Re: Analog versus Digital Shootout
These are the major points of my current workflow... I scan to preserve the highlights, although I don't worry too much about small, bright reflections. I do this by using the exposure controls in the scanner software - I've found that all the other adjustments are best left to Photoshop. Using the preview, I adjust each channel's exposure separately to give a reasonably neutral white- point, with that point as close as I can get to 255 (I'll often use 250 because the preview is quite low in resolution). The image will usually look a bit dark at this stage. Crop any borders off the scan before you start processing, as they'll affect the histogram. In Photoshop, I place the black and white points at standard values (about 5-10 for black, I'm flexible for white). I also make the black and white points neutral. I do this with a Curves layer, using the histogram as a reference. I have the histogram in the all channels view, at the larger size. As you move the mouse over the relevant histogram, you can see the current value at that position: keep adjusting until the lowest/highest values for each channel are in the desired locations (make sure preview is checked in the Curves dialog, so the histograms will update as you make adjustments). That almost completely solved my colour correction difficulties. My scanner setup gives a reddish cast in shadow areas, and I also remember sometimes getting slight green casts in the highlights. Sometimes this won't quite work, and I need to modify the adjustments by eye, often by sampling areas from the image (usually for the highlights), but film grain can cause problems with the sampling, even with it set to 5x5 averaging. I usually only have to adjust the blue channel this way, especially if I'd used E100SW. This will also be affected by atmospheric conditions (smoke, haze, whatever) on the day I shot, so white doesn't always look white. I re-open the Curves dialog and add whatever adjustments are necessary to make the picture look nice - usually a simple brightening will do it, but I often need to add a little contrast in certain areas as well. I usually end up squashing the highlights a bit, which also helps to reduce colour casts in grey skies by reducing the contrast. Unfortunately it has the side-effect of reducing the highlight detail, so I sometimes need to be careful. The best way to make this process as frustrating as possible is to place the slide on a small light box near your computer. You will go mad trying to reproduce the contrast, saturation and shadow detail visible in the slide. But it does make a good reference for your adjustments. Sometimes I'll also need to depart a bit from the slide itself - one in particular had a bit of a colour cast due to atmospheric conditions, which looked OK on the slide but was pretty horrible on the screen. Please note that most of my slides have well-defined neutral highlights and shadows. I occasionally scan slides that don't... in some cases that can be frustrating but for other pics a small colour offset doesn't seem to matter. The time it takes me to do all this varies a bit from slide to slide. I'm generally able to process a dozen 35mm slides in a couple of hours [not including scanning], largely because dICE does most of the hard word for me :) For medium format, I'm using a glass holder and dICE doesn't seem to work very well at the top bottom edges, so dust-spotting takes a while. Combined with the extra filesize, I'll do maybe 4 in the same length of time. The workflow speed is quite important for me, as I have something like 1,000 slides to scan before I start on the negs. When I started this scanning project I was only able to scan process four 35mm slides in a day (scan in the afternoon, process in the evening). - Dave On May 6, 2006, at 2:51 AM, Markus Maurer wrote: Hi David what exactly is different now in your scanning technique? Since I have to scan a lot . I love to learn ;-) greetings Markus AFAIK the newest films were formulated to scan better than the older ones. I'm going through my archives at the moment and I'm currently doing a mix of E100SW, Velvia and Provia 100F films that were shot about 5 years ago. At the start I was having all sorts of problems, particularly in the highlights. Now that I've improved my technique, I'm finding that they all scan pretty well (I'm still glad that I didn't shoot much Velvia). - Dave
Re: A Zoom for the istDS
My answer to this might be the DA50-135/2.8 when it is released. The FA24-90/3.5-4.5 AL is another option. The Tamron 28-75/2.8 is another reputedly good lens in this general range. Godfrey On May 5, 2006, at 7:08 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: What might be a good compliment to the FA 20~35 zoom for the istDS? I'm compiling a wish list, and would like a relatively fast, high- quality zoom that extends the range of the 20~35 to about 100mm or so. I'd prefer an FA rather than a DA, and am not looking for kit lenses or low quality consumer glass - something comparable to the 20~35 or better, preferably fixed aperture. Suggestions welcome - oh, not Sigma ... Thanks! Shel
Re: Another one bites the dust.
Hi Bill, Sorry to hear about your situation. I wish you all the best of luck in finding something better. Glad to see that your're not too worried. Rgds Patrick On 5/2/06, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As most of you know, the life of a photofinisher has changed dramatically over the past couple of years. The business has been taken over by large chain stores who treat the industry as just another department, and now is dealing with the fallout of poorly trained big box store sales staff, and the failings of the computer industry. For the past few years, it has been like watching an old friend die. Consequently, I will be unemployed as of the 12th of May. And not at all unhappy or concerned about the future. William Robb -- Regards Patrick Genovese
Re: Super WA/Fisheye recommendations
My favorite of the lenses you list is the DA14/2.8. I have that and the Zenitar 16 ... both are excellent. If a 20mm is wide enough for you, the FA20-35 is my favorite, most used lens. The only other lens in this group that I'd be interested in is the DA12-24. Godfrey On May 5, 2006, at 9:34 PM, Michael Hamilton wrote: I've been looking to replace my DA 18-55 lately, especially since I can get some amazing prices due to the high Canadian dollar right now (or is it low US dollar? ;) ) I tend to prefer primes if I can, but i certainly won't limit my self to that. I'm really looking to step up optically, but I also would like a little wider if i can get it. Can anyone comment on these lenses for optical and build quality? Experience? I've found a few reviews, but they're not always helpful. Front runners include: Pentax 16-45mm ED AL - $409 Sigma 20mm 1.8 EX - $409 (can be used on Film also - big plus!) Pentax 14mm ED IF - $599 (a bit more than I'd like to spend!) Pentax 12-24mm ED AL - $599 (again, $$$) Sigma 10-20mm - $479 I've also considered a fisheye. If I use a Full-frame fisheye on my DS, would the crop treat it more like a regular wide-angle? ie, less distortion outside of the center axis? Zenitar fisheye (does this work for 35mm also?) - I'd prefer an A lens over M, however... but it's cheap. Pentax SCMP-DA 10-17mm - $399 Sigma 15mm 2.8 - $499 (my regular kit also includes the Pentax-A 28/2.8, Pentax-A 50/1.7, and a Sigma 70-300 APO) Any help is appreciated! Michael Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.michaelhamilton.ca
Windows
Hi, I've just had a few rolls of film developed and scanned that had been lying around for a couple of years. I was slightly surprised to notice a theme of windows, doors, entrances exits, so I've put together a little gallery from the minilab scans. Nothing earth-shattering, but I hope you enjoy them: http://www.web-options.com/Windows/ I took the picture of the 2 women arguing outside a café on the day Cartier-Bresson died. I remember thinking while I was taking it that it was vaguely HCB-ish. When I returned to where we were staying I heard on the news that he had died. The scene also brought to mind one of Dr. Johnson's bad jokes, about the two neighbours arguing on the doorsteps of their houses. Those women will never agree, he said for they are arguing from different premises. -- Cheers, Bob
Re: Super WA/Fisheye recommendations
Hi Michael I have used the following on a DS1 and a Z1p Sigma 12-24mm No quality problems on my sample and superb on film where it is wider than an ordinary fisheye. On digital it is very useful for using indoors in photographing groups at parties, functions etc. Pentax 17-28mm fisheye zoom. Bought it cheap and delighted with the results on film and on digital. Very tempted to buy the new 10-17mm to get the same effect on digital Peleng 8mm Stunning depth of field when stopped down. My wife recently asked me to photograph some flowers in a vase. I put the vase on the patio and stopped the lense down to f16. It was about an inch above the highest flower. Not only were the flowers all incredibly sharp so was the grass on the lawn six feet away. The full circular mode on film is also good fun, peovided you can keep the tripod, or your hands and in my case stomach out of the picture! Come on Pentax, what about a 9mm rectilinear prime Have fun Peter
Re: A Zoom for the istDS
On Fri, 5 May 2006, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On May 5, 2006, at 7:08 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: What might be a good compliment to the FA 20~35 zoom for the istDS? I'm compiling a wish list, and would like a relatively fast, high-quality zoom that extends the range of the 20~35 to about 100mm or so. I'd prefer an FA rather than a DA, and am not looking for kit lenses or low quality consumer glass - something comparable to the 20~35 or better, preferably fixed aperture. Suggestions welcome - oh, not Sigma ... Thanks! My answer to this might be the DA50-135/2.8 when it is released. The FA24-90/3.5-4.5 AL is another option. The Tamron 28-75/2.8 is another reputedly good lens in this general range. Interesting that you are not suggesting the 28-105/3.2-4.5 AL; I thought you had a high opinion of it. Kostas
Re: Analog versus Digital Shootout
On May 5, 2006, at 8:39 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: The author of the test didn't say that. In fact, he scanned the 6x6 at a fairly high resolution. He said he sized both files to make a 240 dpi 20x30. 240 dpi at 20x30 from 6x6 is not all that high -- that scanner is capable of much more. Therefore, the scan was sized down. -Aaron
Re: I'm Done Too!
On Fri, 5 May 2006, Paul Stenquist wrote: We'll deal with that later:-). Still hoping her momma will find a new daddy. Say, do you have any sons? We might be talking dowry here:-)). Let me get this right, Granpa Stenquist: you are looking for someone's son to become your daughter's daddy. How old would that someone be? :-P Kostas p.s.: I had not realised that your daughter returned to the States because of a divorce. Sorry.
