RE: For PZ1p / Z1p users
You are probably right, Dario. I had a Z1 and Z1p for years. I never used this USER function. It's too complicated. The camera is complicated enough with out this. Tell him to go and take some pictures in stead of spending so much time with the manual. IIRC USER SET is the mode for choosing the standard fucnktions. The USER function is for when you want to photograph, using the chosen functions. The K10D has a similar feature. But much more user friendly. I guess Initializing means "beginning" - meaning getting ready for choosing/changing USER funtctions - your standard set up. The manual is here: http://www.pentaximaging.com/files/manual/PZ-1p.pdf Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Dario Bonazza Sendt: 19. februar 2007 19:13 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: For PZ1p / Z1p users Hi, A friend of mine is going crazy with his newly purchased secondhand Z1p and rings me all the time to get explanations. Today the main question is what's the difference between: 1 - USER SET FUNCTION procedure explained on page 74 of the user manual. and 2 -Initializing the USER SET FUNCTION as explained on page 75. My guess is that the procedure on page 74 tells you how to customize the USER position of the main switch, while the so called "Initialization" on page 75 is how to reset to default settings. Unfortunately I don't have a Z1p at hand and the Z1p owner is not smart enough to understand what's going on with his camera, as he is only accustomed to classic mechanical SLR's interface, while the Z1p is apparently too much a step for him at all at once. Any comments? Thanks a lot. Dario -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.18.2/692 - Release Date: 02/18/2007 16:35 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.18.3/699 - Release Date: 02/23/2007 13:26 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - dim bulb
Thanks, Bruce. I seem to be in this thing lately where everything ends up in the fringes of the frame. Glad you like it. -Brendan --- Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That is a pretty cool shot. The offset of the bulb > is quite nice as > well. > > -- > Best regards, > Bruce > > > Friday, February 23, 2007, 5:42:26 PM, you wrote: > > BM> The best of a few attempts at this. > > > BM> http://www.primelensphoto.com/bulb.jpg > > BM> K10D + A*85mm f1.4, Av mode, ISO 100, f11, +2EV, > BM> 1/180, (2X)540 flashes + manual white balance. > > BM> Comments welcome. > > BM> -Brendan > > > > > > BM> > > BM> Don't get soaked. Take a quick peak at the > forecast > BM> with the Yahoo! Search weather shortcut. > BM> > http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#loc_weather > > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > TV dinner still cooling? Check out "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV. http://tv.yahoo.com/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - dim bulb
Yeah, in order to be honest with the shot I had to get all MacGyver on it. But it was fun and a PITA at the same time. ;-] -Brendan --- David Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Feb 24, 2007, at 2:42 PM, Brendan MacRae wrote: > > > The best of a few attempts at this. > > > > http://www.primelensphoto.com/bulb.jpg > > I won't ask about dodgy wiring practises ;) > > - Dave > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > Do you Yahoo!? Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta. http://new.mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Semi-OT: Vivitar 258HV
My issue with the pre-flash technique is that people who tend to blink can be a real problem. The pre-flash starts them into the blink and you end up with shots with their eyes not fully open. I believe all brands have the same problem. For weddings I was shooting TTL with the *istD and now shooting Auto on the flash with the K10D - using my AF400T's for the time being. I use the AF360FGZ's during the day for daylight fill flash. -- Bruce Friday, February 23, 2007, 7:46:31 PM, you wrote: NW> For you (other) manual camera fans who might not have seen this yet, I NW> thought I'd mention that Vivitar has reintroduced their 285HV flash NW> units. They are selling brand new for just under $100 currently. And NW> they have trigger voltages of less than 6 volts, which means they are NW> safe to use on modern cameras too! Just got mine in the mail the other NW> day. In fact, I was so fed up with Canon's crazy ETTL I sold my $300 NW> Canon unit the day I heard the 285s were back! NW> And to put a vaguely Pentax spin on this post ... I'm curious if NW> Pentax's PTTL system is any good? A quick scan through the archives NW> found at least one person who wasn't so thrilled. I'd like to hear NW> more. Thanks! NW> -- NW> ~Nick Wright NW> http://blog.phojonick.com/ NW> http://www.phojonick.com/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D service menu/focus system adjust
David Savage a écrit : > When you go into the hidden service menu it has this list: > > DEBUG MODE > ... > LENS ROM LOAD from FILE > LENS ROM SAVE to FILE > LENS ROM READ/WRITE > ... > Debug mode can read/write on LENS ROM ? Somebody has a sample ? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - dim bulb
That is a pretty cool shot. The offset of the bulb is quite nice as well. -- Best regards, Bruce Friday, February 23, 2007, 5:42:26 PM, you wrote: BM> The best of a few attempts at this. BM> http://www.primelensphoto.com/bulb.jpg BM> K10D + A*85mm f1.4, Av mode, ISO 100, f11, +2EV, BM> 1/180, (2X)540 flashes + manual white balance. BM> Comments welcome. BM> -Brendan BM> BM> Don't get soaked. Take a quick peak at the forecast BM> with the Yahoo! Search weather shortcut. BM> http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#loc_weather -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: GESO
Great work. All the previous efforts and frustration finally paid off. Yes, indeed. -- Bruce Friday, February 23, 2007, 5:29:01 PM, you wrote: JaKM> We've had a lot of thunderstorms in the last two weeks and I've spent a lot JaKM> of time and effort trying to get some good lightning shots. I've been JaKM> frustrated by being in the wrong spot, just missing shots, having the wrong JaKM> settings, etc. JaKM> Well, last night we had a ripper of a lightning display and I finally found JaKM> myself in the right place at the right time and managed to grab six keepers! JaKM> I'm a happy man! JaKM> http://tinyurl.com/2cw8oq JaKM> comments, critiques...all welcome. JaKM> Cheers JaKM> James Messervy -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Ah ... a new lens
On Feb 23, 2007, at 8:46 PM, John Celio wrote: >> http://www.gdgphoto.com/image/godfrey-2007-pentax-2086.jpg > Nice! > Any particular reason you got that instead of the DA 40? Thanks! It's a stop faster and it's about the same size as the DA21 and DA70. There's enough space for me to work the focusing ring, in other words: the DA40 is just too thin for my comfort. I would have preferred a lens with the Quickshift focusing mount. More thoughts: I've gone back and forth on the 40-43 mm focal length in my thinking ... it's a little long and yet a little short. I'd also heard people saying that the 43mm was not especially sharp, particularly when wide open. I already have the FA35/2 and FA50/1.4. But I liked the size and speed: decided to give it a go. I figured that if it really didn't cut it compared to the 35 and 50, there's enough of a market that I could sell it for what I paid, or if it worked out then selling the 35 and 50 will pay for it and then some. Took my first walk with it today and shot a few exposures around the house. f/1.9 is a little bit soft but not unpleasantly so, much like the FA28. Stopped down just half a stop and it snaps into great sharpness and the out of focus rendering is stunning, again much like the FA28. I'll work with it for a few days yet before I make a final decision, but I think the kit outlined by my FoV - Focal Length graph :: http://homepage.mac.com/godders/FoVs-Pentax-DSLR.jpg is it ... I have everything there now and will sell off the rest. All of it, except the DA14, fits in a very compact bag and is remarkably light weight. Perfect for my uses. I guess I should take a family portrait of all the goodies, eh? :-) Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: GESO
On Feb 24, 2007, at 2:29 PM, J and K Messervy wrote: > Well, last night we had a ripper of a lightning display and I > finally found > myself in the right place at the right time and managed to grab six > keepers! > I'm a happy man! > > http://tinyurl.com/2cw8oq Amazing photos. They really look like they want to be printed large. I've been involved in the design and testing of equipment that's built to withstand lightning surges. It's not an easy job! - Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Save for web problem
On Feb 24, 2007, at 2:14 PM, graywolf wrote: > However, manually changing it resulted in a smaller, but otherwise > deteriorated jpeg. At the moment it seems the problem has to do > with the > files being 16bit, although it had not seemed to matter in the past. Pro Photo RGB is an absolutely huge colour space which is likely to cause trouble whenever 8-bit files get involved. I wonder if there's something funny going on when SFW does its conversion to 8-bit to save as jpg. It may be doing some calculations in 8-bit mode when it would be better off doing them in 16-bit. I would definitely advise against saving a jpg from a Pro Photo file without converting to sRGB first. - Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - dim bulb
On Feb 24, 2007, at 2:42 PM, Brendan MacRae wrote: > The best of a few attempts at this. > > http://www.primelensphoto.com/bulb.jpg I won't ask about dodgy wiring practises ;) - Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - dim bulb
Cool!!! I think these lamps are being deprecated in Down Under ;-). Boris Brendan MacRae wrote: > The best of a few attempts at this. > > > http://www.primelensphoto.com/bulb.jpg > > K10D + A*85mm f1.4, Av mode, ISO 100, f11, +2EV, > 1/180, (2X)540 flashes + manual white balance. > > Comments welcome. > > -Brendan > > > > > > > Don't get soaked. Take a quick peak at the forecast > with the Yahoo! Search weather shortcut. > http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#loc_weather > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: GESO
James, the first one is top class. The rest is bloody excellent ;-). You oughtta be happy man ;-). Boris J and K Messervy wrote: > We've had a lot of thunderstorms in the last two weeks and I've spent a lot > of time and effort trying to get some good lightning shots. I've been > frustrated by being in the wrong spot, just missing shots, having the wrong > settings, etc. > > Well, last night we had a ripper of a lightning display and I finally found > myself in the right place at the right time and managed to grab six keepers! > I'm a happy man! > > http://tinyurl.com/2cw8oq > > comments, critiques...all welcome. > > Cheers > James Messervy > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Home page?
