Re: PESO: Wounded Icon

[David Savage]

On 10/10/07, David J Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There was one spot i could get at them, and i just waited until the
> crowds cleared. I was think, next year to bring  a stool, but that
> might be to much

Use "The cooler"?

:-)

I have a shot of you at work at the otter enclosure.

Cheers,

Dave

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Culling and Editing (Long)

[David Savage]

On 10/10/07, Scott Loveless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The first thing you should do is delete any photos that have cats in them.

For you Scott:



Cheers,

Dave ;-)

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Wal-Mart and film processing (Long winded)

[Scott Loveless]

Since we've been tossing around the Wal-Mart name a bit, and since I've 
been doing some scanning recently, this has been on my mind and I 
thought I'd share (with the other 2 of you who are still shooting film).

When I was working in Hagerstown, MD I brought my E-6 to a little 
independent shop called FirstLook Photo.  They had a 2 hour slide 
service than ran about $8.  Drop off before my shift, pick up during 
lunch.  It was wonderful and well worth the price.  The finished product 
was mounted in plastic and filed in archival pages punched for 3-ring 
binders.  They also still did B&W in house.  Not having the volume to 
process it every day, the store owner would do it himself once per week. 
  I think he just liked black and white processing and wasn't too 
terribly interested in making money from it.

After moving north a bit, FirstLook became inconvenient.  So I started 
looking around for another E-6 processor.  I tried three different small 
shops.  None of them did it on site, turn around was at least a week, 
and the end result was variable.  Prices ranged from $8 to $12 per roll. 
  So I decided to try Wal-Mart.  In case you don't know, Wal-Mart sends 
everything that's not 1-hour C-41 to Fuji.  As I have had good luck with 
Fuji's processing in the past, via mailers, I put a few rolls in 
Wal-Mart's send-out bin.  Success!  About a week, quality was 
consistent, and the price tag was $4.88.  Turns out, sometime between a 
year ago and now, Fuji closed their E-6 facility and contracted with 
Dwayne's.  I like Dwayne's.  A lot.  They do good work.

Bottom line, Wally World send out goes to Dwayne's.  36 exposure 35mm 
(E-6 and Kodachrome), 120 or 220 E-6 is $4.88 per roll, and it usually 
takes 7 to 10 days.  I'm a happy camper.

FWIW - there are a couple of "pro" labs in the area, but I haven't tried 
them.  They cater mostly to wedding photographers and don't seem to have 
much interest in developing a roll or two for guys like me.  They're 
also considerably more expensive.  I suppose I'd use them if I was being 
paid for it, but for the amateur crap I shoot, Wal-Mart is fine.

Thanks for listening.

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

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__

[Scott Loveless]

Tom C wrote:
>> My only gripe with Wally World is staffing.  Or lack thereof.  They
>> never have enough registers open.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Scott Loveless
> 
> Yeah, that's when I take my package of sliced Swiss cheese, and hang it 
> behind a bunch of proprietary battery packages right next to the minilab in 
> the Camera/Photo department. ;-)
> 
Were you in my neighborhood recently?  A couple days ago at the local 
supermarket I decided to get an overpriced Pepsi from the cooler by the 
register.  As I reached down to open the door I saw something truly odd 
next to the Mountain Dew.  Someone had put a bag of flour in there.  It 
felt really cold, so I guess it had been there for a while.

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

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__

[P. J. Alling]

I'm not particularly bashing Wally World, they just happened to be the 
large soulless big box store there. (And they failed to keep their own 
lights burning which added a bit to the inaptness).

Scott Loveless wrote:
> William Robb wrote:
>   
>> - Original Message - 
>> From: "Tom C"
>> Subject: Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__
>>
>>
>> 
>>> I didn't get that you were trying to make a statement, but I can understand
>>> it.  It's why I live 30+ miles from the nearest Walmart, even though I 
>>> don't
>>> mind shopping there. ;-)
>>>   
>> Some things get over stated to the point of being tiresome. An anti Wal-Mart 
>> tirade is as boring as an aperture simulator tirade at this point. Everyone 
>> has done it at one time or another, it gets boring after a while.
>>
>> 
>
> My only gripe with Wally World is staffing.  Or lack thereof.  They 
> never have enough registers open.
>
>
>   


-- 
Remember, it’s pillage then burn.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - macro flower

[Tom C]

>
>- Original Message -
>From: "Tom C"
>Subject: Re: PESO - macro flower
>
>
>
> >
> > Sometimes I just hate myself.
> >
>
>It's much more satisfying to make other people hate you.
>
>William Robb
>

I sometimes have little problem with that.  It's nice that you understand.

Tom C.



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__

[Tom C]

>
>My only gripe with Wally World is staffing.  Or lack thereof.  They
>never have enough registers open.
>
>
>--
>Scott Loveless

Yeah, that's when I take my package of sliced Swiss cheese, and hang it 
behind a bunch of proprietary battery packages right next to the minilab in 
the Camera/Photo department. ;-)

Tom C.



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - macro flower

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Tom C" 
Subject: Re: PESO - macro flower



> 
> Sometimes I just hate myself.
> 

It's much more satisfying to make other people hate you.

William Robb

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - macro flower

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

On Oct 9, 2007, at 8:49 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:

>>> http://picasaweb.google.com/sdloveless/PDMLPESO/ 
>>> photo#5119497365061190178
>>
>> Is it supposed to pulse in and out between two resolutions like that?
>>
> No.  It shouldn't pulse in and out.  I'm not sure what you're seeing.
> Picasaweb down sizes images on the fly to fit your browser window.   
> You
> might be seeing first a very low resolution image, followed by the
> higher resolution, as John described it.  Other than that, I don't  
> know.
>   You can also click the little magnifying glass above it and see the
> uploaded resolution - 1600 x something.

On my system in a default browser window, it must be right on the  
cusp between the two sizings as it just sits there cycling between a  
smaller and a larger size endlessly. If I just tweak the window size  
in either direction by a couple of pixels, it settles down to one or  
the other display size.

Truly weird.

Godfrey

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Mlford Pond and Church

[P. J. Alling]

It's been a long time since I did the research, but most of the light 
rail, (trolleys in other words), between New York and Boston, was 
actually bought up by the NY NH & H RR, the RR management seeing a great 
synergy, (as well as a competitor to be squelched), between the existing 
electric light rail and the electrified portions of the NH line. 
Unfortunately the two systems weren't particularly compatible, voltages 
were very different, and the RR used AC current and the Trolleys were 
using DC IIRC. The New Haven ended up abandoning a lot of the inter 
urban lines over the next few decades, and going into bankruptcy itself 
partly because of this "investment". A lot of the lines that were 
actually viable were eventually replaced with buses, mostly because in 
semi rural areas it was easier to reroute a buss line where it was 
needed than get a new right of way and lay new track. That's just 
general. I don't have specific knowledge of the particular lines, but 
they were probably part of that mass consolidation that began around the 
turn of the last century.

Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> It's a scene so Connecticut it's hard to look at without reminiscing  
> about where I grew up. Technically, it seems a touch on the flat  
> side, could be spruced up a bit without sacrificing the delicate  
> tonalities.
>
> A bit OT, but do you have any information on the electric railway  
> that serviced Westchester County, NY, in the two decades or so  
> preceding WWII? It's remains were littered all over the lower county  
> areas (New Rochelle, Pelham, etc) where I grew up and were a source  
> of fascination for me for many years. Most of the remains are gone  
> now, consumed in new building and development throughout the area.
>
> G
>
> On Oct 5, 2007, at 9:29 AM, P. J. Alling wrote:
>
>   
>> I did my College, (University to you non US citizens), senior  
>> thesis on
>> Local Rail, I know quite a bit about the economics and history of
>> Railroads in general.  It's real hard to be a "fan" of the NYNY&H with
>> that kind of knowledge.
>>
>> 
>>> Nice shot, P.J.  Judging by your comments, you would seem to be a
>>> railfan.  Are you a NYNH&H fan?
>>>
>>>   
 I had to be in the center of Milford a much bigger shore town,  
 but as
 self consciously quaint as Stony Creek is still mostly un-self
 consciously quaint. On the other hand Milford has been a relatively
 easy
 commute from New York since the New York, New Haven and Hartford
 Railroad has been in existence.

 

 Equipment Pentax *ist-Ds/smc Pentax FA 20-35mm f4.0 AL
 
>
>
>   


-- 
Remember, it’s pillage then burn.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Culling and Editing (Long)

[Kenneth Waller]

May I add, that if the image needs an explanation of some sort, (EG - I 
didn't have the right lens, it was the best I could do etc) then it probably 
should be pitched, unless it is a very unusual image.

Kenneth Waller
http://tinyurl.com/272u2f


- Original Message - 
From: "Tom C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Culling and Editing (Long)


> Lot's of sound inner reflection snipped down to:
>
>>Are there techniques that can help me "get outside myself" when judging
>>my own shots?  Help to diminish the emotional attachment I have to some
>>images so that I can view them more objectively?
>
> I believe you already know a big portion of the answer. IMO, one needs to
> compare their own images to ones in a similar genre that have already met
> some widely accepted standard of success.  Side by side, does my image 
> hold
> up?  It doesn't mean one must mimic another photographer or can't have 
> their
> own style.  However, if upon viewing photo A (let's call it someone else's
> published photos) and photo B (your/my photo), we see a clear difference
> that tells us photo B might not make the grade, then indeed it might not
> make the grade.
>
> A small collection of outstanding photos, is in my opinion, to be 
> preferred
> over a larger set, that uses possibly lower grade individual photos as
> filler snuck in between better ones (not that you were suggesting that).
>
> If you have doubts about a particular image, then you are probably correct
> in heeding those doubts. I'm always sorry when I don't.
>
> Tom C.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Culling and Editing (Long)

[Doug Franklin]

Scott Loveless wrote:

> What I've been doing is coming back to those from time to time 
> and going over them again.  Each time I do this I delete a few, I might 
> move a few to the keep pile, and the rest I leave where they are. 
> Sometimes this takes several passes, and I usually give it enough time 
> that the images aren't fresh in my mind when I restart the culling process.

Hmmm.  I guess I should've mentioned that I'm often on a deadline, 
though sometimes self-imposed.  For example, the Petit le Mans ran 
October 3-6.  I shot it "uncommitted" as well as "uncredentialed", so no 
one was expecting any product from me.  The deadline-to-printer for my 
main consumer, however, is tomorrow, 10 October.

Luckily, they primarily want shots that feature corner marshals.  So 
that meant only dealing with about 25% of all of the shots to begin 
with.  But I'll still have to go back to the other 75%, and soon. 
Anyway, it took a full ten or twelve hours to do the post and upload the 
results for the consumer to access.  I've got more than three times that 
for the remaining 75% due to details.

OTOH, I have the notion to go through all of the motorsports shots, in 
particular, and create a portfolio.  Now /that/ is a difficult weeding 
out process.  And it brings the "characteristics of the gallery" 
questions to the forefront, too.  And it's "wholly" unconstrained by time.

-- 
Thanks,
DougF (KG4LMZ)

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__

[Scott Loveless]

William Robb wrote:
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Tom C"
> Subject: Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__
> 
> 
>> I didn't get that you were trying to make a statement, but I can understand
>> it.  It's why I live 30+ miles from the nearest Walmart, even though I 
>> don't
>> mind shopping there. ;-)
> 
> Some things get over stated to the point of being tiresome. An anti Wal-Mart 
> tirade is as boring as an aperture simulator tirade at this point. Everyone 
> has done it at one time or another, it gets boring after a while.
> 

My only gripe with Wally World is staffing.  Or lack thereof.  They 
never have enough registers open.


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

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - macro flower

[Scott Loveless]

William Robb wrote:
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Tom C"
> Subject: Re: PESO - macro flower
> 
> 
>> A critique:
>>
>> Scott, I haven't used a 645 macro, but this doesn't look like a macro 
>> shot,
>> more like a telephoto image.  Not sure of the size of the flower or your
>> distance from it, but in general I would expect to see much higher
>> magnification if a macro was used in the macro sense.  The little bit of
>> leaves on the left is somewhat bothersome.
>>
> 
> You haven't tried doing macro work with your 6x7 yet, have you? If that 
> bloom is any less than 4 inches across, it's a better than 1:2 
> magnification. Depending on who owned the plant, I would possibly have done 
> some judicious pruning too. The bokeh on that lens is to die for.
> I like this as an axample of medium format macro, though it is a somewhat 
> extreme example. That is as close to full frame as I could crop from the 
> contact sheet.
> http://pug.komkon.org/02mar/dime.html
> 
Just going on memory, the flower is long gone, I think it was about 5 or 
6 inches across.  I'm guessing magnification is closer to 1:3.  I was 
pleasantly surprised with the quality of the bokeh and spent quite some 
time examining the flower shots from that roll.  More time than I 
normally would have, anyway.  I actually shot an entire roll of those 
flowers before remembering to set the film speed for the Provia 100. 
The previous roll was Portra 800!  I cursed a bit and then made a very 
dramatic display of pulling the film from the magazine as my wife and 
daughter looked on in horror.  The flowers belonged to my neighbor, 
Julie, who is very nice to talk to and very easy on the eyes.  She 
wasn't home when I made the photographs, and I didn't want to disturb them.

