which way to view the remaining contenders in the market. All poised to fail 
due to a generally weak market or more opportunity to prosper due to reduction 
of competition in the market?


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

Re: Picassa2

[Rob Studdert]

On 21 Apr 2006 at 18:25, Don Williams wrote:

> For a quick look Picassa2 is very much faster than either CS or even 
> RSE. No waiting -- the image appears instantly and
> since Picassa updates its database continuously the browser is always up 
> to date. It takes minutes for the thumbnails to
> appear in the CS browser after a card full of images is added to a 
> directory and I have quite a fast PC. RSE is nippier but
> still slower than Picassa2. And RSE is not as easy to use. I find some 
> things a little strange and non-intuitive. I'm starting to
> use the Photoshop CS RAW plug-in more since I got the updated version -- 
> only days ago.

I loaded up Picasa 2 just to see what everyone was on about. Boy it's cute, 
very pretty, visually I could almost believe I was working on a Mac but that's 
where the joy ends. It's not very robust, it crashed on me a couple of times, 
it still can't find many of my subs even though they have been flagged for 
thumbnailing, the sequence in which it build thumbnails I can't work out, it 
seems random mostly. On the whole I'm not really impressed though I could see 
that it's definitely got market appeal and would be more than suitable for a 
lot of home users.

The CS browser just locks up my system every time I browse a sub full of 
images, it's completely hopeless, the CS2 system may be better but I haven't 
had the opportunity to use it yet.

It just seems that every time I try out a new you beaut image management 
utilities I still end up coming back to ThumbsPlus, it's not pretty and it may 
not offer everything I desire in such a utility but it's very robust, 
predictable and is able to handle large volumes of data without hesitation or 
failure, that's a big plus in my books.

There is a thread at dpreview discussing image file management at the moment, 
it's worth a read:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=18107756


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

Re: PAW 2006 - 04 - GDG

[Shel Belinkoff]

I'd have been the first had I seen the pic before Paul 

I played around a bit with the rotation and settled on a 0.04 degree
rotation, which looks pretty good to these old eyes.  At 0.05 degrees I'm
starting to see, or feel, the lamp tilting the other way.

Shel



> [Original Message]
> From: Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Date: 4/21/2006 4:28:49 PM
> Subject: Re: PAW 2006 - 04 - GDG
>
> LOL ... I was wondering who would be the first to suggest rotation. ;-)
>
> It's hard to judge. I've used the edge of the wharf as a reference  
> line and Photoshop suggests -.09 degree rotation. If I use the  
> horizon, it suggests -.2 degrees. Problem is that when I do the  
> rotation, it looks like it's leaning the other way as the lamp and  
> bench fool the eye.
>
> G
>
> On Apr 21, 2006, at 4:04 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
>
> > Interesting in its minimalism. But this is such a geometric  
> > composition that I think it requires complete accuracy. It appears  
> > to need a counterclockwise rotation of about half a degree.

>   http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW6/04.htm

Re: ist D - PE4 questions

[George Sinos]

Godfrey -

Windows browsers simply ignore profiles.  Here are two more articles.

"Mac Browsers, Can You Believe Your Eyes?"



"Why ICC profiles don't fly on the Internet",



Keep in mind, he's discussing the use of profiles on the Internet and
by commercial photo printers.

He's not discussing ink jet printing, photoshop or printing presses.

I think Mac's are great and commend Apple for the way they handle
color management.  But when you're working on the internet or getting
your images printed at the local Wal-mart, the profile hasn't any
effect.

I'm sure there are examples and exceptions to the contrary, but in
general, that's the way it works.

See you later, gs


On 4/21/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've read the article and tried to divine what was meant in the
> statement "The Macintosh browsers Safari and Internet Explorer can,
> but only under unusual circumstances not seen in everyday browsing."
> The article does not state what is meant by that or what 'unusual
> circumstances' are being referred to. In that, at least, they are
> either being facetious or are simply downright wrong.
>
> Mac OS X uses ColorSync to color calibrate every window drawn with
> the system routines. Safari, Preview, most all Mac OS X applications
> that render JPEGs to the screen use these system routines. Those that
> don't, like Photoshop, are generally sophisticated enough to do the
> right thing anyway. If a JPEG file, whether from web or local hard
> drive, has an embedded profile it is honored in Safari. (It's honored
> in Internet Explorer too, but only if you turn on ColorSync profile
> matching.)
>
> In extensive testing with one of my good buddies from another list,
> we found that embedding an sRGB profile in an sRGB rendered image
> helped consistent color rendering even on the brain-dead-with-respect-
> to-color-management Windows browsers, and certainly helped if not
> solved the issues of rendering such photos between Mac OS X and
> Windows platforms, despite the gamma correction standards
> differences. It's a damn good idea to embed a color profile if you
> want to have any hope of consistent color rendering on viewers
> screens, and is certainly worth the extra download time for the 1K
> byte or so of profile data.
>
> Godfrey
>
> On Apr 21, 2006, at 2:56 PM, George Sinos wrote:
>
> > Here's a short quote from the page linked below:
> >
> > "The box of crayons you're given for displaying photos on the web is
> > called sRGB.
> >
> > There are other color spaces, such as Adobe RGB (1998), but no
> > Windows-based browser can display them correctly. The Macintosh
> > browsers Safari and Internet Explorer can, but only under unusual
> > circumstances not seen in everyday browsing."
> >
> > The full story is at:
> > 
> >
> > See you later, gs
> > 
> >
> >
> >
> > On 4/21/06, Thibouille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> As far as web images is concerned, the browser also has to support
> >>> colour management.  I only know of two that do (they use ColorSync).
> >>> One of those was discontinued long ago.
> >>
> >> Which is the currently available one? I'm much interested.
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>

Re: Picassa2

[Tim Sherburne]

Hi guys...

I just verified that Picasa 2 on WinXP _does not_ modify the original 
image (PEF, in this case). I would really be surprised if it did. Here's 
the test I followed.


0) Install some other PEF viewing tool; I happen to have IrfanView installed
1) Locate a PEF file in Explorer
2) Edit to your heart's content in Picasa; use the saturation tool to 
get some really dramatic differences going
3) Open the PEF file in IrfanView, note that none of the changes made in 
Picasa appear
4) Conclusion: You'll need to use Picasa's Export command if you want 
your changes to appear in a file you can use elsewhere


Tim

George Sinos wrote:

Don -

Check the documentation to be sure, but I'm positive it makes a point
that Picassa 2 never modifies the originals.