My home page in the browser just loads the home page on my website. :-) G "... We control the horizontal, we control the vertical ..." -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Semi-OT: Vivitar 258HV
The older ones are (reportedly) a mixed bag. Some are 6 volts, some are not. The only way to know for sure is to check. Luckily that is extremely easy to do, and you can get a cheap volt meter at WallyWorlds for less than $10. On 2/23/07, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > My vivitar 285 is at least 15 years old and it's triggewr > voltage is also only 6 VDC. they changed it a long long time ago. > Its so easy to check, just put a dc voltmeter acroos the foot > contacts when fully charged. > jco > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Bong Manayon > Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 11:20 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: Semi-OT: Vivitar 258HV > > > I have used my "old" 285HV with the 20D & *istDS without any problems. > I know about the voltage thing so I do it sparingly. A newer 285 with a > lower voltage is good news. > > On 2/24/07, Nick Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > For you (other) manual camera fans who might not have seen this yet, I > > > thought I'd mention that Vivitar has reintroduced their 285HV flash > > units. They are selling brand new for just under $100 currently. And > > they have trigger voltages of less than 6 volts, which means they are > > safe to use on modern cameras too! Just got mine in the mail the other > > > day. In fact, I was so fed up with Canon's crazy ETTL I sold my $300 > > Canon unit the day I heard the 285s were back! > > > > And to put a vaguely Pentax spin on this post ... I'm curious if > > Pentax's PTTL system is any good? A quick scan through the archives > > found at least one person who wasn't so thrilled. I'd like to hear > > more. Thanks! > > > > -- > > ~Nick Wright > > http://blog.phojonick.com/ > > http://www.phojonick.com/ > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > PDML@pdml.net > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > -- > Bong Manayon > http://www.bong.uni.cc > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- ~Nick Wright http://blog.phojonick.com/ http://www.phojonick.com/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Boris, Week 7
Thanks! I would be as bold as to extend such a beautiful sentiment to all children of the big world. *Sigh* Boris Walter Hamler wrote: > The eyes tell it all. "Boy, this is a big world!!" > My prayer is that he grows up to a world that is as full of peace and > prosperity as possible!! > > Walt > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Home page?
On Feb 24, 2007, at 11:50 AM, Bob W wrote: > Does anybody know of another good, simple photo-of-the-day site that > doesn't bombard its viewers with crap? http://www.catoftheday.com/ :) At the moment my "home" page is a simple bookmarking application that I wrote last year. If I had the time I'd be adding some more features to it... - Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Boris, Week 7
Tom, the bottle is refilled by demand of the model, not by demand of the photographer ;-). Boris Tom C wrote: > Wonderful eyes. I hope you've refilled his bottle... > > Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Ah ... a new lens
> http://www.gdgphoto.com/image/godfrey-2007-pentax-2086.jpg > > enjoy > G Nice! Any particular reason you got that instead of the DA 40? John -- http://www.neovenator.com http://www.cafepress.com/neovenatorphoto -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: How many K10s do we have now? a poll.
I have one too... Boris Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote: > And another... > > Alex Sarbu > > On 2/24/07, Bill Sawyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> And another... >> >> Bill Sawyer >> Livonia, MI > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Boris, Week 7
Jack, Godfrey, I must humbly disagree with you here. If I were to crop the father's hand that is holding the bottle, then it would basically hang in the air. It is all too obvious from the shot that the baby cannot hold the bottle and actually does not hold the bottle. Thus, I think the viewer will be simply disturbed by the bottle that hangs in the air. Also, my actual intent was to make use of this "tiny-baby-huge-parent" idea but in somewhat different way. Thus the father's hand is rather necessary. A+ain, please don't see my comment as if I am defending myself here. I am merely trying to put down in words what I've tried to carve in pixels. Thanks. Boris Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > That would work well too. I'd title it simply "Idan". > > G > > On Feb 23, 2007, at 4:28 PM, Jack Davis wrote: > >> Have you thought about cropping off some of the left side, including >> the hand? >> >>> http://not.contaxg.com/document.php?id=16807&full=1 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Boris, Week 7
Bill, if you mean the built-in flash, then you're wrong. I used AF 220 flash (the only I have now) with this universal flash diffuser thing I constructed after the video was published on the list ;-). William Robb wrote: > Boris, you've spawned again!!! >>From my POV, there is nothing right with this shot. > It has a baby in it, and it appears to be flash on camera. > He's a cute little guppy though, he's doing something constructive, the > framing is good, and the monochrome conversion is pleasing. > Well done. What is it "to spawn" please? Thanks! Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Boris, Week 7
Hi! Rick Womer wrote: > Boris, > > Brutal +and+ honest...hmmm...let's see... > > THAT'S A #$@&ING NICE PHOTO, YOU ##!%ING GOOD > PHOTOGRAPHER YOU! I PARTICULARLY LIKE THE &&%# EYES > AND THE $$#@ USE OF FOCUS. SO TAKE THAT!!! > > Whew. There. You had it coming. > > Rick Thanks, that was very loud and very clear ;-). Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Semi-OT: Vivitar 258HV
My vivitar 285 is at least 15 years old and it's triggewr voltage is also only 6 VDC. they changed it a long long time ago. Its so easy to check, just put a dc voltmeter acroos the foot contacts when fully charged. jco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bong Manayon Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 11:20 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Semi-OT: Vivitar 258HV I have used my "old" 285HV with the 20D & *istDS without any problems. I know about the voltage thing so I do it sparingly. A newer 285 with a lower voltage is good news. On 2/24/07, Nick Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For you (other) manual camera fans who might not have seen this yet, I > thought I'd mention that Vivitar has reintroduced their 285HV flash > units. They are selling brand new for just under $100 currently. And > they have trigger voltages of less than 6 volts, which means they are > safe to use on modern cameras too! Just got mine in the mail the other > day. In fact, I was so fed up with Canon's crazy ETTL I sold my $300 > Canon unit the day I heard the 285s were back! > > And to put a vaguely Pentax spin on this post ... I'm curious if > Pentax's PTTL system is any good? A quick scan through the archives > found at least one person who wasn't so thrilled. I'd like to hear > more. Thanks! > > -- > ~Nick Wright > http://blog.phojonick.com/ > http://www.phojonick.com/ > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- Bong Manayon http://www.bong.uni.cc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Photo.net Observation
Tom C wrote: >Strange. Many individual photos are untitled. Maybe it's because they're >in folder of a particular name, like Alaska. > > > >Tom C. > > > > The photo of mine that has gotten the most hits has the names of the people in it as it's title. Alfred Butts is one of them. (The inventor of Scrabble) It is far from the "best" photo I've shown on the site. ann > > >>From: Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>Subject: Re: Photo.net Observation >>Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 19:47:56 -0500 >> >>Like some said, it can be due to search engines picking up on the >>title. I've also found that the first shot in a folder gets more >>views than any other. Don't know why. Pics that make it into the >>"highest rated" gallery get a lot of hits. >>Paul >>On Feb 23, 2007, at 7:34 PM, Tom C wrote: >> >> >> >>>No of course not. :-) Each photo displayed on photo.net has a >>>number of >>>times viewed field, that they suppposedly maintain. >>> >>>The PESO I displayed yesterday now has a count of 37, which seems >>>reasonable. But 700+ on photos that have no value to anyone but >>>myself, is >>>weird. >>> >>>Tom C. >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Photo.net Observation Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 16:26:14 -0800 (PST) I gather you have purchased search words to "get" people to look at your photos. I went through that, and about $300 a month, for a year and a half before it sank in that I wasn't making a profit. Actually, my wife was good enough to point it out. Price/hit kept going up and my 'grandfathered in' lower price just didn't get them enough attention. OST, you're possibly not talking about website hits.(?) Jack --- Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >When looking at the Number of Times Viewed statistic for some of my >photos, >I'm surprised. Many photos that are of no interest to anyone other >than >family or friends, have no title, and are mere snapshots, are >showing >up as >having been viewed 700+ times. That seems quite high to me. > >I can understand it if it was a photo I asked for a critique on, or >if it >was one I posted as a PESO, but the ones in question are not. > >I'm wondering if some sort of automated crawler exists that could be >inflating the numbers. The images I'm referring to have been out >there >about two years. I can undertsand that number of hits if random >individuals >came across the gallery and clicked on ones they liked. But I can't >believe >700+ random individuals would click on those I've described. > >Any ideas? > >Tom C. > > > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >PDML@pdml.net >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> >>>-- >>>PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>PDML@pdml.net >>>http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> >>> >>-- >>PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>PDML@pdml.net >>http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >> > > > > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Photo.net Observation
Paul Stenquist wrote: >Like some said, it can be due to search engines picking up on the >title. I've also found that the first shot in a folder gets more >views than any other. > Not at all true on my page. ann -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Photo.net Observation