Re: Re: get Nikon's new 10.2 megapixel D200 digital SLR camera at BH
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/05/06 Sat AM 12:33:52 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: get Nikon's new 10.2 megapixel D200 digital SLR camera at BH In a message dated 5/5/2006 5:07:11 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I bought a D200 last month and i only paid .97 Dave Too many xxx's for me. Marnie aka Doe LOL. Come to the UK. Jessops are giving away DL2 two-lens kits. Well, until next year, that is. - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
Re: Re: Analog versus Digital Shootout
From: Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/05/06 Sat AM 05:44:06 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Analog versus Digital Shootout Hi! It's still a shocking scan as is the post processing of the direct digital capture, it's difficult to derive any useful information from the test. Two other tests for your amusement: Nikon D2X versus Mamiya 7 http://www.diax.nl/pages/start_mamiya_nikon_uk.html Canon 1Ds mark II (16mp) and Betterlight scanning back http://www.betterlight.com/rest_of_the_picture.asp Fascinating articles... What also occurs to me is this. Consider Mamiya 7 article. The guy there definitely *knows well* how to work with Mamiya 7. The adoption of digital camera does not happen overnight, it takes time, lots of time. Usually, which seems to be a part of human nature (especially male) there is a tendency to neglect the other toy... So, I should say, in order to make a better (I dare not say proper), there has to be at least two testers - one who is proficient with film camera and another who is good with digital. But Boris, the adverts imply that any eedjit (extreme form of idiot) can be as good a photographer as David Bailey as long as they use digital. You're not implying that they are spreading untruth, are you? - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
Re: Windows
From: Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nothing earth-shattering, but I hope you enjoy them: http://www.web-options.com/Windows/ Interesting theme. Subtle self-portrait in there. m - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
Re: Analog versus Digital Shootout
Hi! Fascinating articles... What also occurs to me is this. Consider Mamiya 7 article. The guy there definitely *knows well* how to work with Mamiya 7. The adoption of digital camera does not happen overnight, it takes time, lots of time. Usually, which seems to be a part of human nature (especially male) there is a tendency to neglect the other toy... So, I should say, in order to make a better (I dare not say proper), there has to be at least two testers - one who is proficient with film camera and another who is good with digital. But Boris, the adverts imply that any eedjit (extreme form of idiot) can be as good a photographer as David Bailey as long as they use digital. You're not implying that they are spreading untruth, are you? Nope, I did not intend to imply that they were spreading untruth. All I said is that while looking at the comparison one should first try to figure out where the comparison publisher is more proficient. Then, it would be more, hmmm, how to put it, transparent or easy to understand the results of the comparison. Boris
Re: Carrying stuff in the forest
On Fri, 05 May 2006 17:25:10 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bill, Making the dogs carry stuff? Not a bad idea. And if speed is needed, how about ( hanging out front) a cat on a stick. Colllin KC8TKA Good one. John -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
RE: Windows
Bob W wrote: http://www.web-options.com/Windows/ A very interesting set. Malcolm
Re: A Zoom for the istDS
On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 07:08:44PM -0700, Shel Belinkoff wrote: [...] Suggestions welcome - oh, not Sigma ... Thanks! Seems I'm not the only Sigma-hater here, huh? :))) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED], IRC:[EMAIL PROTECTED], /bin/zsh. C|NK Linux moria 2.6.16 #2 Thu Mar 30 19:55:41 CEST 2006 i686 11:20:31 up 11 min, 1 user, load average: 0.12, 0.16, 0.09
Re: PESO - Gannet
On Fri, 05 May 2006 17:19:44 +0100, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 5/5/06, Jostein, discombobulated, unleashed: Another one from our foray in feathers, this time starring the ancient SMCP-500/4.5 and Tim's 1.7 AF converter. http://www.oksne.net/paw/runde/gannet.html Beautiful! Lovely pic, and great technique in the Stenquist mould. 1/500 is very slow with an effective focal length (35mm) of 1:1275. John -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
OT:Tamron Soft focus problem
Hi Derby and anybody else interested :-) I got the film back from the lab today and sadly every shot (around 20) I took with the soft focus ring engaged on the SP Tamron 2.8 70-150mm portrait soft focus lens just produced a blank negative. The other shots without the soft focus are really good. The zoom seems to be defective regarding the soft focus feature. Any ideas what went wrong? I will soon get a second sample of this lens from an auction to test that feature again. greetings Markus
RE: PESO - Monterey Bay
Pleasant, yes. But it does not really turn me on. 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 2. mai 2006 04:31 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: PESO - Monterey Bay I'm debating putting up a Monterey gallery. But although I think most of my shots are okay, (17-mile drive and other stuff) most of it is just touristy and so maybe a gallery isn't worth it. Still debating. So I thought I might dribble out another PESO or two instead. http://members.aol.com/eactivist/PAWS/pages/bay.htm I think this is pleasant. I like the time of day and the soft colors. Although the big vertical stripe sort of annoys me, so I may tone it down if I ever print it. Anyway, I think this is just pleasant, not really anything more. And it looks a tinge muddier here than it did when I was editing the RAW. But only a tinge. Comments welcome and all that jazz. Marnie aka Doe
Re: OT:Tamron Soft focus problem
Markus Maurer wrote: Hi Derby and anybody else interested :-) I got the film back from the lab today and sadly every shot (around 20) I took with the soft focus ring engaged on the SP Tamron 2.8 70-150mm portrait soft focus lens just produced a blank negative. What do you mean by blank? Neg or slide? The other shots without the soft focus are really good. The zoom seems to be defective regarding the soft focus feature. Any ideas what went wrong? I will soon get a second sample of this lens from an auction to test that feature again. greetings Markus
RE: PESO! - Comments / Critique are welcome.
As others have stated, it does look slightly blurred. But that's just a minor thing. I find it a very strong image. You have done wonders with the contrasts and colours. It's lovely. It would look very good at my living room wall. If I ever find the time, I want to experiment with similar stuff, but I'm not sure if I've got the eye for it. 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: Patrick Genovese [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 2. mai 2006 16:13 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: PESO! - Comments / Critique are welcome. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4406828 Regards Patrick
RE: PESO - Cutting the Silence
Boris. I think Shel is pulling your leg. Very nice photography, BTW. 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: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 2. mai 2006 21:15 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: PESO - Cutting the Silence Hi Boris - i like the simplicity of the photo. One small problem, I can't see the feet of the people in the boat. Never saw the original post on the list. Shel [Original Message] From: jtainter http://www.photosight.ru/photo.php?photoid=1409549ref=sectionrefid=16
RE: OT:Tamron Soft focus problem
Hi Mike Fuji Superia ISO 100 color negative film was used and there is simply nothing exposed on the negative = blank, empty when I used soft focus at F2.8 or F4. The beginning and rest of the roll is fine since I did not use the soft focus ring there. Something must be wrong with that lens. greetings Markus -Original Message- From: mike wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2006 12:41 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: OT:Tamron Soft focus problem Markus Maurer wrote: Hi Derby and anybody else interested :-) I got the film back from the lab today and sadly every shot (around 20) I took with the soft focus ring engaged on the SP Tamron 2.8 70-150mm portrait soft focus lens just produced a blank negative. What do you mean by blank? Neg or slide? The other shots without the soft focus are really good. The zoom seems to be defective regarding the soft focus feature. Any ideas what went wrong? I will soon get a second sample of this lens from an auction to test that feature again. greetings Markus
RE: PESO - Monterey Bay
Hi Marnie I like it somehow but it looks like you used a denoiser program at no good use for the sky and parts of the boats. greetings Markus -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 2. mai 2006 04:31 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: PESO - Monterey Bay I'm debating putting up a Monterey gallery. But although I think most of my shots are okay, (17-mile drive and other stuff) most of it is just touristy and so maybe a gallery isn't worth it. Still debating. So I thought I might dribble out another PESO or two instead. http://members.aol.com/eactivist/PAWS/pages/bay.htm I think this is pleasant. I like the time of day and the soft colors. Although the big vertical stripe sort of annoys me, so I may tone it down if I ever print it. Anyway, I think this is just pleasant, not really anything more. And it looks a tinge muddier here than it did when I was editing the RAW. But only a tinge. Comments welcome and all that jazz. Marnie aka Doe
Re: OT:Tamron Soft focus problem
Markus Maurer wrote: Hi Mike Fuji Superia ISO 100 color negative film was used and there is simply nothing exposed on the negative = blank, empty when I used soft focus at F2.8 or F4. The beginning and rest of the roll is fine since I did not use the soft focus ring there. Something must be wrong with that lens. greetings Markus You could check for operation of the diaphragm by shooting with it pointing towards you. You can see it close down to the taking aperture as you fire the shutter. -Original Message- From: mike wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2006 12:41 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: OT:Tamron Soft focus problem Markus Maurer wrote: Hi Derby and anybody else interested :-) I got the film back from the lab today and sadly every shot (around 20) I took with the soft focus ring engaged on the SP Tamron 2.8 70-150mm portrait soft focus lens just produced a blank negative. What do you mean by blank? Neg or slide? The other shots without the soft focus are really good. The zoom seems to be defective regarding the soft focus feature. Any ideas what went wrong? I will soon get a second sample of this lens from an auction to test that feature again. greetings Markus
Re: OT: I'm Done Too!