See you later, gs

On 4/21/06, Don Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

 If it were not that Picassa2 alters the originals...

pdml@pdml.net

[keith_w]

mike wilson wrote:

From: keith_w <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 2006/04/21 Fri AM 12:05:30
GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: PESO - Cathy at the A&W

Jack Davis wrote:

Shel, Convince Cathy to go back to this A&W with you and pose her,
again, in front of the current menu/prices with a little greater DOF. 
Display both images side-by-side. Would love to see that.


Jack




Yes yes, yes! Please. One look at that face is not enough...

keith whaley




At a rough estimate, Cathy will be in her mid-late50s now.  Even with the
fossilising techniques available to modern people, I suspect she doesn't
look quite the same.


Yup. I figured. But, I'd bet that smirk is still available at times...

Quite nearly the same age as my lovely wife, who I like the looks of more 
today than when she was half her age!


keith whaley

pdml@pdml.net

[keith_w]

Cotty wrote:

On 20/4/06, keith_w, discombobulated, unleashed:


Yes yes, yes! Please.
One look at that face is not enough...


Now Keith, where'd you leave your white cane? ;-)


Cheers,
  Cotty


As you'll find out as you age a little more, one doesn't need a cane to prop 
up a mind.


The appreciation cells stay as lively and viable as they ever were.

Thanks BE for *that* small favor!

Last, just because I'm twice your age, and still appreciate the lovely birds 
as well as you... well, that simply proves there IS justice in Mother Nature's 
pack of tricks...  


keith

Re: 2 GB SD cards for IST DS?

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

Be sure you've loaded firmware rev 2.0. I just bought an Ultra II 2G  
card last week. It works just fine.


Congratulations on your book!

Godfrey

On Apr 21, 2006, at 4:42 PM, Barry Rice wrote:

I have a relatively new (6 months old) *istDS. I would like to buy  
another

memory card for it. I usually use the SanDisk 1GB Ultra II, but I was
wondering if there are any problems with using 2 GB SanDisk cards,  
i.e.



http://www.adorama.com/IDSUSD2G.html?searchinfo=sandisk%202% 
20GB&item_no=5


By the way, a book of my photographs etc is to be published in  
September.

Cool!

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0881928070/sr=8-1/qid=1145649315/ 
ref=pd_bbs

_1/102-1759204-3076904?%5Fencoding=UTF8

Oddly, the photo on the front cover layout at Amazon.com is not  
mine...it is

just a dummy image for a pre-production book.

2 GB SD cards for IST DS?

[Barry Rice]

 
Hey Folks,
 
I have a relatively new (6 months old) *istDS. I would like to buy another
memory card for it. I usually use the SanDisk 1GB Ultra II, but I was
wondering if there are any problems with using 2 GB SanDisk cards, i.e.
 

http://www.adorama.com/IDSUSD2G.html?searchinfo=sandisk%202%20GB&item_no=5
 
By the way, a book of my photographs etc is to be published in September.
Cool!

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0881928070/sr=8-1/qid=1145649315/ref=pd_bbs
_1/102-1759204-3076904?%5Fencoding=UTF8

Oddly, the photo on the front cover layout at Amazon.com is not mine...it is
just a dummy image for a pre-production book.
 
Cheers
 
Barry

Barry A. Rice, Ph.D.
FAQ--Author
http://www.sarracenia.com/faq.html
Galleria Carnivora--Curator
http://www.sarracenia.com/galleria/galleria.html 

Re: Paper for printing

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

Yes, the black ink is the only one that changes between paper  
surfaces. Matte Black gives a richer black on matte papers. You can  
also use the Photo Black on matte papers, there's a profile for it  
when selecting EEM in case you have Photo Black in the printer and  
need to make an occasional print.


Godfrey

On Apr 21, 2006, at 4:28 PM, Juan Buhler wrote:


On 4/21/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


It's a great printer for B&W. Go for it!


I was just reading old posts to the list about this printer. I can
feel the enablement coming...

I also just sold two prints, even before my show...

I guess I'll just transfer the money to Epson.

Darn you guys.

Just one more quick question: is the black (matte or black) the only
cartridge where there's a decision to make?  From what I read I should
go with the matte black, right. I expect to be printing mostly on
Epson Enhanced Matte, maybe some on Somerset Velvet and stuff like
that.

j

--
Juan Buhler
Water Molotov: http://photoblog.jbuhler.com
Slippery Slope: http://color.jbuhler.com

Re: Paper for printing

[Juan Buhler]

On 4/21/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> It's a great printer for B&W. Go for it!

I was just reading old posts to the list about this printer. I can
feel the enablement coming...

I also just sold two prints, even before my show...

I guess I'll just transfer the money to Epson.

Darn you guys.

Just one more quick question: is the black (matte or black) the only
cartridge where there's a decision to make?  From what I read I should
go with the matte black, right. I expect to be printing mostly on
Epson Enhanced Matte, maybe some on Somerset Velvet and stuff like
that.

j

--
Juan Buhler
Water Molotov: http://photoblog.jbuhler.com
Slippery Slope: http://color.jbuhler.com

Re: PAW 2006 - 04 - GDG

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

thanks bruce!

G

On Apr 21, 2006, at 4:07 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote:


Much better large.  I rather like it.

--  
Best regards,

Bruce


Friday, April 21, 2006, 3:43:17 PM, you wrote:

GD>  From last Sunday morning's visit to the Santa Cruz wharf:

GD>http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW6/04.htm

GD> It works best in a large print. I've included a 1000x1500 pixel
GD> rendering to see it better, if you have the bandwidth and  
display space.


GD> Comments, critique, all appreciated.

GD> best,
GD> Godfrey

Re: PAW 2006 - 04 - GDG

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

LOL ... I was wondering who would be the first to suggest rotation. ;-)

It's hard to judge. I've used the edge of the wharf as a reference  
line and Photoshop suggests -.09 degree rotation. If I use the  
horizon, it suggests -.2 degrees. Problem is that when I do the  
rotation, it looks like it's leaning the other way as the lamp and  
bench fool the eye.


G

On Apr 21, 2006, at 4:04 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:

Interesting in its minimalism. But this is such a geometric  
composition that I think it requires complete accuracy. It appears  
to need a counterclockwise rotation of about half a degree.