Tom C wrote: >No of course not. :-) Each photo displayed on photo.net has a number of >times viewed field, that they suppposedly maintain. > >The PESO I displayed yesterday now has a count of 37, which seems >reasonable. But 700+ on photos that have no value to anyone but myself, is >weird. > >Tom C. > > Tom - what is the link to your main page there? with thumbnails? I want to see the pics you think are of no interest :) I do find it interesting to see which photos of mine have gotten the most hits -- apart from the fact that some have been up for a longer time than others. I do find it curious that except for the first couple of months I was on photo.net I have gotten no critiques or ratings... mind you, I don't care - I don't do it myself, but it has been over a year since anyone rated one of my photos, let alone critqued it. I wondered if it was because I don't rate the pics of others so am somehow shut out of the process. ann > > > > >>From: Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>Subject: Re: Photo.net Observation >>Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 16:26:14 -0800 (PST) >> >>I gather you have purchased search words to "get" people to look at >>your photos. >>I went through that, and about $300 a month, for a year and a half >>before it sank in that I wasn't making a profit. Actually, my wife was >>good enough to point it out. >>Price/hit kept going up and my 'grandfathered in' lower price just >>didn't get them enough attention. >>OST, you're possibly not talking about website hits.(?) >> >>Jack >>--- Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> >>>When looking at the Number of Times Viewed statistic for some of my >>>photos, >>>I'm surprised. Many photos that are of no interest to anyone other >>>than >>>family or friends, have no title, and are mere snapshots, are showing >>>up as >>>having been viewed 700+ times. That seems quite high to me. >>> >>>I can understand it if it was a photo I asked for a critique on, or >>>if it >>>was one I posted as a PESO, but the ones in question are not. >>> >>>I'm wondering if some sort of automated crawler exists that could be >>>inflating the numbers. The images I'm referring to have been out >>>there >>>about two years. I can undertsand that number of hits if random >>>individuals >>>came across the gallery and clicked on ones they liked. But I can't >>>believe >>>700+ random individuals would click on those I've described. >>> >>>Any ideas? >>> >>>Tom C. >>> >>> >>> >>>-- >>>PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>PDML@pdml.net >>>http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> >>> >>> >>__ >>Do You Yahoo!? >>Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >>http://mail.yahoo.com >> >>-- >>PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>PDML@pdml.net >>http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >> > > > > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: GESO
Took perseverance and some daring. Congratulations! Jack --- J and K Messervy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We've had a lot of thunderstorms in the last two weeks and I've spent > a lot > of time and effort trying to get some good lightning shots. I've > been > frustrated by being in the wrong spot, just missing shots, having the > wrong > settings, etc. > > Well, last night we had a ripper of a lightning display and I finally > found > myself in the right place at the right time and managed to grab six > keepers! > I'm a happy man! > > http://tinyurl.com/2cw8oq > > comments, critiques...all welcome. > > Cheers > James Messervy > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > The fish are biting. Get more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search Marketing. http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/arp/sponsoredsearch_v2.php -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Semi-OT: Vivitar 258HV
I have used my "old" 285HV with the 20D & *istDS without any problems. I know about the voltage thing so I do it sparingly. A newer 285 with a lower voltage is good news. On 2/24/07, Nick Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For you (other) manual camera fans who might not have seen this yet, I > thought I'd mention that Vivitar has reintroduced their 285HV flash > units. They are selling brand new for just under $100 currently. And > they have trigger voltages of less than 6 volts, which means they are > safe to use on modern cameras too! Just got mine in the mail the other > day. In fact, I was so fed up with Canon's crazy ETTL I sold my $300 > Canon unit the day I heard the 285s were back! > > And to put a vaguely Pentax spin on this post ... I'm curious if > Pentax's PTTL system is any good? A quick scan through the archives > found at least one person who wasn't so thrilled. I'd like to hear > more. Thanks! > > -- > ~Nick Wright > http://blog.phojonick.com/ > http://www.phojonick.com/ > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- Bong Manayon http://www.bong.uni.cc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Photo.net Observation
Rick Womer wrote: >I think those numbers come from a random number >generator. I've posted photos that have gotten lots >of comments on this list, but for which the view count >has remained zero for weeks. I've also had the >experience you describe. > >Don't waste your time emailing photo.net about it, >though--they never answer. > >Rick > > Rick, Actually, I wrote them a few weeks ago about the views of one or two of my photos being "0" (even though it had been commented on on our list and certainly had been viewed by my friends to whom a couple of the images were of poersonal importance) I got an email pretty quickly with an semi-apology... to wit: ... "We're doing a software relaunch in about two weeks. And a few of the site features are acting weird because of it. We expect that things should straighten out after the upgrade. Josh" . ann > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Semi-OT: Vivitar 258HV
For you (other) manual camera fans who might not have seen this yet, I thought I'd mention that Vivitar has reintroduced their 285HV flash units. They are selling brand new for just under $100 currently. And they have trigger voltages of less than 6 volts, which means they are safe to use on modern cameras too! Just got mine in the mail the other day. In fact, I was so fed up with Canon's crazy ETTL I sold my $300 Canon unit the day I heard the 285s were back! And to put a vaguely Pentax spin on this post ... I'm curious if Pentax's PTTL system is any good? A quick scan through the archives found at least one person who wasn't so thrilled. I'd like to hear more. Thanks! -- ~Nick Wright http://blog.phojonick.com/ http://www.phojonick.com/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Ah ... a new lens
On 2/23/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://www.gdgphoto.com/image/godfrey-2007-pentax-2086.jpg Congratulations. That's presently part of my 4 lens kit, and I love it. I'd considered selling it for the DA40, but I was going to end up losing money on the deal and I decided that the change wasn't worthwhile. I like that the FA43 and DA70 are nearly identical in size and weight. I've also cut down on one hood, so they now share a Takamur 105mm hood. Really happy with my kit right now. There's (surprisingly) nothing that I'm jonesing for. -- -- Cheers, [EMAIL PROTECTED] MichaelHamilton.ca -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: GESO
Thanks very much mate! I'm in Canberra. The vantage point was the fire trail that runs around the hill backing Banks, just above the last houses. Looking Northwest across the Tuggeranong Valley towards the Brindabellas. Below me are the lights of Banks, Conder and Gordon. - Original Message - From: "Brian Walters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2007 2:01 PM Subject: Re: GESO > Bloody marvellous! > > I hear some thunder in the Blue Mountains as I write - we might get a > storm here later - you've inspired me to have a go if the conditions are > right. > > What was the vantage point? > > > > Cheers > > Brian > > ++ > Brian Walters > Western Sydney Australia > > > > > Quoting J and K Messervy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> We've had a lot of thunderstorms in the last two weeks and I've >> spent a lot >> of time and effort trying to get some good lightning shots. I've >> been >> frustrated by being in the wrong spot, just missing shots, having >> the wrong >> settings, etc. >> >> Well, last night we had a ripper of a lightning display and I >> finally found >> myself in the right place at the right time and managed to grab six >> keepers! >> I'm a happy man! >> >> http://tinyurl.com/2cw8oq >> >> comments, critiques...all welcome. >> >> Cheers >> James Messervy >> > > -- > Click for dental plans with huge savings, top service and coverage > http://tags.bluebottle.com/fc/CAaCMPJew4Iec0PcXFeVDkwcwj7JuiKR/ > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.3/699 - Release Date: 23/02/2007 > 1:26 PM > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Rue Chale
- Original Message - From: "Ralf R. Radermacher" Subject: PESO: Rue Chale More DRI (HDR or whatever it's to be called this week...) monochrome with the K10D, tonight at Seraing, between two rain showers: http://www.fotocommunity.de/pc/pc/mypics/770012/display/8052619 I'm at last beginning to enjoy this camera. As always, your comments... :-) Very nice. Would you mind sharing your technique for this sort of work? William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: GESO
Thanks. And thanks for sharing them. Paul On Feb 23, 2007, at 9:39 PM, J and K Messervy wrote: > Exposures ranged from 15-30 seconds. Thank goodness for the K10's > weather > sealing too! > - Original Message - > From: "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" > Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2007 1:33 PM > Subject: Re: GESO > > >> How long an exposure? I see by the exif data that your stop was f8 >> and the ISO was 160. >> Paul >> On Feb 23, 2007, at 9:26 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: >> >>> >>> On Feb 23, 2007, at 5:29 PM, J and K Messervy wrote: >>> Well, last night we had a ripper of a lightning display and I finally found myself in the right place at the right time and managed to grab six keepers! I'm a happy man! http://tinyurl.com/2cw8oq >>> >>> Very cool! Lightning storms like that are so rare around here it's >>> nearly impossible to capture such photos.. >>> >>> Godfrey >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >> >> >> >> -- >> No virus found in this incoming message. >> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.3/699 - Release Date: >> 23/02/2007 >> 1:26 PM >> > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Ah ... a new lens
