RE: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspectivecontrol (was:PESO:Church tower))

[Anthony Farr]

> 
> What about choosing which elements to include by a simple step to the
> left or right before tripping the shutter?
>

Here's a fine example of that concept (warning: strong language):
http://www.theztv.com/ausradiosearch/images/Acrunt_alan%20jones.jpg

It could be argued that by moving a little left or right, and selectively
framing the background word, the photographer has produced an image whose
collective truth far surpasses the individual truths of each picture
element.  Everyone I know who's seen this picture agrees with its sentiment.
AFAIK the picture has no manipulation of any kind.

For the curious, the subject is described here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Jones_(radio_broadcaster)

regards, Anthony


> -Original Message-
> From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
> Christian
> Sent: Wednesday, 11 March 2009 11:13 AM
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Subject: Re: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspectivecontrol
> (was:PESO:Church tower))
> 
> Bob W wrote:
> 
> >
> > Adding or removing elements breaks the causal relation between the
picture
> > and the subject and adds an entirely different dimension to
> > the truth-value of the picture,
> I can make (former) President Bush look like a total ass (literally) be
> framing his head just right with a background element (as was done in a
> certain image where he appeared to have long donkey-ears due to a
> certain background feature).  Or I can make one step to the left and not
> include that element.  The inclusion of the element was a conscious
> decision.
> 
> There are a lot of people that get all high-and-mighty about removing or
> adding an element in post-production (photoshopping) but say nothing of
> the above example when both are deliberate acts of manipulation.  One is
> "ethical" becuase there was no pixel-moving, the other unethical because
> it isn't "true."  To me, neither is the truth.  If you want truth you
> need to witness every event first-hand and draw your own conclusions.
> 
> Me?  I trust no one in the media.  Least of all photographers because I
> know their tricks...
> 
> 
> > "It depends on what the photographer is claiming about the image.
> 
> Exactly.  But even then I don't trust them to show me "truth"
> 
> There is no truth in photography.
> 
> However "In vino veritas"
> 
> --
> 
> Christian
> http://404mohawknotfound.blogspot.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.


--
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.

NorCal PDML gathering in Sacramento, Saturday March 14 (3nd announcement)

[Mark Erickson]

One more NorCal PDML (Sacramento Edition) spam!  

We're meeting on Saturday, March 14 at 11 am at the California State Capitol
in Sacramento, CA.  The weather looks to be nice (sunny and mid 60's).
We'll meet on the north side of Capitol Park opposite the garage at 10th and
L streets.

If you'd like directions and a map, please email me directly.  I may be a
little delayed in responding to you, since I'm going to be "bachelor dad" to
my two daughters tomorrow night ;-)

See you there!

Mark Erickson

-Original Message-
From: Mark Erickson [mailto:m...@westerickson.net] 
Sent: Monday, February 23, 2009 8:58 PM
To: PDML (pdml@pdml.net)
Subject: NorCal PDML gathering in Sacramento, Saturday March 14 (2nd
announcement)

All,

The state of California (finally) has a budget, so they won't be closing and
selling off the Capitol grounds in Sacramento.  This is the 2nd announcement
for our planned 2nd Saturday NorCal PDML gathering.

Its a little less than three weeks away.  Weather willing, we'll have a
great time!  I'll get some parking information emailed out for out-of-town
visitors in a week or so.  Any questions?  Don't hesitate to ask.

I'll have my K10D, a sack full of Ltd lenses, and a collection of A series
classics (50 f1.2, 50 f2.8 macro, 100 f2.8 macro, A* 200 f4 macro) with me.
I have a few old classics (Contax IIa, Leica IIf, Rolleiflex 2.8C) I can
bring if anyone is interested.

Email me if you think you might come and I'll put you on my little
distribution list

Mark Erickson

p.s., here's the original announcement email:

-Original Message-
From: Mark Erickson [mailto:m...@westerickson.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 8:47 PM
To: PDML (pdml@pdml.net)
Subject: NorCal PDML gathering in Sacramento

All,

I've been corresponding with Bruce Dayton about getting a NorCal PDML
gathering together in Sacramento, CA.  Sacramento has a pretty good
selection of photogenic locations in the downtown area, and, it turns out,
quite a vibrant arts scene.  The Second Saturday of every month most of the
local art galleries open from 6 to 9 for, you guessed it, a "2nd Saturday"
art walk.  Here's the current proposal:

Date:  Saturday, Mar. 14

Time:  Start at 11am

Plans: Meet on the State Capitol grounds
   Shoot on the grounds for a couple of hours
   Adjourn to the Pyramid Alehouse around 1pm for lunch

After that, we have lots of options:
   The California State Railroad Museum
   Old Sacramento
   Wineries/Tasting at Clarksburg and Bogle only 15 miles south

Finish by attending 2nd Saturday art walk



If you're interested, please contact me directly via email and I'll get a
list of folks together, send out parking info, etc

--Mark

Local links:

Capitol Park: http://www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=495
Pyramid: http://www.pyramidbrew.com/alehouses/sacramento
Rail Museum: http://www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=668
Old Sacramento: http://www.oldsacramento.com/
Sugar Mill Wineries: http://www.oldsugarmill.com/
Bogle Vineyards: http://www.boglewinery.com/

2nd Saturday Art Walk in Sacramento
and a few galleries I like

http://2nd-sat.com/
http://www.viewpointgallery.org/
http://www.appelgallery.com/index.asp
http://www.sdgallery.com/index.htm
http://www.artfoundryinc.com/about.html
http://www.20art.net/




--
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: Just call me "Speck"

[Christine Aguila]

Wow, that was too funny.  Cheers, Christine


- Original Message - 
From: "Mark Roberts" 

To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 9:26 AM
Subject: Just call me "Speck"



Went Googling for references to the PDML book and came across this one:
http://www.picstips.com/pentax/the-pdml-pentax-photo-book-camera-price-reductions-and-pma-rumors.html

Looks as if it's been through a couple of computer translators, from 
English to something else and back, to wonderful effect :)



--
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: Happy Sheep

[Christine Aguila]

A lovely pastoral scene, Jack.  Cheers, Christine


- Original Message - 
From: "Jack Davis" 

To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 12:16 PM
Subject: Happy Sheep




This is a bit of a play on TV's incessant "Happy Cows" commercials which 
have a similar look about them. Also, a little something for the 
Australian friends among us. ;)

Taken this AM.