Paul
On Apr 21, 2006, at 6:43 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:


From last Sunday morning's visit to the Santa Cruz wharf:

  http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW6/04.htm

It works best in a large print. I've included a 1000x1500 pixel  
rendering to see it better, if you have the bandwidth and display  
space.


Comments, critique, all appreciated.

best,
Godfrey

Re: Paper for printing

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

I print a lot of B&W work with it (if you've stopped in to Zocalo in  
San Leandro to see the "Ramsey" show, every print there was printed  
with the R2400), have had no problems whatsoever with clogging. The  
K3 inkset has everything you need, the standard Epson driver can  
either be bypassed and let Photoshop do all the color management or  
you can use its built-in B&W controls to handle toning etc.


It's a great printer for B&W. Go for it!

Godfrey


On Apr 21, 2006, at 3:55 PM, Juan Buhler wrote:


Hi Godfrey,

Would you recommend the R2400 for just B&W printing?
I have (had?) an 1160 with PiezoBW and then MIS inks. One night, days
before my last show, I stayed up all night injecting Windex through
the heads to unclog it--it was a nightmare. I don't even want to think
how clogged those heads must be now.

I'm tempted to go back to printing my own inkjets, with an R2400 now.
Hopefully it doesn't have the clogging problems of the 1160.

j

Re: PAW 2006 - 04 - GDG

[Bruce Dayton]

Much better large.  I rather like it.

-- 
Best regards,
Bruce


Friday, April 21, 2006, 3:43:17 PM, you wrote:

GD>  From last Sunday morning's visit to the Santa Cruz wharf:

GD>http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW6/04.htm

GD> It works best in a large print. I've included a 1000x1500 pixel  
GD> rendering to see it better, if you have the bandwidth and display space.

GD> Comments, critique, all appreciated.

GD> best,
GD> Godfrey

Re: PAW 2006 - 04 - GDG

[Paul Stenquist]

Interesting in its minimalism. But this is such a geometric composition 
that I think it requires complete accuracy. It appears to need a 
counterclockwise rotation of about half a degree.

Paul
On Apr 21, 2006, at 6:43 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:


From last Sunday morning's visit to the Santa Cruz wharf:

  http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW6/04.htm

It works best in a large print. I've included a 1000x1500 pixel 
rendering to see it better, if you have the bandwidth and display 
space.


Comments, critique, all appreciated.

best,
Godfrey

Re: OT - for info - wide prime vs wide zoom / now Treo 650

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

On Apr 21, 2006, at 3:11 PM, Cotty wrote:


On 21/4/06, Charles Robinson, discombobulated, unleashed:

It keeps your screen from ending up looking like this:
http://charles.robinsontwins.org/images/IMGP7953.jpg


Ouch.


Ouch indeed.

The Sena you chose is one of the ones I looked at, but handling it I  
found it a bit awkward. I'll be interested to hear how it works out  
in use for you.


Charles: the Seidio skin and belt clip weren't of much interest to me  
as I tend to keep my phone either in my pocket or in my bag, not  
clipped to my belt. One of the things I like about the Covertec is  
that the belt clip business is removable so that the case is smooth  
and slides into my pocket handily. (Funny, but the Treo 650 reminds  
me of carrying a Minox 35GT-E in my pocket... ;-)


Godfrey

Re: ist D - PE4 questions

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

I've read the article and tried to divine what was meant in the  
statement "The Macintosh browsers Safari and Internet Explorer can,  
but only under unusual circumstances not seen in everyday browsing."  
The article does not state what is meant by that or what 'unusual  
circumstances' are being referred to. In that, at least, they are  
either being facetious or are simply downright wrong.


Mac OS X uses ColorSync to color calibrate every window drawn with  
the system routines. Safari, Preview, most all Mac OS X applications  
that render JPEGs to the screen use these system routines. Those that  
don't, like Photoshop, are generally sophisticated enough to do the  
right thing anyway. If a JPEG file, whether from web or local hard  
drive, has an embedded profile it is honored in Safari. (It's honored  
in Internet Explorer too, but only if you turn on ColorSync profile  
matching.)


In extensive testing with one of my good buddies from another list,  
we found that embedding an sRGB profile in an sRGB rendered image  
helped consistent color rendering even on the brain-dead-with-respect- 
to-color-management Windows browsers, and certainly helped if not  
solved the issues of rendering such photos between Mac OS X and  
Windows platforms, despite the gamma correction standards  
differences. It's a damn good idea to embed a color profile if you  
want to have any hope of consistent color rendering on viewers  
screens, and is certainly worth the extra download time for the 1K  
byte or so of profile data.


Godfrey

On Apr 21, 2006, at 2:56 PM, George Sinos wrote:


Here's a short quote from the page linked below:

"The box of crayons you're given for displaying photos on the web is
called sRGB.

There are other color spaces, such as Adobe RGB (1998), but no
Windows-based browser can display them correctly. The Macintosh
browsers Safari and Internet Explorer can, but only under unusual
circumstances not seen in everyday browsing."

The full story is at:


See you later, gs




On 4/21/06, Thibouille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

As far as web images is concerned, the browser also has to support
colour management.  I only know of two that do (they use ColorSync).
One of those was discontinued long ago.


Which is the currently available one? I'm much interested.

Re: Paper for printing

[Juan Buhler]

Hi Godfrey,

Would you recommend the R2400 for just B&W printing?
I have (had?) an 1160 with PiezoBW and then MIS inks. One night, days
before my last show, I stayed up all night injecting Windex through
the heads to unclog it--it was a nightmare. I don't even want to think
how clogged those heads must be now.