http://www.gdgphoto.com/image/godfrey-2007-pentax-2086.jpg enjoy G -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: GESO
Bloody marvellous! I hear some thunder in the Blue Mountains as I write - we might get a storm here later - you've inspired me to have a go if the conditions are right. What was the vantage point? Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia Quoting J and K Messervy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > We've had a lot of thunderstorms in the last two weeks and I've > spent a lot > of time and effort trying to get some good lightning shots. I've > been > frustrated by being in the wrong spot, just missing shots, having > the wrong > settings, etc. > > Well, last night we had a ripper of a lightning display and I > finally found > myself in the right place at the right time and managed to grab six > keepers! > I'm a happy man! > > http://tinyurl.com/2cw8oq > > comments, critiques...all welcome. > > Cheers > James Messervy > -- Click for dental plans with huge savings, top service and coverage http://tags.bluebottle.com/fc/CAaCMPJew4Iec0PcXFeVDkwcwj7JuiKR/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: GESO
- Original Message - From: "J and K Messervy" Subject: GESO > > http://tinyurl.com/2cw8oq I'm impressed. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - dim bulb
Thanks, Godfrey. -Brendan --- Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Feb 23, 2007, at 5:42 PM, Brendan MacRae wrote: > > > http://www.primelensphoto.com/bulb.jpg > > > > K10D + A*85mm f1.4, Av mode, ISO 100, f11, +2EV, > > 1/180, (2X)540 flashes + manual white balance. > > Very nice, Brendan! All elements in balance. :-) > > G > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > The fish are biting. Get more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search Marketing. http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/arp/sponsoredsearch_v2.php -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: GESO
As good as any I've seen. WTG! -Brendan --- J and K Messervy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We've had a lot of thunderstorms in the last two > weeks and I've spent a lot > of time and effort trying to get some good lightning > shots. I've been > frustrated by being in the wrong spot, just missing > shots, having the wrong > settings, etc. > > Well, last night we had a ripper of a lightning > display and I finally found > myself in the right place at the right time and > managed to grab six keepers! > I'm a happy man! > > http://tinyurl.com/2cw8oq > > comments, critiques...all welcome. > > Cheers > James Messervy > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > It's here! Your new message! Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - dim bulb
Thanks, Paul. -Brendan --- Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well done. A nice balance between the overall > exposure and the > brightness of the element. The composition works for > me as well. > Paul > On Feb 23, 2007, at 8:42 PM, Brendan MacRae wrote: > > > The best of a few attempts at this. > > > > > > http://www.primelensphoto.com/bulb.jpg > > > > K10D + A*85mm f1.4, Av mode, ISO 100, f11, +2EV, > > 1/180, (2X)540 flashes + manual white balance. > > > > Comments welcome. > > > > -Brendan > > > > > > > > > > > > > __ > > > __ > > Don't get soaked. Take a quick peak at the > forecast > > with the Yahoo! Search weather shortcut. > > > http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#loc_weather > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > PDML@pdml.net > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > Never miss an email again! Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: GESO
Exposures ranged from 15-30 seconds. Thank goodness for the K10's weather sealing too! - Original Message - From: "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2007 1:33 PM Subject: Re: GESO > How long an exposure? I see by the exif data that your stop was f8 > and the ISO was 160. > Paul > On Feb 23, 2007, at 9:26 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > >> >> On Feb 23, 2007, at 5:29 PM, J and K Messervy wrote: >> >>> Well, last night we had a ripper of a lightning display and I >>> finally found >>> myself in the right place at the right time and managed to grab six >>> keepers! >>> I'm a happy man! >>> >>> http://tinyurl.com/2cw8oq >> >> Very cool! Lightning storms like that are so rare around here it's >> nearly impossible to capture such photos.. >> >> Godfrey >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.3/699 - Release Date: 23/02/2007 > 1:26 PM > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: GESO
How long an exposure? I see by the exif data that your stop was f8 and the ISO was 160. Paul On Feb 23, 2007, at 9:26 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > > On Feb 23, 2007, at 5:29 PM, J and K Messervy wrote: > >> Well, last night we had a ripper of a lightning display and I >> finally found >> myself in the right place at the right time and managed to grab six >> keepers! >> I'm a happy man! >> >> http://tinyurl.com/2cw8oq > > Very cool! Lightning storms like that are so rare around here it's > nearly impossible to capture such photos.. > > Godfrey > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: GESO
On Feb 23, 2007, at 5:29 PM, J and K Messervy wrote: > Well, last night we had a ripper of a lightning display and I > finally found > myself in the right place at the right time and managed to grab six > keepers! > I'm a happy man! > > http://tinyurl.com/2cw8oq Very cool! Lightning storms like that are so rare around here it's nearly impossible to capture such photos.. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - dim bulb
On Feb 23, 2007, at 5:42 PM, Brendan MacRae wrote: > http://www.primelensphoto.com/bulb.jpg > > K10D + A*85mm f1.4, Av mode, ISO 100, f11, +2EV, > 1/180, (2X)540 flashes + manual white balance. Very nice, Brendan! All elements in balance. :-) G -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - dim bulb
Well done. A nice balance between the overall exposure and the brightness of the element. The composition works for me as well. Paul On Feb 23, 2007, at 8:42 PM, Brendan MacRae wrote: > The best of a few attempts at this. > > > http://www.primelensphoto.com/bulb.jpg > > K10D + A*85mm f1.4, Av mode, ISO 100, f11, +2EV, > 1/180, (2X)540 flashes + manual white balance. > > Comments welcome. > > -Brendan > > > > > > __ > __ > Don't get soaked. Take a quick peak at the forecast > with the Yahoo! Search weather shortcut. > http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#loc_weather > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: DA* instead of DFA* : an idea why ?
K.Takeshita wrote: >On 2/23/07 8:10 PM, "Mark Roberts", <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I have heard that this is nothing more than a change in nomenclature, >> not in the coverage area of the lens. > >I am not aware of change in nomenclature but you might know something we >don't. At these FLs, there is no reason to deliberately make the image >circle smaller for the telecentric reason. So, they may have unified the >nomenclature simply as Digital Auto. That is exactly what I meant. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: GESO
Excellent. I like the high saturation. Congratulations. On Feb 23, 2007, at 8:29 PM, J and K Messervy wrote: > We've had a lot of thunderstorms in the last two weeks and I've > spent a lot > of time and effort trying to get some good lightning shots. I've been > frustrated by being in the wrong spot, just missing shots, having > the wrong > settings, etc. > > Well, last night we had a ripper of a lightning display and I > finally found > myself in the right place at the right time and managed to grab six > keepers! > I'm a happy man! > > http://tinyurl.com/2cw8oq > > comments, critiques...all welcome. > > Cheers > James Messervy > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: DA* instead of DFA* : an idea why ?
On 2/23/07 8:10 PM, "Mark Roberts", <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have heard that this is nothing more than a change in nomenclature, > not in the coverage area of the lens. I am not aware of change in nomenclature but you might know something we don't. At these FLs, there is no reason to deliberately make the image circle smaller for the telecentric reason. So, they may have unified the nomenclature simply as Digital Auto. I might be able to find out. Ken -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
PESO - dim bulb
The best of a few attempts at this. http://www.primelensphoto.com/bulb.jpg K10D + A*85mm f1.4, Av mode, ISO 100, f11, +2EV, 1/180, (2X)540 flashes + manual white balance. Comments welcome. -Brendan Don't get soaked. Take a quick peak at the forecast with the Yahoo! Search weather shortcut. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#loc_weather -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
GESO
We've had a lot of thunderstorms in the last two weeks and I've spent a lot of time and effort trying to get some good lightning shots. I've been frustrated by being in the wrong spot, just missing shots, having the wrong settings, etc. Well, last night we had a ripper of a lightning display and I finally found myself in the right place at the right time and managed to grab six keepers! I'm a happy man! http://tinyurl.com/2cw8oq comments, critiques...all welcome. Cheers James Messervy -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: How many K10s do we have now? a poll.
And another... Alex Sarbu On 2/24/07, Bill Sawyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > And another... > > Bill Sawyer > Livonia, MI -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Save for web problem
Hum...? You are right it did not change it. However, manually changing it resulted in a smaller, but otherwise deteriorated jpeg. At the moment it seems the problem has to do with the files being 16bit, although it had not seemed to matter in the past. I have been thinking that I ought to work up a script to automatically convert open photos from my normal mode to reduced web photos. I guess this is a good time to look into that. Paul Stenquist wrote: > Just go and try it. Take an adobe 98 file and do a save for web. It > will still be an adobe 98 file. To get an srgb file, you have to > convert it first. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: DA* instead of DFA* : an idea why ?
K.Takeshita wrote: >However, some lenses in previous roadmap were denoted as DFA but now DA. I have heard that this is nothing more than a change in nomenclature, not in the coverage area of the lens. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Home page?