Jack

http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=388

K10, DA16~45




--
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: Experiments With Faith

[Christine Aguila]

- Original Message - 
From: "Bharath M" 


And without further ado, here's my first attempt at sharing a gallery.

http://picasaweb.google.com/itinerant.observer/ExperimentsWithFaith



Hi Bharath:  Welcome!  What fun to have another Pentaxian from India! 
That's a very nice gallery, and I especially like numbers 5, 7, 10, 18, and 
35.  The composition on #7 is just about perfect as is light and color (to 
my eye anyway), and I love the colors in #5.  I love the portrait (#10) and 
#18 holds very interesting content as does #35.  Well done.  Cheers, 
Christine 




--
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: cemetary Mary revisited

[Larry Colen]

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:16:07PM -0400, Doug Brewer wrote:
> frank theriault wrote:
> >On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Larry Colen  wrote:
> >>I tried reshooting Cemetary Mary this afternoon with the K20, 18-250
> >>and bringing my own "halos" rather than trying to rely on the
> >>poinsettas:
> >>http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157614916598003/
> >
> >I like the "softer" halo in colour...
> >
> >http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/3338824221/in/set-72157614916598003/
> >
> >cheers,
> >frank
> >
> 
> I'm with Frank on this, but would also like to see some taken in decent 
> light. It's way too harsh for this.

Amusingly, when I got there it was overcast, but while I was setting
up the sun came out.  I set up a reflector to try and allevieate that
problem. 

In retrospect, I could probably set up a diffuser umbrella over Mary
and, I guess, something to hold the plate up off the ground so I can
get the best angle on her face.

For something that started out as playing with an amusing
juxtaposition of elements, it could easily turn into quite a
production. Though I do seem to learn a bit with every iteration.


-- 
Every medium suffers from its own particular handicap. Photography's
greatest handicap is the ease with which the medium as such can be
learned. As a result, too many budding neophytes learn to speak the
language too long before they have anything to say."  W. Connell 1949

Larry Colen l...@red4est.comhttp://www.red4est.com/lrc


--
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: Some shots from the Go Cart Track

[Christine Aguila]

Great fun, Walt!  You go to all the best places and hang with all the fun 
folks :-).  I've decided I'm gonna be just like you when I grow up.  Cheers, 
Christine




- Original Message - 
From: "Walter Hamler" 

To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 8:04 PM
Subject: GESO: Some shots from the Go Cart Track



http://walthamler.smugmug.com/gallery/4592986_mrB5J#488411382_ZR4Fi

The Groomsmen for my daughter's upcoming wedding had a day out at the
local Go Cart Track. I found out that I was too big to fit in them and
drive safely, so I had my son drive me while I shot pics with the FE
lens! It was a hoot!

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.






--
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: Being Watched

[Christine Aguila]

Very nice, Jack.  Love the horse--really makes the pic, though the barn on 
its own is great too.  Cheers, Christine




- Original Message - 
From: "Jack Davis" 

To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 1:38 PM
Subject: PESO: Being Watched




I had noticed this barn in the past and thought I remembered where and 
which direction it faced. Decided to go looking for it early this AM. I 
wanted the sun at this angle, or lower.
Was glad to see the resident moving about, so as to give me permission to 
drive in and photograph the barn. They asked me why, to which I responded. 
"I d'know, guess I just like old barns". That seemed to satisfy her.
I shot a few from the diagonal, but wasn't pleased with all the "stuff" 
stacked around in the front and started to leave a little disappointed. As 
I made a "U" in the lot, I realized I was being watched. I lowered the 
window and took a couple just before he moved from the opening in the 
shed.


Jack

Comments always welcome

http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=389

K10, DA16~45







--
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: Chicago on Acid? - was: Peso: Warning - cat photo (chicago stuffnow)

[Christine Aguila]

Mark:  LSD:  Lake Shore Drive.  Cheers, Christine


- Original Message - 
From: "Mark Roberts" 

To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 3:30 PM
Subject: Re: Chicago on Acid? - was: Peso: Warning - cat photo (chicago 
stuffnow)




frank theriault wrote:


HOLY CRAP!

That'll learn me.

I started this thread from the bottom and worked my way up.

I'm thinking that all these Chi-town types are living double lives,
dropping acid and listening to loud rock music and partying 'til you
drop.

Then I scroll up to see what LSD stands for.

You guys put a scare into me!


I know nothing about this LSD of which you speak.
I'm too young and innocent.


--
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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control(was:PESO:Church tower))

[Christine Aguila]

Hear! Hear!  Bob puts it very well.  Cheers, Christine


- Original Message - 
From: "Bob W" 

To: "'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'" 
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 6:26 PM
Subject: RE: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective 
control(was:PESO:Church tower))



What is it about the photos that is dishonest? What are they showing that
didn't happen? Apparently nothing, according to you. If there is dishonesty
it is because someone lies about them. It is the liar who is dishonest, not
the photograph. Furthermore, even if it were possible for some photographs
to be dishonest, Christian claims that EVERY photograph is dishonest.

Here is what I wrote in an earlier discussion of this type. I stand by it:

"The key thing about photography that differentiates it from other media is
that the image is formed mechanically from the direct action of light on a
surface - it's not mediated by anyone's brain, so you can, in principle,
show a causal link between the subject matter and
the image. This is why photographs are so inherently believable, and is why
people feel a sense of betrayal when they learn that a
photograph has been manipulated (ie elements added or removed - certain
activities in post-processing, such as contrast adjustment,
dodging and burning are just working with what's already there to improve
the presentation).

Adding or removing elements breaks the causal relation between the picture
and the subject and adds an entirely different dimension to
the truth-value of the picture, taking into the realm of painting and
writing. These activities may be based in the real world, but they are
mitigated by the writer's or painter's brain. "

and

"It depends on what the photographer is claiming about the image.

If you photoshop some fairies into your picture, claim that they really were
there at the bottom of your garden, and sell the photos to
the News of the World on that basis, then you're very obviously lying and it
would be no different to writing an article about the
aforementioned fairies and claiming that it was true.

If on the other hand you sell the same picture as a whimsical fantasy image
then you're not doing anything wrong*.

Most people know the difference between fiction and reporting. It's not
wrong or immoral to write fiction*. The immoral thing is to claim
fiction as reporting.

It's not wrong or immoral to photoshop a photograph - the immoral thing is
to lie about it
[..]
generally speaking. There are, of course, situations where lying is a moral
thing to do, but going into detail here is stretching things a
bit."