I'm tempted to go back to printing my own inkjets, with an R2400 now.
Hopefully it doesn't have the clogging problems of the 1160.

j

On 4/21/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have both Epson 1270 and R2400 printers, had the Epson 1160 as
> well. The 1160 was my dedicated B&W printer until the PiezographyBW
> inks finally killed the print head and it wasn't worth fixing (2003).
> I then dedicated the 1270 to B&W work with MIS UT-2 inks and
> QuadToneRIP, which ran well enough albeit with a number of issues in
> clogs and drips that it motivated me to buy the R2400. The R2400 is
> the best printer I've had to date; the 1270 is now relegated to light
> duty for printing envelopes.
>
> My work has been printed on Epson Heavyweight Matte and Epson
> Archival Matte (now Epson Enhanced Matte) since 2000-2001. With the
> R2400, I'm also using Epson Velvet Fine Art as well, but sparingly as
> it is both more costly and more time consuming to handle. I've tried
> several other papers but find little real advantage to most of the
> other standard papers (some of the high-end, high-rag-content papers
> are wonderful though). I feel it is generally more sensible to learn
> a single paper or maybe two, optimizing rendering and printing to do
> best on them.
>
> So far, Heavyweight Matte and EEM look very similar. EEM has just a
> bit more tonal separation in the Zone II-IV range, a slightly deeper
> black with R2400 Matte Black inks. Over four-five years, some of the
> EEM prints have aged to a little warmer rendering.
>
> Inks have been more variable. The 1270 color inks shift a bit when
> exposed to air and light, over time there's substantial fading. The
> PiezographyBW inks have been very stable, as have the MIS UT2. I
> expect the R2400's K3 inkset to be more stable yet.
>
> Godfrey
>
> On Apr 21, 2006, at 12:51 PM, Jerome Reyes wrote:
>
> > Guys and gals,
> >
> > I was about to press the trigger on an Adorama order and at the last
> > minute thought about adding some paper. I have about a 7 or 8 framed
> > photos around the house (mostly 11" by 14") and all are on Epson
> > Enhanced
> > Matte Inkjet Paper (A3 Size), printed on a Epson Stylus Photo 1280.
> > They
> > were all printed within the past 12 months, so none have passed the
> > test
> > of time yet ... even though I suspect the ink will be the culprit
> > more so
> > than the paper if they start to fade.
> >
> > Anyhow, I'm pretty happy with all of them (and the printer)... but was
> > struck by curiousity as to what some others may be printing on.
> >
> >   - Jerome
> >
> > PS.  by the way, the max width for the Epson 1280 is 13".
> >
>
>


--
Juan Buhler
Water Molotov: http://photoblog.jbuhler.com
Slippery Slope: http://color.jbuhler.com

FS FRI

[Jack Davis]

Earlier today I listed an A* 300mm f/2.8 and 1.4L T/C for sale. They
have now sold.

The MZ-S w/BG10 Grip is still avail. @ $775.
w/carrying strap and manuals.
Both appear and operate as new.
 

Jack


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

PAW 2006 - 04 - GDG

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

From last Sunday morning's visit to the Santa Cruz wharf:

  http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW6/04.htm

It works best in a large print. I've included a 1000x1500 pixel  
rendering to see it better, if you have the bandwidth and display space.


Comments, critique, all appreciated.

best,
Godfrey

RE: PESO - "You won't believe me"

[Tim Øsleby]

Brutal and honestly. 
It has its weak points. But it does not really matter. 
A charming shot of two charming ladies. It moves me.


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: 21. april 2006 16:35
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: PESO - "You won't believe me"
> 
> Hi!
> 
> http://not.contaxg.com/document.php?id=13178
> 
> Be brutal and honest, as usual.
> 
> Boris
> 

Re: Sorrento

[Daniel J. Matyola]

Igor:

Thanks for your comments.  The photos were also interesting.

For some reason, however, I didn't see Giafranco's post.  I'll have to
try the archives.

Dan M

Re: OT - for info - wide prime vs wide zoom / now Treo 650

[Cotty]

On 21/4/06, Charles Robinson, discombobulated, unleashed:

>It keeps your screen from ending up looking like this:
>
>http://charles.robinsontwins.org/images/IMGP7953.jpg

Ouch.






Cheers,
  Cotty


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

Re: OT - for info - wide prime vs wide zoom

[Mark Roberts]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

>For my first quarter century of serious photography, I never owned a zoom. A 
>few years 
>ago I bought a Pentax K 80-20/4.5 for a special project that required a locked 
>off camera 
>and numerous shots at varying focal lengths. I found that lens quite 
>satisfactory at most 
>focal lengths, but no match for my primes. When I bought my second D, I 
>decided to take
>advantage of the rebate offer on the DA 16-45, since the widest prime I owned 
>was a 24. 
>I found it to be a very good performer, and used it for a number of paying 
>jobs. When I 
>had to complete a job that required room interior shots, I needed something 
>even wider, 
>so I purchased the widest Pentax rectilinear lens available -- the DA 12-24. I 
>have found 
>it to be even better. I'm extremely pleased with its performance, as is my 
>client.

I used zooms somewhat reluctantly for years. Then I got the FA*80-200
and lo, my eyes were opened ;-) 
If you stick with *really good* zooms the only penalty you'll pay is
in size and weight (of any one lens - even a big zoom is lighter than
all the primes it would replace).
I have only 4 zooms:
Pentax FA*28-70/2.8
Pentax FA*80-200/2.8 Tamron 17-35/2.8-4
Vivitar 70-120/2.8-4 Series 1
I really prefer shooting with primes for my own stuff, but when I'm
doing a job I almost always go with zooms because of the speed and
versatility they offer with fewer lens changes.

Re: Picassa2

[George Sinos]

Don -

Check the documentation to be sure, but I'm positive it makes a point
that Picassa 2 never modifies the originals.

See you later, gs

On 4/21/06, Don Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  If it were not that Picassa2 alters the originals...

Re: ist D - PE4 questions

[George Sinos]

Here's a short quote from the page linked below:

"The box of crayons you're given for displaying photos on the web is
called sRGB.

There are other color spaces, such as Adobe RGB (1998), but no
Windows-based browser can display them correctly. The Macintosh
browsers Safari and Internet Explorer can, but only under unusual
circumstances not seen in everyday browsing."

The full story is at:


See you later, gs




On 4/21/06, Thibouille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > As far as web images is concerned, the browser also has to support
> > colour management.  I only know of two that do (they use ColorSync).
> > One of those was discontinued long ago.
>
> Which is the currently available one? I'm much interested.
>
>

Re: Sorrento

[Igor Roshchin]

Daniel J. Matyola wrote:
> Tomorrow my wife and I leave for 7 days in Sorrento.  We anticipate
> short trips to Amalfi, Positano, Capri and possibly Naples.
> 
> Any advice about places to visit, places to avoid, restaurants,
> museums,and photo opportunities would be greatly appreciated.
>

Giafranco gave very good pointers, - I cannot compete with him.
I'd just share some of my impressions from that area.
I was in that area at the end of September-beginning of October in 2005,
for a week, mostly in the coastal area.
It is a very interesting area. You can spend much more than 7 days there.
The tourist "season" was ending, so many places in Amalfi coast
(Minori, Maiori, ...) were closing down. That part was a bit depressive,
but on another hand, we avoided crouds.