There are some shots taken a few minutes later with the 45.  I may scan 
those next.  You've been warned

> 
> http://picasaweb.google.com/sdloveless/PDMLPESO/photo#5119497365061190178 
> 
> 


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

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - macro flower

[Tom C]

No... I've barely tried anything with it, not to mention I don't have any 
macro lenses or other equivalents for the 6x7.

Sometimes I just hate myself.

Tom C.


>From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List 
>To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
>Subject: Re: PESO - macro flower
>Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 21:46:22 -0600
>
>
>- Original Message -
>From: "Tom C"
>Subject: Re: PESO - macro flower
>
>
> >A critique:
> >
> > Scott, I haven't used a 645 macro, but this doesn't look like a macro
> > shot,
> > more like a telephoto image.  Not sure of the size of the flower or your
> > distance from it, but in general I would expect to see much higher
> > magnification if a macro was used in the macro sense.  The little bit of
> > leaves on the left is somewhat bothersome.
> >
>
>You haven't tried doing macro work with your 6x7 yet, have you? If that
>bloom is any less than 4 inches across, it's a better than 1:2
>magnification. Depending on who owned the plant, I would possibly have done
>some judicious pruning too. The bokeh on that lens is to die for.
>I like this as an axample of medium format macro, though it is a somewhat
>extreme example. That is as close to full frame as I could crop from the
>contact sheet.
>http://pug.komkon.org/02mar/dime.html
>
>
>William Robb
>
>
>http://picasaweb.google.com/sdloveless/PDMLPESO/photo#5119497365061190178
>
>
>--
>PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>PDML@pdml.net
>http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
>follow the directions.



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

RE: Culling and Editing (Long)

[Tom C]

Lot's of sound inner reflection snipped down to:

>Are there techniques that can help me "get outside myself" when judging
>my own shots?  Help to diminish the emotional attachment I have to some
>images so that I can view them more objectively?

I believe you already know a big portion of the answer. IMO, one needs to 
compare their own images to ones in a similar genre that have already met 
some widely accepted standard of success.  Side by side, does my image hold 
up?  It doesn't mean one must mimic another photographer or can't have their 
own style.  However, if upon viewing photo A (let's call it someone else's 
published photos) and photo B (your/my photo), we see a clear difference 
that tells us photo B might not make the grade, then indeed it might not 
make the grade.

A small collection of outstanding photos, is in my opinion, to be preferred 
over a larger set, that uses possibly lower grade individual photos as 
filler snuck in between better ones (not that you were suggesting that).

If you have doubts about a particular image, then you are probably correct 
in heeding those doubts. I'm always sorry when I don't.

Tom C.



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - macro flower

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Tom C"
Subject: Re: PESO - macro flower


>A critique:
>
> Scott, I haven't used a 645 macro, but this doesn't look like a macro 
> shot,
> more like a telephoto image.  Not sure of the size of the flower or your
> distance from it, but in general I would expect to see much higher
> magnification if a macro was used in the macro sense.  The little bit of
> leaves on the left is somewhat bothersome.
>

You haven't tried doing macro work with your 6x7 yet, have you? If that 
bloom is any less than 4 inches across, it's a better than 1:2 
magnification. Depending on who owned the plant, I would possibly have done 
some judicious pruning too. The bokeh on that lens is to die for.
I like this as an axample of medium format macro, though it is a somewhat 
extreme example. That is as close to full frame as I could crop from the 
contact sheet.
http://pug.komkon.org/02mar/dime.html


William Robb


http://picasaweb.google.com/sdloveless/PDMLPESO/photo#5119497365061190178 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Culling and Editing (Long)

[Scott Loveless]

Doug Franklin wrote:
> Howdy, folks,
> 
> It's been a while, so I guess it's time for me to make a (rare) On Topic 
> post.  Well, at least arguably on topic.  It's also been a while since I 
> remember this topic bouncing around the PDML.  At least two or three 
> years, by my (perhaps faulty) recollection.  So we may be encountering a 
> rare convergence.  Keep your tin foil hats handy.
> 
> This requires that I set the stage a little bit, so, here goes.  I spent 
> most of last week shooting the Petit le Mans sportscar race without 
> credentials.  It turns out I could've had them for the asking, but 
> that's another story.
> 
> Anyway, after four days shooting, I came home with about 1,200 shots 
> (deleted about 400 in the field via 'chimping').  During the first cull, 
> I reacquainted myself with just how much this type of shooting requires 
> practice, Practice, PRACTICE!  After the first cull, I'm down to about 
> 600 shots.  The first cull only gets rid of those shots so "malcomposed" 
> or "ill-executed" that they exceed even Theraultian (?sp?) boundaries. :-)
> 
> Now for the hard part.  Of the 600 or so remaining, about 100 to 150 are 
> going to get the axe just due to the higher standards of the second 
> cull.  For example, less motion blur is tolerated in the second cull.  I 
> don't worry about exposure, since I shoot in RAW or RAW+JPG modes and 
> can pull in all but the most improperly exposed shots during post, if I 
> have to.  That said, I try really hard not to have to.
> 
> As a side note, I noticed over the weekend that I needed to run the K10D 
> at +1 exposure compensation to get images I found to be pleasing.  I 
> didn't even look at the histograms, though.  That hasn't yet become part 
> of my "muscle memory".  I never needed it on the *ist D.
> 
> To get back to the, as yet unstated, question at hand, though ...
> 
> How do I get better at doing my own gallery editing?  I'm not talking 
> about the fine points of bending Photoshop to my will.  I'm talking 
> about choosing the images that end up in the gallery for a collection 
> and the characteristics of the gallery itself.
> 
> Stuff like ... how do I figure out the "proper" size for the final 
> gallery for any particular collection?  Is "mo' bigger" "mo' better"? 
> Is small beautiful?  I know the answers to these questions are largely 
> subjective, but I want to draw out the various subjectives on the list 
> and try to get a sense of sensibilities, if you will.
> 
> Are there techniques that can help me "get outside myself" when judging 
> my own shots?  Help to diminish the emotional attachment I have to some 
> images so that I can view them more objectively?
> 
> General "meta" stuff like that.
> 
> Discuss. :-)
> 
The first thing you should do is delete any photos that have cats in them.

I really can't help with the large vs. small, but I asked a similar 
question a few months ago and got an interesting response from Godfrey. 
I can't recall exactly his method, but what I've started doing is 
separating the photos into three (virtual) piles - keep, maybe, and 
circular file.  Sounds like you've already taken care of the circular 
file part.  After looking at the rest of them you should have at least a 
few that you really, really like.  Keep them.  Everything else is a 
maybe.  What I've been doing is coming back to those from time to time 
and going over them again.  Each time I do this I delete a few, I might 
move a few to the keep pile, and the rest I leave where they are. 
Sometimes this takes several passes, and I usually give it enough time 
that the images aren't fresh in my mind when I restart the culling process.

HTH.

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

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - macro flower

[Scott Loveless]

Tom C wrote:
> A critique:
> 
> Scott, I haven't used a 645 macro, but this doesn't look like a macro 
> shot, more like a telephoto image.  Not sure of the size of the flower 
> or your distance from it, but in general I would expect to see much 
> higher magnification if a macro was used in the macro sense.  The little 
> bit of leaves on the left is somewhat bothersome.
> 
> Tom C.

Thanks, Tom.  It's definitely not a 1:1 shot.  The flower itself was 
probably 5 or 6 inches in diameter and the front element was several 
inches away, so I guess it's not technically a "macro" shot.  But I used 
a macro lens!

> 
>> >> On Oct 9, 2007, at 5:29 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> This is one of my first macro attempts.  P645, 120 Macro, Provia
>> >>>
>> >> 100.
>> >>
>> >>> http://picasaweb.google.com/sdloveless/PDMLPESO/
>> >>> photo#5119497365061190178
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks for looking.  Comments, critiques and general cries of
>> >>>
>> >> anguish
>> >>
>> >>> are all appreciated.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> > --
>> > Find out how you can get spam free email.
>> > http://www.bluebottle.com/tag/3
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Remember, it’s pillage then burn.
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> PDML@pdml.net
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
>> follow the directions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
> Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.6/1059 - Release Date: 10/9/2007 
> 8:44 AM


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

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Tom C"
Subject: Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__


>I didn't get that you were trying to make a statement, but I can understand
> it.  It's why I live 30+ miles from the nearest Walmart, even though I 
> don't
> mind shopping there. ;-)

Some things get over stated to the point of being tiresome. An anti Wal-Mart 
tirade is as boring as an aperture simulator tirade at this point. Everyone 
has done it at one time or another, it gets boring after a while.
>

William Robb



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: GESO - Ammutinamenti 2007

[William Robb]

> Dario Bonazza wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>

>> http://www.dariobonazza.com/amm07e.htm
>>

Well, I looked at it at work..
If I had stuff like that going on around here, I'd probably be out taking 
more pictures. I always like looking at your work, but I often forget to 
tell you that.
Take care
bill 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - macro flower

[Scott Loveless]

Brian Walters wrote:
> Agreed, it is nicely done, but what's this pulsing in and out?  All I see is 
> a static photo.  What am I missing?
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Brian

Thanks, Brian.  Much appreciated.
> 
>>
>> On Oct 9, 2007, at 5:29 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:
>>
>>> This is one of my first macro attempts.  P645, 120 Macro, Provia
>> 100.
>>> http://picasaweb.google.com/sdloveless/PDMLPESO/ 
>>> photo#5119497365061190178
>>>
>>> Thanks for looking.  Comments, critiques and general cries of
>> anguish
>>> are all appreciated.
>>
> 
> --
> Find out how you can get spam free email.
> http://www.bluebottle.com/tag/3
> 
> 


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

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - macro flower

[Scott Loveless]

Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> Nice photo.

Thanks, Godfrey.
> 
> Is it supposed to pulse in and out between two resolutions like that?
> 
No.  It shouldn't pulse in and out.  I'm not sure what you're seeing. 
Picasaweb down sizes images on the fly to fit your browser window.  You 
might be seeing first a very low resolution image, followed by the 
higher resolution, as John described it.  Other than that, I don't know. 
  You can also click the little magnifying glass above it and see the 
uploaded resolution - 1600 x something.
> G
> 
> On Oct 9, 2007, at 5:29 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:
> 
>> This is one of my first macro attempts.  P645, 120 Macro, Provia 100.
>>
>> http://picasaweb.google.com/sdloveless/PDMLPESO/ 
>> photo#5119497365061190178
>>
>> Thanks for looking.  Comments, critiques and general cries of anguish
>> are all appreciated.
> 
> 


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

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Culling and Editing (Long)

[Doug Franklin]

Howdy, folks,

It's been a while, so I guess it's time for me to make a (rare) On Topic 
post.  Well, at least arguably on topic.  It's also been a while since I 
remember this topic bouncing around the PDML.  At least two or three 
years, by my (perhaps faulty) recollection.  So we may be encountering a 
rare convergence.  Keep your tin foil hats handy.

This requires that I set the stage a little bit, so, here goes.  I spent 
most of last week shooting the Petit le Mans sportscar race without 
credentials.  It turns out I could've had them for the asking, but 
that's another story.

Anyway, after four days shooting, I came home with about 1,200 shots 
(deleted about 400 in the field via 'chimping').  During the first cull, 
I reacquainted myself with just how much this type of shooting requires 
practice, Practice, PRACTICE!  After the first cull, I'm down to about 
600 shots.  The first cull only gets rid of those shots so "malcomposed" 
or "ill-executed" that they exceed even Theraultian (?sp?) boundaries. :-)

Now for the hard part.  Of the 600 or so remaining, about 100 to 150 are 
going to get the axe just due to the higher standards of the second 
cull.  For example, less motion blur is tolerated in the second cull.  I 
don't worry about exposure, since I shoot in RAW or RAW+JPG modes and 
can pull in all but the most improperly exposed shots during post, if I 
have to.  That said, I try really hard not to have to.

As a side note, I noticed over the weekend that I needed to run the K10D 
at +1 exposure compensation to get images I found to be pleasing.  I 
didn't even look at the histograms, though.  That hasn't yet become part 
of my "muscle memory".  I never needed it on the *ist D.

To get back to the, as yet unstated, question at hand, though ...

How do I get better at doing my own gallery editing?  I'm not talking 
about the fine points of bending Photoshop to my will.  I'm talking 
about choosing the images that end up in the gallery for a collection 
and the characteristics of the gallery itself.

Stuff like ... how do I figure out the "proper" size for the final 
gallery for any particular collection?  Is "mo' bigger" "mo' better"? 
Is small beautiful?  I know the answers to these questions are largely 
subjective, but I want to draw out the various subjectives on the list 
and try to get a sense of sensibilities, if you will.

Are there techniques that can help me "get outside myself" when judging 
my own shots?  Help to diminish the emotional attachment I have to some 
images so that I can view them more objectively?

General "meta" stuff like that.

Discuss. :-)

-- 
Thanks,
DougF (KG4LMZ)

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - macro flower

[Tom C]

A critique:

Scott, I haven't used a 645 macro, but this doesn't look like a macro shot, 
more like a telephoto image.  Not sure of the size of the flower or your 
distance from it, but in general I would expect to see much higher 
magnification if a macro was used in the macro sense.  The little bit of 
leaves on the left is somewhat bothersome.