The relevance to your photos is much the same. Rather than Photoshopping
stuff in you have set up a scene and photographed it. The scene really
happened, I assume, so the causal relation exists between the scene and the
photographs. But it was not an alien spacecraft that you photographed. If
you tell me it was then you are lying, not the photograph. If you show me
the photograph without making any claim about it I, as a skeptic, assume
it's a set-up. A set-up is not the same as a lie, any more than a
performance of Faustus is a lie.

Bob




--
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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was:PESO:Church tower))

[Ken Waller]

Pentax needs to release some new equipment


Either that or some people need to go out and use their camera.

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

- Original Message - 
From: "William Robb" 
Subject: Re: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control 
(was:PESO:Church tower))





- Original Message - 
From: "Bruce Walker"
Subject: Re: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was: 
PESO:Church tower))






I susbscribe to the "photography is essentially art" view myself.



Pentax needs to release some new equipment.

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: Multiplicity fail :(

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 3/10/2009 7:39:28 P.M.  Pacific Daylight Time, 
ann...@nyc.rr.com writes:
I'd actually like to do the  opposite... (I've done it with film and an 
LEX on bulb)...  make all  the people that
are milling about disappear  -  Marnie has a photo  of mine where it was 
partly accomplished... just sneakers
walking by  themselves remained...

I'm babbling -- got the f'ing 3rd cold of the  year with company 
arriving Thursday from the great  north...
(Toronto)  was supposed to be last  week...

ann

===
And that is one cool, shot. Love it.  But you did that with good camera work, 
not PS.

Marnie aka  Doe   If you ever figure out how to PS people out, let me know.  
:-)

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

**Worried about job security? Check out the 5 safest jobs in a 
recession. 
(http://jobs.aol.com/gallery/growing-job-industries?ncid=emlcntuscare0002)

--
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: Ad-Hoc PDML London meet

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 3/10/2009 5:55:06 P.M.  Pacific Daylight Time, 
tim...@clancode.hu writes:
Ps.: If you speak British  please get someone who can translate to English :D

=
LOL.  After reading this thread, just what I was thinking.

Marnie aka Doe  :-)

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

**Worried about job security? Check out the 5 safest jobs in a 
recession. 
(http://jobs.aol.com/gallery/growing-job-industries?ncid=emlcntuscare0002)

--
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: Happy Sheep

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 3/10/2009 8:15:12 P.M.  Pacific Daylight Time, 
jo...@panix.com writes:
Note that the exit off 17 in  Scotts Valley goes to Santa's Village Road.


Uh huh. One  is Scotts one is Scott. Not going to show it on a map because I 
don't want  everyone flocking there. I actually try to keep it semi-secret.

Sure  about it, because it's come up before with Jack and we settled it back 
when.  There are, actually, lots of Scott, Scott's, Scotts valleys all over 
the  US.

Us of Scottish decent seemed to like valleys. Something to do with  all that 
rock back in Scotland.

Or something. Like sheep. (Though Scott  Valley has cows, er, cattle. 
Actually they have cows too.)

Marnie aka Doe  ;-)

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

**Worried about job security? Check out the 5 safest jobs in a 
recession. 
(http://jobs.aol.com/gallery/growing-job-industries?ncid=emlcntuscare0002)

--
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: Experiments With Faith

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 3/10/2009 6:05:08 P.M.  Pacific Daylight Time, 
bharath.m...@gmail.com writes:
> Very interesting.  You should listen to Cotty about the horizontals.

Anything particular  about the horizontals? I am not sure what you mean.

It could be that it's  early in the morning here in India and I am a  
bit dense!

--  Bharath

==
A lot of your horizontals (and verticals) aren't  straight. Like the horizon 
line. While in real life sometimes horizons aren't  straight, it's a 
convention in photography to have them straight. It just makes  it easier on 
the eyes, 
and takes away a distraction that can ruin an otherwise  good photo. 
Straightening them is done in post processing with "rotate" photo.  Or one can 
just be 
more aware when shooting -- checking all a way around the  frame to see that 
things are straight.

BTW (By The Way), I also like the  golden light on the train and the other 
busy, colorful shore shot someone else  picked out.

HTH (Hope that helps). Marnie aka Doe  :-)

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

**Worried about job security? Check out the 5 safest jobs in a 
recession. 
(http://jobs.aol.com/gallery/growing-job-industries?ncid=emlcntuscare0002)

--
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: Q: Gels for Pentax flashes?

[Fernando]

Yep, that Lumiquest thingy looks neat, looks like the best option.
Just for the record photogels.com's gels arrived and are way larger
than the 360 flash (and I'm sure it's probably larger than the 540 as
well) in summary they are good, just need to trim them down.

Cheers



On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 7:07 PM, Bruce Walker  wrote:
> Bruce Walker wrote:
>>
>> Quick question for the flash users ...
>>
>> Are there coloured gels available for the AF540FGZ or AF360FGZ?  Do gels
>> for Speedlights or other flashes fit or are able to be adapted?  Or do you
>> just get sheet gels, cut them to size and sticky-tape them in place?
>>
>> I'm seriously considering getting into some flash photography and I'm
>> considering the myriad options.
>
> Thanks for all the great suggestions from Fernando, Nick and Peter.
>
> Peter's suggestion, the Lumiquest FXtra (LQ-121) looks like a simple and
> inexpensive ($20 US) way to get gels in front of the Pentax flashes and
> avoid light leakage.  I'll likely go with that for a 360FGZ.
>
> Thanks again all!
>
> -bmw
>
> --
> 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.
>



-- 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ferand/

--
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: Happy Sheep

[John Francis]

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:01:26PM -0400, eactiv...@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 3/10/2009 2:05:55 P.M.  Pacific Daylight Time, 
> jdavi...@yahoo.com writes:
> When we lived in San Jose,  (1957-1975) we went to Scott's Valley several 
> times. Wasn't there a Santa's  Village and amusement park located there?
> Our girls (10 and 8 when we left)  enjoyed that and a park named Frontier 
> Village on the south edge of  SJ.
> 
> Jack
> 
> ===
> Scott Valley, Siskiyou County, near Yreka.  Scotts Valley is elsewhere. Scott 
> Valley is pretty isolated and with very few  people. Which is why it is nice. 
> Nary a commercial thing there, like a Santa's  Village. No sir, now way.
> 
> Marnie aka Doe  ;-)

Are you quite sure about that?

http://www.santasvillage.net/

Note that the exit off 17 in Scotts Valley goes to Santa's Village Road.


--
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: Experiments With Faith

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 3/10/2009 7:44:28 A.M.  Pacific Daylight Time, 
bharath.m...@gmail.com writes:
Greetings,

I  joined a couple of days ago and I must say it is a relief to find so   
many "Pentax People". I am tired of explaining to people that there   
are many more camera manufacturers than just Nikon and Canon!