Pompeii was really impressive. It makes one thinking what is common between
us and them, the people who lived there, and what changed over these 
hundreds of years. We ran out of time and did not go the top of
Vesuvius.

I still haven't sorted the photos from that trip, they are in my
"to do" queue that I need to finish before this summer starts.
I shot many coastal views - from the coast and from a boat.
Of all coastal and near-coastal town, Positano was the most
impressive. Ravello, and especially road to Ravello was also very 
interesting, with great views.
Due to weather and limited time we didn't make it to Capri... 

Take a look at a few snapshots that I converted from RAW erlier:
http://www.komkon.org/~igor/PHOTOS/Italy/
The last two are from Positano. The rest are probably from Amalfi-Minori 
(don't remember exactly, and don't have time to check it). 

Practical issue: we found that the reservations for the rental
cars that we made ahead of time (with Hertz, via Internet + coupons-specials) 
- were much cheaper than what we could find locally.
There were, however, delays when renting a car from a non-airport location:
In one case the car was not available on time (Sorrento), in another case 
(in Rome) one of the engine cylinders was not working at low RPMs, causing
some reasonant vibrations,  and they were claiming it was the only car 
available at the moment. 

Don't overplan, - and just grasp what you can visit/see within 
that period of time. Enjoy the ambience, people, views, don't try
to cover all tourist destinations.

HTH,

Igor

Re: OT - for info - wide prime vs wide zoom / now Treo 650

[Charles Robinson]

On Apr 21, 2006, at 14:20, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:


If you want a good case, I like the ones made by Covertec. I use  
the Covertec flip case ... it protects the screen well without  
being obnoxiously cumbersome or bulky, and the phone slips out of  
it easily for when you want completely unimpeded access to keyboard  
buttons.





I've got the Seidio "Skin" with belt clip.  The silicone skin  
protects the phone and leaves the keyboard exposed, and when you clip  
the Treo into the holster the screen faces your body so it isn't  
exposed to the elements.


http://www.seidioonline.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=196

It keeps your screen from ending up looking like this:

http://charles.robinsontwins.org/images/IMGP7953.jpg

(although to be fair, this happened by my brother DRIVING OVER HIS  
TREO accidentally - he was rushing back to the grocery store to see  
if it had fallen off of his belt case in the parking lot, when in  
fact it was on the floor of his garage.  So he backed over it while  
leaving the garage, and gave it another squish when he pulled back  
into the garage.  $80 and some fiddling around later, he's got a new  
screen)


 -Charles

--
Charles Robinson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Minneapolis, MN
http://charles.robinsontwins.org

Re: OT - for info - wide prime vs wide zoom

[Cotty]

On 21/4/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi, discombobulated, unleashed:

>If you want a good case, I like the ones made by Covertec. I use the  
>Covertec flip case ... it protects the screen well without being  
>obnoxiously cumbersome or bulky, and the phone slips out of it easily  
>for when you want completely unimpeded access to keyboard buttons.
>ref_produit=SX94-01&menu=smart&ref_machine=PALTREO650>

Thanks. I've ordered a Sena flip case - I wanted the flipping part to
flip down rather than up. I often cup my hand over my mouth during cell
phone calls - I don't like an audience on my calls, which are mainly for
work, and the walls have ears ;-)






Cheers,
  Cotty


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

Re: Way OT - Brita Water Filters

[Charles Robinson]

On Apr 21, 2006, at 14:42, Juan Buhler wrote:


http://www.ohmygoditburns.com/wordpress/index.php?p=4


Mythbusters (a show on the Discovery Channel here in the U.S.) just  
covered this "filtered vodka" thing and came to the conclusion that  
it made precious little difference.


 -Charles

--
Charles Robinson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Minneapolis, MN
http://charles.robinsontwins.org

RE: Way OT - Brita Water Filters

[Henk Terhell]

Brita filters have: 1. top-mesh pre-filtration; 2. ion exchange resins
removing temporary hardness and heavy metals; 3. activated carbon; 4.
bottom mesh after-filtration

Henk

> -Original Message-
> From: mike wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: 21 April, 2006 10:55 PM
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: Way OT - Brita Water Filters
> 
> 
> Juan Buhler wrote:
> 
> > Brita filters have some great uses:
> > 
> > http://www.ohmygoditburns.com/wordpress/index.php?p=4
> > 
> > :)
> 
> Whilst they are absolutely right about cheap vodka (the worst 
> one I've 
> tasted is Vladivar - distilled in Warrington) Brita 
> filters are ion 
> exchange resin, not charcoal, afaik.
> 

Re: OT - for info - wide prime vs wide zoom

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

On Apr 21, 2006, at 12:38 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

For my first quarter century of serious photography, I never owned  
a zoom.  ...


Same here.

I tried several zoom lenses (Nikon, Minolta) in the middle 1980s and  
returned them. I tried another one in 1999 (Nikon) and again in 2001  
(Canon) and didn't like them either. The Zuiko 50-90mm for the  
Olympus Pen FV was a good lens, although beset with flare problems.  
It was only when I bought the Canon 70-200/4L in 2003 that I first  
found a zoom that I liked.


The Pentax FA20-35 has surprised me with its quality. If the DA12-24  
is as good or better, it is a fantastic lens.


Godfrey

Re: Mamiya is history

[Shel Belinkoff]

Indeed, what a shame ...

Shel



> [Original Message]
> From: (Ralf R. Radermacher)

>
> I'm afraid he's correct.
>
> http://www.camera-news.com/
>
> ...plus a few more Japanese sources, including Mamiya's own web site.
>
> Pity, really. 

Re: Mamiya is history

[Ryan K. Brooks]

Pål Jensen wrote:

Apparently.

I'll bet Hasselblad is next to go



Nah. They've already been uplifted into digital-land.

The Mamiya death doesn't bode well for integrated backs in the MF world 
though.