Tom C.


From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List 
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List 
Subject: Re: PESO - macro flower
Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 23:04:03 -0400

You're using the wrong drugs...

Brian Walters wrote:
> Agreed, it is nicely done, but what's this pulsing in and out?  All I 
see is a static photo.  What am I missing?

>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Brian
>
> ++
> Brian Walters
> Western Sydney Australia
> http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/
>
>
> Quoting Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
>> Nice photo.
>>
>> Is it supposed to pulse in and out between two resolutions like
>> that?
>>
>> G
>>
>> On Oct 9, 2007, at 5:29 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:
>>
>>
>>> This is one of my first macro attempts.  P645, 120 Macro, Provia
>>>
>> 100.
>>
>>> http://picasaweb.google.com/sdloveless/PDMLPESO/
>>> photo#5119497365061190178
>>>
>>> Thanks for looking.  Comments, critiques and general cries of
>>>
>> anguish
>>
>>> are all appreciated.
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Find out how you can get spam free email.
> http://www.bluebottle.com/tag/3
>
>
>


--
Remember, it’s pillage then burn.


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
follow the directions.




-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__

[Adam Maas]

I quite like the shot. But I do have a prediliction towards 
juxtapositions, which it certainly was.

-Adam


P. J. Alling wrote:
> Ya know, I was actually trying to make a statement. It seems to have 
> passed almost entirely unnoticed, though Marnie came close. Now it may 
> be clichéd, it may have missed the mark, it may have been completely 
> misinterpreted, but I thought it was well exposed composed.
> 

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__

[Adam Maas]

William Robb wrote:
> - Original Message - 
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> Subject: Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__
> 
> 
> 
>> Beautiful sunset, but not so hot foreground. In  fact, it looks a bit like 
>> a
>> Wal-Mart ad, unfortunately.
>>
>> I have seen  countless beautiful sunsets... right outside our Safeway when
>> shopping for  groceries. I no longer try to bother to take them.
> 
> Good decision.
> The majority of the pictures that get posted here fail simply because the 
> scene, while it may have a couple of nice elements, is ruined by distracting 
> elements or technical flaws.
> If the picture can be fixed, I'll use the one of the sunglasses that Igor 
> posted the other day, then great. It isn't a really strong picture, but at 
> least it holds together in a cohesive manner. OTOH, Bruce posted a shot the 
> other day of a bit of a building. The shot had some nice elements in it, but 
> failed because of poor technique, in that there wasn't enough depth of field 
> to keep what needed to be in focus in focus.
> I realize it was a framing element, but because it wasn't sharp, the picture 
> went from one that had the potential to be pleasing to a sub par image that 
> was annoying.
> I realize that it may have been impossible to secure sufficient depth of 
> field with the equipment he was using, even if he had bothered with a 
> tripod, which means he was using the wrong equipment. A view camera would 
> probably have been a better choice, but that is work, which no one seems 
> willing to do anymore.
> 
> Sometimes the best choice is to not push the button, and look elswhere for a 
> picture.
> 
> William Robb
> 

Someimes it's worth pushing the button anyways, just so you can evaluate 
(or discuss) what makes the image not work. It may not be obvious in the 
beginning, and some thought about it can go a long ways to improving 
ones photography.

Every shot is a learning experience, if you're willing to learn from it, 
even if the lesson is 'that was a waste of time/space/film'.

-Adam


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__

[Tom C]

I didn't get that you were trying to make a statement, but I can understand 
it.  It's why I live 30+ miles from the nearest Walmart, even though I don't 
mind shopping there. ;-)


That being said, a well composed and exposed image of a scene that is 
lacking in overall visual appeal does not make an image a good one, any more 
than a poorly exposed or composed shot of a cute kitten, child, or an 
absolutely breathtaking location makes an image a good one.


Tom C.



From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List 
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List 
Subject: Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__
Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 23:03:22 -0400

Ya know, I was actually trying to make a statement. It seems to have
passed almost entirely unnoticed, though Marnie came close. Now it may
be clichéd, it may have missed the mark, it may have been completely
misinterpreted, but I thought it was well exposed composed.

Tom C wrote:
>> From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> - Original Message ->From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>> Subject: Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Beautiful sunset, but not so hot foreground. In  fact, it looks a bit
>>>
>> like
>>
>>> a
>>> Wal-Mart ad, unfortunately.
>>>
>>> I have seen  countless beautiful sunsets... right outside our Safeway
>>>
>> when
>>
>>> shopping for  groceries. I no longer try to bother to take them.
>>>
>> Good decision.
>> The majority of the pictures that get posted here fail simply because 
the

>> scene, while it may have a couple of nice elements, is ruined by
>> distracting
>> elements or technical flaws.
>> If the picture can be fixed, I'll use the one of the sunglasses that 
Igor
>> posted the other day, then great. It isn't a really strong picture, but 
at
>> least it holds together in a cohesive manner. OTOH, Bruce posted a shot 
the
>> other day of a bit of a building. The shot had some nice elements in 
it,

>> but
>> failed because of poor technique, in that there wasn't enough depth of
>> field
>> to keep what needed to be in focus in focus.
>> I realize it was a framing element, but because it wasn't sharp, the
>> picture
>> went from one that had the potential to be pleasing to a sub par image 
that

>> was annoying.
>> I realize that it may have been impossible to secure sufficient depth 
of

>> field with the equipment he was using, even if he had bothered with a
>> tripod, which means he was using the wrong equipment. A view camera 
would
>> probably have been a better choice, but that is work, which no one 
seems

>> willing to do anymore.
>>
>> Sometimes the best choice is to not push the button, and look elswhere 
for

>> a
>> picture.
>>
>> William Robb
>>
>>
>
> I agree with this and my comments that follow will be sure to ellicit 
the

> ire and wrath of some.  Oh well, what's new?
>
> My assumption is, probably because it's been my desire ever since 
starting

> in photography, that most everyone here that shows photos is striving to
> improve as a photographer.  Is that a valid assumption?  I hope at some
> level it is.
>
> What I see here seldom bears that out.  Not picking on anyone in 
particular.
>   A pretty sunset with a ho-hum unappealing foreground, is not a great 
shot.

> Plenty of those have been displayed, often to much praise. A different
> image, a landscape with an obvious skewed horizon and poor focus, meets 
with
> similar applause.  Another photo with a blown out background, and 
consequent

> underexposed main subject, unlevel, and poorly composed is also praised.
>
> I often wonder if the criteria for showing an image is simply because it 
was

> the best of an even more lackluster collection.  I believe I'm leaving
> plenty of room for subjectivity and personal taste, but I could always 
be

> wrong.
>
> It seems that very few look at their photography with an analytical,
> critical eye.  And even fewer beholders appear to do so.
>
> Sure, let's share photos of our personal lives that don't meet the bar 
for
> being a great image, we do that, I've done it.  But let's not fool 
ourselves
> into thinking that every image warrants praise just because we've taken 
it.

>
> The only way to improve one's skills is to realize failures for 
failures,
> pleasing scenes with failures as failures, and really exciting shots 
with

> failures as failures. Otherwise we doom ourselves to mediocrity.
>
> Tom C.
>
>
>
>


--
Remember, it’s pillage then burn.


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
follow the directions.




-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - macro flower

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 10/9/2007 8:12:42 P.M.  Pacific Daylight Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dave (I don't see it  either)


=
Ditto.

Marnie aka Doe  

-
Warning: I am now  filtering my email, so you may be censored.  




** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: GESO - Ammutinamenti 2007

[Adam Maas]

Dario Bonazza wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I've seldom contributed to the list for some time. That could be a possible 
> reason for the low interest raised by my pictures postered here, or perhaps 
> they are just pure crap. That's a possibility I take into serious account 
> (and I'm not kidding). So I've thought for some time whether it's worth 
> pointing out the latest gallery I've added to my website.
> 
> OK, here's the link for the few which might be interested:
> http://www.dariobonazza.com/amm07e.htm
> 
> WARNING!!! THERE'S SOME EXPOSED SKIN THERE, MORE THAN CAN BE ACCEPTABLE FOR 
> SOME FOLKS THE WORLD OVER. PLEASE DON'T VISIT THE GALLERY IF YOU FEEL 
> OFFENDED BY NIPPLES AND THE LIKE.
> 
> More to follow (if I feel like that).
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Dario
> 
> 

Excellent work. Love the slow-sync stuff.

-Adam

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - macro flower

[P. J. Alling]

You're using the wrong drugs...

Brian Walters wrote:
> Agreed, it is nicely done, but what's this pulsing in and out?  All I see is 
> a static photo.  What am I missing?
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Brian
>
> ++
> Brian Walters
> Western Sydney Australia
> http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/
>
>
> Quoting Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>   
>> Nice photo.
>>
>> Is it supposed to pulse in and out between two resolutions like
>> that?
>>
>> G
>>
>> On Oct 9, 2007, at 5:29 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:
>>
>> 
>>> This is one of my first macro attempts.  P645, 120 Macro, Provia
>>>   
>> 100.
>> 
>>> http://picasaweb.google.com/sdloveless/PDMLPESO/ 
>>> photo#5119497365061190178
>>>
>>> Thanks for looking.  Comments, critiques and general cries of
>>>   
>> anguish
>> 
>>> are all appreciated.
>>>   
>> 
>
> --
> Find out how you can get spam free email.
> http://www.bluebottle.com/tag/3
>
>
>   


-- 
Remember, it’s pillage then burn.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__

[Kenneth Waller]

> Sometimes the best choice is to not push the button, and look elswhere for 
> a
> picture.

Mark!

Kenneth Waller
http://tinyurl.com/272u2f


- Original Message - 
From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__


>
> - Original Message - 
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Subject: Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__
>
>
>
>> Beautiful sunset, but not so hot foreground. In  fact, it looks a bit 
>> like
>> a
>> Wal-Mart ad, unfortunately.
>>
>> I have seen  countless beautiful sunsets... right outside our Safeway 
>> when
>> shopping for  groceries. I no longer try to bother to take them.
>
> Good decision.
> The majority of the pictures that get posted here fail simply because the
> scene, while it may have a couple of nice elements, is ruined by 
> distracting
> elements or technical flaws.
> If the picture can be fixed, I'll use the one of the sunglasses that Igor
> posted the other day, then great. It isn't a really strong picture, but at
> least it holds together in a cohesive manner. OTOH, Bruce posted a shot 
> the
> other day of a bit of a building. The shot had some nice elements in it, 
> but
> failed because of poor technique, in that there wasn't enough depth of 
> field
> to keep what needed to be in focus in focus.
> I realize it was a framing element, but because it wasn't sharp, the 
> picture
> went from one that had the potential to be pleasing to a sub par image 
> that
> was annoying.
> I realize that it may have been impossible to secure sufficient depth of
> field with the equipment he was using, even if he had bothered with a
> tripod, which means he was using the wrong equipment. A view camera would
> probably have been a better choice, but that is work, which no one seems
> willing to do anymore.
>
> Sometimes the best choice is to not push the button, and look elswhere for 
> a
> picture.
>
> William Robb


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PAW 2007 - 42 - GDG

[P. J. Alling]

>
> I just noticed something.  Does it look to anyone else like giant chopsticks 
> are grasping the kid's head?  Perhaps it's just my over-active imagination.
You're a sick man John.

John Celio wrote:
>>   http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW7/42.htm
>>
>> Comments, critique, etc always appreciated.
>> 
>
> Although I can see why other people wouldn't dig it, I like this image.  The 
> child's gesture is cute and endearing, and I love the colors and stark 
> contrast between top and bottom.
>
> I just noticed something.  Does it look to anyone else like giant chopsticks 
> are grasping the kid's head?  Perhaps it's just my over-active imagination.
>
> John
>
> --
> http://www.neovenator.com
> http://www.cafepress.com/neovenatorphoto 
>
>
>   


-- 
Remember, it’s pillage then burn.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__

[P. J. Alling]

Ya know, I was actually trying to make a statement. It seems to have 
passed almost entirely unnoticed, though Marnie came close. Now it may 
be clichéd, it may have missed the mark, it may have been completely 
misinterpreted, but I thought it was well exposed composed.