Bob W wrote: >I had the astronomy picture of the day as my home page for a long >time, but I started to get bored with it. Then I changed to the Magnum >photo essay of the day on Slate. But they seem to be putting more and >more annoying crap, popups and animations on the site. Those are easy enough to kill, even with Internet Exploiter. With Firefox I turn off GIF animations with the about:config settings and stop Flash animations with the Flashblock add-on. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Photo.net Observation
Strange. Many individual photos are untitled. Maybe it's because they're in folder of a particular name, like Alaska. Tom C. >From: Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >Subject: Re: Photo.net Observation >Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 19:47:56 -0500 > >Like some said, it can be due to search engines picking up on the >title. I've also found that the first shot in a folder gets more >views than any other. Don't know why. Pics that make it into the >"highest rated" gallery get a lot of hits. >Paul >On Feb 23, 2007, at 7:34 PM, Tom C wrote: > > > No of course not. :-) Each photo displayed on photo.net has a > > number of > > times viewed field, that they suppposedly maintain. > > > > The PESO I displayed yesterday now has a count of 37, which seems > > reasonable. But 700+ on photos that have no value to anyone but > > myself, is > > weird. > > > > Tom C. > > > > > >> From: Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >> Subject: Re: Photo.net Observation > >> Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 16:26:14 -0800 (PST) > >> > >> I gather you have purchased search words to "get" people to look at > >> your photos. > >> I went through that, and about $300 a month, for a year and a half > >> before it sank in that I wasn't making a profit. Actually, my wife > >> was > >> good enough to point it out. > >> Price/hit kept going up and my 'grandfathered in' lower price just > >> didn't get them enough attention. > >> OST, you're possibly not talking about website hits.(?) > >> > >> Jack > >> --- Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>> When looking at the Number of Times Viewed statistic for some of my > >>> photos, > >>> I'm surprised. Many photos that are of no interest to anyone other > >>> than > >>> family or friends, have no title, and are mere snapshots, are > >>> showing > >>> up as > >>> having been viewed 700+ times. That seems quite high to me. > >>> > >>> I can understand it if it was a photo I asked for a critique on, or > >>> if it > >>> was one I posted as a PESO, but the ones in question are not. > >>> > >>> I'm wondering if some sort of automated crawler exists that could be > >>> inflating the numbers. The images I'm referring to have been out > >>> there > >>> about two years. I can undertsand that number of hits if random > >>> individuals > >>> came across the gallery and clicked on ones they liked. But I can't > >>> believe > >>> 700+ random individuals would click on those I've described. > >>> > >>> Any ideas? > >>> > >>> Tom C. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >>> PDML@pdml.net > >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > >>> > >> > >> > >> __ > >> Do You Yahoo!? > >> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > >> http://mail.yahoo.com > >> > >> -- > >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >> PDML@pdml.net > >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > PDML@pdml.net > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >PDML@pdml.net >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO: Rue Chale
Excellent. The shape of the road enhances the composition. The tonality is beautiful. Paul On Feb 23, 2007, at 7:31 PM, Ralf R. Radermacher wrote: > More DRI (HDR or whatever it's to be called this week...) monochrome > with the K10D, tonight at Seraing, between two rain showers: > > http://www.fotocommunity.de/pc/pc/mypics/770012/display/8052619 > > I'm at last beginning to enjoy this camera. > > As always, your comments... :-) > > Ralf > > -- > Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany > private homepage: http://www.fotoralf.de > manual cameras and photo galleries - updated Jan. 10, 2005 > Contarex - Kiev 60 - Horizon 202 - P6 mount lenses > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Photo.net Observation
Like some said, it can be due to search engines picking up on the title. I've also found that the first shot in a folder gets more views than any other. Don't know why. Pics that make it into the "highest rated" gallery get a lot of hits. Paul On Feb 23, 2007, at 7:34 PM, Tom C wrote: > No of course not. :-) Each photo displayed on photo.net has a > number of > times viewed field, that they suppposedly maintain. > > The PESO I displayed yesterday now has a count of 37, which seems > reasonable. But 700+ on photos that have no value to anyone but > myself, is > weird. > > Tom C. > > >> From: Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> Subject: Re: Photo.net Observation >> Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 16:26:14 -0800 (PST) >> >> I gather you have purchased search words to "get" people to look at >> your photos. >> I went through that, and about $300 a month, for a year and a half >> before it sank in that I wasn't making a profit. Actually, my wife >> was >> good enough to point it out. >> Price/hit kept going up and my 'grandfathered in' lower price just >> didn't get them enough attention. >> OST, you're possibly not talking about website hits.(?) >> >> Jack >> --- Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> When looking at the Number of Times Viewed statistic for some of my >>> photos, >>> I'm surprised. Many photos that are of no interest to anyone other >>> than >>> family or friends, have no title, and are mere snapshots, are >>> showing >>> up as >>> having been viewed 700+ times. That seems quite high to me. >>> >>> I can understand it if it was a photo I asked for a critique on, or >>> if it >>> was one I posted as a PESO, but the ones in question are not. >>> >>> I'm wondering if some sort of automated crawler exists that could be >>> inflating the numbers. The images I'm referring to have been out >>> there >>> about two years. I can undertsand that number of hits if random >>> individuals >>> came across the gallery and clicked on ones they liked. But I can't >>> believe >>> 700+ random individuals would click on those I've described. >>> >>> Any ideas? >>> >>> Tom C. >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> >> >> >> __ >> Do You Yahoo!? >> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >> http://mail.yahoo.com >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
PESO: Rue Chale
More DRI (HDR or whatever it's to be called this week...) monochrome with the K10D, tonight at Seraing, between two rain showers: http://www.fotocommunity.de/pc/pc/mypics/770012/display/8052619 I'm at last beginning to enjoy this camera. As always, your comments... :-) Ralf -- Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany private homepage: http://www.fotoralf.de manual cameras and photo galleries - updated Jan. 10, 2005 Contarex - Kiev 60 - Horizon 202 - P6 mount lenses -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Photo.net Observation
No of course not. :-) Each photo displayed on photo.net has a number of times viewed field, that they suppposedly maintain. The PESO I displayed yesterday now has a count of 37, which seems reasonable. But 700+ on photos that have no value to anyone but myself, is weird. Tom C. >From: Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >Subject: Re: Photo.net Observation >Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 16:26:14 -0800 (PST) > >I gather you have purchased search words to "get" people to look at >your photos. >I went through that, and about $300 a month, for a year and a half >before it sank in that I wasn't making a profit. Actually, my wife was >good enough to point it out. >Price/hit kept going up and my 'grandfathered in' lower price just >didn't get them enough attention. >OST, you're possibly not talking about website hits.(?) > >Jack >--- Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > When looking at the Number of Times Viewed statistic for some of my > > photos, > > I'm surprised. Many photos that are of no interest to anyone other > > than > > family or friends, have no title, and are mere snapshots, are showing > > up as > > having been viewed 700+ times. That seems quite high to me. > > > > I can understand it if it was a photo I asked for a critique on, or > > if it > > was one I posted as a PESO, but the ones in question are not. > > > > I'm wondering if some sort of automated crawler exists that could be > > inflating the numbers. The images I'm referring to have been out > > there > > about two years. I can undertsand that number of hits if random > > individuals > > came across the gallery and clicked on ones they liked. But I can't > > believe > > 700+ random individuals would click on those I've described. > > > > Any ideas? > > > > Tom C. > > > > > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > PDML@pdml.net > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > >__ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >PDML@pdml.net >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Boris, Week 7
That would work well too. I'd title it simply "Idan". G On Feb 23, 2007, at 4:28 PM, Jack Davis wrote: > Have you thought about cropping off some of the left side, including > the hand? > >> http://not.contaxg.com/document.php?id=16807&full=1 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Boy with cow's head
Everyone get in a single line and no shoving. Iris will apply the lashes. Jack --- Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Tom C wrote: > > >>Tom C wrote: > >> > >> >> > On 2/23/07, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> >>> > >> >> >> Eating eyeballs strikes me as a little unsightly. > >> >> >> > >> >> > You should try it and see for yourself. > >> >> > >> >>Yeah, but I see his point. > >> > > >> >This is like the blind leading the blind. > >> > >>Yes, but you can still learn a lot from it if you're an attentive > pupil. > >> > >That's one of the corneaest thinks I've heard. > > Whoever started this thread should get 50 lashes. > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > Have a burning question? Go to www.Answers.yahoo.com and get answers from real people who know. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: pentax 645D cogitations
> No it's not just you. > > For some reason when I read Bill's post "coffee enema" sprang to mind. Yeah, Me too. I think I'll go wash my brain with acid, in an attempt to remove the image. - Peter -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Boris, Week 7
Great shot, Boris! Nothing to be brutal about with this one... G On Feb 23, 2007, at 11:21 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: > http://not.contaxg.com/document.php?id=16807&full=1 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Boris, Week 7
Boris, Have you thought about cropping off some of the left side, including the hand? Jack --- Boris Liberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi! > > http://not.contaxg.com/document.php?id=16807&full=1 > > I really think title is unnecessary here. > > I am pondering the possibility of making a little gallery starring > baby > Idan. I seem to have enough material ;-). > > Please be brutal and honest as usual. > > Boris > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > We won't tell. Get more on shows you hate to love (and love to hate): Yahoo! TV's Guilty Pleasures list. http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/265 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Photo.net Observation
I gather you have purchased search words to "get" people to look at your photos. I went through that, and about $300 a month, for a year and a half before it sank in that I wasn't making a profit. Actually, my wife was good enough to point it out. Price/hit kept going up and my 'grandfathered in' lower price just didn't get them enough attention. OST, you're possibly not talking about website hits.(?) Jack --- Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > When looking at the Number of Times Viewed statistic for some of my > photos, > I'm surprised. Many photos that are of no interest to anyone other > than > family or friends, have no title, and are mere snapshots, are showing > up as > having been viewed 700+ times. That seems quite high to me. > > I can understand it if it was a photo I asked for a critique on, or > if it > was one I posted as a PESO, but the ones in question are not. > > I'm wondering if some sort of automated crawler exists that could be > inflating the numbers. The images I'm referring to have been out > there > about two years. I can undertsand that number of hits if random > individuals > came across the gallery and clicked on ones they liked. But I can't > believe > 700+ random individuals would click on those I've described. > > Any ideas? > > Tom C. > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: How many K10s do we have now? a poll.
And another... Bill Sawyer Livonia, MI -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David J Brooks Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 11:07 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: How many K10s do we have now? a poll. Add 1 more Dave On 2/23/07, cbwaters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We're over 40 so far... > > CW > > - Original Message - > From: "cbwaters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Pdml@pdml.net" > Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 5:16 PM > Subject: How many K10s do we have now? a poll. > > > > Hey List, > > How many K10D cameras do the PDML members have now? > > > > Send me a reply off-list and I'll compile by the weekend. > > > > If you've ordered yours but it hasn't arrived yet, count it. if you're > > still saving, not so much. > > > > Cory > > > > > > > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > PDML@pdml.net > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > > -- > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.18.3/697 - Release Date: 2/22/2007 > > 11:55 AM > > > > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: DA* instead of DFA* : an idea why ?