My youngest daughter graduated from college today. HOO ROO!! Four kids and half a million dollars later, I'm a free man. Twelve years of paying college tuition every semester is no but a memory. No more college home equity loans. No more fall move ins and spring move outs. No more critiquing essays. No more. I'm done. Paul Nice to hear Paul. Look at all that camera money now freed up.:-) Dave
Re: Super WA/Fisheye recommendations
I spent thirty years shooting with nothing but primes. For the past couple of years I've been using the new Pentax wide zooms. I find them to be outstanding, and generally the equal of primes in everything save speed. So when low light isn't a problem, they are a great solution. I referenced a couple of pis. You can find more going through the photo.net page on which these appear. Here's a DA 16-45 pic: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3672858size=lg This was shot for a magazine article with the DA 12-24. Perspective correction in Photoshop. This is at 12mm, and the lens gave me the corner sharpness I needed to pull this off: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3924131size=lg On May 6, 2006, at 12:34 AM, Michael Hamilton wrote: I've been looking to replace my DA 18-55 lately, especially since I can get some amazing prices due to the high Canadian dollar right now (or is it low US dollar? ;) ) I tend to prefer primes if I can, but i certainly won't limit my self to that. I'm really looking to step up optically, but I also would like a little wider if i can get it. Can anyone comment on these lenses for optical and build quality? Experience? I've found a few reviews, but they're not always helpful. Front runners include: Pentax 16-45mm ED AL - $409 Sigma 20mm 1.8 EX - $409 (can be used on Film also - big plus!) Pentax 14mm ED IF - $599 (a bit more than I'd like to spend!) Pentax 12-24mm ED AL - $599 (again, $$$) Sigma 10-20mm - $479 I've also considered a fisheye. If I use a Full-frame fisheye on my DS, would the crop treat it more like a regular wide-angle? ie, less distortion outside of the center axis? Zenitar fisheye (does this work for 35mm also?) - I'd prefer an A lens over M, however... but it's cheap. Pentax SCMP-DA 10-17mm - $399 Sigma 15mm 2.8 - $499 (my regular kit also includes the Pentax-A 28/2.8, Pentax-A 50/1.7, and a Sigma 70-300 APO) Any help is appreciated! Michael Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.michaelhamilton.ca
Re: Analog versus Digital Shootout
That's true. It was sized down for printing. He should have printed it at 300 or 360. But the web images would have been resized anyway, and that's all we're seeing here. I'm sure he did something wrong, but I'm betting it was lousy scans. The difference is too big for any other explanation. But I do think it demonstrates that 12 megapixel digital from a full frame sensor is capable of quality that can compete with medium format. Many pros have staked their careers on that and have proven it to be the case. Clint Clemens is a good example. (I mentioned this in a previous message, but it never showed up.) He's a 30K/day commercial shooter with fine-art credentials. He works exclusively with the Canon full frame dslr in the studio and on location, and is booked solid. Paul On May 6, 2006, at 3:16 AM, Aaron Reynolds wrote: On May 5, 2006, at 8:39 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: The author of the test didn't say that. In fact, he scanned the 6x6 at a fairly high resolution. He said he sized both files to make a 240 dpi 20x30. 240 dpi at 20x30 from 6x6 is not all that high -- that scanner is capable of much more. Therefore, the scan was sized down. -Aaron
Re: I'm Done Too!
I'd go for anyone under sixty, but I think my daughter is fussier:-). She is back in America, living at our home and working nights as a waitress. The ex is still in Scotland and probably hasn't looked up from his beer often enough to notice his wife and daughter are gone. No need to be sorry. It's cause for celebration. Her husband literally kept her locked up most of the time, so she had to plot an escape. Thankfully, she was able to pull it off. She had to leave with just a suitcase and the clothes on her back, but it's better to be free and poor than to be a captive in the home of a drunken lunatic. Paul On May 6, 2006, at 3:18 AM, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Fri, 5 May 2006, Paul Stenquist wrote: We'll deal with that later:-). Still hoping her momma will find a new daddy. Say, do you have any sons? We might be talking dowry here:-)). Let me get this right, Granpa Stenquist: you are looking for someone's son to become your daughter's daddy. How old would that someone be? :-P Kostas p.s.: I had not realised that your daughter returned to the States because of a divorce. Sorry.
Re: Analog versus Digital Shootout
Film advertising claimed the same thing. In the US we were treated to Canon ads that showed someone in the stands of a football game shooting tremendous, tight action shots with a cheap consumer zoom. On May 6, 2006, at 4:29 AM, mike wilson wrote: But Boris, the adverts imply that any eedjit (extreme form of idiot) can be as good a photographer as David Bailey as long as they use digital. You're not implying that they are spreading untruth, are you? - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
RE: PESO: Patience is a Virtue
A well told sweet daily life story. To state the obvious: There is a strong line between the dog and the door. This makes it obvious for us that the dog's attention is at the door. That's what tells the story. 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: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 3. mai 2006 02:16 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: PESO: Patience is a Virtue http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4409012size=lg Note the absence of any kind of restraint. This guy waited ten minutes for his lady. DA 50-200, 50mm, f8 @ 1/125th Paul
RE: PESO - Eternal Sea
The tree on top of the hill makes this shot for me. I'd like to see it a bit larger. 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 3. mai 2006 05:02 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: PESO - Eternal Sea My Monterey Bay peso I threw up the other day drew no comment. I admit it was rather ho-hum, pleasant but not much more. Maybe this will draw at least one comment. :-) I shot quite a few shots of this, but most had too much glare. I think this is the best. I have used Highlight/Shadows in PS to lighten the shadows a tad. Maybe too much? It is actually a color shot, not BW. This is looking up the coast line from near the Lone Cyprus. Eternal Sea... http://members.aol.com/eactivist/PAWS/pages/sea.htm Comments welcome. Marnie aka Doe I think this about concludes my shots until I throw up a jellyfish gallery.
Re: OT: I'm Done Too!
Paul Stenquist wrote: My youngest daughter graduated from college today. HOO ROO!! Four kids and half a million dollars later, I'm a free man. Twelve years of paying college tuition every semester is no but a memory. No more college home equity loans. No more fall move ins and spring move outs. No more critiquing essays. No more. I'm done. Yikes. I'm glad I live in a country where higher education is still (mostly) state-funded... S
RE: PESO - My First PESO
I think most that needs to be said is said. After Godfrey has over(?)done his magic, it pops ;-) A nice portrait. 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: Michael Hamilton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 3. mai 2006 06:20 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: PESO - My First PESO This is partly an experiment in BW post-processing, part trying to rescue a low-light shot. Orig: http://www.michaelhamilton.ca/images/joc.jpg BW: http://www.michaelhamilton.ca/images/jocbw.jpg Technical: *ist DS, A-50mm/1.7, 1/25s, f/2.0, ISO 400. I de-saturated, then adjusted the lightness of the spectrum. Added some noise. Tips? Honesty? Brutality? Thanks. Michael Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.michaelhamilton.ca
RE: PESO - Fields of (Red) Gold
I can see that you are in love ;-) Lovely colours, lovely sky. But I have one nit. The house leans to the right, so I assume your horizon is not correct. 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: 3. mai 2006 13:15 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: PESO - Fields of (Red) Gold Hi! Spring is largely over in Israel. But some last nice days still remain. http://not.contaxg.com/document.php?id=13405 Expect more PESOs as I am deeply in love with my 31 Limited. Boris
RE: Skua (lens competition)
Don't know why. Just my gut feeling. Anyway, I haven't time to try now. So most likely I'll forget the idea ;-) 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: Kenneth Waller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 3. mai 2006 16:45 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Skua (lens competition) Well done Tim. It's uncanny how the background hue matches the bird's. I think it could look nice in bw too. Why? Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Tim Øsleby [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PESO: Skua (lens competition) Here is another Skua, shot at the same trip. In fact, I wonder if it is the same bird. This one is a more strait forward composition, read less exiting. But because of how the colours match, I like it a lot. I think it could look nice in bw too. It also shows better what the crappy(?) old manual focus Tokina lens can do under near perfect conditions. http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=234225 *istDS, tripod, Tokina AT-X 150-500/5,6 @ 500mm, f:11, 1/350s, 400 ISO raw. Whatdoyoahthink? Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds (Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)
RE: OT - PESO - Blackbird and Insect
Good catch (your and the birds) 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: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 3. mai 2006 18:34 To: pentax list Subject: OT - PESO - Blackbird and Insect I try not to post non-Pentax pics here, but I thought some of the twitchers here might like to see this. A nest of Blackbird chicks resides just inside the roof of our house and the mother flutters to and fro bringing food and taking out the garbage (old feathers). I found a very close vantage point trough my son's window. Here she is filling the frame, just about to dart up under the wooden eaves... http://www.cottysnaps.com/snaps/nature/images/pic32.html 1DmarkII, 70-200 2.8 L IS, ISO 800, 1/1000th at f 5.6 Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
RE: PESO - Monterey Bay
Marnie, (missed the original post?) I think you've described this perfectly. Totally agree with your pleasant description. Soft tones and quiet theme do it for me. Jack --- Tim Øsleby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Pleasant, yes. But it does not really turn me on. 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 2. mai 2006 04:31 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: PESO - Monterey Bay I'm debating putting up a Monterey gallery. But although I think most of my shots are okay, (17-mile drive and other stuff) most of it is just touristy and so maybe a gallery isn't worth it. Still debating. So I thought I might dribble out another PESO or two instead. http://members.aol.com/eactivist/PAWS/pages/bay.htm I think this is pleasant. I like the time of day and the soft colors. Although the big vertical stripe sort of annoys me, so I may tone it down if I ever print it. Anyway, I think this is just pleasant, not really anything more. And it looks a tinge muddier here than it did when I was editing the RAW. But only a tinge. Comments welcome and all that jazz. Marnie aka Doe __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Re; A Zoom for the istDS
Good luck to you, Michael ... Shel [Original Message] From: Michael Hamilton I've got a FA 28-90 3.5-4.6 that I'm looking to get rid of... Never mind the cheap plastic mount or the loose focus ring... ;)
Re: Semi OT... DVD rewriter
Alex, Been using Plexors at work since 1x CD writers. Nothing but flawless operations, but pricy. When I bought mine at home, I went cheaper and saw the problems. (not insurmontable, but annoying) All this stuff is so cheap now, how can you go wrong! Regards, Bob S. On 5/5/06, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 5/5/06, mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, My ancient (one of the first x2 rewriters in the country!!!) CDRW drive seems to be expiring. Just in time for me to fill my HDD with PEF files. I'm looking at a Philips PBDV1660G/00 DVD+-RW. Anyone got any nasty experiences, humerous stories, prices cheaper than £29.36? Other recommendations? mike You should take a look at www.cdfreaks.com The review is here: http://www.cdfreaks.com/article/267 Overall, it seems a good drive. Hmm... a week ago, I was in a computer store, wanting to buy a LG 4167B. Instead, I choosed a Plextor - big mistake. That Plextor - the PX750A - is actually a very expensive Teac. -- Best regards, Alex Sarbu
PAD - renewed :)
Thanx to your suggestions, I encouraged myself to change construction of my website. How do you like it now, lads? :) cheers alkos -- go out, burn some film! 24x36 at op pl http://pad.go.pl
Re: I'm Done Too!
- Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist Subject: Re: I'm Done Too! I'd go for anyone under sixty, but I think my daughter is fussier:-). She is back in America, living at our home and working nights as a waitress. The ex is still in Scotland and probably hasn't looked up from his beer often enough to notice his wife and daughter are gone. No need to be sorry. It's cause for celebration. Her husband literally kept her locked up most of the time, so she had to plot an escape. Thankfully, she was able to pull it off. She had to leave with just a suitcase and the clothes on her back, but it's better to be free and poor than to be a captive in the home of a drunken lunatic. Damned Scots, still figuring the best way to get a wife is to raid the Sasanak. William Robb
RE: OT:Tamron Soft focus problem
Hi Mike thanks, I will try that. greetings Markus -Original Message- From: mike wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2006 1:23 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: OT:Tamron Soft focus problem Markus Maurer wrote: Hi Mike Fuji Superia ISO 100 color negative film was used and there is simply nothing exposed on the negative = blank, empty when I used soft focus at F2.8 or F4. The beginning and rest of the roll is fine since I did not use the soft focus ring there. Something must be wrong with that lens. greetings Markus You could check for operation of the diaphragm by shooting with it pointing towards you. You can see it close down to the taking aperture as you fire the shutter.
Re: PESO - Monterey Bay
Actually, no. I have no denoiser program. But it was taken fairly low light and probably does have more noise than normal. It also probably needs more tweaking than I have given it so far. Thanks for looking. Marnie aka Doe = Hi Marnie I like it somehow but it looks like you used a denoiser program at no good use for the sky and parts of the boats. greetings Markus -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 2. mai 2006 04:31 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: PESO - Monterey Bay I'm debating putting up a Monterey gallery. But although I think most of my shots are okay, (17-mile drive and other stuff) most of it is just touristy and so maybe a gallery isn't worth it. Still debating. So I thought I might dribble out another PESO or two instead. http://members.aol.com/eactivist/PAWS/pages/bay.htm
Re: A Zoom for the istDS
Interesting that you are not suggesting the 28-105/3.2-4.5 AL; I thought you had a high opinion of it. It's a good lens but I didn't think it met shel's req's. G
Re: First enablement in quite a while.
Don, These are hard to find and your price was appropriate. I'm still looking for one as I like the M100/2.8. Regards, Bob S. On 5/2/06, Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=7612790892 I know I paid too much for it but I was out this morning and compared the M100/2.8 to my Tamron SP 90 macro. The bokeh on the 100 is SO much smoother. This should be the same lens without the Green Button Zip sound required, scared away two birds this morning. ;-( Been buying only broken stuff lately, be nice to get one that works out of the box. Don
RE: PAD - renewed
I said it before and I'll say it again, this is some of the most consistently good photography I've seen. Wonderful stuff, just the sort of photography I enjoy. Now, alkos keeps changing the web design, so every so often I have to figure out how to view the images... LOL. But it's worth it! *UncaMikey --- alkos passed along: http://pad.go.pl/
RE: Windows
I like these, little slices of life, well done. My favorite is the one a-kilter of the elderly woman reading a paper on the stoop. Extra points for the Samuel Johnson -- he has so many of those zingers that I can't remember them, so each time I hear one it sounds brand new. Different premises larf larf larf. *UncaMikey - Bob W wrote: http://www.web-options.com/Windows/
OT: In support of Old Stuff.
This is my response to all of those If it ain't new, it's crap kinda folk. (PDMLers are _not_ that kind) ;-) A 37 year old Olympus 35SP took this yesterday as I was testing it: http://www.donsauction.com/PDML/Oly_SP.htm Bear in mind this is ISO 400 film and taken from a highly compressed 1.5MP 'Picture CD' scan. I can't wait to re-scan the negative as a 15MP Tiff! I have to hook the Minolta back up, too busy playing camera repairman right now. ;-( Don
Re: A Zoom for the istDS
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Fri, 5 May 2006, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On May 5, 2006, at 7:08 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: What might be a good compliment to the FA 20~35 zoom for the istDS? I'm compiling a wish list, and would like a relatively fast, high-quality zoom that extends the range of the 20~35 to about 100mm or so. I'd prefer an FA rather than a DA, and am not looking for kit lenses or low quality consumer glass - something comparable to the 20~35 or better, preferably fixed aperture. Suggestions welcome - oh, not Sigma ... Thanks! My answer to this might be the DA50-135/2.8 when it is released. The FA24-90/3.5-4.5 AL is another option. The Tamron 28-75/2.8 is another reputedly good lens in this general range. Interesting that you are not suggesting the 28-105/3.2-4.5 AL; I thought you had a high opinion of it. Kostas I'll recommend it for you. ;) The SMC Pentax-FA 28-105 f/3.2-4.5 AL is a compact, sharp, and relatively fast lens that provides an excellent range of focal length. It sits in my bag right next to my 16-45 (but 20-35 is great too), while my FA28 or FA50 sit on the camera. lol Seriously though, I get a lot of use out of the combination of 16-45 and 28-105. I think the 28-105 makes a good companion to your 20-35, and you'll find you're using it much of the time. Dave
Re: OT: In support of Old Stuff.
Don, I'm with you! Vic Don Sanderson wrote: This is my response to all of those If it ain't new, it's crap kinda folk. (PDMLers are _not_ that kind) ;-) A 37 year old Olympus 35SP took this yesterday as I was testing it: http://www.donsauction.com/PDML/Oly_SP.htm Bear in mind this is ISO 400 film and taken from a highly compressed 1.5MP 'Picture CD' scan. I can't wait to re-scan the negative as a 15MP Tiff! I have to hook the Minolta back up, too busy playing camera repairman right now. ;-( Don
Re: OT: In support of Old Stuff.
Nice shot. It appears to show very good detail. Paul On May 6, 2006, at 11:33 AM, Don Sanderson wrote: This is my response to all of those If it ain't new, it's crap kinda folk. (PDMLers are _not_ that kind) ;-) A 37 year old Olympus 35SP took this yesterday as I was testing it: http://www.donsauction.com/PDML/Oly_SP.htm Bear in mind this is ISO 400 film and taken from a highly compressed 1.5MP 'Picture CD' scan. I can't wait to re-scan the negative as a 15MP Tiff! I have to hook the Minolta back up, too busy playing camera repairman right now. ;-( Don
Re: PAD - renewed :)
I like it. Much easier to browse. Dave S. On 5/6/06, alkos [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanx to your suggestions, I encouraged myself to change construction of my website. How do you like it now, lads? :) cheers alkos -- go out, burn some film! 24x36 at op pl http://pad.go.pl
Re: Super WA/Fisheye recommendations
I've been looking to replace my DA 18-55 lately, especially since I can get some amazing prices due to the high Canadian dollar right now (or is it low US dollar? ;) ) Michael, your list of candidates consists of apples and oranges. They are lenses for different purposes. First you must think through what you need the new lens for. Or might you buy more than one? If you are looking to replace the kit 18-55, you cannot do better than the DA 16-45. It is a very fine performer, and my most used lens. Otherwise it would not be in my kit. The wide end is wide enough for most purposes. But think through what you want to do, then come back to us with refined questions about specific lenses. Joe
OT:? keep the Internet free
I hope all US residents on the list have signed the petition to keep the Internet free and open. As a Canadian I can't sign but if the bill is passed it will effect the activities of all Internet users. The following is taken from a post by Keith Krebs on the Epson list. Powell = If you want to read the original bill (HR 5252) it's at: http://www.benton.org/benton_files/HR%205252%20COPE_0.pdfhttp://www.bent on.org/benton_files/HR%205252%20COPE_0.pdf It's basically an end run on net neutrality by telecom carriers looking for what is effectively a subsidy through ending net neutrality. The bottom line is that they want it to underwrite expansion of their capital infrastructure in the form of physical networks. That, at a time when even industry publications like Network World say there is a glut of capacity. IMHO, that's the real agenda, these carriers built too much capacity, they have lots of it after a round of mergers, and now they want Congress to effectively tax all of us to pay for their poor business choices. Sadly, that tax will also limit free and open commentary on the net. Please sign this petition letting your member of Congress know you support preserving Internet freedom. Click here: http://www.civic.moveon.org/save_the_internet?track_referer=706%7C571152- Sx7iBQ7NlbcDp5pBcFv0oQhttp://www.civic.moveon.org/save_the_internet?track_ referer=706%7C571152-Sx7iBQ7NlbcDp5pBcFv0oQ
Re: A Zoom for the istDS
On May 6, 2006, at 8:32 AM, David Oswald wrote: Interesting that you are not suggesting the 28-105/3.2-4.5 AL; I thought you had a high opinion of it. I'll recommend it for you. ;) The SMC Pentax-FA 28-105 f/3.2-4.5 AL is a compact, sharp, and relatively fast lens that provides an excellent range of focal length. It sits in my bag right next to my 16-45 (but 20-35 is great too), while my FA28 or FA50 sit on the camera. lol Seriously though, I get a lot of use out of the combination of 16-45 and 28-105. I think the 28-105 makes a good companion to your 20-35, and you'll find you're using it much of the time. stream-of-consciousness train-of-thought: I got a lot of use out of the 28-105/3.2-4.5 last year. But where I want the longer focal length I also often use near wide open settings. The FA135/2.8 does me better and is faster, but it's often a bit too long. Comparisons of the 28-105 against the 24-90 show that the latter does better at its longer settings, where I want to use this kind of lens more of the time, so I sold the 28-105 and was planning to buy the 24-90. But then the roadmap showed the DA50-135/2.8 coming up and I've decided to wait for that one ... I also keep thinking of an FA77 limited or the upcoming DA70 as well. I'm no help, eh? Godfrey
Re: OT: In support of Old Stuff.