And  without further ado, here's my first attempt at sharing a  gallery.

http://picasaweb.google.com/itinerant.observer/ExperimentsWithFaith

I  shot this in Varanasi and Omkareshwar - these are two of the most   
holiest places in Hinduism and both have major temples dedicated to   
the God Shiva. I am not the least bit religious, but was curious to   
find out why so many millions (and often extremely poor) travel   
thousands of miles to see these places. Pictures were shot over 7   
days, enduring atrocious North Indian weather, one mugging and a half   
broken camera!

-- Bharath

Fascinating. A colorful  and interesting gallery about a culture I know only 
a little about. I really  enjoyed looking at it. Thanks for sharing.

And welcome to  PDML.

Marnie aka Doe  :-)

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

**Worried about job security? Check out the 5 safest jobs in a 
recession. 
(http://jobs.aol.com/gallery/growing-job-industries?ncid=emlcntuscare0002)

--
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: Happy Sheep

[Jack Davis]

Thanks, Ann!

Jack


--- On Tue, 3/10/09, ann sanfedele  wrote:

> From: ann sanfedele 
> Subject: Re: Happy Sheep
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
> Date: Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 7:20 PM
> eactiv...@aol.com wrote:
> 
> >In a message dated 3/10/2009 2:05:55 P.M.  Pacific
> Daylight Time, 
> >jdavi...@yahoo.com writes:
> >When we lived in San Jose,  (1957-1975) we went to
> Scott's Valley several 
> >times. Wasn't there a Santa's  Village and
> amusement park located there?
> >Our girls (10 and 8 when we left)  enjoyed that and a
> park named Frontier 
> >Village on the south edge of  SJ.
> >
> >Jack
> >
> >===
> >Scott Valley, Siskiyou County, near Yreka.  Scotts
> Valley is elsewhere. Scott 
> >Valley is pretty isolated and with very few  people.
> Which is why it is nice. 
> >Nary a commercial thing there, like a Santa's 
> Village. No sir, now way.
> >
> >Marnie aka Doe  ;-)
> >
> to paraphrase -
> Yreka, I have found it!
> 
> I stayed in Yreka once ...  
> Jack - nice photo -- I love those odd hills... and the
> green blanket 
> over them.
> 
> 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.


  

--
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: Happy Sheep

[Jack Davis]

No, no, 'Yreka' is a vacuum cleaner. =)

J


--- On Tue, 3/10/09, ann sanfedele  wrote:

> From: ann sanfedele 
> Subject: Re: Happy Sheep
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
> Date: Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 7:20 PM
> eactiv...@aol.com wrote:
> 
> >In a message dated 3/10/2009 2:05:55 P.M.  Pacific
> Daylight Time, 
> >jdavi...@yahoo.com writes:
> >When we lived in San Jose,  (1957-1975) we went to
> Scott's Valley several 
> >times. Wasn't there a Santa's  Village and
> amusement park located there?
> >Our girls (10 and 8 when we left)  enjoyed that and a
> park named Frontier 
> >Village on the south edge of  SJ.
> >
> >Jack
> >
> >===
> >Scott Valley, Siskiyou County, near Yreka.  Scotts
> Valley is elsewhere. Scott 
> >Valley is pretty isolated and with very few  people.
> Which is why it is nice. 
> >Nary a commercial thing there, like a Santa's 
> Village. No sir, now way.
> >
> >Marnie aka Doe  ;-)
> >
> to paraphrase -
> Yreka, I have found it!
> 
> I stayed in Yreka once ...  
> Jack - nice photo -- I love those odd hills... and the
> green blanket 
> over them.
> 
> 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.


  

--
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: Happy Sheep

[Jack Davis]

OH, sorry! Guess I could have asked rather than assume. Your being a Bay Area 
resident (?) allowed me to jump to that conclusion, but wrongly.

Jack



--- On Tue, 3/10/09, eactiv...@aol.com  wrote:

> From: eactiv...@aol.com 
> Subject: Re: Happy Sheep
> To: pdml@pdml.net
> Date: Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 7:01 PM
> In a message dated 3/10/2009 2:05:55 P.M.  Pacific Daylight
> Time, 
> jdavi...@yahoo.com writes:
> When we lived in San Jose,  (1957-1975) we went to
> Scott's Valley several 
> times. Wasn't there a Santa's  Village and
> amusement park located there?
> Our girls (10 and 8 when we left)  enjoyed that and a park
> named Frontier 
> Village on the south edge of  SJ.
> 
> Jack
> 
> ===
> Scott Valley, Siskiyou County, near Yreka.  Scotts Valley
> is elsewhere. Scott 
> Valley is pretty isolated and with very few  people. Which
> is why it is nice. 
> Nary a commercial thing there, like a Santa's  Village.
> No sir, now way.
> 
> Marnie aka Doe  ;-)
> 
> -
> Warning: I am now  filtering my email, so you may be
> censored.  
> 
> **Worried about job security? Check out the 5
> safest jobs in a 
> recession. 
> (http://jobs.aol.com/gallery/growing-job-industries?ncid=emlcntuscare0002)
> 
> --
> 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: Just call me "Speck"

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 3/10/2009 7:26:50 A.M.  Pacific Daylight Time, 
msrobert...@ysu.edu writes:
Went Googling for  references to the PDML book and came across this  one:
http://www.picstips.com/pentax/the-pdml-pentax-photo-book-camera-price-reducti
ons-and-pma-rumors.html

Looks  as if it's been through a couple of computer translators, from 
English to  something else and back, to wonderful effect :)

==
"All assert  volumes regarding the flair extra sense of their creators."

I always knew  one really needed the sixth sense to take good photos.

Here we have it  confirmed! Heh. Not sure that write up isn't better than the 
 first.

Marnie aka Doe  :-)

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

**Worried about job security? Check out the 5 safest jobs in a 
recession. 
(http://jobs.aol.com/gallery/growing-job-industries?ncid=emlcntuscare0002)

--
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: Book - Looking in Robert Frank's the Americans

[steve harley]

they whom i call Fernando wrote:

If you have the chance take a look at this book at your local
bookstore, in the last chapter it includes contact sheets of Frank's
photos with his picks, you can also in which case he took more than
one photo, and which one got picked, and some crops (e.g. I didn't
know that this photo was originally shot in landscape orientation:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3013/2708910256_5239f73252_o.jpg ). I
found the whole exercise highly educational.