-Ryan


Pål

Re: Paper for printing

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

I have both Epson 1270 and R2400 printers, had the Epson 1160 as  
well. The 1160 was my dedicated B&W printer until the PiezographyBW  
inks finally killed the print head and it wasn't worth fixing (2003).  
I then dedicated the 1270 to B&W work with MIS UT-2 inks and  
QuadToneRIP, which ran well enough albeit with a number of issues in  
clogs and drips that it motivated me to buy the R2400. The R2400 is  
the best printer I've had to date; the 1270 is now relegated to light  
duty for printing envelopes.


My work has been printed on Epson Heavyweight Matte and Epson  
Archival Matte (now Epson Enhanced Matte) since 2000-2001. With the  
R2400, I'm also using Epson Velvet Fine Art as well, but sparingly as  
it is both more costly and more time consuming to handle. I've tried  
several other papers but find little real advantage to most of the  
other standard papers (some of the high-end, high-rag-content papers  
are wonderful though). I feel it is generally more sensible to learn  
a single paper or maybe two, optimizing rendering and printing to do  
best on them.


So far, Heavyweight Matte and EEM look very similar. EEM has just a  
bit more tonal separation in the Zone II-IV range, a slightly deeper  
black with R2400 Matte Black inks. Over four-five years, some of the  
EEM prints have aged to a little warmer rendering.


Inks have been more variable. The 1270 color inks shift a bit when  
exposed to air and light, over time there's substantial fading. The  
PiezographyBW inks have been very stable, as have the MIS UT2. I  
expect the R2400's K3 inkset to be more stable yet.


Godfrey

On Apr 21, 2006, at 12:51 PM, Jerome Reyes wrote:


Guys and gals,

I was about to press the trigger on an Adorama order and at the last
minute thought about adding some paper. I have about a 7 or 8 framed
photos around the house (mostly 11" by 14") and all are on Epson  
Enhanced
Matte Inkjet Paper (A3 Size), printed on a Epson Stylus Photo 1280.  
They
were all printed within the past 12 months, so none have passed the  
test
of time yet ... even though I suspect the ink will be the culprit  
more so

than the paper if they start to fade.

Anyhow, I'm pretty happy with all of them (and the printer)... but was
struck by curiousity as to what some others may be printing on.

  - Jerome

PS.  by the way, the max width for the Epson 1280 is 13".

Re: Way OT - Brita Water Filters

[mike wilson]

Juan Buhler wrote:


Brita filters have some great uses:

http://www.ohmygoditburns.com/wordpress/index.php?p=4

:)


Whilst they are absolutely right about cheap vodka (the worst one I've 
tasted is Vladivar - distilled in Warrington) Brita filters are ion 
exchange resin, not charcoal, afaik.


Must give this a whirl.

You could use it to take all those horrible things out of whisky.  8-))



On 4/20/06, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Do any of you have a Brita water filter? How do you like it? Does it work
well? Impart any taste to the water?


Shel








--
Juan Buhler
Water Molotov: http://photoblog.jbuhler.com
Slippery Slope: http://color.jbuhler.com

Re: Way OT - Brita Water Filters

[mike wilson]

Ralf R. Radermacher wrote:


Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



Yuck!  Your water must be really bad if it forms a skin on top.



They claim it's better than some of the bottled stuff sold in
supermarkets. And it only happens with tea. Interesting stuff, this link
about 'tea scum'. In fact, our tap water is quite hard.

Ralf



Most likely, it is tea dust adhering to the surface of the water.

RE: Way OT - Brita Water Filters

[Bob W]

London water does that too. I think anybody in a hard water area will see
the same problem. It's limescale. I have a Brita kettle, but I gave up
buying filters because they're so expensive. Now the kettle is all furred
up.

I have to wonder about the logic of buying filters to remove the minerals
from the tapwater, then buying bottled water which promotes the benefits of
all the minerals it contains...

The best water I ever tasted I drew from an old-fashioned well in a remote
valley in northern Romania.

--
Cheers,
 Bob 

> -Original Message-
> From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: 21 April 2006 14:25
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: Way OT - Brita Water Filters
> 
> Yuck!  Your water must be really bad if it forms a skin on top.
> 
> Shel
> 
> 
> 
> > [Original Message]
> > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> > Also, the funny skin on top of the tea in the cup is gone. Have I 
> > already mentioned it tastes better?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: OT - for info - wide prime vs wide zoom

[pnstenquist]

For my first quarter century of serious photography, I never owned a zoom. A 
few 
years ago I bought a Pentax K 80-20/4.5 for a special project that required a 
locked off camera and numerous shots at varying focal lengths. I found that 
lens 
quite satisfactory at most focal lengths, but no match for my primes. When I 
bought my second D, I decided to take advantage of the rebate offer on the DA 
16-45, since the widest prime I owned was a 24. I found it to be a very good 
performer, and used it for a number of paying jobs. When I had to complete a 
job 
that required room interior shots, I needed something even wider, so I 
purchased 
the widest Pentax rectilinear lens available -- the DA 12-24. I have found it 
to 
be even better. I'm extremely pleased with its performance, as is my client.
Paul
 -- Original message --
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> On Apr 21, 2006, at 11:28 AM, Cotty wrote:
> 
> > Thanks for the insights. For my part, if I'm shooting wide and it the
> > focal length is not right for the shot, I just *walk*
> 
> Hmm. That's a little ambiguous... depending upon what you mean:
> 
> - Walking changes the perspective of the shot.
> - Walking away means you don't get it at all.
> 
> Let's assume that you want to get the shot... ;-)
> 
> Working close-in with a wide lens, perspective is very important and  
> very changeable with minor changes of distance. A 20-35 affords a  
> great deal of versatility in perspective at a close-in distance  
> without having to carry several different lenses.
> 
> > BTW, I'm settling in nicely with my Treo 650. It's pretty capable and
> > much more stable than my Samsung Palm phone. Just got some retractable
> > 2.5mm headphones, and just installed a car kit - - Treo enablement is
> > starting to rival Pentax enablement.
> 
> Good to hear you're enjoying it. I find the Treo 650 invaluable. And  
> yes: freekin' accessories. I've been eyeing the wireless keyboard and  
> Bluetooth headset...
> 
> If you want a good case, I like the ones made by Covertec. I use the  
> Covertec flip case ... it protects the screen well without being  
> obnoxiously cumbersome or bulky, and the phone slips out of it easily  
> for when you want completely unimpeded access to keyboard buttons.
>  ref_produit=SX94-01&menu=smart&ref_machine=PALTREO650>
> 
> Godfrey
> 

RE: National Wildlife Photo Winners

[Bob W]

Wonderful. 