PDMLers are innoculated against expecting new things=good, old things=bad. We don't have that much choice about new things, since they so seldom occur. That's why we fiddle around with 40 year old m42 lenses and talk about lots of stuff other than new gear. I think this is a good thing. D Vic Mortelmans wrote: Don, I'm with you! Vic Don Sanderson wrote: This is my response to all of those If it ain't new, it's crap kinda folk. (PDMLers are _not_ that kind) ;-) A 37 year old Olympus 35SP took this yesterday as I was testing it: http://www.donsauction.com/PDML/Oly_SP.htm Bear in mind this is ISO 400 film and taken from a highly compressed 1.5MP 'Picture CD' scan. I can't wait to re-scan the negative as a 15MP Tiff! I have to hook the Minolta back up, too busy playing camera repairman right now. ;-( Don -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc
Web Gallery and Copyright help
Hi all. Well i have PSCS and possibly CS2 if i get it, for Mac. I have Fetch, a decent inexpensive FTP program, to upload my photos to my site, for Mac, and renamer4mac, so i can do my global renames quickly. Only thing is to sort out how my web pages will be created. I have just done some experimenting with PS in Web Gallery, and i have set it up, as far as i can tell, to accept my copyright on the image face.When i run my test photos, nothing appears, just the banner info,no copy right across the image. I checked out the CS help but i;m doing what it says,again i think.:-) Any help here. If i can get this to work, i can do all my photo work on the Mac. If not i';ll just have to work with BBPro on the PC for the web pages. Dave David J Brooks Equine, Pets, Bands, Rural Landscape Photography in York Region www.caughtinmotion.com Pentax istD, PZ-1, Nikon D1 D2H
Re: OT:Tamron Soft focus problem
Hi Markus, I'm really sorry to hear that. This is your lens, right? http://jfcampbell.us/photo/tamron70-150sf.htm The Pentax lenses are really simple, with no open aperture lever - it just stops down to whatever f-stop you select. The smaller the aperture, the darker your viewfinder (and of course less soft focus). It sounds like the Tamron uses a floating element (shifting the relay lens) to adjust the spherical aberration. Hard to think of a reason why that would affect exposure though. Keep us informed about the prognosis. Haven't had a chance to use the 6x7 120mm yet, but I will soon. D Markus Maurer wrote: Hi Mike Fuji Superia ISO 100 color negative film was used and there is simply nothing exposed on the negative = blank, empty when I used soft focus at F2.8 or F4. The beginning and rest of the roll is fine since I did not use the soft focus ring there. Something must be wrong with that lens. greetings Markus -Original Message- From: mike wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2006 12:41 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: OT:Tamron Soft focus problem Markus Maurer wrote: Hi Derby and anybody else interested :-) I got the film back from the lab today and sadly every shot (around 20) I took with the soft focus ring engaged on the SP Tamron 2.8 70-150mm portrait soft focus lens just produced a blank negative. What do you mean by blank? Neg or slide? The other shots without the soft focus are really good. The zoom seems to be defective regarding the soft focus feature. Any ideas what went wrong? I will soon get a second sample of this lens from an auction to test that feature again. greetings Markus -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc
Re: Web Gallery and Copyright help
Just to check. Is this what the gallery creator look like where you set up the copyright info? (I'm using CS2 I can't remember if CS was any different) http://www.arach.net.au/~savage/Misc/PSCRI.jpg These are the copyright settings I used for the last gallery I put together and it worked fine for me. The gallery: http://www.arach.net.au/~savage/GESO/GESO_010/index.htm Dave S. On 5/7/06, Dave Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all. Well i have PSCS and possibly CS2 if i get it, for Mac. I have Fetch, a decent inexpensive FTP program, to upload my photos to my site, for Mac, and renamer4mac, so i can do my global renames quickly. Only thing is to sort out how my web pages will be created. I have just done some experimenting with PS in Web Gallery, and i have set it up, as far as i can tell, to accept my copyright on the image face.When i run my test photos, nothing appears, just the banner info,no copy right across the image. I checked out the CS help but i;m doing what it says,again i think.:-) Any help here. If i can get this to work, i can do all my photo work on the Mac. If not i';ll just have to work with BBPro on the PC for the web pages. Dave David J Brooks Equine, Pets, Bands, Rural Landscape Photography in York Region www.caughtinmotion.com Pentax istD, PZ-1, Nikon D1 D2H
Re: OT: In support of Old Stuff.
On May 6, 2006, at 8:33 AM, Don Sanderson wrote: A 37 year old Olympus 35SP took this yesterday as I was testing it: http://www.donsauction.com/PDML/Oly_SP.htm Olympus always did make excellent quality lenses. Film has gotten better. Godfrey
Re: Web Gallery and Copyright help
The HTML creation tools cannot place a watermark into the image file, as far as I'm aware. You should create a script to add a watermark and save out that as an additional image set prior to building the HTML. Godfrey On May 6, 2006, at 9:48 AM, Dave Brooks wrote: Hi all. Well i have PSCS and possibly CS2 if i get it, for Mac. I have Fetch, a decent inexpensive FTP program, to upload my photos to my site, for Mac, and renamer4mac, so i can do my global renames quickly. Only thing is to sort out how my web pages will be created. I have just done some experimenting with PS in Web Gallery, and i have set it up, as far as i can tell, to accept my copyright on the image face.When i run my test photos, nothing appears, just the banner info,no copy right across the image. I checked out the CS help but i;m doing what it says,again i think.:-) Any help here. If i can get this to work, i can do all my photo work on the Mac. If not i';ll just have to work with BBPro on the PC for the web pages. Dave David J Brooks Equine, Pets, Bands, Rural Landscape Photography in York Region www.caughtinmotion.com Pentax istD, PZ-1, Nikon D1 D2H
RE: PAD - renewed :)
I'm getting a 404. -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: alkos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 06 May 2006 15:30 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: PAD - renewed :) Thanx to your suggestions, I encouraged myself to change construction of my website. How do you like it now, lads? :) cheers alkos -- go out, burn some film! 24x36 at op pl http://pad.go.pl
RE: PESO - bird through a mosquito net
Fri, 05 May 2006 07:22:32 -0700 Markus Maurer wrote: Hi Igor the background rendering is much nicer here. Still not very good but okay for a non Pentax lens ;-) greetings Markus Markus, you are right. I didn't notice it myself... Thank you for pointing it out. Interesting effect that I didn't expect from just changing the contrast profile. Igor
RE: Windows
too subtle for me, Mike. Where is it? -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: mike wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 06 May 2006 09:46 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Windows From: Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nothing earth-shattering, but I hope you enjoy them: http://www.web-options.com/Windows/ Interesting theme. Subtle self-portrait in there. m
Re: Skua (lens competition)
By the way, this seems like an amazing proof of nature's efficiency to camouflage in the environment!! (of course nature didn't take PDML photographers into account...) Groeten, Vic Vic Mortelmans wrote: Hi, why black-and-white?, seems obvious to me... there's basically only one color in the picture, so if you turn to grayscale, you won't loose alot. Open it in an image editor and use the tool to pick colors; try to get the HSV-value of some pixels and you'll see that the H-values are very similar allover the picture. I noticed because I've been experimenting with a conversion tool to make duotone images (i.e. images that can be printed using two inks, most likely black + a spot color). When I run this image through the tool, it has very little effect, since the source image is very close to a duotone. Here's the comparison: http://users.pandora.be/vicmortelmans/monochrome_bird/monochrome_bird.html (I also added a version using a different spot color, closer to red) Groeten, VIc If you like to read more about my experiments (and maybe give feedback), look here: http://users.pandora.be/vicmortelmans/fts/adaptiveduotone/adaptiveduotone.html Tim Øsleby wrote: Don't know why. Just my gut feeling. Anyway, I haven't time to try now. So most likely I'll forget the idea ;-) 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: Kenneth Waller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 3. mai 2006 16:45 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Skua (lens competition) Well done Tim. It's uncanny how the background hue matches the bird's. I think it could look nice in bw too. Why? Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Tim Øsleby [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PESO: Skua (lens competition) Here is another Skua, shot at the same trip. In fact, I wonder if it is the same bird. This one is a more strait forward composition, read less exiting. But because of how the colours match, I like it a lot. I think it could look nice in bw too. It also shows better what the crappy(?) old manual focus Tokina lens can do under near perfect conditions. http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=234225 *istDS, tripod, Tokina AT-X 150-500/5,6 @ 500mm, f:11, 1/350s, 400 ISO raw. Whatdoyoahthink? Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds (Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)
Re: I'm Done Too!