[delurking]

i went to the exhibit based on this book two days ago; it's at 
the National Gallery of Art in Washington DC:




while i have a special interest in Frank, i think it would be 
well worth it for anyone -- in addition to the complete sequence 
from the book, the exhibit includes quite a few work prints, 
contact sheets, correspondence, etc. and a good amount of Frank's 
early work as well as some later pieces; even Kerouac's first and 
second drafts of the introduction (a second draft being somewhat 
unusual for Kerouac)


what's more, a small gallery next door has some unusual images by 
Ansel Adams, Robert Adams and Alfred Stieglitz



http://www.amazon.ca/Looking-Robert-Americans-Sarah-Greenough/dp/3865218067/ref=pd_sim_b?ie=UTF8&qid=1236649263&sr=8-1


oddly, that Amazon Canada entry doesn't call it "Expanded 
Edition", though you can faintly read that on the image -- 
there's a difference; while at the museum and resolved to get the 
Expanded Edition, which i think will keep me busy for a few years


--
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: Multiplicity fail :(

[ann sanfedele]

David Savage wrote:


2009/3/9 David Savage :
 


I'm certain it's done in PS.

The post processing technique of layer stacking & masking is quite
straight forward. And not to dissimilar to this shot of mine:



When I get home I'll make one using the frames from my recent "New Day" PESO.
   



Quick & dirty



One Dave is never enough :-)

Cheers,

Dave

 

This may look like fiction... but think of  what one might see 20 or 30 
years down the road , due to the
overzealous propagation of the "octo-mom" and the kids all wore the same 
shirt.


Dave -- I cant' think of any reason why I'd want to try this, but in 
case I did... will elements 5 handle it?


I'd actually like to do the opposite... (I've done it with film and an 
LEX on bulb)...  make all the people that
are milling about disappear  -  Marnie has a photo of mine where it was 
partly accomplished... just sneakers

walking by themselves remained...

I'm babbling -- got the f'ing 3rd cold of the year with company 
arriving Thursday from the great north...

(Toronto)  was supposed to be last week...

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: OT: ...and so to blog

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 3/10/2009 2:20:33 P.M.  Pacific Daylight Time, 
knarftheria...@gmail.com writes:
Does he use Dave  Brooks' spellchecker?

cheers,
frank

===
The mind  boggles.

If a Dave Brooks spellcheck would check spelling, how much  spelling would it 
check?

Marnie aka Doe :-)   

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

**Worried about job security? Check out the 5 safest jobs in a 
recession. 
(http://jobs.aol.com/gallery/growing-job-industries?ncid=emlcntuscare0002)

--
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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was: PESO:Church to...

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 3/10/2009 4:52:15 P.M.  Pacific Daylight Time, 
christ...@skofteland.net writes:
Is this an honest  photograph worthy of winning such a competition?  Have 
I manipulated  the viewer?

-- 

Christian

==
Yes. And thanks for  bringing that up. Because nature photographers do it all 
the time.

Which  is why in 2007 for a little show I did, I tried to show both, nature 
and other  -- pollution and/or man's intrusion. A lot of people didn't like 
them, some did.  (Not referring to quality of the shots.)

Nature photographers lie all the  time.

Marnie  :-)

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

**Worried about job security? Check out the 5 safest jobs in a 
recession. 
(http://jobs.aol.com/gallery/growing-job-industries?ncid=emlcntuscare0002)

--
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: Happy Sheep

[ann sanfedele]

eactiv...@aol.com wrote:

In a message dated 3/10/2009 2:05:55 P.M.  Pacific Daylight Time, 
jdavi...@yahoo.com writes:
When we lived in San Jose,  (1957-1975) we went to Scott's Valley several 
times. Wasn't there a Santa's  Village and amusement park located there?
Our girls (10 and 8 when we left)  enjoyed that and a park named Frontier 
Village on the south edge of  SJ.


Jack

===
Scott Valley, Siskiyou County, near Yreka.  Scotts Valley is elsewhere. Scott 
Valley is pretty isolated and with very few  people. Which is why it is nice. 
Nary a commercial thing there, like a Santa's  Village. No sir, now way.


Marnie aka Doe  ;-)


to paraphrase -
Yreka, I have found it!

I stayed in Yreka once ...  
Jack - nice photo -- I love those odd hills... and the green blanket 
over them.


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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was: PESO: Church t...

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 3/10/2009 3:06:54 P.M.  Pacific Daylight Time, 
bkday...@daytonphoto.com writes:
I think what happens  is while shooting film, for these people, the
act of shooting was the major  portion of their involvement.  Now with
the ability to post process  reasonably, there is more to finishing an
image than simply taking the  picture.  The taking of the picture is
only one step in several to  produce the image that they have in mind.

-- 
Best  regards,
Bruce

--
Yes. I wish I could get it  exactly the way I want in "in camera," but often 
I am not a good enough  photographer for that. I do more than crop, but not a 
lot more. I do rely  heavily on lighten shadows, because, frankly, the dynamic 
range of digital is  similar to slides and that doesn't allow for enough 
leeway. I've found it best  to shoot for highlights and bring up shadow detail 
later. 

So definitely  just one step. Many of the pictures I've shown on list that 
people have admired  have been tweaked -- cropped, curved (or shadows 
lightened), sometimes a  judicious small cloning out here and there, and 
sometimes even 
layers are  involved. Lying, no. I see no reason I have to live with exactly 
the way the  camera caught it when it couldn't handle both highlights and 
shadows, while my  eye can. I've also fixed perspective on wide angle shots, 
which 
is only caused  by lenses, since my eye can see it without distortion.

I feel a  photograph should show more of what I saw than what a limited 
camera can  capture. 

Marnie aka Doe   OTOH, I also believe in artistic  manipulation, although 
that is usually pretty  visible.

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

**Worried about job security? Check out the 5 safest jobs in a 
recession. 
(http://jobs.aol.com/gallery/growing-job-industries?ncid=emlcntuscare0002)

--
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: cemetary Mary revisited

[Doug Brewer]

frank theriault wrote:

On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Larry Colen  wrote:

I tried reshooting Cemetary Mary this afternoon with the K20, 18-250
and bringing my own "halos" rather than trying to rely on the
poinsettas:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157614916598003/


I like the "softer" halo in colour...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/3338824221/in/set-72157614916598003/

cheers,
frank



I'm with Frank on this, but would also like to see some taken in decent 
light. It's way too harsh for this.