Tom C wrote:
>> From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> - Original Message ->From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>> Subject: Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>> Beautiful sunset, but not so hot foreground. In  fact, it looks a bit 
>>>   
>> like
>> 
>>> a
>>> Wal-Mart ad, unfortunately.
>>>
>>> I have seen  countless beautiful sunsets... right outside our Safeway 
>>>   
>> when
>> 
>>> shopping for  groceries. I no longer try to bother to take them.
>>>   
>> Good decision.
>> The majority of the pictures that get posted here fail simply because the
>> scene, while it may have a couple of nice elements, is ruined by 
>> distracting
>> elements or technical flaws.
>> If the picture can be fixed, I'll use the one of the sunglasses that Igor
>> posted the other day, then great. It isn't a really strong picture, but at
>> least it holds together in a cohesive manner. OTOH, Bruce posted a shot the
>> other day of a bit of a building. The shot had some nice elements in it, 
>> but
>> failed because of poor technique, in that there wasn't enough depth of 
>> field
>> to keep what needed to be in focus in focus.
>> I realize it was a framing element, but because it wasn't sharp, the 
>> picture
>> went from one that had the potential to be pleasing to a sub par image that
>> was annoying.
>> I realize that it may have been impossible to secure sufficient depth of
>> field with the equipment he was using, even if he had bothered with a
>> tripod, which means he was using the wrong equipment. A view camera would
>> probably have been a better choice, but that is work, which no one seems
>> willing to do anymore.
>>
>> Sometimes the best choice is to not push the button, and look elswhere for 
>> a
>> picture.
>>
>> William Robb
>>
>> 
>
> I agree with this and my comments that follow will be sure to ellicit the 
> ire and wrath of some.  Oh well, what's new?
>
> My assumption is, probably because it's been my desire ever since starting 
> in photography, that most everyone here that shows photos is striving to 
> improve as a photographer.  Is that a valid assumption?  I hope at some 
> level it is.
>
> What I see here seldom bears that out.  Not picking on anyone in particular. 
>   A pretty sunset with a ho-hum unappealing foreground, is not a great shot. 
> Plenty of those have been displayed, often to much praise. A different 
> image, a landscape with an obvious skewed horizon and poor focus, meets with 
> similar applause.  Another photo with a blown out background, and consequent 
> underexposed main subject, unlevel, and poorly composed is also praised.
>
> I often wonder if the criteria for showing an image is simply because it was 
> the best of an even more lackluster collection.  I believe I'm leaving 
> plenty of room for subjectivity and personal taste, but I could always be 
> wrong.
>
> It seems that very few look at their photography with an analytical, 
> critical eye.  And even fewer beholders appear to do so.
>
> Sure, let's share photos of our personal lives that don't meet the bar for 
> being a great image, we do that, I've done it.  But let's not fool ourselves 
> into thinking that every image warrants praise just because we've taken it.
>
> The only way to improve one's skills is to realize failures for failures, 
> pleasing scenes with failures as failures, and really exciting shots with 
> failures as failures. Otherwise we doom ourselves to mediocrity.
>
> Tom C.
>
>
>
>   


-- 
Remember, it’s pillage then burn.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - macro flower

[David Savage]

The in & out pulsing...

:-)

Cheers,

Dave (I don't see it either)


At 10:37 AM 10/10/2007, Brian Walters wrote:
>Agreed, it is nicely done, but what's this pulsing in and out?  All I see 
>is a static photo.  What am I missing?
>
>
>
>Cheers
>
>Brian
>
>++
>Brian Walters
>Western Sydney Australia
>http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/
>
>
>Quoting Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Nice photo.
> >
> > Is it supposed to pulse in and out between two resolutions like
> > that?
> >
> > G
> >
> > On Oct 9, 2007, at 5:29 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:
> >
> > > This is one of my first macro attempts.  P645, 120 Macro, Provia
> > 100.
> > >
> > > http://picasaweb.google.com/sdloveless/PDMLPESO/
> > > photo#5119497365061190178
> > >
> > > Thanks for looking.  Comments, critiques and general cries of
> > anguish
> > > are all appreciated.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PAW 2007 - 42 - GDG

[John Celio]

>   http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW7/42.htm
>
> Comments, critique, etc always appreciated.

Although I can see why other people wouldn't dig it, I like this image.  The 
child's gesture is cute and endearing, and I love the colors and stark 
contrast between top and bottom.

I just noticed something.  Does it look to anyone else like giant chopsticks 
are grasping the kid's head?  Perhaps it's just my over-active imagination.

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
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - macro flower

[Brian Walters]

Agreed, it is nicely done, but what's this pulsing in and out?  All I see is a 
static photo.  What am I missing?



Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/


Quoting Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> Nice photo.
> 
> Is it supposed to pulse in and out between two resolutions like
> that?
> 
> G
> 
> On Oct 9, 2007, at 5:29 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:
> 
> > This is one of my first macro attempts.  P645, 120 Macro, Provia
> 100.
> >
> > http://picasaweb.google.com/sdloveless/PDMLPESO/ 
> > photo#5119497365061190178
> >
> > Thanks for looking.  Comments, critiques and general cries of
> anguish
> > are all appreciated.
> 
>

--
Find out how you can get spam free email.
http://www.bluebottle.com/tag/3


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__

[Tom C]

>From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>- Original Message ->From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>Subject: Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__
>
>
>
> > Beautiful sunset, but not so hot foreground. In  fact, it looks a bit 
>like
> > a
> > Wal-Mart ad, unfortunately.
> >
> > I have seen  countless beautiful sunsets... right outside our Safeway 
>when
> > shopping for  groceries. I no longer try to bother to take them.
>
>Good decision.
>The majority of the pictures that get posted here fail simply because the
>scene, while it may have a couple of nice elements, is ruined by 
>distracting
>elements or technical flaws.
>If the picture can be fixed, I'll use the one of the sunglasses that Igor
>posted the other day, then great. It isn't a really strong picture, but at
>least it holds together in a cohesive manner. OTOH, Bruce posted a shot the
>other day of a bit of a building. The shot had some nice elements in it, 
>but
>failed because of poor technique, in that there wasn't enough depth of 
>field
>to keep what needed to be in focus in focus.
>I realize it was a framing element, but because it wasn't sharp, the 
>picture
>went from one that had the potential to be pleasing to a sub par image that
>was annoying.
>I realize that it may have been impossible to secure sufficient depth of
>field with the equipment he was using, even if he had bothered with a
>tripod, which means he was using the wrong equipment. A view camera would
>probably have been a better choice, but that is work, which no one seems
>willing to do anymore.
>
>Sometimes the best choice is to not push the button, and look elswhere for 
>a
>picture.
>
>William Robb
>

I agree with this and my comments that follow will be sure to ellicit the 
ire and wrath of some.  Oh well, what's new?

My assumption is, probably because it's been my desire ever since starting 
in photography, that most everyone here that shows photos is striving to 
improve as a photographer.  Is that a valid assumption?  I hope at some 
level it is.

What I see here seldom bears that out.  Not picking on anyone in particular. 
  A pretty sunset with a ho-hum unappealing foreground, is not a great shot. 
Plenty of those have been displayed, often to much praise. A different 
image, a landscape with an obvious skewed horizon and poor focus, meets with 
similar applause.  Another photo with a blown out background, and consequent 
underexposed main subject, unlevel, and poorly composed is also praised.

I often wonder if the criteria for showing an image is simply because it was 
the best of an even more lackluster collection.  I believe I'm leaving 
plenty of room for subjectivity and personal taste, but I could always be 
wrong.

It seems that very few look at their photography with an analytical, 
critical eye.  And even fewer beholders appear to do so.

Sure, let's share photos of our personal lives that don't meet the bar for 
being a great image, we do that, I've done it.  But let's not fool ourselves 
into thinking that every image warrants praise just because we've taken it.

The only way to improve one's skills is to realize failures for failures, 
pleasing scenes with failures as failures, and really exciting shots with 
failures as failures. Otherwise we doom ourselves to mediocrity.

Tom C.



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: WTB - SMC-A 20mm 2.8

[cbwaters]

Ok, lets really pile it on...

CW

- Original Message - 
From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "pentax list" 
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 3:36 AM
Subject: Re: WTB - SMC-A 20mm 2.8


>
>
>>Cotty, you have to admit, you stepped right into it...
>
> I like to lay down a challenge...
>
> -- 
>
>
> 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
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
> follow the directions.
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.4/1057 - Release Date: 10/8/2007 
> 9:04 AM
>
> 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: WTB - SMC-A 20mm 2.8

[Bob Blakely]

Hot Damn!!!

Now I want one!

Regards,
Bob...

“Art is not a reflection of reality. it is the reality of a reflection.”
  –Jean Luc Godard

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


If I had one I'd be using it and it would never get into your evil
clutches...

Cotty wrote:
> Just testing the waters for a project - anyone have one they might want
> to sell? Pls contact me off-list. Ta.
>
> 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: WTB - SMC-A 20mm 2.8

[P. J. Alling]

If I had one I'd be using it and it would never get into your evil 
clutches...

Cotty wrote:
> Just testing the waters for a project - anyone have one they might want
> to sell? Pls contact me off-list. Ta.
>
> 
>
>
>
>   


-- 
Remember, it’s pillage then burn.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: October PUG is up

[P. J. Alling]

Well you, if you're channeling Carrot Top...

Scott Loveless wrote:
> P. J. Alling wrote:
>   
>> It was less scary than I expected. He's been much worse...
>> 
>
> Who?  Me or Carrot Top?
>
>   
>> Brian Walters wrote:
>> 
>>> Ok - That's pretty scary
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Brian
>>>
>>> ++
>>> Brian Walters
>>> Western Sydney, Australia
>>> http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/
>>> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/brianwalters
>>>
>>>
>>> Quoting "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>>
>>>   
>>>   
> Worked with me - even if I have no idea who or what "Carrot Top"
>   
>   
 is
 
 
>   
>   
>   
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GacvyJofD34&mode=related&search=

 Brian Walters wrote:
 
 
> Cheers
> Quoting Scott Loveless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>   
>   
>   
>> I currently have one submission for the November PUG.  And it's
>> 
>> 
 not
 
 
>> themed.  Get on it.  Otherwise, Carrot Top impersonations will
>> follow.
>>
>> -- 
>> Scott Loveless
>> http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/
>> 
>> 
>> 
> Is that supposed to frighten us?
>
> Worked with me - even if I have no idea who or what "Carrot Top"
>   
>   
 is
 
 
> Brian
>   
>   
>>> --
>>> Get a free email address with REAL anti-spam protection.
>>> http://www.bluebottle.com/tag/1
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>>>   
>> 
>
>
>   


-- 
Remember, it’s pillage then burn.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: October PUG is up

[Scott Loveless]

P. J. Alling wrote:
> It was less scary than I expected. He's been much worse...

Who?  Me or Carrot Top?

> 
> Brian Walters wrote:
>> Ok - That's pretty scary
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Brian
>>
>> ++
>> Brian Walters
>> Western Sydney, Australia
>> http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/
>> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/brianwalters
>>
>>
>> Quoting "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>>   
 Worked with me - even if I have no idea who or what "Carrot Top"
   
>>> is
>>> 
   
   
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GacvyJofD34&mode=related&search=
>>>
>>> Brian Walters wrote:
>>> 
 Cheers
 Quoting Scott Loveless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

   
   
> I currently have one submission for the November PUG.  And it's
> 
>>> not
>>> 
> themed.  Get on it.  Otherwise, Carrot Top impersonations will
> follow.
>
> -- 
> Scott Loveless
> http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/
> 
> 
 Is that supposed to frighten us?

 Worked with me - even if I have no idea who or what "Carrot Top"
   
>>> is
>>> 

 Brian
   
>> --
>> Get a free email address with REAL anti-spam protection.
>> http://www.bluebottle.com/tag/1
>>
>>
>>   
> 
> 


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

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Subject: Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__



> Beautiful sunset, but not so hot foreground. In  fact, it looks a bit like 
> a
> Wal-Mart ad, unfortunately.
>
> I have seen  countless beautiful sunsets... right outside our Safeway when
> shopping for  groceries. I no longer try to bother to take them.

Good decision.
The majority of the pictures that get posted here fail simply because the 
scene, while it may have a couple of nice elements, is ruined by distracting 
elements or technical flaws.
If the picture can be fixed, I'll use the one of the sunglasses that Igor 
posted the other day, then great. It isn't a really strong picture, but at 
least it holds together in a cohesive manner. OTOH, Bruce posted a shot the 
other day of a bit of a building. The shot had some nice elements in it, but 
failed because of poor technique, in that there wasn't enough depth of field 
to keep what needed to be in focus in focus.
I realize it was a framing element, but because it wasn't sharp, the picture 
went from one that had the potential to be pleasing to a sub par image that 
was annoying.
I realize that it may have been impossible to secure sufficient depth of 
field with the equipment he was using, even if he had bothered with a 
tripod, which means he was using the wrong equipment. A view camera would 
probably have been a better choice, but that is work, which no one seems 
willing to do anymore.

Sometimes the best choice is to not push the button, and look elswhere for a 
picture.

William Robb




-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Photographer Being Sued

[P. J. Alling]

I don't belong to any service, when I click on the link below it takes 
me to a page with the Docket for the case. You only have to log in to 
read the details. This I believe should be open to everyone. It's a 
public proceeding, but apparently the public isn't trusted with public 
knowledge.