Say, do you have any sons? As a matter of fact I do. But since this isn't Utah it won't work - he's happily married with a 20 month old son and another on the way. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: I'm Done Too! We'll deal with that later:-). Still hoping her momma will find a new daddy. Say, do you have any sons? We might be talking dowry here:-)). Paul On May 5, 2006, at 9:29 PM, Kenneth Waller wrote: No more critiquing essays. No more. I'm done. Paul Now about that grandchild.. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: OT: I'm Done Too! My youngest daughter graduated from college today. HOO ROO!! Four kids and half a million dollars later, I'm a free man. Twelve years of paying college tuition every semester is no but a memory. No more college home equity loans. No more fall move ins and spring move outs. No more critiquing essays. No more. I'm done. Paul
Re: PAD - renewed :)
Much nicer to browse! G On May 6, 2006, at 7:29 AM, alkos wrote: Thanx to your suggestions, I encouraged myself to change construction of my website. How do you like it now, lads? :) cheers alkos -- go out, burn some film! 24x36 at op pl http://pad.go.pl
Re: Web Gallery and Copyright help
Interesting, David. I had no idea the gallery creator could do that! thx Godfrey On May 6, 2006, at 10:11 AM, David Savage wrote: Just to check. Is this what the gallery creator look like where you set up the copyright info? (I'm using CS2 I can't remember if CS was any different) http://www.arach.net.au/~savage/Misc/PSCRI.jpg These are the copyright settings I used for the last gallery I put together and it worked fine for me. The gallery: http://www.arach.net.au/~savage/GESO/GESO_010/index.htm Dave S. On 5/7/06, Dave Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all. Well i have PSCS and possibly CS2 if i get it, for Mac. I have Fetch, a decent inexpensive FTP program, to upload my photos to my site, for Mac, and renamer4mac, so i can do my global renames quickly. Only thing is to sort out how my web pages will be created. I have just done some experimenting with PS in Web Gallery, and i have set it up, as far as i can tell, to accept my copyright on the image face.When i run my test photos, nothing appears, just the banner info,no copy right across the image. I checked out the CS help but i;m doing what it says,again i think.:-) Any help here. If i can get this to work, i can do all my photo work on the Mac. If not i';ll just have to work with BBPro on the PC for the web pages. Dave David J Brooks Equine, Pets, Bands, Rural Landscape Photography in York Region www.caughtinmotion.com Pentax istD, PZ-1, Nikon D1 D2H
Re: RESEND: Heads-up and question
I think John Francis uses a tool he created to do this for the D. I don't know whether it is the same for files created with the DS. Godfrey On May 5, 2006, at 6:51 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Al well and good - how does one look there? Heck, where is the tag even found? Shel [Original Message] From: John Francis On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 05:50:06PM -0700, Brian Dipert wrote: Folks, FYI KEH has cut their prices on used *istD bodies. Bodies- only in EX shape for $645 (formerly 725), full packages in EX for $665 and EX + for $695. I ordered a body-only (as backup for my existing *istD) which just arrived and, although I haven't yet popped in batteries, it appears to be in like-new cosmetic shape. How does one determine how many to-date shots have been taken by a particular *istD? Look in the Pentax private data in the MakerNote tag, tag ID code 41.
RE: PAD - renewed :)
I agree. Very, very good stuff. alkos is the new buhler... -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 06 May 2006 19:36 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: PAD - renewed :) Much nicer to browse! G On May 6, 2006, at 7:29 AM, alkos wrote: Thanx to your suggestions, I encouraged myself to change construction of my website. How do you like it now, lads? :) cheers alkos -- go out, burn some film! 24x36 at op pl http://pad.go.pl
Re: Analog versus Digital Shootout
On May 5, 2006, at 8:41 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: Because most photographic projects now involve a digital source, almost all photographic projects favor digital. The exception would be personal hobby photography. For that, film is still great. Actually, my high-end work is always on film. Clients appreciate the difference in the look and are willing to pay for it. Yes, you can get similar effects to all these wonderful alternative film processes in the digital realm, but somehow it's just not the same. -Aaron
Re: exhibit ... reminder
Thanks Ann! G On May 4, 2006, at 8:47 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote: Wish I were on the west coast, GOdfrey - good luck with it! BEst, ann Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: The Pacific Arts League Weekend Show was a big success last week. I've got two photos hanging in the Photo and Sculpture show at the same venue, which opened yesterday. I'd like to invite you to come see them and enjoy the reception. --- May 3 - 26 Photo and Sculpture :: Reception 6-9 pm :: Friday, May 5th :: Awards at 6:15 in the Main Gallery gallery viewing hours: Mon-Fri 9-5, Sat 10-4 --- The gallery is located at Pacific Art League of Palo Alto 668 Ramona Street Palo Alto, CA 94301 650-321-3891 www.pacificartleague.org best Godfrey
Re: Windows
in this one: http://www.web-options.com/Windows/pages/68280013.htm On May 6, 2006, at 1:40 PM, Bob W wrote: too subtle for me, Mike. Where is it? -- Cheers, Bob
Re: Windows
Your thumbnails are incredibly tiny on my monitor, Bob. Only about 1/2 inch wide. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Bob W wrote: Hi, I've just had a few rolls of film developed and scanned that had been lying around for a couple of years. I was slightly surprised to notice a theme of windows, doors, entrances exits, so I've put together a little gallery from the minilab scans. Nothing earth-shattering, but I hope you enjoy them: http://www.web-options.com/Windows/ I took the picture of the 2 women arguing outside a café on the day Cartier-Bresson died. I remember thinking while I was taking it that it was vaguely HCB-ish. When I returned to where we were staying I heard on the news that he had died. The scene also brought to mind one of Dr. Johnson's bad jokes, about the two neighbours arguing on the doorsteps of their houses. Those women will never agree, he said for they are arguing from different premises. -- Cheers, Bob
Re: Analog versus Digital Shootout
Oh, 12MP is fine for a very large range of applications. But that test is not representative of film. I saw your Clint message, by the way. -Aaron On May 6, 2006, at 7:51 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote: That's true. It was sized down for printing. He should have printed it at 300 or 360. But the web images would have been resized anyway, and that's all we're seeing here. I'm sure he did something wrong, but I'm betting it was lousy scans. The difference is too big for any other explanation. But I do think it demonstrates that 12 megapixel digital from a full frame sensor is capable of quality that can compete with medium format. Many pros have staked their careers on that and have proven it to be the case. Clint Clemens is a good example. (I mentioned this in a previous message, but it never showed up.) He's a 30K/day commercial shooter with fine-art credentials. He works exclusively with the Canon full frame dslr in the studio and on location, and is booked solid. Paul On May 6, 2006, at 3:16 AM, Aaron Reynolds wrote: On May 5, 2006, at 8:39 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: The author of the test didn't say that. In fact, he scanned the 6x6 at a fairly high resolution. He said he sized both files to make a 240 dpi 20x30. 240 dpi at 20x30 from 6x6 is not all that high -- that scanner is capable of much more. Therefore, the scan was sized down. -Aaron
Yo, Mr Listguy?
Anything we can be doing to help out the list constipation? I just did a quick check against the archives, I'm missing almost 75% of the messages. I sent one this morning and there were at least 4 responses, all I recieved was 1 of the responses, didn't even get my own. Nothing is different at my end, I'm the domain owner, mail administrator and ISP, so I'm sure of that. ;-) Don
Re: Skua (lens competition)
Hi, why black-and-white?, seems obvious to me... there's basically only one color in the picture, so if you turn to grayscale, you won't loose alot. Open it in an image editor and use the tool to pick colors; try to get the HSV-value of some pixels and you'll see that the H-values are very similar allover the picture. I noticed because I've been experimenting with a conversion tool to make duotone images (i.e. images that can be printed using two inks, most likely black + a spot color). When I run this image through the tool, it has very little effect, since the source image is very close to a duotone. Here's the comparison: http://users.pandora.be/vicmortelmans/monochrome_bird/monochrome_bird.html (I also added a version using a different spot color, closer to red) Groeten, VIc If you like to read more about my experiments (and maybe give feedback), look here: http://users.pandora.be/vicmortelmans/fts/adaptiveduotone/adaptiveduotone.html Tim Øsleby wrote: Don't know why. Just my gut feeling. Anyway, I haven't time to try now. So most likely I'll forget the idea ;-) 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: Kenneth Waller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 3. mai 2006 16:45 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Skua (lens competition) Well done Tim. It's uncanny how the background hue matches the bird's. I think it could look nice in bw too. Why? Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Tim Øsleby [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PESO: Skua (lens competition) Here is another Skua, shot at the same trip. In fact, I wonder if it is the same bird. This one is a more strait forward composition, read less exiting. But because of how the colours match, I like it a lot. I think it could look nice in bw too. It also shows better what the crappy(?) old manual focus Tokina lens can do under near perfect conditions. http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=234225 *istDS, tripod, Tokina AT-X 150-500/5,6 @ 500mm, f:11, 1/350s, 400 ISO raw. Whatdoyoahthink? Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds (Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)
Re: Yo, Mr Listguy?
Maybe a 'post softener'? Jack --- Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anything we can be doing to help out the list constipation? I just did a quick check against the archives, I'm missing almost 75% of the messages. I sent one this morning and there were at least 4 responses, all I recieved was 1 of the responses, didn't even get my own. Nothing is different at my end, I'm the domain owner, mail administrator and ISP, so I'm sure of that. ;-) Don __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Web Gallery and Copyright help
Sat, 06 May 2006 09:49:02 -0700 Dave Brooks Hi all. Well i have PSCS and possibly CS2 if i get it, for Mac. I have Fetch, a decent inexpensive FTP program, to upload my photos to my site, for Mac, and renamer4mac, so i can do my global renames quickly. Only thing is to sort out how my web pages will be created. I have just done some experimenting with PS in Web Gallery, and i have set it up, as far as i can tell, to accept my copyright on the image face.When i run my test photos, nothing appears, just the banner info,no copy right across the image. I checked out the CS help but i;m doing what it says,again i think.:-) Any help here. If i can get this to work, i can do all my photo work on the Mac. If not i';ll just have to work with BBPro on the PC for the web pages. Dave Dave, I am not in front of a Mac now, but I think it should be the same with PC version of CS2. 1. In the Automate-Web Photo Gallery - you choose Options - Security (see first image the David Savage posted : http://www.arach.net.au/~savage/Misc/PSCRI.jpg ) 2. You choose - one of the options in Content. David chose Custom Text and entered it. If you choose Copyright - then Photoshop will use the Copyright field from the images Exif (You can set it for any and all images in Bridge - in CS2, or (I believe) from Explorer in CS). You can see results e.g. here: http://www.komkon.org/~igor/PHOTOS/Segovia-Pentax/pages/IMGP0818.html HTH, Igor
Peso: Merrit Island Wildlife Refuge
Took a drive after a convention yesterday in Orlando, Florida to head over to Cape Canaveral and the wildlife refuge. We saw an alligator and many birds at Blackpoint Wildlife Drive last time, but the weather is very dry now. I did manage to catch these shots. http://www.members.aol.com/rfsindg/Manatees.jpg *ist DS with DA16-45mm zoom at 45mm, f8 1/750 sec. ISO 800 small crop in on very big animals... http://www.members.aol.com/rfsindg/Darter.jpg *ist DS with A200/4 and AF1.7 converter, f8 1/350 sec.ISO 800 small crop and slight sharpening of a drying swimmer No 'gators... Bob S.