--
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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was:PESO:Church tower))

[ann sanfedele]

Christian wrote:




There are a lot of people that get all high-and-mighty about removing 
or adding an element in post-production (photoshopping) but say 
nothing of the above example when both are deliberate acts of 
manipulation.  One is "ethical" becuase there was no pixel-moving, the 
other unethical because it isn't "true."  To me, neither is the truth. 


To me, neither is "unethical" -   just (I guess this can't be said 
enough) as long as , in the case of photoshopping,
the perp tells us all what was done.  Bob W put this much better in 
earlier post... with a nod to Bea Lily...


If you want truth you need to witness every event first-hand and draw 
your own conclusions.



Ooops.  Your eyes (and your history) are as much a camera as the 
physical, mechanical tool in your hands is,

and no more and no less reliable, most of the time.

my 2 cents

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: Happy Sheep

[Beaker]

On Mar 10, 2009, at 7:05 PM, Cotty wrote:


On 10/3/09, eactiv...@aol.com, discombobulated, unleashed:


Well, what do you call individual  cattle?


Darling.

--


Cheers,
  Cotty


Bit 'o Welsh in ya Cotty?

Cheers
Beaker

--
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: Perspective control (was: PESO: Church tower)

[Joseph McAllister]

On Mar 10, 2009, at 14:13 , William Robb wrote:


It's one of those Foundview things that is no longer relevant.

William Robb



Always dragging up the irrelevant past, Robb.

:-)


Joseph McAllister
Lots of gear, not much time

http://gallery.me.com/jomac
http://web.me.com/jomac/show.me/Blog/Blog.html


--
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: Happy Sheep

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 3/10/2009 2:05:55 P.M.  Pacific Daylight Time, 
jdavi...@yahoo.com writes:
When we lived in San Jose,  (1957-1975) we went to Scott's Valley several 
times. Wasn't there a Santa's  Village and amusement park located there?
Our girls (10 and 8 when we left)  enjoyed that and a park named Frontier 
Village on the south edge of  SJ.

Jack

===
Scott Valley, Siskiyou County, near Yreka.  Scotts Valley is elsewhere. Scott 
Valley is pretty isolated and with very few  people. Which is why it is nice. 
Nary a commercial thing there, like a Santa's  Village. No sir, now way.

Marnie aka Doe  ;-)

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

**Worried about job security? Check out the 5 safest jobs in a 
recession. 
(http://jobs.aol.com/gallery/growing-job-industries?ncid=emlcntuscare0002)

--
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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control

[Keith Whaley]

Christian wrote:
The act of taking the photograph is an act of manipulation and is 
therefore always "dishonest"


YOU CHOOSE what to include in every photograph you take and what to 
exclude.  YOU CHOOSE the angle it is shot from.  YOU CHOOSE the subject 
matter, etc etc etc.


All these CHOICES are "manipulating" the photograph and telling the 
story that YOU want to tell.


Whether you do it by composition, in photoshop, or in the darkroom, 
EVERY photograph is "dishonest."



BULL.

keith whaley

--
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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control

[Doug Franklin]

Christian wrote:


Exactly.  But even then I don't trust them to show me "truth"


No two-dimensional representation of a four-dimensional scene can show 
anyone "truth".  But it can lead them there.


--
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: Being Watched

[Jack Davis]

It's actually a horse, and although I didn't see it, I assume it has one.
Appreciated comments.

Jack


--- On Tue, 3/10/09, Cotty  wrote:

> From: Cotty 
> Subject: Re: PESO: Being Watched
> To: "pentax list" 
> Date: Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 4:13 PM
> On 10/3/09, Jack Davis, discombobulated, unleashed:
> 
> >
> >I had noticed this barn in the past and thought I
> remembered where and
> >which direction it faced. Decided to go looking for it
> early this AM. I
> >wanted the sun at this angle, or lower.
> >Was glad to see the resident moving about, so as to
> give me permission
> >to drive in and photograph the barn. They asked me why,
> to which I
> >responded. "I d'know, guess I just like old
> barns". That seemed to
> >satisfy her.
> >I shot a few from the diagonal, but wasn't pleased
> with all the "stuff"
> >stacked around in the front and started to leave a
> little disappointed.
> >As I made a "U" in the lot, I realized I was
> being watched. I lowered
> >the window and took a couple just before he moved from
> the opening in
> >the shed.
> >
> >Jack
> >
> >Comments always welcome
> >
> >http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=389
> 
> The ass makes it. Beautiful shot mate.
> 
> --
> 
> 
> 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.


  

--
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: Experiments With Faith

[Bharath M]

Very interesting. You should listen to Cotty about the horizontals.


Anything particular about the horizontals? I am not sure what you mean.

It could be that it's early in the morning here in India and I am a  
bit dense!


-- Bharath

--
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: Ad-Hoc PDML London meet

[timber]

Well I am in London since last friday and I am happy to meet any Pentaxian
so it sounds good to me :) But how about a photowalking and some street
photography? :D (please no boring night landscapes like this:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/timbah/3337415463/ cause I don't want to
carry my tripod again :D)
.timber
+44 75 3143 6929

Ps.: If you speak British please get someone who can translate to English :D



--
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: Ethics of Manipulation

[Christian]

William Robb wrote:


- Original Message - From: "Christian"
Subject: Re: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspectivecontrol 
(was:PESO:Church tower))






However "In vino veritas"



In wine we trust?


Truth.  In wine there is truth.  Pliney the Elder.  Hey I've had a few 
cocktails this evening



--

Christian
http://404mohawknotfound.blogspot.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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was: PESO:Church tower))

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Bruce Walker"
Subject: Re: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was: 
PESO:Church tower))






I susbscribe to the "photography is essentially art" view myself.



Pentax needs to release some new equipment.

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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was: PESO:Church tower))

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "David Savage"
Subject: Re: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was: 
PESO:Church tower))



Another entertaining & eloquent piece of prose from Bob W.

:-)


Bob never uses either too many words, or words too complicated.

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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspectivecontrol (was:PESO:Church tower))

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Christian"
Subject: Re: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspectivecontrol 
(was:PESO:Church tower))






However "In vino veritas"



In wine we trust?

ww 



--
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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was: PESO: Church tower))

[Bruce Walker]

The Online Photographer today references a NYT video article, "Sex, Lies 
and Photoshop".  As it discusses some of these Ethics of Manipulation 
aspects it's worth a view ...


http://is.gd/mGG3

I susbscribe to the "photography is essentially art" view myself.  I 
agree that using an image to promote a lie is the problem, not the 
content of any image.