Tom C wrote:
> I may be stupid, but when I click on the link it seems to want me to 
> subscribe to a service to be able to read the crud.
>
>
>
> Tom C.
>
>
>> From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List 
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List 
>> Subject: Re: Photographer Being Sued
>> Date: Sun, 07 Oct 2007 16:22:03 -0400
>>
>> Here you go, read the docket!
>>
>> http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-scdce/case_no-2:2007cv03264/case_id-153215/
>>  
>>
>>
>> Bob Blakely wrote:
>> > This can be a fuzzy area. Apparently the photographer was on private
>> > property and the photos were taken of that same private property; 
>> further,
>> > it appears that the photographer did not have permission from the 
>> owner(s)
>> > to even be there, let alone take photographs. Now, had he taken the 
>> photos
>> > from public property where what he photographed was easily visible 
>> to the
>> > public, the College of Charleston Foundation would generally have 
>> no legal
>> > standing.
>> >
>> > Photographers have been successfully prosecuted for going onto the 
>> property
>> > of celebrities to take their photographs or photographs of their 
>> property
>> > furnishings. It is an issue both of privacy and of the right of a 
>> owners to
>> > control what happens on their property. Note that the College of 
>> Charleston
>> > Foundation is a private organization - not public, and the owners 
>> of this
>> > nonprofit organization have rights too.
>> >
>> > As far as copyright is concerned, this doesn't seem to be an issue 
>> brought
>> > up by the foundation, but raised by the photographer's counsel. 
>> What I'm
>> > saying is that this is probably not a copyright case and the issue of
>> > copyright may well not come into the judges consideration.
>> >
>> > Look, if several of my fellows and I owned a piece of property, and we
>> > didn't want photographers coming onto our property to take photos - 
>> for ANY
>> > reason, or if we were conservators of the estate of someone who 
>> didn't want
>> > photographers coming onto the property to take photos - for ANY 
>> reason, and
>> > you did, and we found out about it, your as would be in court. It 
>> would be a
>> > case od, "It's our goddam property, we get to control it and what 
>> happens on
>> > it within the law and you (the photographer) are not imbued with 
>> special
>> > privileges over others and their property simply because you have a 
>> camera
>> > or you make your living with a camera. The issue of copyright would 
>> never
>> > come up in court - our private property rights would. Now, if you 
>> get your
>> > shots from off my property, I can say nothing.
>> >
>> > If you want to take and use shots of private places from the 
>> private places,
>> > get permission (preferably written releases). If they say no, 
>> sorry, your
>> > "need" for the shot(s) does not trump their right to the amount and 
>> type of
>> > privacy they desire - on their own property.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Bob...
>> > 
>> > "Art is not a reflection of reality. it is the reality of a 
>> reflection."
>> > -Jean Luc Godard
>> >
>> > - Original Message -
>> > From: "Rebekah" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> Just found this interesting, what do you guys think?
>> >>
>> >> http://www.thestate.com/local/story/190126.html
>> >>
>> >> rg2
>> >> --
>> >> "the subject of a photograph is far less important than its 
>> composition"
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Remember, it’s pillage then burn.
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> PDML@pdml.net
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above 
>> and follow the directions.
>
>
>


-- 
Remember, it’s pillage then burn.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Quick, who is this body?

[P. J. Alling]

I've read the rest of this thread, I should have looked closer.

P. J. Alling wrote:
> Looks like a black MX, the winder is right for it and the prism seems to 
> have that very slight overhang the I remember my MX having. It could be 
> an ME from that angle however the instruction booklet looks more like it 
> has a picture of a LX on it.
>
> cbwaters wrote:
>   
>> http://images.craigslist.org/01010501020901030320071008913886dbd196696482001edc.jpg
>>
>> What camera is that?
>>
>> CW 
>>
>>
>>   
>> 
>
>
>   


-- 
Remember, it’s pillage then burn.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__

[P. J. Alling]

I figured that Wal-Mart wouldn't be so happy if corporate could see the 
burned out bulbs in the sign.

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a message dated 10/9/2007 10:32:00 A.M.  Pacific Daylight Time, 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> One more from  yesterday. A truly spectacular sunset, but I had to be at 
> the local shopping  center. So the result  is:
>
> http://www.mindspring.com/~happydogsoftware/PESO%20--%20sunsetoverwalmart.html
>
> Ya  takes 'em where you finds 'em.
>
> Equipment: Pentax *ist-Ds/smc Pentax FA  28-35mm f4.0 AL
>
> As usual comments are welcome but may be totally  ignored.
>
> =
> Beautiful sunset, but not so hot foreground. In  fact, it looks a bit like a 
> Wal-Mart ad, unfortunately.
>
> I have seen  countless beautiful sunsets... right outside our Safeway when 
> shopping for  groceries. I no longer try to bother to take them.
>
> Marnie aka Doe  :-)
>
> -
> Warning: I am now  filtering my email, so you may be censored.  
>
>
>
>
> ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
>
>   


-- 
Remember, it’s pillage then burn.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: October PUG is up

[P. J. Alling]

It was less scary than I expected. He's been much worse...

Brian Walters wrote:
> Ok - That's pretty scary
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Brian
>
> ++
> Brian Walters
> Western Sydney, Australia
> http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/
> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/brianwalters
>
>
> Quoting "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>   
>>> Worked with me - even if I have no idea who or what "Carrot Top"
>>>   
>> is
>> 
>>>   
>>>   
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GacvyJofD34&mode=related&search=
>>
>> Brian Walters wrote:
>> 
>>> Cheers
>>> Quoting Scott Loveless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>>
>>>   
>>>   
 I currently have one submission for the November PUG.  And it's
 
>> not
>> 
 themed.  Get on it.  Otherwise, Carrot Top impersonations will
 follow.

 -- 
 Scott Loveless
 http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/
 
 
>>>
>>> Is that supposed to frighten us?
>>>
>>> Worked with me - even if I have no idea who or what "Carrot Top"
>>>   
>> is
>> 
>>>
>>>
>>> Brian
>>>   
>
> --
> Get a free email address with REAL anti-spam protection.
> http://www.bluebottle.com/tag/1
>
>
>   


-- 
Remember, it’s pillage then burn.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - macro flower

[John Francis]

In and out?

I see it load at low resolution first, and then get replaced by
the higher-resolution image.  This is the usual way to show a
progressive .JPG (it's just about the only reason for the format)


On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 05:36:55PM -0700, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> Nice photo.
> 
> Is it supposed to pulse in and out between two resolutions like that?
> 
> G
> 
> On Oct 9, 2007, at 5:29 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:
> 
> > This is one of my first macro attempts.  P645, 120 Macro, Provia 100.
> >
> > http://picasaweb.google.com/sdloveless/PDMLPESO/ 
> > photo#5119497365061190178
> >
> > Thanks for looking.  Comments, critiques and general cries of anguish
> > are all appreciated.
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Quick, who is this body?

[P. J. Alling]

Looks like a black MX, the winder is right for it and the prism seems to 
have that very slight overhang the I remember my MX having. It could be 
an ME from that angle however the instruction booklet looks more like it 
has a picture of a LX on it.

cbwaters wrote:
> http://images.craigslist.org/01010501020901030320071008913886dbd196696482001edc.jpg
>
> What camera is that?
>
> CW 
>
>
>   


-- 
Remember, it’s pillage then burn.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - YASATL

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 10/8/2007 4:56:54 P.M.  Pacific Daylight Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yet Another Sunset At  The Lake

Pentax PZ-1p, FA  135/2.8

http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/0031-19.htm


--  
Bruce

Looks more like a sunrise, because it's not  red/orange. I like the unusual 
colors, blue and yellow. Nice.
Marnie aka  Doe


-
Warning: I am  now filtering my email, so you may be censored.  




** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 10/9/2007 10:32:00 A.M.  Pacific Daylight Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
One more from  yesterday. A truly spectacular sunset, but I had to be at 
the local shopping  center. So the result  is:

http://www.mindspring.com/~happydogsoftware/PESO%20--%20sunsetoverwalmart.html

Ya  takes 'em where you finds 'em.

Equipment: Pentax *ist-Ds/smc Pentax FA  28-35mm f4.0 AL

As usual comments are welcome but may be totally  ignored.

=
Beautiful sunset, but not so hot foreground. In  fact, it looks a bit like a 
Wal-Mart ad, unfortunately.

I have seen  countless beautiful sunsets... right outside our Safeway when 
shopping for  groceries. I no longer try to bother to take them.

Marnie aka Doe  :-)

-
Warning: I am now  filtering my email, so you may be censored.  




** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - Loading Dock

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 10/9/2007 9:29:45 A.M.  Pacific Daylight Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Part of a series of  Texture studies I'm working on. This one's worth seeing 
large if you have the  bandwidth

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mawz/1521177104/

Large  Version/Direct link for  non-flickrites:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2040/1521177104_69f49f54db_b.jpg

-Adam


I  like that. Works centered and has a nice gritty flavor to it. Well  caught.

Marnie aka Doe  

-
Warning: I am now  filtering my email, so you may be censored.  




** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PAW 2007 - 42 - GDG

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 10/9/2007 2:23:38 P.M.  Pacific Daylight Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The subject merge with  the column ruins this for me.

Kenneth  Waller
http://tinyurl.com/272u2f


=
Sorry,  ditto.

Marnie aka Doe  

-
Warning: I am now  filtering my email, so you may be censored.  




** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - macro flower

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

Nice photo.

Is it supposed to pulse in and out between two resolutions like that?

G

On Oct 9, 2007, at 5:29 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:

> This is one of my first macro attempts.  P645, 120 Macro, Provia 100.
>
> http://picasaweb.google.com/sdloveless/PDMLPESO/ 
> photo#5119497365061190178
>
> Thanks for looking.  Comments, critiques and general cries of anguish
> are all appreciated.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

PESO - macro flower

[Scott Loveless]

This is one of my first macro attempts.  P645, 120 Macro, Provia 100.

http://picasaweb.google.com/sdloveless/PDMLPESO/photo#5119497365061190178

Thanks for looking.  Comments, critiques and general cries of anguish 
are all appreciated.

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

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Quick, who is this body?

[Bob Blakely]

P5

Regards,
Bob...

"Art is not a reflection of reality. it is the reality of a reflection."
  -Jean Luc Godard

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


> http://images.craigslist.org/01010501020901030320071008913886dbd196696482001edc.jpg
>
> What camera is that?


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Quick, who is this body?

[Adam Maas]

I stand corrected. Though they didn't take a winder.

-Adam


Brian Walters wrote:
> I agree with Bob.  I have a P50 in front of me as I write.  The location of 
> the red self-timer light looks to be in the correct position as shown in the 
> photo (in the Program A it's higher).  
> 
> And, yes - the P50 definitely takes a winder.
> 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Brian
> 
> ++
> Brian Walters
> Western Sydney, Australia
> http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/
> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/brianwalters
> 
> 
> Quoting Bob Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 
>> I've used a MEII winder on the P5.
>> The P5 is an A series camera with program lines, but
>> stripped out the TTL flash control on the Super Program.
>> The P3 / P5 fall between the ME or MG / Program A
>> and the SF1.  No autofocus on either...
>> Regards, Bob S.
>>
>> On 10/9/07, Bob Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> P3 or P5 with an MEII winder attached (yes they did work on the
>> P3 & P5).
>>> Regards,  Bob S.
>>>
>>> On 10/9/07, cbwaters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> http://images.craigslist.org/01010501020901030320071008913886dbd196696482001edc.jpg
 What camera is that?

 CW


 --
> 
> --
> Get a free email address with REAL anti-spam protection.
> http://www.bluebottle.com/tag/1
> 
> 



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Maximum capacity of SD card for the K-100D ?

[Bob Blakely]

I use 4 GB SDHC cards all the time. No problem. Firmware: 1.03

Regards,
Bob...

"Art is not a reflection of reality. it is the reality of a reflection." 
  -Jean Luc Godard
 
- Original Message - 
From: "Glen Berry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


> Hi Scott,
> 
> My firmware was only 1.00 before I did the upgrade. That particular 
> revision didn't support 4 gig cards. I was hoping the newer firmware 
> revision would support 4 gig and larger, but I didn't notice any 
> definite confirmation of this on the Pentax web site.
> 
> thanks,
> Glen
> 
> Scott Loveless wrote:
>> Glen Berry wrote:
>>   
>>> I just updated my K-100D firmware to version 1.02
>>>
>>> Does anyone know, what is the largest capacity of SD card supported by 
>>> this firmware?
>>>
>>> I currently have a 2 gig card, and I'd be interested in getting 
>>> something larger.
>>>
>>> thanks,
>>> Glen
>>>
>>> 
>> The K100D has supported SDHC cards since 1.01.  SDHC capacity ranges 
>> from 4GB to 32GB.  4 and 8GB cards shouldn't be too hard to find.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PUG themes for 2008

[Scott Loveless]

Rick Womer wrote:
> Scott,
> 
> As you say, there is a lot of overlap; too much to be
> really stimulating, I think.  Nature, Landscape,
> Macro, Synchronicity all tend in the same direction.
> Then there's "Red shirt"?!?!
> 
> Rick

Thanks, Rick.  I think a little overlap isn't necessarily bad.  Unless 
one had a model train set with real plants, it would awfully hard to 
satisfy nature, landscape and macro with one photograph.  But perhaps we 
could turn them into two themes instead of three.  Nature/landscapes and 
macro/close up.  These allow quite a lot of interpretation within the 
same theme while not limiting participation due to a lack of specialty 
lenses.

Same for fashion/glamour and portraits.  I have a feeling, though, that 
combining them into simply a portrait theme would probably leave us 
without too much fashion and glamour.  I like fashion and glamour. 
Especially with long legs.

As for "Red shirt", I thought you would know about that one.  Look it 
up.  

I guess we need a couple more themes.  I'll dig some more.  How does 
aerial photography sound to everyone?

Seriously, Bill laid it out rather plainly during a previous discussion 
of PUG themes, and I'm trying to abide:

William Robb wrote:
  > The PUG is supposed to be as inclusive a gallery as possible. This 
means
 > that themes should be doable with fairly basic equipment, and that the
 > subject shouldn't be exclusive to certain parts of the world.
 >
 > William Robb

I think the themes thus far adhere to that philosophy rather well, 
allowing much more liberal interpretation than "flower" or "Halloween".