What exactly are you refering to ? 2007/2/24, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > That would of course have a damaging effect on their reputation for > backward compatibility, but it doesn't seem to have stopped them from > doing that sort of thing recently. > > Thibouille wrote: > > An idea just attacked my brain (poor brain) which is the following: > > > > The current speculation is that the dual AF system won't necessarily > > be present in next DA*, there's of course no commitment at all to this > > Dual AF. > > > > Now, if Pentax wanna get rid of the screwdriver AF in those tele lens > > (200/2.8 etc) and let only SDM system, would Pentax be wise to market > > them as DFA*? It would be stupid and probably badly received. They'd > > better lmarket them as DA* (the loss of "old" AF would be acceptable, > > not that it is any good of course) and ley(s cut the aprture ring BTW, > > saving costs. > > > > Just my 2 cents. We will know soon enough (or maybe not). > > > > > > > -- > Entropy Seminar: The results of a five yeer studee ntu the sekend lw uf > thurmodynamiks aand itz inevibl fxt hon shewb rt nslpn raq liot. > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille -- K10D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Home page?
On 2/23/07, Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I had the astronomy picture of the day as my home page for a long > time, but I started to get bored with it. Then I changed to the Magnum > photo essay of the day on Slate. But they seem to be putting more and > more annoying crap, popups and animations on the site. So I want a new > home page. Even Magnum have changed their home page so that it's full > of animation, even when the essays are really good. > > Does anybody know of another good, simple photo-of-the-day site that > doesn't bombard its viewers with crap? > I like the Geographic's photo of the day. http://lava.nationalgeographic.com/pod/ -- Scott Loveless http://www.twosixteen.com Shoot more film! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10d web forum
Oh sorry! It's http://www.digitalphotographer.com.ph (no "s"). Should've have cut & pasted it, typing it without having my dose of coffee was a bad thing... On 2/24/07, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Looks like if didn't last long, I get "The name > digitalphotographers.com.ph is for sale". > > Bong Manayon wrote: > > For one thing, the K10D does put Pentax back into everyone's radar > > screen so its users are sticking their heads up high. Here we have > > the Digital Photographer Philippines forum > > (http://www.digitalphotographers.com.ph) where there are sections for > > Canon, Nikon, et. al. Pentax is classified under "others" :-\ > > > > On 2/23/07, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> Seems a bit of overkill to have a web forum for just one camera model. > >> > >> cbwaters wrote: > >> > >>> I found this in a signature somebody has at dpreview and I hadn't seen it > >>> mentioned here anywhere. > >>> http://k10dslr.net > >>> A web forum (with a whopping 18 members so far) dedicated to the K10 etc. > >>> Kinda neat, if you go in for that sort of stuff. > >>> > >>> I think I'll post a poll in another message and see if I can count how > >>> many > >>> K10s "we" have now. > >>> > >>> CW > >>> Member #18 > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> -- > >> -- > >> > >> The more I know of men, the more I like my dog. > >> -- Anne Louise Germaine de Stael > >> > >> > >> -- > >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >> PDML@pdml.net > >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > -- > -- > > The more I know of men, the more I like my dog. > -- Anne Louise Germaine de Stael > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- Bong Manayon http://www.bong.uni.cc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: IIIIIIIIIIIII
One of those, "oh, I wish I took that photo..." Of course, it would be the end of us all if ever the lakes in the Philippines froze... Bong On 2/20/07, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: "Fernando Terrazzino" > Subject: PESO: I > > > > I'm probably more inclined to pay attention to frozen lakes, as I come > > from a warmer place. > > > > http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=395612866&size=o > > > > Gorgeous shot. > Your pictures deserve a Wisner. > > William Robb > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- Bong Manayon http://www.bong.uni.cc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: DA* instead of DFA* : an idea why ?
That would of course have a damaging effect on their reputation for backward compatibility, but it doesn't seem to have stopped them from doing that sort of thing recently. Thibouille wrote: > An idea just attacked my brain (poor brain) which is the following: > > The current speculation is that the dual AF system won't necessarily > be present in next DA*, there's of course no commitment at all to this > Dual AF. > > Now, if Pentax wanna get rid of the screwdriver AF in those tele lens > (200/2.8 etc) and let only SDM system, would Pentax be wise to market > them as DFA*? It would be stupid and probably badly received. They'd > better lmarket them as DA* (the loss of "old" AF would be acceptable, > not that it is any good of course) and ley(s cut the aprture ring BTW, > saving costs. > > Just my 2 cents. We will know soon enough (or maybe not). > > -- Entropy Seminar: The results of a five yeer studee ntu the sekend lw uf thurmodynamiks aand itz inevibl fxt hon shewb rt nslpn raq liot. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Leica Camera AG - R System
I don't think that they've ever been accused of building spare 35mm SLRs. Charles Robinson wrote: > On Feb 23, 2007, at 15:45, Thibouille wrote: > > >> AFAIK the Leica R digital back is out of business ... >> >> 2007/2/23, Roman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >>> http://www.leica-camera.us/photography/r_system/ >>> >>> For film & digital. It's shoots on film and with digital back - it's >>> DSLR in seconds. >>> >>> > > Is it considered heretical to say that a Leica assembly looks like > something ugly, unweildy, and non-user-friendly? > > The TOP view of that camera, especially, makes it look like something > I'd never ever want to use. I thought Leica was known for their > spare, efficient, jewel-like assembly. This thing looks like a big > pig with a lot of parts just glued on to the outside! > > (I don't mean literally glued, but still - yow, it's a mess!) > > -Charles > > -- > Charles Robinson > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Minneapolis, MN > http://charles.robinsontwins.org > > > > -- Entropy Seminar: The results of a five yeer studee ntu the sekend lw uf thurmodynamiks aand itz inevibl fxt hon shewb rt nslpn raq liot. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Leica Camera AG - R System
The LX isn't equipped to compete in today's marketplace. And dual- purpose cameras are such a small niche, I can't see anyone other than Leica pursuing it. Paul On Feb 23, 2007, at 6:05 PM, P. J. Alling wrote: > We were arguing about that years ago. If Pentax made something like > that for the LX I'd be happy. > > Roman wrote: >> http://www.leica-camera.us/photography/r_system/ >> >> For film & digital. It's shoots on film and with digital back - it's >> DSLR in seconds. >> >> >> > > > -- > -- > > The more I know of men, the more I like my dog. > -- Anne Louise Germaine de Stael > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: X-Ray & Film Parcels
Thanks for the advice. Yup, we make some of the Pentax's in use out there. Of course most Filipinos does not even know that, or if they do, are proud of it. Listen to my anecdote: Over a year ago when the *istDS was first released, I went into a local Pentax shop to finally see a DS. The sales person immediately commented that it was cheaper than the *istD. Since I have not yet looked at any data or specification sheet, I asked "why?" The sales person answered, "oh its because its made in the Philippines." :-\ On 2/24/07, Jens Bladt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have an x-ray proof box, that works fine. Can't you persuade the dealer to > ship in x-ray proof package. I may even send a box ahead. > These days these boxes can be purchased quite cheaply. > So you are from the Philippines - just like my new Pentax camera :-) > Regards > Jens Bladt > Nytarkort / Greeting Card: > http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html > > http://www.jensbladt.dk > +45 56 63 77 11 > +45 23 43 85 77 > Skype: jensbladt248 > > -Oprindelig meddelelse- > Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Bong > Manayon > Sendt: 22. februar 2007 03:43 > Til: pdml@pdml.net > Emne: X-Ray & Film Parcels > > > I mentioned in another thread that I'm back to shooting film for > personal fun (and occassionally when I convince a client that film > works as well as digital...). > > My problem now is that what is commercially available is reduced to > the consumer films (Kodak 100/400 or the Fuji Superia 100/400). There > are still a lot of Kodak ProImage/Profoto or the Fuji ProPlus > professional films but the local dealers here in the Philippines no > longer stock on Supras or Fuji Realas which I really like. So I'm > thinking ordering abroad... > > Question is, do they x-ray parcels? > > I also thought of asking friends to buy some for me but with the > paranoia, I know that both hand-carried and checked in stuff are > x-rayed (no I never really trusted those x-ray proof bags). > > Bong > -- > Bong Manayon > http://www.bong.uni.cc > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.18.3/697 - Release Date: 02/22/2007 > 11:55 > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.18.3/699 - Release Date: 02/23/2007 > 13:26 > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- Bong Manayon http://www.bong.uni.cc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Home page?