-bmw

--
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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was:PESO:Church tower))

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "DagT"
Subject: Re: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control 
(was:PESO:Church tower))



I agree with Christian, and maybe it´s time to show these again:
http://photo.net/photodb/folder.tcl?folder_id=366144

Scanned from slides and not altered at all after scanning they are not
manipulated according to the rules of photo.net, but they are
certainly results of an act of manipulation as they obviously do not
show anything that really happened.


I recall being amazed by that series of pictures the first time I saw them 
too.


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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control(was: PESO:Church tower))

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Christian"
Subject: Re: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control(was: 
PESO:Church tower))






Bob W wrote:

Bullshit.


I'm a nature photographer.  I love beauty in nature.  I go down to the 
local dump and find a nasty garbage-infested, oil-stained, mercury-laden 
pond and see.. I don't know, a Great Egret wading amongst some reeds with 
the sun setting just-so, side-lighting the bird's resplendent 
white-plumage, enhancing every feather detail in glorious mating display. 
I trip the shutter, making sure to not include the cans floating in the 
oil-slick and dead, rotting fish to the left of the bird.  The picture 
wins a national competition promoted by the Sierra Club dedicated to 
protecting our wild lands.


Is this an honest photograph worthy of winning such a competition?  Have I 
manipulated the viewer?




Its either comedy or irony, it's hard to say.

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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was: PESO:Church tower))

[David Savage]

Another entertaining & eloquent piece of prose from Bob W.

:-)

Cheers,

Dave

2009/3/11 Bob W :
>
> Bullshit.
>
>>
>> The act of taking the photograph is an act of manipulation and is
>> therefore always "dishonest"
>>
>> YOU CHOOSE what to include in every photograph you take and what to
>> exclude.  YOU CHOOSE the angle it is shot from.  YOU CHOOSE
>> the subject
>> matter, etc etc etc.
>>
>> All these CHOICES are "manipulating" the photograph and telling the
>> story that YOU want to tell.
>>
>> Whether you do it by composition, in photoshop, or in the darkroom,
>> EVERY photograph is "dishonest."

--
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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was:PESO:Church tower))

[Christian]

Bob W wrote:



Adding or removing elements breaks the causal relation between the picture
and the subject and adds an entirely different dimension to
the truth-value of the picture,


What about choosing which elements to include by a simple step to the 
left or right before tripping the shutter?


I can make (former) President Bush look like a total ass (literally) be 
framing his head just right with a background element (as was done in a 
certain image where he appeared to have long donkey-ears due to a 
certain background feature).  Or I can make one step to the left and not 
include that element.  The inclusion of the element was a conscious 
decision.


There are a lot of people that get all high-and-mighty about removing or 
adding an element in post-production (photoshopping) but say nothing of 
the above example when both are deliberate acts of manipulation.  One is 
"ethical" becuase there was no pixel-moving, the other unethical because 
it isn't "true."  To me, neither is the truth.  If you want truth you 
need to witness every event first-hand and draw your own conclusions.


Me?  I trust no one in the media.  Least of all photographers because I 
know their tricks...



"It depends on what the photographer is claiming about the image. 


Exactly.  But even then I don't trust them to show me "truth"

There is no truth in photography.

However "In vino veritas"

--

Christian
http://404mohawknotfound.blogspot.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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was:PESO:Church tower))

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Bob W"
Subject: RE: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control 
(was:PESO:Church tower))





Bullshit.



Interestingly, I posted this almost nine years ago in reply to that 
penultimate Presbeterian, Matt Grene


"Photographs by their very nature are lies and untruths. They sit
there, static representations of moving subjects. They lie in
two dimensions, making mock of the three dimensional nature they
claim to represent. They are black and white lies of coloured
scenes. They are off colour lies of colour scenes. "

It went on from there, but that is the gist of it.
Now being how it was Mafud, I was probably arguing for the sake of arguing 
and trying to get a rise out of him, and he doing the same to me, I am sure.


William Robb







The act of taking the photograph is an act of manipulation and is
therefore always "dishonest"

YOU CHOOSE what to include in every photograph you take and what to
exclude.  YOU CHOOSE the angle it is shot from.  YOU CHOOSE
the subject
matter, etc etc etc.

All these CHOICES are "manipulating" the photograph and telling the
story that YOU want to tell.

Whether you do it by composition, in photoshop, or in the darkroom,
EVERY photograph is "dishonest."


--

Christian
http://404mohawknotfound.blogspot.com/

Nick Wright wrote:
> Yes, it is. But somewhere along the line I came to view one as
> "honest" and the other as "dishonest."
>
> Not that it's that simple though. Because I think that a "straight"
> photo can be dishonest as well.
>
> Which is something that I've also been thinking about in
regards to my
> original photo. I like my shot quite a bit, but I cycled past that
> church again the other day and I realized that it is not an honest
> photo.
>
> The reason I believe that is because in the photo the tower
appears to
> be much taller than the rest of the building, when in
reality the roof
> line to the right of the tower in the photo is higher.
>
> I didn't think about it when I shot it, and then I didn't
think about
> it when I got the negs back.
>
> So what do you all think about that?
>
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Bruce Dayton
 wrote:
>> Isn't just changing the lens or the angle that you take the shot,
>> changing the perspective?  It would seem that if altering the photo
>> after the shot bothers you, then altering the photo before the shot
>> should to.  Just different methods of accomplishing the same basic
>> thing.
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Bruce
>>
>>
>> Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 5:06:20 AM, you wrote:
>>
>> NW> Thanks to all the folks who took time to comment on
this last PESO of
>> NW> mine. I do appreciate the critiques.
>>
>> NW> One item I'd like to touch on is the concept of
software perspective
>> NW> control. I'd been thinking about this recently before
I'd posted my
>> NW> PESO and then Brian brought it up in his critique of my image.
>>
>> NW> I'm just amazed at how fast technology changes. The
last time I was an
>> NW> active member of this list (granted that was 8 years
ago) the only way
>> NW> to achieve perspective control was with a view camera
or shift lens.
>> NW> Now you can get something of the same effect using photoshop.
>>
>> NW> I don't currently have any software with the ability
to "correct"
>> NW> perspective, but an older laptop of mine had Elements
2 which did. I
>> NW> played around with it a bit but never could really get
my heart into
>> NW> it.
>>
>> NW> I think it mainly has to do with all those years at
the newspaper. Any
>> NW> alteration of a photograph like that just makes me cringe.
>>
>> NW> I'm curious to hear more of you all's opinions on the process?
>>
>> NW> On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Brian Walters
 wrote:
 Nice composition but the tower gets a  bit lost in the
background sky.