RE: Peso: Merrit Island Wildlife Refuge
Two mermaids and a phoenix! How about a unicorn next time? I especially like the phoenix. -- Cheers, Bob http://www.members.aol.com/rfsindg/Manatees.jpg *ist DS with DA16-45mm zoom at 45mm, f8 1/750 sec. ISO 800 small crop in on very big animals... http://www.members.aol.com/rfsindg/Darter.jpg *ist DS with A200/4 and AF1.7 converter, f8 1/350 sec.ISO 800 small crop and slight sharpening of a drying swimmer
Re: Super WA/Fisheye recommendations
From my digging around and your recommendations, I think I'll go for the FA 20-35 and Zenitar 16. I think the DA 16-45 would be a great lens, but I'd like to have the option of using a really nice wide angle with film as well. I've never spent $500 on a lens, so if I do it I'd like it to be as flexible as possible (not Lensbaby-type flexible). While 20mm isn't super wide for my DS, it's pretty much as wide as I currently have (18-55mm). The Zenitar 16 will do a decent job of that, even if it's Fisheye. Thanks, all. Now I can properly enable myself... Michael Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.michaelhamilton.ca On 6-May-06, at 12:53 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: My favorite of the lenses you list is the DA14/2.8. I have that and the Zenitar 16 ... both are excellent. If a 20mm is wide enough for you, the FA20-35 is my favorite, most used lens. The only other lens in this group that I'd be interested in is the DA12-24. Godfrey On May 5, 2006, at 9:34 PM, Michael Hamilton wrote: I've been looking to replace my DA 18-55 lately, especially since I can get some amazing prices due to the high Canadian dollar right now (or is it low US dollar? ;) ) I tend to prefer primes if I can, but i certainly won't limit my self to that. I'm really looking to step up optically, but I also would like a little wider if i can get it. Can anyone comment on these lenses for optical and build quality? Experience? I've found a few reviews, but they're not always helpful. Front runners include: Pentax 16-45mm ED AL - $409 Sigma 20mm 1.8 EX - $409 (can be used on Film also - big plus!) Pentax 14mm ED IF - $599 (a bit more than I'd like to spend!) Pentax 12-24mm ED AL - $599 (again, $$$) Sigma 10-20mm - $479 I've also considered a fisheye. If I use a Full-frame fisheye on my DS, would the crop treat it more like a regular wide-angle? ie, less distortion outside of the center axis? Zenitar fisheye (does this work for 35mm also?) - I'd prefer an A lens over M, however... but it's cheap. Pentax SCMP-DA 10-17mm - $399 Sigma 15mm 2.8 - $499 (my regular kit also includes the Pentax-A 28/2.8, Pentax-A 50/1.7, and a Sigma 70-300 APO) Any help is appreciated! Michael Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.michaelhamilton.ca
Re: Yo, Mr Listguy?
Because of problems like these, another list I'm on recently moved to being a Yahoo group. All the delivery problems have disappeared. Godfrey On May 6, 2006, at 12:39 PM, Don Sanderson wrote: Anything we can be doing to help out the list constipation? I just did a quick check against the archives, I'm missing almost 75% of the messages. I sent one this morning and there were at least 4 responses, all I recieved was 1 of the responses, didn't even get my own. Nothing is different at my end, I'm the domain owner, mail administrator and ISP, so I'm sure of that. ;-) Don
Re: Semi OT... DVD rewriter
Bob Sullivan wrote: Alex, Been using Plexors at work since 1x CD writers. Nothing but flawless operations, but pricy. When I bought mine at home, I went cheaper and saw the problems. (not insurmontable, but annoying) All this stuff is so cheap now, how can you go wrong! Regards, Bob S. That was what I thought when I bought the gear for a wireless setup. You don't want to hear the thoughts I had a month later, when it was still not working after two changes of equipment. My strongest recommendation is to not buy Belkin. On 5/5/06, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 5/5/06, mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, My ancient (one of the first x2 rewriters in the country!!!) CDRW drive seems to be expiring. Just in time for me to fill my HDD with PEF files. I'm looking at a Philips PBDV1660G/00 DVD+-RW. Anyone got any nasty experiences, humerous stories, prices cheaper than £29.36? Other recommendations? mike You should take a look at www.cdfreaks.com The review is here: http://www.cdfreaks.com/article/267 Overall, it seems a good drive. Hmm... a week ago, I was in a computer store, wanting to buy a LG 4167B. Instead, I choosed a Plextor - big mistake. That Plextor - the PX750A - is actually a very expensive Teac. -- Best regards, Alex Sarbu
Re: I'm Done Too!
William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist Subject: Re: I'm Done Too! I'd go for anyone under sixty, but I think my daughter is fussier:-). She is back in America, living at our home and working nights as a waitress. The ex is still in Scotland and probably hasn't looked up from his beer often enough to notice his wife and daughter are gone. No need to be sorry. It's cause for celebration. Her husband literally kept her locked up most of the time, so she had to plot an escape. Thankfully, she was able to pull it off. She had to leave with just a suitcase and the clothes on her back, but it's better to be free and poor than to be a captive in the home of a drunken lunatic. Damned Scots, still figuring the best way to get a wife is to raid the Sasanak. Is that an Eskimo tribe? Seems like a long way to go. Most Scots are more interested in thieving your cattle, anyway.
Re: Windows
Bob W wrote: too subtle for me, Mike. Where is it? -- Cheers, Bob http://www.web-options.com/Windows/pages/68280013.htm Over the guy's right (as you look at him) shoulder. Looks like the stone facade of the shop. -Original Message- From: mike wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 06 May 2006 09:46 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Windows From: Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nothing earth-shattering, but I hope you enjoy them: http://www.web-options.com/Windows/ Interesting theme. Subtle self-portrait in there. m
Re: PAD - renewed :)
Bob W wrote: I agree. Very, very good stuff. alkos is the new buhler... -- Cheers, Bob I can't find a page 94 -Original Message- From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 06 May 2006 19:36 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: PAD - renewed :) Much nicer to browse! G On May 6, 2006, at 7:29 AM, alkos wrote: Thanx to your suggestions, I encouraged myself to change construction of my website. How do you like it now, lads? :) cheers alkos -- go out, burn some film! 24x36 at op pl http://pad.go.pl
Re: Semi OT... DVD rewriter
Hum...? Belkin wireless router is working fine. Of course this one has only been up 3 days so it is hard to say if it is going to be durable or not. The first had a scorched smell out of the box so I returned it, this one seems fine. Running restricted access and encrypted, the firewall checks out fine too. So what kind of problems are you having. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- mike wilson wrote: That was what I thought when I bought the gear for a wireless setup. You don't want to hear the thoughts I had a month later, when it was still not working after two changes of equipment. My strongest recommendation is to not buy Belkin.
Re: I'm Done Too!
The only Scot with whom I'm familiar is only interested in collecting public assistance and going to the pub. That's what socialism buys you. But I'd just as soon drop this. Paul On May 6, 2006, at 5:23 PM, mike wilson wrote: William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist Subject: Re: I'm Done Too! I'd go for anyone under sixty, but I think my daughter is fussier:-). She is back in America, living at our home and working nights as a waitress. The ex is still in Scotland and probably hasn't looked up from his beer often enough to notice his wife and daughter are gone. No need to be sorry. It's cause for celebration. Her husband literally kept her locked up most of the time, so she had to plot an escape. Thankfully, she was able to pull it off. She had to leave with just a suitcase and the clothes on her back, but it's better to be free and poor than to be a captive in the home of a drunken lunatic. Damned Scots, still figuring the best way to get a wife is to raid the Sasanak. Is that an Eskimo tribe? Seems like a long way to go. Most Scots are more interested in thieving your cattle, anyway.
Re: PAD - renewed :)
alkos wrote: Thanx to your suggestions, I encouraged myself to change construction of my website. How do you like it now, lads? :) cheers alkos You have an eye for the surreal! I like the BW photos very much! keith whaley
Re: Yo, Mr Listguy?