I had the astronomy picture of the day as my home page for a long time, but I started to get bored with it. Then I changed to the Magnum photo essay of the day on Slate. But they seem to be putting more and more annoying crap, popups and animations on the site. So I want a new home page. Even Magnum have changed their home page so that it's full of animation, even when the essays are really good. Does anybody know of another good, simple photo-of-the-day site that doesn't bombard its viewers with crap? -- Regards, Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Leica Camera AG - R System
We were arguing about that years ago. If Pentax made something like that for the LX I'd be happy. Roman wrote: > http://www.leica-camera.us/photography/r_system/ > > For film & digital. It's shoots on film and with digital back - it's > DSLR in seconds. > > > -- -- The more I know of men, the more I like my dog. -- Anne Louise Germaine de Stael -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Leica Camera AG - R System
Thibouille wrote: >AFAIK the Leica R digital back is out of business ... Yep. Leica killed it Feb 8: http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-8736-8825 "the Leica Digital-Modul-R is sold out with immediate effect. Leica Camera will not be accepting any more orders or making any further deliveries of the DMR." -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: PESO - Boris, Week 7
Wonderful eyes. I hope you've refilled his bottle... Tom C. >From: Boris Liberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List , PAW Project Discussions ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: PESO - Boris, Week 7 >Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 21:21:24 +0200 > >Hi! > >http://not.contaxg.com/document.php?id=16807&full=1 > >I really think title is unnecessary here. > >I am pondering the possibility of making a little gallery starring baby >Idan. I seem to have enough material ;-). > >Please be brutal and honest as usual. > >Boris > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >PDML@pdml.net >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: More good things announced it seems :) :)
Nope, that's simply not the case. The mechanical coupling is much smaller than in-lens motors can be. For a good example compare the Nikkor 20/2.8 AF-D to the Canon EF 20/2.8 USM, or even the Nikkor 50/1.8 AF-D to the Canon EF 50/1.8 II (which is plain old DC micromotor drive). Putting the motor in the lens makes it bigger, a lot bigger in some cases, particularly when ring-type USM drives are used (As you have the motor surrounding the optical group in that case). Both the Nikon's are half the size of the comparable Canon lenses, in fact the Nikons are only slightly larger in AF-D form than the optically identical AI-S manual focus versions. The DA limiteds are going to be screwdriver AF for a long time. John Francis wrote: > SDM lenses can be *smaller* than lenses with mechanical AF coupling. > > On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 10:52:03PM +0100, Thibouille wrote: >> Maybe not that soon. >> DA Limited won't get SDM because of size, I think. >> >> 2007/2/23, John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>> On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 01:00:40PM +0100, John Whittingham wrote: On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 23:57:53 +0100, Thibouille wrote > http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=22150903 > > -- > > Thibault Massart aka Thibouille > -- > *ist-D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ... Ooooh! SMC Pentax-DA* 300mm f4 ED IF SDM, yes please, gimme, gimme 8) John >>> I'm sure it will be. Quite apart from anything else, SDM offers the >>> most advantages with larger, heavier lenses; a larger motor can be >>> fitted, providing more responsive focussing. >>> >>> But, in any case, I very much doubt that we'll see any new lens >>> designs that don't have SDM - that's the way of the future for Pentax. >>> What will disappear is the old mechanical screwdriver autofocus. >>> We'll eventually see camera bodies that won't even have an in-body >>> autofocus motor, and will only autofocus with SDM lenses. >>> The first such body (no more than five years from now) will almost >>> certainly be a low-end entry-level model, where the price savings are >>> significant. But I expect it will gradually spread throughout the >>> range, until screwdriver AF goes the way of the aperture simulator. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> >> >> -- >> Thibault Massart aka Thibouille >> -- >> K10D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ... >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: DA* instead of DFA* : an idea why ?
On 2/23/07 5:10 PM, "Paul Stenquist", <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think the only reason the lenses are DA is that there is no plan to > market a full-frame camera. It's as simple as that. It's indeed as simple as that. However, some lenses in previous roadmap were denoted as DFA but now DA. I am sure each camera maker are given by sensor makers their development roadmaps and Pentax did not see any so called FF sensors in foreseeable future, or they are still too expensive. I would believe that some makers might try FF DSLRs but for exploration only and they will never sell in great numbers, at least for now. Or, there may have been significant progress in the development of APS size sensors. In any case, I personally do not want DSLRs going for larger sensor, with larger mirrors/mirror boxes etc. When Sony entered into DSLR market, they said that they would endeavour to keep sensor size as small as possible (yet they might announce an FF DSLR :-). Sensor, particularly CCD, is a semiconductor and in that world, the smaller, the better. We'll see. I need a small Pentax digital ranger finder that can use compact Limited's. That would be fabulous. Don't make DSLRS any larger than K10D please! YMMV. Ken -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Mores Creek Overlook
>From: ann sanfedele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >I think it is people who have never seen this IRL... it looks spot-on >real to me, and very nice. >An effect of nature, not your photography or post-processing, I'd say. > >But "bleak" comes to mind in the mode of the photo - perhaps that is >what is meant by others >I ain't been reading the whole thread tho > >ann Thanks Ann. Nice words coming from you. ;-) I did do a fair amount of post-processing on this. But you are correct that the light here looks this way sometimes. Some of my first photos taken with the PZ-1p and Reala in northern Idaho back in 1998 (before I lived here) have the same feel to them. Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Boy with cow's head
On 23/2/07, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed: >>> >> >> >> Eating eyeballs strikes me as a little unsightly. >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> > You should try it and see for yourself. >>> >> >> >>> >> >>Yeah, but I see his point. >>> >> > >>> >> >This is like the blind leading the blind. >>> >> >>> >>Yes, but you can still learn a lot from it if you're an attentive >pupil. >>> >> >>> >That's one of the corneaest thinks I've heard. >>> >>> Whoever started this thread should get 50 lashes. >>> >>Your browbeating doesn't scare us. > >Time to put a lid on it then. Just when we're having a ball? -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: More good things announced it seems :) :)
SDM lenses can be *smaller* than lenses with mechanical AF coupling. On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 10:52:03PM +0100, Thibouille wrote: > Maybe not that soon. > DA Limited won't get SDM because of size, I think. > > 2007/2/23, John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 01:00:40PM +0100, John Whittingham wrote: > > > On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 23:57:53 +0100, Thibouille wrote > > > > http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=22150903 > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Thibault Massart aka Thibouille > > > > -- > > > > *ist-D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ... > > > > > > Ooooh! SMC Pentax-DA* 300mm f4 ED IF SDM, yes please, gimme, gimme 8) > > > > > > John > > > > I'm sure it will be. Quite apart from anything else, SDM offers the > > most advantages with larger, heavier lenses; a larger motor can be > > fitted, providing more responsive focussing. > > > > But, in any case, I very much doubt that we'll see any new lens > > designs that don't have SDM - that's the way of the future for Pentax. > > What will disappear is the old mechanical screwdriver autofocus. > > We'll eventually see camera bodies that won't even have an in-body > > autofocus motor, and will only autofocus with SDM lenses. > > The first such body (no more than five years from now) will almost > > certainly be a low-end entry-level model, where the price savings are > > significant. But I expect it will gradually spread throughout the > > range, until screwdriver AF goes the way of the aperture simulator. > > > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > PDML@pdml.net > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > -- > Thibault Massart aka Thibouille > -- > K10D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ... > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: DA* instead of DFA* : an idea why ?
Thibouille wrote: >An idea just attacked my brain (poor brain) which is the following: > >The current speculation is that the dual AF system won't necessarily >be present in next DA*, there's of course no commitment at all to this >Dual AF. > >Now, if Pentax wanna get rid of the screwdriver AF in those tele lens >(200/2.8 etc) and let only SDM system, would Pentax be wise to market >them as DFA*? It would be stupid and probably badly received. They'd >better lmarket them as DA* (the loss of "old" AF would be acceptable, >not that it is any good of course) and ley(s cut the aperture ring BTW, >saving costs. The new telephoto lenses that were listed as "DFA" in the roadmap are probably still full-frame coverage but Pentax dropped the "DFA" designation because they don't have aperture rings like the D FA 50/2.8 macro and D FA 100/2.8 macro. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Boy with cow's head
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 02:55:30PM -0500, Scott Loveless wrote: > On 2/23/07, Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Tom C wrote: > > > > >>Tom C wrote: > > >> > > >> >> > On 2/23/07, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >> Eating eyeballs strikes me as a little unsightly. > > >> >> >> > > >> >> > You should try it and see for yourself. > > >> >> > > >> >>Yeah, but I see his point. > > >> > > > >> >This is like the blind leading the blind. > > >> > > >>Yes, but you can still learn a lot from it if you're an attentive pupil. > > >> > > >That's one of the corneaest thinks I've heard. > > > > Whoever started this thread should get 50 lashes. > > > Your browbeating doesn't scare us. I find a total lack of humour in these remarks. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: DA* instead of DFA* : an idea why ?