Maybe Tim can take note of the technique used to get closer to the curlew:
"Doxstater took off his socks and shoes and slowly waded into the marsh,
making digital photos along the way using a 500mm lens and a 1.4x
teleconverter."

The photo of all the dolphins reminds me of a week I spent in
Plettenbergbaai in South Africa. 2 or 3 times a day a similar-sized pod of
at least 100 dolphins swam round the bay. We would watch from the terrace of
the house we had hired, then go down and dive in from the beach to swim &
surf with them when they came right by us. It was an unforgettable
experience.

--
Cheers,
 Bob 

> -Original Message-
> From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: 21 April 2006 18:06
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: RE: National Wildlife Photo Winners
> 
> Better Link:
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/77896
> 
> or
> 
> http://www.nwf.org/nationalwildlife/article.cfm?issueID=79&art
icleID=1158
> 

Re: Way OT - Brita Water Filters

[John Francis]

As investigated on a recent "Mythbusters" show.
Their conclusions: filtering cheap vodka does improve
it somewhat, but you pretty much get what you pay for.

On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 12:42:59PM -0700, Juan Buhler wrote:
> Brita filters have some great uses:
> 
> http://www.ohmygoditburns.com/wordpress/index.php?p=4
> 
> :)
> 
> On 4/20/06, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Do any of you have a Brita water filter? How do you like it? Does it work
> > well? Impart any taste to the water?
> >
> >
> > Shel
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> --
> Juan Buhler
> Water Molotov: http://photoblog.jbuhler.com
> Slippery Slope: http://color.jbuhler.com

RE: OT - for info - wide prime vs wide zoom

[Bob W]

> -Original Message-
> From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: 21 April 2006 18:00
> To: pentax list
> Subject: Re: OT - for info - wide prime vs wide zoom
> 
> Seems there might be sample variation
> 
> 
> 
> I still wouldn't buy one. I don't understand the point of a 
> wide angle zoom.
> 

The Pentax M 24-35 is a fantastically useful wide zoom for pj & travel work.
Very versatile. I loved mine. 

Bob

Re: Mamiya is history

[Ralf R. Radermacher]

Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> The Samsung GX-1S gets a lackluster review on that link as well...

What else would you expect - a mere 5 months away from the next
Photokina - for a 6 MPix DSLR with specifications which weren't exactly
ground-breaking at the last show, two years ago? 

Ralf

...who still likes his DS

-- 
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

Paper for printing

[Jerome Reyes]

Guys and gals,

I was about to press the trigger on an Adorama order and at the last
minute thought about adding some paper. I have about a 7 or 8 framed
photos around the house (mostly 11" by 14") and all are on Epson Enhanced
Matte Inkjet Paper (A3 Size), printed on a Epson Stylus Photo 1280. They
were all printed within the past 12 months, so none have passed the test
of time yet ... even though I suspect the ink will be the culprit more so
than the paper if they start to fade.

Anyhow, I'm pretty happy with all of them (and the printer)... but was
struck by curiousity as to what some others may be printing on.

  - Jerome

PS.  by the way, the max width for the Epson 1280 is 13".

Re: Way OT - Brita Water Filters

[Juan Buhler]

Brita filters have some great uses:

http://www.ohmygoditburns.com/wordpress/index.php?p=4

:)

On 4/20/06, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do any of you have a Brita water filter? How do you like it? Does it work
> well? Impart any taste to the water?
>
>
> Shel
>
>
>
>


--
Juan Buhler
Water Molotov: http://photoblog.jbuhler.com
Slippery Slope: http://color.jbuhler.com

Re: OT - for info - wide prime vs wide zoom

[pnstenquist]

For my first quarter century of serious photography, I never owned a zoom. A 
few years ago I bought a Pentax K 80-20/4.5 for a special project that required 
a locked off camera and numerous shots at varying focal lengths. I found that 
lens quite satisfactory at most focal lengths, but no match for my primes. When 
I bought my second D, I decided to take advantage of the rebate offer on the DA 
16-45, since the widest prime I owned was a 24. I found it to be a very good 
performer, and used it for a number of paying jobs. When I had to complete a 
job that required room interior shots, I needed something even wider, so I 
purchased the widest Pentax rectilinear lens available -- the DA 12-24. I have 
found it to be even better. I'm extremely pleased with its performance, as is 
my client.
Paul
 -- Original message --
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> On Apr 21, 2006, at 11:28 AM, Cotty wrote:
> 
> > Thanks for the insights. For my part, if I'm shooting wide and it the
> > focal length is not right for the shot, I just *walk*
> 
> Hmm. That's a little ambiguous... depending upon what you mean:
> 
> - Walking changes the perspective of the shot.
> - Walking away means you don't get it at all.
> 
> Let's assume that you want to get the shot... ;-)
> 
> Working close-in with a wide lens, perspective is very important and  
> very changeable with minor changes of distance. A 20-35 affords a  
> great deal of versatility in perspective at a close-in distance  
> without having to carry several different lenses.
> 
> > BTW, I'm settling in nicely with my Treo 650. It's pretty capable and
> > much more stable than my Samsung Palm phone. Just got some retractable
> > 2.5mm headphones, and just installed a car kit - - Treo enablement is
> > starting to rival Pentax enablement.
> 
> Good to hear you're enjoying it. I find the Treo 650 invaluable. And  
> yes: freekin' accessories. I've been eyeing the wireless keyboard and  
> Bluetooth headset...
> 
> If you want a good case, I like the ones made by Covertec. I use the  
> Covertec flip case ... it protects the screen well without being  
> obnoxiously cumbersome or bulky, and the phone slips out of it easily  
> for when you want completely unimpeded access to keyboard buttons.
>  ref_produit=SX94-01&menu=smart&ref_machine=PALTREO650>
> 
> Godfrey
> 

Re: Mamiya is history

[Tom C]

The Samsung GX-1S gets a lackluster review on that link as well...

http://www.camera-news.com/

Tom C.







From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ralf R. Radermacher)
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Mamiya is history
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 21:30:20 +0200

Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> WHat's your source?

I'm afraid he's correct.

http://www.camera-news.com/

...plus a few more Japanese sources, including Mamiya's own web site.

Pity, really.

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

Re: Mamiya is history

[Ralf R. Radermacher]

Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> WHat's your source?