> 
> --- Scott Loveless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
>> I've put together a list of 12 themes for 2008. 
>> I've tried to stay away 
>> from the more abstract themes and focus more on
>> photographic genres, in 
>> hopes that some of us will actually go try something
>> new.  The list with 
>> notes (not in order, necessarily):
>>
>> Documentary/photojournalism
>>
>> 'Tis the season - I thought February would be a good
>> month, allowing 
>> plenty of time to go through your
>> Christmas/Festivus/New Year/whatever 
>> photos.
>>
>> Fashion/glamour
>>
>> Portrait
>>
>> Photowalking - you guys are good at this, so it's
>> pretty much a done 
>> deal.  :-P
>>
>> Macro/close-up
>>
>> Red shirt
>>
>> Landscape
>>
>> Nature
>>
>> Equinox/synchronicity (x2) - I thought it would be
>> nice to do this 
>> twice, but I'm open to other suggestions.  The
>> equinox is near the end 
>> of March and September, putting some serious time
>> constraints on those 
>> of us with other things to do.  Having the relevant
>> PUGs in May and 
>> November would give everyone ample time to edit.
>>
>> Etc - Yes, this is a theme.  Walt Hamler
>> proposed it and several 
>> people said something like "Cool!"  Basically, one
>> month devoted to 
>> whatever the hell you feel like shooting.  A
>> Super-PESO, if you will.
>>
>> As you can see, there is quite some overlap of
>> themes, such as nature, 
>> macro and landscape, for example.  I would expect
>> nothing less than a 
>> very liberal interpretation from this group.
>>
>> This list is not concrete, obviously, so I'd
>> appreciate your thoughts.
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Scott Loveless
>> http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/
>>
>> -- 
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> PDML@pdml.net
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link
>> directly above and follow the directions.
>>
> 
> 
> 
>
> 
> Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. 
> Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
> http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469
> 


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

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PUG themes for 2008

[Cotty]

> > Flowers
> > Kittens
> > Dirty Socks
> > Strange Phenomena/UFOs
> > Baby Pigeons
> > Gumbo
> > Hangovers
> > Root Beer
> > Jimi Hendrix
> > HDTV
> > Mothers-in-Law
> > Global Warming
> > Gravel
> > WTF?
> > WMDs
> > Beer
> >
> > Norm

That glue he uses to make cell phone cases is stronger than he thinks.
Or maybe not.

-- 


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
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: GESO - Trip to the Arboretum

[Cotty]

On 09/10/07, Walter Hamler, discombobulated, unleashed:

>John, I am adding the "Re:" in the subject lines on my replys but they come 
>through without it added for some reason. Hope you don't think I am ignoring 
>your request.

Point of info - you shouldn't have to add it - the email app you use
will have a preference for adding it - or removing it. probably needs a
tweak ;-)

-- 


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
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PUG themes for 2008

[Scott Loveless]

Norm Baugher wrote:
> Fine, whatever. Nobody ever takes my theme suggestions...
> Norm

Allow me to quote Mr. Norm "Can't remember what I had for breakfast" 
Baugher.

Norm Baugher wrote:
 > OK, I'll give it a try...
 >
 > Black & White
 > Synchronicity

Ahem.

 > Flowers
 > Kittens
 > Dirty Socks
 > Strange Phenomena/UFOs
 > Baby Pigeons
 > Gumbo
 > Hangovers
 > Root Beer
 > Jimi Hendrix
 > HDTV
 > Mothers-in-Law
 > Global Warming
 > Gravel
 > WTF?
 > WMDs
 > Beer
 >
 > Norm
> 
> Scott Loveless wrote:
>> Equinox/synchronicity (x2) - I thought it would be nice to do this 
>> twice, but I'm open to other suggestions.  The equinox is near the end 
>> of March and September, putting some serious time constraints on those 
>> of us with other things to do.  Having the relevant PUGs in May and 
>> November would give everyone ample time to edit.
>>
Ahem.

Basically, Norman, I see the PUG as something that's probably rated 
PG-13 and you'll have to get your baby pigeon gumbo fix on Flickr. 
Thank you.  Have a nice day.



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

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: GESO - Ammutinamenti 2007

[Cotty]

On 09/10/07, Dario Bonazza, discombobulated, unleashed:

>OK, here's the link for the few which might be interested:
>http://www.dariobonazza.com/amm07e.htm

Lovely work as usual Dario - I love 5 through 9. Great use of shutter
and flash :-)

-- 


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
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Quick, who is this body?

[cbwaters]

Boz's page says they'll take the motor drive A or winder MEII
I'm now almost convinced it's a P5.  I just don't see why I can't see the 
Pentax name on the prism.
There's another picture in the listing that shows the manual.  It almost 
certainly doesn't say "Program".
Pity the dude couldn't take any better pictures or at least put the model of 
the camera and lenses in the listing...

Anybody interested in a "like new" P5 (minus the winder)?

CW

- Original Message - 
From: "Adam Maas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 6:15 PM
Subject: Re: Quick, who is this body?


> Doubt it, they won't take a winder. I'd agree it's likely a Program A or 
> maybe a Program Plus.
>
> -Adam
>
>
> Bob W wrote:
>> Then it's a P3 / P30 or P50
>>
>> --
>>  Bob
>>
>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>>> Behalf Of cbwaters
>>> Sent: 09 October 2007 22:37
>>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> Subject: Re: Quick, who is this body?
>>>
>>> naw, my MX doesn't have that red blinking eye to the left of the
>> lens
>>> mount/mirror body.
>>>
>>> CW
>>>
>>> - Original Message - 
>>> From: "Bob W" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> To: "'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'" 
>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 5:26 PM
>>> Subject: RE: Quick, who is this body?
>>>
>>>
 Looks like an MX

 --
 Bob


> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of cbwaters
> Sent: 09 October 2007 22:15
> To: Pdml@pdml.net
> Subject: Quick, who is this body?
>
> http://images.craigslist.org/01010501020901030320071008913886d
> bd196696482001edc.jpg
>
> What camera is that?
>
> CW
>
>
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly
> above and follow the directions.
>
>

 -- 
 PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
 PDML@pdml.net
 http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
 to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link
>>> directly above and
 follow the directions.


 -- 
 No virus found in this incoming message.
 Checked by AVG Free Edition.
 Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.6/1059 - Release
>>> Date: 10/9/2007
 8:44 AM


>>>
>>> -- 
>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> PDML@pdml.net
>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly
>>> above and follow the directions.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
> follow the directions.
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.6/1059 - Release Date: 10/9/2007 
> 8:44 AM
>
> 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - Australians have lied to us!

[Brian Walters]

That's English!  You'll find all of those words in an English dictionary.

Well, most of them..


Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney, Australia
http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/brianwalters



Quoting Bob Blakely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> and the Brits claim that English hasn't been spoken in the
> Americas for 
> years...
> 
> Regards,
> Bob...
> 
> "Art is not a reflection of reality. it is the reality of a
> reflection."
>   -Jean Luc Godard
> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Brian Walters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> 
> > Strewth mate, that bloody roo fair dinkum near came a cropper. 
> Bloody 
> > stupid drongo musta come down from back o' Bourke.  Couple more
> hops and 
> > he'd a been cactus
>

--
Finally - A spam blocker that actually works.
http://www.bluebottle.com/tag/4


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Quick, who is this body?

[Brian Walters]

I agree with Bob.  I have a P50 in front of me as I write.  The location of the 
red self-timer light looks to be in the correct position as shown in the photo 
(in the Program A it's higher).  

And, yes - the P50 definitely takes a winder.


Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney, Australia
http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/brianwalters


Quoting Bob Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> I've used a MEII winder on the P5.
> The P5 is an A series camera with program lines, but
> stripped out the TTL flash control on the Super Program.
> The P3 / P5 fall between the ME or MG / Program A
> and the SF1.  No autofocus on either...
> Regards, Bob S.
> 
> On 10/9/07, Bob Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > P3 or P5 with an MEII winder attached (yes they did work on the
> P3 & P5).
> > Regards,  Bob S.
> >
> > On 10/9/07, cbwaters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> http://images.craigslist.org/01010501020901030320071008913886dbd196696482001edc.jpg
> > >
> > > What camera is that?
> > >
> > > CW
> > >
> > >
> > > --

--
Get a free email address with REAL anti-spam protection.
http://www.bluebottle.com/tag/1


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: October PUG is up

[Brian Walters]

Ok - That's pretty scary



Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney, Australia
http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/brianwalters


Quoting "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> >
> > Worked with me - even if I have no idea who or what "Carrot Top"
> is
> >   
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GacvyJofD34&mode=related&search=
> 
> Brian Walters wrote:
> > Cheers
> > Quoting Scott Loveless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> >   
> >> I currently have one submission for the November PUG.  And it's
> not
> >>
> >> themed.  Get on it.  Otherwise, Carrot Top impersonations will
> >> follow.
> >>
> >> -- 
> >> Scott Loveless
> >> http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/
> >> 
> >
> >
> >
> > Is that supposed to frighten us?
> >
> > Worked with me - even if I have no idea who or what "Carrot Top"
> is
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Brian

--
Get a free email address with REAL anti-spam protection.
http://www.bluebottle.com/tag/1


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: GESO - Ammutinamenti 2007

[Dario Bonazza]

Hi Bob,

Yes, it was a series of performance arts which took place in different 
places and different days here and there in Ravenna. The gallery is mainly 
meant to show a small selection of pictures to the folks who managed the 
events and the performers as well.
I'm probably going to split the gallery into two, based on the feeling of 
"warmup" as opposed to "actual performance".

Thanks for looking and for commenting.

Dario

- Original Message - 
From: "Bob Sullivan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 12:21 AM
Subject: Re: GESO - Ammutinamenti 2007


> Dario,
> Nice to hear from you again.
> I went thru the gallery and it is very confusing to me.
> It looks like a record of performance art.
> This is hard to do without seeing the audience or
> knowing the intent.
> Regards, Bob S.
>
> On 10/9/07, Dario Bonazza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've seldom contributed to the list for some time. That could be a 
>> possible
>> reason for the low interest raised by my pictures postered here, or 
>> perhaps
>> they are just pure crap. That's a possibility I take into serious account
>> (and I'm not kidding). So I've thought for some time whether it's worth
>> pointing out the latest gallery I've added to my website.
>>
>> OK, here's the link for the few which might be interested:
>> http://www.dariobonazza.com/amm07e.htm
>>
>> WARNING!!! THERE'S SOME EXPOSED SKIN THERE, MORE THAN CAN BE ACCEPTABLE 
>> FOR
>> SOME FOLKS THE WORLD OVER. PLEASE DON'T VISIT THE GALLERY IF YOU FEEL
>> OFFENDED BY NIPPLES AND THE LIKE.
>>
>> More to follow (if I feel like that).
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Dario
>>
>>
>> --
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> PDML@pdml.net
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
>> follow the directions.
>>
>
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
> follow the directions. 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: GESO - Ammutinamenti 2007

[Dario Bonazza]

Hi Derby,

Thanks for commenting, and I take good note of your suggestion. Yes, I need 
to re-arrange them far better than that.
Those pictures were just posted in chronological order, and some of them are 
there "just because I promised someone to do so".

Cheers,

Dario

- Original Message - 
From: "Derby Chang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 12:09 AM
Subject: Re: GESO - Ammutinamenti 2007


> Dario Bonazza wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've seldom contributed to the list for some time. That could be a 
>> possible
>> reason for the low interest raised by my pictures postered here, or 
>> perhaps
>> they are just pure crap. That's a possibility I take into serious account
>> (and I'm not kidding). So I've thought for some time whether it's worth
>> pointing out the latest gallery I've added to my website.
>>
>> OK, here's the link for the few which might be interested:
>> http://www.dariobonazza.com/amm07e.htm
>>
>> WARNING!!! THERE'S SOME EXPOSED SKIN THERE, MORE THAN CAN BE ACCEPTABLE 
>> FOR
>> SOME FOLKS THE WORLD OVER. PLEASE DON'T VISIT THE GALLERY IF YOU FEEL
>> OFFENDED BY NIPPLES AND THE LIKE.
>>
>> More to follow (if I feel like that).
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Dario
>>
>>
>>
>
> Love 'em. Very sexy. Are the last few shots from behind-the-scene
> warmups? They could stand on their own.
>
> D
>
> -- 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc
>
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
> follow the directions. 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Quick, who is this body?

[Bob Sullivan]

I've used a MEII winder on the P5.
The P5 is an A series camera with program lines, but
stripped out the TTL flash control on the Super Program.
The P3 / P5 fall between the ME or MG / Program A
and the SF1.  No autofocus on either...
Regards, Bob S.

On 10/9/07, Bob Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> P3 or P5 with an MEII winder attached (yes they did work on the P3 & P5).
> Regards,  Bob S.
>
> On 10/9/07, cbwaters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > http://images.craigslist.org/01010501020901030320071008913886dbd196696482001edc.jpg
> >
> > What camera is that?
> >
> > CW
> >
> >
> > --
> > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> > PDML@pdml.net
> > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
> > follow the directions.
> >
>

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Quick, who is this body?