I think the only reason the lenses are DA is that there is no plan to market a full-frame camera. It's as simple as that. Paul On Feb 23, 2007, at 4:58 PM, Thibouille wrote: > An idea just attacked my brain (poor brain) which is the following: > > The current speculation is that the dual AF system won't necessarily > be present in next DA*, there's of course no commitment at all to this > Dual AF. > > Now, if Pentax wanna get rid of the screwdriver AF in those tele lens > (200/2.8 etc) and let only SDM system, would Pentax be wise to market > them as DFA*? It would be stupid and probably badly received. They'd > better lmarket them as DA* (the loss of "old" AF would be acceptable, > not that it is any good of course) and ley(s cut the aprture ring BTW, > saving costs. > > Just my 2 cents. We will know soon enough (or maybe not). > > -- > Thibault Massart aka Thibouille > -- > K10D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ... > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Save for web problem
Just go and try it. Take an adobe 98 file and do a save for web. It will still be an adobe 98 file. To get an srgb file, you have to convert it first. Paul On Feb 23, 2007, at 4:55 PM, graywolf wrote: > To the best of my knowledge it does. However there may be and issue > with > ProPhoto that was not there with Adobe98. I will double check that. > > Brian Walters wrote: >> Given that sRGB is required for web images, I wonder why >> Photoshop's "Save for web" doesn't do the conversion automatically >> when necessary. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Leica Camera AG - R System
Charles Robinson wrote: > On Feb 23, 2007, at 15:45, Thibouille wrote: > >> AFAIK the Leica R digital back is out of business ... >> >> 2007/2/23, Roman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>> http://www.leica-camera.us/photography/r_system/ >>> >>> For film & digital. It's shoots on film and with digital back - it's >>> DSLR in seconds. >>> > > Is it considered heretical to say that a Leica assembly looks like > something ugly, unweildy, and non-user-friendly? > > The TOP view of that camera, especially, makes it look like something > I'd never ever want to use. I thought Leica was known for their > spare, efficient, jewel-like assembly. This thing looks like a big > pig with a lot of parts just glued on to the outside! > > (I don't mean literally glued, but still - yow, it's a mess!) > > -Charles > What, you don't like the Hunchback of Solms? I've not been impressed by any of the R series bodies I've seen. The older ones are very much Minoltas (and while the MD mount bodies are competent, I've never much liked them) and the newer ones are just plain odd, and underfeatured compared to the equivalent Contax bodies. Combine that with Leica's seeming lack of any understanding of the SLR market (Why did they never have a lower-end body? Even Contax typically had low and mid range bodies to complement the RTS) and I wonder how the R system lasted so long. -Adam -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Leica Camera AG - R System
On Feb 23, 2007, at 1:58 PM, Charles Robinson wrote: >>> http://www.leica-camera.us/photography/r_system/ > > Is it considered heretical to say that a Leica assembly looks like > something ugly, unweildy, and non-user-friendly? > > The TOP view of that camera, especially, makes it look like something > I'd never ever want to use. I thought Leica was known for their > spare, efficient, jewel-like assembly. This thing looks like a big > pig with a lot of parts just glued on to the outside! > > (I don't mean literally glued, but still - yow, it's a mess!) Hmm. I have to disagree. I was very very hot to buy an R8 around 1998 ... it's a big, beefy camera but if you have large hands like mine it is *perfectly* shaped. Every control fell exactly where my fingers wanted it to be and was logically placed for sensible use. I think they designed it from a picture of my hands... The R9 is basically the same and remains one of my favorite 35mm SLRs. I killed the idea when I looked at how much it would cost to assemble a Leica R + four-five lens kit. Yikes! Makes Pentax Limited lens' prices look like chicken feed. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Leica Camera AG - R System
Temporarily it seems. Apparently the problems were twofold, the sensor vendor was being problematic and Leica needed the resources for the R10 project. -Adam Who's looking at picking up some R glass for his EOS body. can't have too many 50's Thibouille wrote: > AFAIK the Leica R digital back is out of business ... > > 2007/2/23, Roman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> http://www.leica-camera.us/photography/r_system/ >> >> For film & digital. It's shoots on film and with digital back - it's >> DSLR in seconds. >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Save for web problem
I have to change color space to SRGB or I get exactly the kind of result you're getting. SFW is weird. Paul On Feb 23, 2007, at 4:51 PM, graywolf wrote: > > > David Savage wrote: >> What's your working space in PS? >> >> Do you convert to sRGB (Edit>Convert to Profile) before you save >> for web? > > Nope, and I didn't do that before. AFAIK, SFW is set up to > automatically > convert your photo to a standard web image from whatever it is to > begin > with. Let me reiterate, I have not changed my methology at all. Things > just stated to be different for no reason that I can see. However, > I am > willing to believe that I changed some setting somewhere in PS and > don't > remember doing so, getting old is hell. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Leica Camera AG - R System
B&H Photo lists the Digital Modul R as "taking orders". G On Feb 23, 2007, at 1:45 PM, Thibouille wrote: > AFAIK the Leica R digital back is out of business ... > > 2007/2/23, Roman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> http://www.leica-camera.us/photography/r_system/ >> >> For film & digital. It's shoots on film and with digital back - it's >> DSLR in seconds. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Photo.net Observation
He, try to a words like "pussy", "kiss", "chick", "sex" or similar to a title or tag - and you'll get loads of hit :-) Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af John Whittingham Sendt: 23. februar 2007 22:30 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: Photo.net Observation On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 12:11:57 -0700, Tom C wrote > When looking at the Number of Times Viewed statistic for some of my > photos, I'm surprised. Many photos that are of no interest to anyone > other than family or friends, have no title, and are mere snapshots, > are showing up as having been viewed 700+ times. That seems quite > high to me. > > I can understand it if it was a photo I asked for a critique on, or > if it was one I posted as a PESO, but the ones in question are not. > > I'm wondering if some sort of automated crawler exists that could be > inflating the numbers. The images I'm referring to have been out > there about two years. I can undertsand that number of hits if > random individuals came across the gallery and clicked on ones they > liked. But I can't believe 700+ random individuals would click on > those I've described. > > Any ideas? > > Tom C. Something in the title matches a key search word perhaps? May just be someones name?! John The information transmitted is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you have received an email in error please notify Carmel College on [EMAIL PROTECTED] then delete all copies of it from your systems. Although Carmel College scans incoming and outgoing emails and email attachments for viruses we cannot guarantee a communication to be free of all viruses nor accept any responsibility for viruses. Although Carmel College monitors incoming and outgoing emails for inappropriate content, the college cannot be held responsible for the views or expressions of the author. The views expressed may not necessarily be those of Carmel College and Carmel College cannot be held responsible for any loss or injury resulting from the contents of a message. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.18.3/699 - Release Date: 02/23/2007 13:26 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.18.3/699 - Release Date: 02/23/2007 13:26 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Save for web problem
That did not fix it, nor did converting to SRGB, but strangely converting to 8 bit first looks like maybe it has. Humm? I thought I have been using 16 bit all along? Maybe Adobe has hired some of those experts at writing self-modifying code from MS? Thanks to all who have commented, and I welcome any other suggestions. Rick Womer wrote: > Tom, > > I had the same problem a year ago. Checking the "ICC > Profile" box on the "Save for Web" window fixed it. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Pentax SMC 15mm f/3.5 on digital
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 07:30:23 -0800, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote > On Feb 23, 2007, at 3:45 AM, John Whittingham wrote: > > >>http://homepage.mac.com/godders/14mm-examples/ > > > > Some nice shots there. I can see a little CA in IMGP1449-B2 @ f/8, the > > converging verticals make me feel dizzy in that shot. There's more in > > IMGP0591 @ f/5.6, nice Ducati Monster though. Still not a bad > > showing for > > such a wide lens. > > As I said, not "none" but insignificant. You're looking at image > examples with nothing other than default conversion to JPEG direct > from RAW at 1:1 pixel size. You would likely not see any in an A3 print. Yeah sorry, just me being picky and over analysing, I did read insignificant. I'm just particularly intolerant to CA. > > Lightroom.ah, only works on XP AFAIK, I'm running Win2K and > > sticking > > for now, no bugs or BSoD. Can you set up the same in ACR I've not > > looked. > > With Camera Raw 3.7, you can save settings in subsets by lens tab. > So you would save a set of settings for the DA14, or any other lens, > selecting which specific settings would apply to all of them. To > apply them to batches of files, select and open all the 14mm files, > click the Select All button at the top of the thumbnail column, > then pick the settings file you created to apply those corrections > to all of them. That would do nicely providing it's not image dependant. > I'm not sure whether this could be scripted... I'd have to look that > up in "Real World Camera Raw with Photoshop CS2". > > Godfrey Thanks again Godfrey. Regards, John The information transmitted is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you have received an email in error please notify Carmel College on [EMAIL PROTECTED] then delete all copies of it from your systems. Although Carmel College scans incoming and outgoing emails and email attachments for viruses we cannot guarantee a communication to be free of all viruses nor accept any responsibility for viruses. Although Carmel College monitors incoming and outgoing emails for inappropriate content, the college cannot be held responsible for the views or expressions of the author. The views expressed may not necessarily be those of Carmel College and Carmel College cannot be held responsible for any loss or injury resulting from the contents of a message. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Save for web problem
"Save for Web" doesn't automatically change the color space on either of my macines (CS1 and CS2), although they do automatically save as a jpeg. On Feb 23, 2007, at 3:54 PM, William Robb wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: "Brian Walters" > Subject: Re: Save for web problem > > >> Given that sRGB is required for web images, I wonder why >> Photoshop's "Save >> for web" doesn't do the conversion automatically when necessary. > > It does on my machine. > > William Robb > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Pentax SMC 15mm f/3.5 on digital
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 12:00:02 -0600, William Robb wrote > - Original Message - > From: "David Savage" > Subject: Re: Pentax SMC 15mm f/3.5 on digital > > > I'd like to take up ice fishing. Unfortunately, no ice. > > You are coming to Canada in June? > We can provide ice fishing for you. > WW Got any ice fishing cormorants out there? 8) John The information transmitted is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you have received an email in error please notify Carmel College on [EMAIL PROTECTED] then delete all copies of it from your systems. Although Carmel College scans incoming and outgoing emails and email attachments for viruses we cannot guarantee a communication to be free of all viruses nor accept any responsibility for viruses. Although Carmel College monitors incoming and outgoing emails for inappropriate content, the college cannot be held responsible for the views or expressions of the author. The views expressed may not necessarily be those of Carmel College and Carmel College cannot be held responsible for any loss or injury resulting from the contents of a message. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Save for web problem
To the best of my knowledge it does. However there may be and issue with ProPhoto that was not there with Adobe98. I will double check that. Brian Walters wrote: > Given that sRGB is required for web images, I wonder why Photoshop's "Save > for web" doesn't do the conversion automatically when necessary. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Leica Camera AG - R System
On Feb 23, 2007, at 15:45, Thibouille wrote: > AFAIK the Leica R digital back is out of business ... > > 2007/2/23, Roman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> http://www.leica-camera.us/photography/r_system/ >> >> For film & digital. It's shoots on film and with digital back - it's >> DSLR in seconds. >> Is it considered heretical to say that a Leica assembly looks like something ugly, unweildy, and non-user-friendly? The TOP view of that camera, especially, makes it look like something I'd never ever want to use. I thought Leica was known for their spare, efficient, jewel-like assembly. This thing looks like a big pig with a lot of parts just glued on to the outside! (I don't mean literally glued, but still - yow, it's a mess!) -Charles -- Charles Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