I'm afraid he's correct.

http://www.camera-news.com/

...plus a few more Japanese sources, including Mamiya's own web site.

Pity, really. 

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

Re: Mamiya is history

[Tom C]

A sky is falling prediction

Put that 645D money back in your wallets unless it sells for a bargain 
basement price.



Tom C.







From: Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: 
Subject: Re: Mamiya is history
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 21:15:36 +0200




WHat's your source?



http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?lp=ja_en&trurl=http%3a%2f%2fdc.watch.impress.co.jp%2fcda%2fother%2f2006%2f04%2f21%2f3690.html

Re: OT - for info - wide prime vs wide zoom

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

On Apr 21, 2006, at 11:28 AM, Cotty wrote:


Thanks for the insights. For my part, if I'm shooting wide and it the
focal length is not right for the shot, I just *walk*


Hmm. That's a little ambiguous... depending upon what you mean:

- Walking changes the perspective of the shot.
- Walking away means you don't get it at all.

Let's assume that you want to get the shot... ;-)

Working close-in with a wide lens, perspective is very important and  
very changeable with minor changes of distance. A 20-35 affords a  
great deal of versatility in perspective at a close-in distance  
without having to carry several different lenses.



BTW, I'm settling in nicely with my Treo 650. It's pretty capable and
much more stable than my Samsung Palm phone. Just got some retractable
2.5mm headphones, and just installed a car kit - - Treo enablement is
starting to rival Pentax enablement.


Good to hear you're enjoying it. I find the Treo 650 invaluable. And  
yes: freekin' accessories. I've been eyeing the wireless keyboard and  
Bluetooth headset...


If you want a good case, I like the ones made by Covertec. I use the  
Covertec flip case ... it protects the screen well without being  
obnoxiously cumbersome or bulky, and the phone slips out of it easily  
for when you want completely unimpeded access to keyboard buttons.



Godfrey

Re: Mamiya is history

[Pål Jensen]

WHat's your source?



http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?lp=ja_en&trurl=http%3a%2f%2fdc.watch.impress.co.jp%2fcda%2fother%2f2006%2f04%2f21%2f3690.html 

Re: Way OT - Brita Water Filters

[Ralf R. Radermacher]

Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Yuck!  Your water must be really bad if it forms a skin on top.

They claim it's better than some of the bottled stuff sold in
supermarkets. And it only happens with tea. Interesting stuff, this link
about 'tea scum'. In fact, our tap water is quite hard.

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

RE: Mamiya is history

[Tom C]

WHat's your source?



Tom C.







From: Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: 
Subject: Mamiya is history
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 21:06:24 +0200

Apparently.

I'll bet Hasselblad is next to go


Pål

Mamiya is history

[Pål Jensen]

Apparently.

I'll bet Hasselblad is next to go


Pål 

Re: PESO - "You won't believe me"

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

On Apr 21, 2006, at 7:34 AM, Boris Liberman wrote:


http://not.contaxg.com/document.php?id=13178


I like this photo a lot, but it needs some work.

- The tilt in a square frame was the first thing I noticed and it's  
distracting.
- The hair on the woman in the foreground needs to be burned in to a  
deeper tone, as should be some overbright bits on the table. The hair  
especially, however.
- Some of the business at the top of the frame seems distracting. I'd  
experiment with cropping


The skin tones and expression of the woman in red are excellent,  
however. You caught a very real moment in time with the shot.


Godfrey

Re: OT - for info - wide prime vs wide zoom

[Cotty]

>> I don't understand the point of a wide angle zoom.

On 21/4/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi, discombobulated, unleashed:

>
>It's simple: convenience and speed in use. Many photographs do not  
>require the absolute maximum in lens performance, any hand-held  
>photograph is giving up 20-30% of a len's performance. I'm not a big  
>zoom lover, but for some things a zoom lens enables you to obtain  
>photos that you would otherwise miss due to not having the right  
>focal length on the camera.
>
>The FA20-35 is a very good fit to a lot of my work. It produces image  
>quality nearly comparable to (not equal to..) hand-held primes when  
>stopped down to f/5.6-f/8 (my usual working range), it is small and  
>light for its range and speed. It works well when wide open. I know  
>the FA20, FA28, FA35 are better performers, but this one is good  
>enough for a lot of subject matter and offers the right range of  
>flexibility with regards to field of view. The DA16-45 was also very  
>good, but I didn't like its size, weight and balance as much as the  
>FA20-35, and I think the latter has nicer rendering qualities as well.
>
>It would be interesting to see how the 17-40L on the Canon 10D  
>compares against the FA20-35 on the Pentax *ist DS. That's a more  
>comparable test. Hmm. Maybe I can borrow my friend's 17-40L and do  
>some fun comparison testing since I still have the 10D body...
>
>Na. Waste of time. ;-)

Har!

Thanks for the insights. For my part, if I'm shooting wide and it the
focal length is not right for the shot, I just *walk* ;-))

BTW, I'm settling in nicely with my Treo 650. It's pretty capable and
much more stable than my Samsung Palm phone. Just got some retractable
2.5mm headphones, and just installed a car kit - - Treo enablement is
starting to rival Pentax enablement.


Cheers,
  Cotty


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

Re: PESO: The Ice Cream Man Cometh

[Aaron Reynolds]

On Apr 21, 2006, at 2:40 AM, David Mann wrote:


Our ice-cream man plays "The Happy Wanderer".


Ours plays some disgustingly distorted version of Greensleeves.  You 
couldn't imagine how much it annoys me, hearing it all afternoon as he 
goes up and down every street in the neighbourhood.


I haven't been following the thread -- did anyone trot out what the ice 
cream truck plays in Steven Wright's neighborhood?


-Aaron

Re: FOV conversion 35mm -> 645 & 67 -> 645D

[Aaron Reynolds]

On Apr 21, 2006, at 2:40 AM, Thibouille wrote:


I'm really lost now. Could someone tell me how to convert between
those formats and 35mm?

35mm -> *istDx is  1.5x
35mm -> 645  ??
645 -> 645D ?? (I think it is 1.3x but not sure).
35mm -> 645D  ??
35mm -> 67  ??



The quick-and-dirty measurement for 6x7 to 35mm is to divide in half -- 
a 6x7 105mm lens is approximately equivalent to a 50mm lens on a 35.  
My 75mm is slightly wide, comparable to a 35mm lens on 35.


-Aaron