[Bob Sullivan]

P3 or P5 with an MEII winder attached (yes they did work on the P3 & P5).
Regards,  Bob S.

On 10/9/07, cbwaters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://images.craigslist.org/01010501020901030320071008913886dbd196696482001edc.jpg
>
> What camera is that?
>
> CW
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.
>

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: GESO - Ammutinamenti 2007

[Bob Sullivan]

Dario,
Nice to hear from you again.
I went thru the gallery and it is very confusing to me.
It looks like a record of performance art.
This is hard to do without seeing the audience or
knowing the intent.
Regards, Bob S.

On 10/9/07, Dario Bonazza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've seldom contributed to the list for some time. That could be a possible
> reason for the low interest raised by my pictures postered here, or perhaps
> they are just pure crap. That's a possibility I take into serious account
> (and I'm not kidding). So I've thought for some time whether it's worth
> pointing out the latest gallery I've added to my website.
>
> OK, here's the link for the few which might be interested:
> http://www.dariobonazza.com/amm07e.htm
>
> WARNING!!! THERE'S SOME EXPOSED SKIN THERE, MORE THAN CAN BE ACCEPTABLE FOR
> SOME FOLKS THE WORLD OVER. PLEASE DON'T VISIT THE GALLERY IF YOU FEEL
> OFFENDED BY NIPPLES AND THE LIKE.
>
> More to follow (if I feel like that).
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dario
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.
>

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Quick, who is this body?

[Adam Maas]

Doubt it, they won't take a winder. I'd agree it's likely a Program A or maybe 
a Program Plus.

-Adam


Bob W wrote:
> Then it's a P3 / P30 or P50
> 
> --
>  Bob
>  
> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On 
>> Behalf Of cbwaters
>> Sent: 09 October 2007 22:37
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject: Re: Quick, who is this body?
>>
>> naw, my MX doesn't have that red blinking eye to the left of the
> lens 
>> mount/mirror body.
>>
>> CW
>>
>> - Original Message - 
>> From: "Bob W" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'" 
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 5:26 PM
>> Subject: RE: Quick, who is this body?
>>
>>
>>> Looks like an MX
>>>
>>> --
>>> Bob
>>>
>>>
 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of cbwaters
 Sent: 09 October 2007 22:15
 To: Pdml@pdml.net
 Subject: Quick, who is this body?

 http://images.craigslist.org/01010501020901030320071008913886d
 bd196696482001edc.jpg

 What camera is that?

 CW


 -- 
 PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
 PDML@pdml.net
 http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
 to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly
 above and follow the directions.


>>>
>>> -- 
>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> PDML@pdml.net
>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link 
>> directly above and 
>>> follow the directions.
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>> Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.6/1059 - Release 
>> Date: 10/9/2007 
>>> 8:44 AM
>>>
>>>
>>
>> -- 
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> PDML@pdml.net
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly 
>> above and follow the directions.
>>
>>
> 
> 



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: GESO - Ammutinamenti 2007

[Derby Chang]

Dario Bonazza wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've seldom contributed to the list for some time. That could be a possible 
> reason for the low interest raised by my pictures postered here, or perhaps 
> they are just pure crap. That's a possibility I take into serious account 
> (and I'm not kidding). So I've thought for some time whether it's worth 
> pointing out the latest gallery I've added to my website.
>
> OK, here's the link for the few which might be interested:
> http://www.dariobonazza.com/amm07e.htm
>
> WARNING!!! THERE'S SOME EXPOSED SKIN THERE, MORE THAN CAN BE ACCEPTABLE FOR 
> SOME FOLKS THE WORLD OVER. PLEASE DON'T VISIT THE GALLERY IF YOU FEEL 
> OFFENDED BY NIPPLES AND THE LIKE.
>
> More to follow (if I feel like that).
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dario
>
>
>   

Love 'em. Very sexy. Are the last few shots from behind-the-scene 
warmups? They could stand on their own.

D

-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PUG themes for 2008

[Mark Roberts]

Kenneth Waller wrote:

>Norm Baugher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Fine, whatever. Nobody ever takes my theme suggestions...
>> Norm
>
>Fine. Then may I suggest NORM .

How about "above the Norm"?



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

GESO - Ammutinamenti 2007

[Dario Bonazza]

Hi all,

I've seldom contributed to the list for some time. That could be a possible 
reason for the low interest raised by my pictures postered here, or perhaps 
they are just pure crap. That's a possibility I take into serious account 
(and I'm not kidding). So I've thought for some time whether it's worth 
pointing out the latest gallery I've added to my website.

OK, here's the link for the few which might be interested:
http://www.dariobonazza.com/amm07e.htm

WARNING!!! THERE'S SOME EXPOSED SKIN THERE, MORE THAN CAN BE ACCEPTABLE FOR 
SOME FOLKS THE WORLD OVER. PLEASE DON'T VISIT THE GALLERY IF YOU FEEL 
OFFENDED BY NIPPLES AND THE LIKE.

More to follow (if I feel like that).

Cheers,

Dario


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

RE: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__

[Tom C]

The sun never sets on the Walmart Empire.

Tom C.



From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List 
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List 
Subject: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__
Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 13:23:17 -0400

One more from yesterday. A truly spectacular sunset, but I had to be at
the local shopping center. So the result is:

http://www.mindspring.com/~happydogsoftware/PESO%20--%20sunsetoverwalmart.html

Ya takes 'em where you finds 'em.

Equipment: Pentax *ist-Ds/smc Pentax FA 28-35mm f4.0 AL

As usual comments are welcome but may be totally ignored.

--
Remember, it’s pillage then burn.


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
follow the directions.




-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

RE: Quick, who is this body?

[Bob W]

Then it's a P3 / P30 or P50

--
 Bob
 

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On 
> Behalf Of cbwaters
> Sent: 09 October 2007 22:37
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Subject: Re: Quick, who is this body?
> 
> naw, my MX doesn't have that red blinking eye to the left of the
lens 
> mount/mirror body.
> 
> CW
> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Bob W" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'" 
> Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 5:26 PM
> Subject: RE: Quick, who is this body?
> 
> 
> > Looks like an MX
> >
> > --
> > Bob
> >
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> >> Behalf Of cbwaters
> >> Sent: 09 October 2007 22:15
> >> To: Pdml@pdml.net
> >> Subject: Quick, who is this body?
> >>
> >> http://images.craigslist.org/01010501020901030320071008913886d
> >> bd196696482001edc.jpg
> >>
> >> What camera is that?
> >>
> >> CW
> >>
> >>
> >> -- 
> >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> >> PDML@pdml.net
> >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly
> >> above and follow the directions.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > -- 
> > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> > PDML@pdml.net
> > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link 
> directly above and 
> > follow the directions.
> >
> >
> > -- 
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.6/1059 - Release 
> Date: 10/9/2007 
> > 8:44 AM
> >
> > 
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly 
> above and follow the directions.
> 
> 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Quick, who is this body?

[cbwaters]

That's what I'm thinking.

- Original Message - 
From: "Scott Loveless" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 5:38 PM
Subject: Re: Quick, who is this body?


> Looks like a Program A to me.
>
> cbwaters wrote:
>> naw, my MX doesn't have that red blinking eye to the left of the lens
>> mount/mirror body.
>>
>> CW
>>
>> - Original Message - 
>> From: "Bob W" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'" 
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 5:26 PM
>> Subject: RE: Quick, who is this body?
>>
>>
>>> Looks like an MX
>>>
>>> --
>>> Bob
>>>
>>>
 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of cbwaters
 Sent: 09 October 2007 22:15
 To: Pdml@pdml.net
 Subject: Quick, who is this body?

 http://images.craigslist.org/01010501020901030320071008913886d
 bd196696482001edc.jpg

 What camera is that?

 CW


 -- 
 PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
 PDML@pdml.net
 http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
 to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly
 above and follow the directions.


>>>
>>> -- 
>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> PDML@pdml.net
>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
>>> follow the directions.
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>> Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.6/1059 - Release Date: 
>>> 10/9/2007
>>> 8:44 AM
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Scott Loveless
> http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/
>
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
> follow the directions.
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.6/1059 - Release Date: 10/9/2007 
> 8:44 AM
>
> 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - Groovin'

[Kenneth Waller]

Very well done Knarf, I'm a sucker for good shots of mechanical components.

I have to add --

Glad to see you finally have your groove on.

Kenneth Waller
http://tinyurl.com/272u2f


- Original Message - 
From: "frank theriault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: PESO - Groovin'


> Started documenting my trackbike - piece by piece.
>
> There are two parts of my bike that I think are particularly
> beautiful:  the stem and the seatpost.
>
> Shots I took of the seatpost didn't look right, so you'll have to wait
> for those, but I do rather like the way the stem turned out.  It's a
> Cinelli Groove:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/3ctvg6
>
> http://bp0.blogger.com/_EaTEtfR4WJw/RwtuJcA-_1I/Axw/-ZZQBax5Tj0/s1600-h/oct_9+001.jpg
>
> Comment always welcome!
>
> thanks,
> frank


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

RE: OT - Australians have lied to us!

[Walter Hamler]

That video was just rune several times on our local NBC affiliate. Looks 
even scarier on HDTV That was one lucky roo !

Walt 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

GESO - Trip to the Arboretum

[Walter Hamler]

Walt, could you please add "re:" to your responses to other people's posts?
I keep clicking yours thinking you're the original poster, but that's rarely
the case.  Then I have to find the original post to see the link, since you
tend to remove it from your post.

It would just be a heck of a lot easier if you added the "re:" like everyone
else.  Your email client should do it automatically (I've yet to use one
that doesn't), but if it doesn't, perhaps there's a setting you could change
to fix that?

John

John, I am adding the "Re:" in the subject lines on my replys but they come 
through without it added for some reason. Hope you don't think I am ignoring 
your request.

Walt 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Quick, who is this body?

[Scott Loveless]

Looks like a Program A to me.

cbwaters wrote:
> naw, my MX doesn't have that red blinking eye to the left of the lens 
> mount/mirror body.
> 
> CW
> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Bob W" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'" 
> Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 5:26 PM
> Subject: RE: Quick, who is this body?
> 
> 
>> Looks like an MX
>>
>> --
>> Bob
>>
>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>>> Behalf Of cbwaters
>>> Sent: 09 October 2007 22:15
>>> To: Pdml@pdml.net
>>> Subject: Quick, who is this body?
>>>
>>> http://images.craigslist.org/01010501020901030320071008913886d
>>> bd196696482001edc.jpg
>>>
>>> What camera is that?
>>>
>>> CW
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> PDML@pdml.net
>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly
>>> above and follow the directions.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> -- 
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> PDML@pdml.net
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
>> follow the directions.
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>> Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.6/1059 - Release Date: 10/9/2007 
>> 8:44 AM
>>
>>
> 
> 


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

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Quick, who is this body?

[cbwaters]

naw, my MX doesn't have that red blinking eye to the left of the lens 
mount/mirror body.

CW

- Original Message - 
From: "Bob W" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'" 
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 5:26 PM
Subject: RE: Quick, who is this body?


> Looks like an MX
>
> --
> Bob
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>> Behalf Of cbwaters
>> Sent: 09 October 2007 22:15
>> To: Pdml@pdml.net
>> Subject: Quick, who is this body?
>>
>> http://images.craigslist.org/01010501020901030320071008913886d
>> bd196696482001edc.jpg
>>
>> What camera is that?
>>
>> CW
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> PDML@pdml.net
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly
>> above and follow the directions.
>>
>>
>
>
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
> follow the directions.
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.6/1059 - Release Date: 10/9/2007 
> 8:44 AM
>
> 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

RE: Quick, who is this body?

[Bob W]

Looks like an MX

--
 Bob
 

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On 
> Behalf Of cbwaters
> Sent: 09 October 2007 22:15
> To: Pdml@pdml.net
> Subject: Quick, who is this body?
> 
> http://images.craigslist.org/01010501020901030320071008913886d
> bd196696482001edc.jpg
> 
> What camera is that?
> 
> CW 
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly 
> above and follow the directions.
> 
> 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PUG themes for 2008

[Kenneth Waller]

> Fine, whatever. Nobody ever takes my theme suggestions...
> Norm

Fine. Then may I suggest NORM .

Kenneth Waller
http://tinyurl.com/272u2f


- Original Message - 
From: "Norm Baugher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Subject: Re: PUG themes for 2008


> Fine, whatever. Nobody ever takes my theme suggestions...
> Norm
>
> Scott Loveless wrote:
>> I've put together a list of 12 themes for 2008.  I've tried to stay away
>> from the more abstract themes and focus more on photographic genres, in
>> hopes that some of us will actually go try something new.  The list with
>> notes (not in order, necessarily):
>>
>> Documentary/photojournalism
>>
>> 'Tis the season - I thought February would be a good month, allowing
>> plenty of time to go through your Christmas/Festivus/New Year/whatever
>> photos.
>>
>> Fashion/glamour
>>
>> Portrait
>>
>> Photowalking - you guys are good at this, so it's pretty much a done
>> deal.  :-P
>>
>> Macro/close-up
>>
>> Red shirt
>>
>> Landscape
>>
>> Nature
>>
>> Equinox/synchronicity (x2) - I thought it would be nice to do this
>> twice, but I'm open to other suggestions.  The equinox is near the end
>> of March and September, putting some serious time constraints on those
>> of us with other things to do.  Having the relevant PUGs in May and
>> November would give everyone ample time to edit.
>>
>> Etc - Yes, this is a theme.  Walt Hamler proposed it and several
>> people said something like "Cool!"  Basically, one month devoted to
>> whatever the hell you feel like shooting.  A Super-PESO, if you will.
>>
>> As you can see, there is quite some overlap of themes, such as nature,
>> macro and landscape, for example.  I would expect nothing less than a
>> very liberal interpretation from this group.
>>
>> This list is not concrete, obviously, so I'd appreciate your thoughts.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: GESO -- Monarch Butterflies

[Kenneth Waller]

P.J. - Very nice job.
On of the best series I seen here in a while.