We will not be going to Yahoo. Yahoo is evil. We will, however, be migrating to a new host, with a more robust software. I'm hoping to have this accomplished within a week. I don't think it's on your end, Don. I think there are issues between the PDML end and your end that are hampering efficient delivery of the list traffic. The software I've been using, it turns out, has largely been abandoned, so since I've been wanting something with a little more umph, as well as better options for modification, I've been exploring other packages. I think I've settled for one, and using it will entail moving to a new hosting company, and thus at least temporary interruption. That will suck, but I'm certain that, in the long run, it will be a better arrangement for all of us. Sorry for all this. Doug List Guy On May 6, 2006, at 5:03 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: Because of problems like these, another list I'm on recently moved to being a Yahoo group. All the delivery problems have disappeared. Godfrey On May 6, 2006, at 12:39 PM, Don Sanderson wrote: Anything we can be doing to help out the list constipation? I just did a quick check against the archives, I'm missing almost 75% of the messages. I sent one this morning and there were at least 4 responses, all I recieved was 1 of the responses, didn't even get my own. Nothing is different at my end, I'm the domain owner, mail administrator and ISP, so I'm sure of that. ;-) Don
Re: Semi OT... DVD rewriter
graywolf wrote: Hum...? Belkin wireless router is working fine. Of course this one has only been up 3 days so it is hard to say if it is going to be durable or not. The first had a scorched smell out of the box so I returned it, this one seems fine. Running restricted access and encrypted, the firewall checks out fine too. So what kind of problems are you having. Pretty much the same. Overheating leading to network drop out and some wierd form of router dormancy. Had to physically reboot it to get it to go again, by switching the power off and back on again, after trotting to the other end of the house. Replaced router and it happened again. One of the adaptors (for the desktop) physically failed, too and was replaced. The PC card for the laptop would never pick up first time and regularly took about four complete restarts to get hold of the network. The three-step, simple wizard hung my machine every time I tried to use it to install the router. The firmware upgrade download hung twice and never installed. The utility interfaces are different for the USB and PC adaptors, so it is not possible to say for sure if you have the same faults or connectivity on both machines. Email tech support is probably a robot, going by the (prompt) answers I received. Telephone support, whilst free, is based somewhere on the Indian subcontinent and was not entirely helpful. Didn't like Zonealarm running at the same time. Looking on www.techsupportforum.com I found numerous others were having the same problems with these particular models. Luckily, here in the UK, the retailer is responsible for providing you with suitable product so I just took the whole lot back, got refunded and bought Netgear. 30 minutes to install the whole system and everything works perfectly and looks the same on both machines. Router web interface is better, too. Left the router on the windowsill in direct sunlight, downloading two 30Mb files simultaneously - no problem. No problem since. Cost a total of about £25 more. On the Belkin box: Designed in California. In small writing under the router: Made in China. A complete waste of fossil resources. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- mike wilson wrote: That was what I thought when I bought the gear for a wireless setup. You don't want to hear the thoughts I had a month later, when it was still not working after two changes of equipment. My strongest recommendation is to not buy Belkin.
RE: Yo, Mr Listguy?
Thanks for all your effort Doug, as an ISP I fully understand what you put up with. If you need 'Beta testers' or any other assistance, let me know. I'm very grateful for this list and would be glad to help. Don -Original Message- From: Doug Brewer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2006 4:56 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Yo, Mr Listguy? We will not be going to Yahoo. Yahoo is evil. We will, however, be migrating to a new host, with a more robust software. I'm hoping to have this accomplished within a week. I don't think it's on your end, Don. I think there are issues between the PDML end and your end that are hampering efficient delivery of the list traffic. The software I've been using, it turns out, has largely been abandoned, so since I've been wanting something with a little more umph, as well as better options for modification, I've been exploring other packages. I think I've settled for one, and using it will entail moving to a new hosting company, and thus at least temporary interruption. That will suck, but I'm certain that, in the long run, it will be a better arrangement for all of us. Sorry for all this. Doug List Guy On May 6, 2006, at 5:03 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: Because of problems like these, another list I'm on recently moved to being a Yahoo group. All the delivery problems have disappeared. Godfrey On May 6, 2006, at 12:39 PM, Don Sanderson wrote: Anything we can be doing to help out the list constipation? I just did a quick check against the archives, I'm missing almost 75% of the messages. I sent one this morning and there were at least 4 responses, all I recieved was 1 of the responses, didn't even get my own. Nothing is different at my end, I'm the domain owner, mail administrator and ISP, so I'm sure of that. ;-) Don
Re: Yo, Mr Listguy?
You the man, Doug. Do your thing. Paul On May 6, 2006, at 5:56 PM, Doug Brewer wrote: We will not be going to Yahoo. Yahoo is evil. We will, however, be migrating to a new host, with a more robust software. I'm hoping to have this accomplished within a week. I don't think it's on your end, Don. I think there are issues between the PDML end and your end that are hampering efficient delivery of the list traffic. The software I've been using, it turns out, has largely been abandoned, so since I've been wanting something with a little more umph, as well as better options for modification, I've been exploring other packages. I think I've settled for one, and using it will entail moving to a new hosting company, and thus at least temporary interruption. That will suck, but I'm certain that, in the long run, it will be a better arrangement for all of us. Sorry for all this. Doug List Guy On May 6, 2006, at 5:03 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: Because of problems like these, another list I'm on recently moved to being a Yahoo group. All the delivery problems have disappeared. Godfrey On May 6, 2006, at 12:39 PM, Don Sanderson wrote: Anything we can be doing to help out the list constipation? I just did a quick check against the archives, I'm missing almost 75% of the messages. I sent one this morning and there were at least 4 responses, all I recieved was 1 of the responses, didn't even get my own. Nothing is different at my end, I'm the domain owner, mail administrator and ISP, so I'm sure of that. ;-) Don
Re: Yo, Mr Listguy?
Doug Brewer wrote: We will not be going to Yahoo. Yahoo is evil. We will, however, be migrating to a new host, with a more robust software. I'm hoping to have this accomplished within a week. Glad to hear that. Yahoo groups is banned at work, so I would be having to find something to do. I don't think it's on your end, Don. I think there are issues between the PDML end and your end that are hampering efficient delivery of the list traffic. The software I've been using, it turns out, has largely been abandoned, so since I've been wanting something with a little more umph, as well as better options for modification, I've been exploring other packages. I think I've settled for one, and using it will entail moving to a new hosting company, and thus at least temporary interruption. That will suck, but I'm certain that, in the long run, it will be a better arrangement for all of us. Sorry for all this. Stop apologising. It's good enough that you are telling us what you are going to do. My ISP doesn't do that. Come to think of it, neither does my wife. Doug List Guy On May 6, 2006, at 5:03 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: Because of problems like these, another list I'm on recently moved to being a Yahoo group. All the delivery problems have disappeared. Godfrey On May 6, 2006, at 12:39 PM, Don Sanderson wrote: Anything we can be doing to help out the list constipation? I just did a quick check against the archives, I'm missing almost 75% of the messages. I sent one this morning and there were at least 4 responses, all I recieved was 1 of the responses, didn't even get my own. Nothing is different at my end, I'm the domain owner, mail administrator and ISP, so I'm sure of that. ;-) Don
Re: Yo, Mr Listguy?
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: Because of problems like these, another list I'm on recently moved to being a Yahoo group. All the delivery problems have disappeared. Leaving only the Yahoo problems. ;-) S
OT - FS Jupiter 12
Sorry, it is not Pentax. I still have a new, unused Jupiter 12 35/2.8 (Contax-Kiev RF bayonet mount) for sale: http://sandiego.craigslist.org/ele/158210888.html More (and larger) pictures are available upon request. If interested, e-mail for price and additional information. Igor
Re: Super WA/Fisheye recommendations
You can't go far wrong. I use the FA 20-35, (one of the sharpest lenses I've seen, it replaces a number of primes in my kit), and SMCP 17mm F4. in much the same pairing. If you don't have too many straight lines near the edges of your frame the Fisheye effect isn't horrible, and you can use software to give a rectilinear result. The fact that it isn't fisheye enough on the *ist-D is my biggest complaint. Michael Hamilton wrote: From my digging around and your recommendations, I think I'll go for the FA 20-35 and Zenitar 16. I think the DA 16-45 would be a great lens, but I'd like to have the option of using a really nice wide angle with film as well. I've never spent $500 on a lens, so if I do it I'd like it to be as flexible as possible (not Lensbaby-type flexible). While 20mm isn't super wide for my DS, it's pretty much as wide as I currently have (18-55mm). The Zenitar 16 will do a decent job of that, even if it's Fisheye. Thanks, all. Now I can properly enable myself... Michael Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.michaelhamilton.ca On 6-May-06, at 12:53 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: My favorite of the lenses you list is the DA14/2.8. I have that and the Zenitar 16 ... both are excellent. If a 20mm is wide enough for you, the FA20-35 is my favorite, most used lens. The only other lens in this group that I'd be interested in is the DA12-24. Godfrey On May 5, 2006, at 9:34 PM, Michael Hamilton wrote: I've been looking to replace my DA 18-55 lately, especially since I can get some amazing prices due to the high Canadian dollar right now (or is it low US dollar? ;) ) I tend to prefer primes if I can, but i certainly won't limit my self to that. I'm really looking to step up optically, but I also would like a little wider if i can get it. Can anyone comment on these lenses for optical and build quality? Experience? I've found a few reviews, but they're not always helpful. Front runners include: Pentax 16-45mm ED AL - $409 Sigma 20mm 1.8 EX - $409 (can be used on Film also - big plus!) Pentax 14mm ED IF - $599 (a bit more than I'd like to spend!) Pentax 12-24mm ED AL - $599 (again, $$$) Sigma 10-20mm - $479 I've also considered a fisheye. If I use a Full-frame fisheye on my DS, would the crop treat it more like a regular wide-angle? ie, less distortion outside of the center axis? Zenitar fisheye (does this work for 35mm also?) - I'd prefer an A lens over M, however... but it's cheap. Pentax SCMP-DA 10-17mm - $399 Sigma 15mm 2.8 - $499 (my regular kit also includes the Pentax-A 28/2.8, Pentax-A 50/1.7, and a Sigma 70-300 APO) Any help is appreciated! Michael Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.michaelhamilton.ca -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Yo, Mr Listguy?
Yes, but you get all the Yahoo problems instead... Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: Because of problems like these, another list I'm on recently moved to being a Yahoo group. All the delivery problems have disappeared. Godfrey On May 6, 2006, at 12:39 PM, Don Sanderson wrote: Anything we can be doing to help out the list constipation? I just did a quick check against the archives, I'm missing almost 75% of the messages. I sent one this morning and there were at least 4 responses, all I recieved was 1 of the responses, didn't even get my own. Nothing is different at my end, I'm the domain owner, mail administrator and ISP, so I'm sure of that. ;-) Don -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