Kenneth Waller
http://tinyurl.com/272u2f

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

Subject: GESO -- Monarch Butterflies


It's getting on towards the time for the Monarch Butterflies to be
starting their long arduous migration to the mountains of Mexico to over
winter. They are congregating in large numbers to stock up on nectar for
that long journey. I find it amazing that such delicate creatures can
make this trip and return.

These creatures are very hard to photograph on the wing as is evidenced
by my first photo. I missed the focus because this guy, (or girl),
landed and took off so fast that I decided to pre-focus where I thought
it might land. The flowers are nicely in focus though.

The second is nice, caught the one at the top of the frame just as it
was coming in for a landing, though I was too far away, and I had to
crop it by about 1/2 the frame.

The Third photo, I should have focused on the nearest Butterfly, but
instead I focused on the one on the right, after which all of them flew
off.

http://www.mindspring.com/~happydogsoftware/monarchgallery/gallerymonarchs.html

Note: I've decided that the only solution to this is carbon
tetrachloride. I think I hate butterflies.

As usual comments are welcome but may be totally ignored.

-- 
Remember, it’s pillage; then burn.




-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PAW 2007 - 42 - GDG

[Kenneth Waller]

The subject merge with the column ruins this for me.

Kenneth Waller
http://tinyurl.com/272u2f


- Original Message - 
From: "Godfrey DiGiorgi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: PAW 2007 - 42 - GDG


> Hope you enjoy ...
> 
>   http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW7/42.htm
> 
> Comments, critique, etc always appreciated.
> 
> enjoy!
> Godfrey


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Quick, who is this body?

[cbwaters]

http://images.craigslist.org/01010501020901030320071008913886dbd196696482001edc.jpg

What camera is that?

CW 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - Australians have lied to us!

[Cotty]

On 09/10/07, Scott Loveless, discombobulated, unleashed:

>The Brits are just a bunch of retrogrouches.

I'm sorry.

-- 


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
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PUG themes for 2008

[Norm Baugher]

Fine, whatever. Nobody ever takes my theme suggestions...
Norm

Scott Loveless wrote:
> I've put together a list of 12 themes for 2008.  I've tried to stay away 
> from the more abstract themes and focus more on photographic genres, in 
> hopes that some of us will actually go try something new.  The list with 
> notes (not in order, necessarily):
>
> Documentary/photojournalism
>
> 'Tis the season - I thought February would be a good month, allowing 
> plenty of time to go through your Christmas/Festivus/New Year/whatever 
> photos.
>
> Fashion/glamour
>
> Portrait
>
> Photowalking - you guys are good at this, so it's pretty much a done 
> deal.  :-P
>
> Macro/close-up
>
> Red shirt
>
> Landscape
>
> Nature
>
> Equinox/synchronicity (x2) - I thought it would be nice to do this 
> twice, but I'm open to other suggestions.  The equinox is near the end 
> of March and September, putting some serious time constraints on those 
> of us with other things to do.  Having the relevant PUGs in May and 
> November would give everyone ample time to edit.
>
> Etc - Yes, this is a theme.  Walt Hamler proposed it and several 
> people said something like "Cool!"  Basically, one month devoted to 
> whatever the hell you feel like shooting.  A Super-PESO, if you will.
>
> As you can see, there is quite some overlap of themes, such as nature, 
> macro and landscape, for example.  I would expect nothing less than a 
> very liberal interpretation from this group.
>
> This list is not concrete, obviously, so I'd appreciate your thoughts.
>
>
>   

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PAW 2007 - 42 - GDG

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

On Oct 9, 2007, at 1:48 PM, ann sanfedele wrote:

 http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW7/42.htm
>
> You probably know this, but of course I imagined you were clicking  
> away
> at the scene , as you describe,
> but you chose this one in the selection process, indicating you   
> (and I)
> think the placement of the kid works fine...
> and you like the green but I don't :) :)

Yup.

>> Actually, some of these responses beg a question: How many people
>> open up the larger rendering I provide by clicking on the image in
>> the web page? Or are you commenting based solely upon the smaller
>> rendering in the web page?
>>
> The image I looked at filled my monitor.

Okay ... That's an answer to a different question but 'tis quite all  
right .. ;-)

G



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PUG themes for 2008

[Rick Womer]

Scott,

As you say, there is a lot of overlap; too much to be
really stimulating, I think.  Nature, Landscape,
Macro, Synchronicity all tend in the same direction.
Then there's "Red shirt"?!?!

Rick

--- Scott Loveless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I've put together a list of 12 themes for 2008. 
> I've tried to stay away 
> from the more abstract themes and focus more on
> photographic genres, in 
> hopes that some of us will actually go try something
> new.  The list with 
> notes (not in order, necessarily):
> 
> Documentary/photojournalism
> 
> 'Tis the season - I thought February would be a good
> month, allowing 
> plenty of time to go through your
> Christmas/Festivus/New Year/whatever 
> photos.
> 
> Fashion/glamour
> 
> Portrait
> 
> Photowalking - you guys are good at this, so it's
> pretty much a done 
> deal.  :-P
> 
> Macro/close-up
> 
> Red shirt
> 
> Landscape
> 
> Nature
> 
> Equinox/synchronicity (x2) - I thought it would be
> nice to do this 
> twice, but I'm open to other suggestions.  The
> equinox is near the end 
> of March and September, putting some serious time
> constraints on those 
> of us with other things to do.  Having the relevant
> PUGs in May and 
> November would give everyone ample time to edit.
> 
> Etc - Yes, this is a theme.  Walt Hamler
> proposed it and several 
> people said something like "Cool!"  Basically, one
> month devoted to 
> whatever the hell you feel like shooting.  A
> Super-PESO, if you will.
> 
> As you can see, there is quite some overlap of
> themes, such as nature, 
> macro and landscape, for example.  I would expect
> nothing less than a 
> very liberal interpretation from this group.
> 
> This list is not concrete, obviously, so I'd
> appreciate your thoughts.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Scott Loveless
> http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link
> directly above and follow the directions.
> 



   

Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. 
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Maximum capacity of SD card for the K-100D ?

[Scott Loveless]

They did, in a roundabout, cya, sort of way.  1.01 introduced support 
for SDHC, and 1.02 included "improved" support for SDHC (whatever that 
means).  They never actually mentioned card capacity, only format.  The 
SDHC standard (if one can call it a "standard") supports cards from 4GB 
to 32GB.  I'm not sure what's currently on the market, but you can 
definitely get 4 and 8GB cards.  But like Godfrey said, make sure any 
card you buy with a capacity over 2GB has the SDHC logo on it.

Glen Berry wrote:
> Hi Scott,
> 
> My firmware was only 1.00 before I did the upgrade. That particular 
> revision didn't support 4 gig cards. I was hoping the newer firmware 
> revision would support 4 gig and larger, but I didn't notice any 
> definite confirmation of this on the Pentax web site.
> 
> thanks,
> Glen
> 
> Scott Loveless wrote:
>> Glen Berry wrote:
>>   
>>> I just updated my K-100D firmware to version 1.02
>>>
>>> Does anyone know, what is the largest capacity of SD card supported by 
>>> this firmware?
>>>
>>> I currently have a 2 gig card, and I'd be interested in getting 
>>> something larger.
>>>
>>> thanks,
>>> Glen
>>>
>>> 
>> The K100D has supported SDHC cards since 1.01.  SDHC capacity ranges 
>> from 4GB to 32GB.  4 and 8GB cards shouldn't be too hard to find.
>>   
> 
> 


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

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PAW 2007 - 42 - GDG

[ann sanfedele]

Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:

>>>http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW7/42.htm
>>>  
>>>
>From: ann sanfedele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>  
>
>>Jaume Lahuerta wrote:
>>
>>>What a shame those (table legs?) just above the child's head...
>>>
>>>  
>>>
  ann said:

>>I sure disagree  - The legs frame the kid's head  and taking the
>>legs/posts out is removing something that is really there... not
>>in Godders style to do that (nor mine) ... the kid's silhouettte is  
>>just right.  I also wouldn't crop at the bottom..
>>
>>
GG replies...

>I made about seven exposures ... the child (and his mother) were  
>running about the room quite quickly and were certainly not under my  
>control so the notion of moving left or right to catch the child at  
>this point is impossible to imagine doing. The whole sequence of  
>seven were taken in less than 4 seconds by the timestamps, and then  
>they were out of the room. I'm glad I had the camera on Continuous  
>drive mode for once. And I don't know why I did... ;-)
>
>I chose this frame because of the positioning of child and table, and  
>the visibility of the illuminated limb of his silhouette and the  
>gesture in his hand.
>
ann says

You probably know this, but of course I imagined you were clicking away 
at the scene , as you describe,
but you chose this one in the selection process, indicating you  (and I) 
think the placement of the kid works fine...
and you like the green but I don't :) :)

> Downsizing it for the web has reduced that point  
>of near-far separation, which I might be able to restore with a  
>little selective editing. But it is actually exactly what I was after  
>as I worked on it: the juxtaposition of the hard, sharp objects  
>against the organic shapes in silhouette. Whether it works for you or  
>not remains a personal opinion, of course.
>
>Actually, some of these responses beg a question: How many people  
>open up the larger rendering I provide by clicking on the image in  
>the web page? Or are you commenting based solely upon the smaller  
>rendering in the web page?
>  
>
The image I looked at filled my monitor.

>>I don't know whether the blue cast is "real"  I'd like to se it in  
>>pure
>>black and white, but that is purely a matter of taste
>>and I'm betting Godders has already looked at it that way and changed
>>back again.
>>
>>
>
>Yes, I've made monochrome renderings of others in this sequence but  
>was not as thrilled with them as I was with this one's intense colors.
>
>Thanks again!
>
>Godfrey
>  
>
Yup -- good going!
ann

>  
>



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Maximum capacity of SD card for the K-100D ?

[Adam Maas]

Glen Berry wrote:
> I just updated my K-100D firmware to version 1.02
> 
> Does anyone know, what is the largest capacity of SD card supported by 
> this firmware?
> 
> I currently have a 2 gig card, and I'd be interested in getting 
> something larger.
> 
> thanks,
> Glen
> 

For plain SD, the max is 2GB, 4GB SD cards are outside of spec and will not be 
reliable. SDHC is supported with an effective max capacity of 8GB today.

I generally recommend multiple smaller (1-2GB) cards rather than a single large 
card. This insulates somewhat you from card failure. 

-Adam


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Maximum capacity of SD card for the K-100D ?

[Glen Berry]

Hi Scott,

My firmware was only 1.00 before I did the upgrade. That particular 
revision didn't support 4 gig cards. I was hoping the newer firmware 
revision would support 4 gig and larger, but I didn't notice any 
definite confirmation of this on the Pentax web site.

thanks,
Glen

Scott Loveless wrote:
> Glen Berry wrote:
>   
>> I just updated my K-100D firmware to version 1.02
>>
>> Does anyone know, what is the largest capacity of SD card supported by 
>> this firmware?
>>
>> I currently have a 2 gig card, and I'd be interested in getting 
>> something larger.
>>
>> thanks,
>> Glen
>>
>> 
> The K100D has supported SDHC cards since 1.01.  SDHC capacity ranges 
> from 4GB to 32GB.  4 and 8GB cards shouldn't be too hard to find.
>   


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: October PUG is up

[Daniel J. Matyola]

The PUG looks really great.  Thanks for all your hard work and patience, Scott.

Dan

On 10/8/07, Scott Loveless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> PUG's up.  Sorry for the delay.  http://pug.komkon.org/  November's
> theme is opposites.  You can submit photos at http://pdmlpug.org/?cat=4.
>
> We have a large field this month.  35 damn fine photos.  I guess you
> guys really don't like John Denver much.
>
> I fixed the glitch with the file extensions being case sensitive, so
> that shouldn't be a problem anymore.  Also, if you decide you don't like
> the photograph you've submitted, just shoot me a message and I can pull
> it out, or you can submit another photo.  In the event that I get more
> than one photo from the same submitter, I'll use the most recent.
>
> --
> Scott Loveless
> http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.
>

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Maximum capacity of SD card for the K-100D ?

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

On Oct 9, 2007, at 1:16 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:

> The K100D has supported SDHC cards since 1.01.  SDHC capacity ranges
> from 4GB to 32GB.  4 and 8GB cards shouldn't be too hard to find.

Just to drive the point home:

Be SURE you are buying SDHC cards for any capacity over 2 Gbytes.  
There are quite a number of SD 4Gbyte cards on the market which are  
NOT SDHC ... results with them are unpredictable.

Godfrey

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.