 Also, I'd try a bit of perspective correction to make
the verticals
 vertical and the horizontals, er...horizontal.  It may not be an
 improvement but worth investigating.






--
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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was: PESO: Church tower))

[Christian]

Cotty wrote:

On 10/3/09, Christian, discombobulated, unleashed:


YOU CHOOSE what to include in every photograph you take and what to
exclude.  YOU CHOOSE the angle it is shot from.  YOU CHOOSE the subject
matter, etc etc etc.

All these CHOICES are "manipulating" the photograph and telling the
story that YOU want to tell.

Whether you do it by composition, in photoshop, or in the darkroom,
EVERY photograph is "dishonest."


I calculcate a 14.5% JCO infiltration factor in the above text over the
course of one post. At this rate Christian will morph beyond repair in
less than 12 hours..


YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.  OF COURSE I WILL MORPH 
INTO JCO BUT MUCH SNER THAT YOU COULD EVER EXPECT


--

Christian
http://404mohawknotfound.blogspot.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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was: PESO:Church tower))

[Christian]

Bob W wrote:

Bullshit.


I'm a nature photographer.  I love beauty in nature.  I go down to the 
local dump and find a nasty garbage-infested, oil-stained, mercury-laden 
pond and see.. I don't know, a Great Egret wading amongst some reeds 
with the sun setting just-so, side-lighting the bird's resplendent 
white-plumage, enhancing every feather detail in glorious mating 
display.  I trip the shutter, making sure to not include the cans 
floating in the oil-slick and dead, rotting fish to the left of the 
bird.  The picture wins a national competition promoted by the Sierra 
Club dedicated to protecting our wild lands.


Is this an honest photograph worthy of winning such a competition?  Have 
I manipulated the viewer?


--

Christian
http://404mohawknotfound.blogspot.com/




The act of taking the photograph is an act of manipulation and is 
therefore always "dishonest"


YOU CHOOSE what to include in every photograph you take and what to 
exclude.  YOU CHOOSE the angle it is shot from.  YOU CHOOSE 
the subject 
matter, etc etc etc.


All these CHOICES are "manipulating" the photograph and telling the 
story that YOU want to tell.


Whether you do it by composition, in photoshop, or in the darkroom, 
EVERY photograph is "dishonest."



--

Christian
http://404mohawknotfound.blogspot.com/

Nick Wright wrote:

Yes, it is. But somewhere along the line I came to view one as
"honest" and the other as "dishonest."

Not that it's that simple though. Because I think that a "straight"
photo can be dishonest as well.

Which is something that I've also been thinking about in 

regards to my

original photo. I like my shot quite a bit, but I cycled past that
church again the other day and I realized that it is not an honest
photo.

The reason I believe that is because in the photo the tower 

appears to
be much taller than the rest of the building, when in 

reality the roof

line to the right of the tower in the photo is higher.

I didn't think about it when I shot it, and then I didn't 

think about

it when I got the negs back.

So what do you all think about that?

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Bruce Dayton 

 wrote:

Isn't just changing the lens or the angle that you take the shot,
changing the perspective?  It would seem that if altering the photo
after the shot bothers you, then altering the photo before the shot
should to.  Just different methods of accomplishing the same basic
thing.

--
Best regards,
Bruce


Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 5:06:20 AM, you wrote:

NW> Thanks to all the folks who took time to comment on 

this last PESO of

NW> mine. I do appreciate the critiques.

NW> One item I'd like to touch on is the concept of 

software perspective
NW> control. I'd been thinking about this recently before 

I'd posted my

NW> PESO and then Brian brought it up in his critique of my image.

NW> I'm just amazed at how fast technology changes. The 

last time I was an
NW> active member of this list (granted that was 8 years 

ago) the only way
NW> to achieve perspective control was with a view camera 

or shift lens.

NW> Now you can get something of the same effect using photoshop.

NW> I don't currently have any software with the ability 

to "correct"
NW> perspective, but an older laptop of mine had Elements 

2 which did. I
NW> played around with it a bit but never could really get 

my heart into

NW> it.

NW> I think it mainly has to do with all those years at 

the newspaper. Any

NW> alteration of a photograph like that just makes me cringe.

NW> I'm curious to hear more of you all's opinions on the process?

NW> On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Brian Walters 

 wrote:
Nice composition but the tower gets a  bit lost in the 

background sky.
Also, I'd try a bit of perspective correction to make 

the verticals

vertical and the horizontals, er...horizontal.  It may not be an
improvement but worth investigating.


Cheers

Brian

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



On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 07:52 -0500, "Nick Wright"
 wrote:

Here's another PESO:
http://pedalingprose.wordpress.com/2009/03/08/church-tower-2/

Comment welcome and appreciated.

--
~Nick David Wright
http://pedalingprose.wordpress.com/


--


--
http://www.fastmail.fm - The way an email service should be


--
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.






--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml

Re: Ad-Hoc PDML London meet

[John Francis]

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:58:33PM -, Bob W wrote:
> > 
> > >I'll give you a call tomorrow if I can make it - it depends 
> > on what time I
> > >can escape from Alcatraz and how knackered I feel
> > 
> > I'll be up in the garden and about 6.30 ish for 7. Got to pick up a
> > tumble dryer in Slough. Do not even think about asking
> > 
> 
> I've picked up far stranger things in Slough, believe me.
> 
> Bob

Broad-spectrum antibiotics are your friend.


--
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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was:PESO:Church tower))

[Bob W]

What is it about the photos that is dishonest? What are they showing that
didn't happen? Apparently nothing, according to you. If there is dishonesty
it is because someone lies about them. It is the liar who is dishonest, not
the photograph. Furthermore, even if it were possible for some photographs
to be dishonest, Christian claims that EVERY photograph is dishonest.

Here is what I wrote in an earlier discussion of this type. I stand by it:

"The key thing about photography that differentiates it from other media is
that the image is formed mechanically from the direct action of light on a
surface - it's not mediated by anyone's brain, so you can, in principle,
show a causal link between the subject matter and
the image. This is why photographs are so inherently believable, and is why
people feel a sense of betrayal when they learn that a
photograph has been manipulated (ie elements added or removed - certain
activities in post-processing, such as contrast adjustment,
dodging and burning are just working with what's already there to improve
the presentation).

Adding or removing elements breaks the causal relation between the picture
and the subject and adds an entirely different dimension to
the truth-value of the picture, taking into the realm of painting and
writing. These activities may be based in the real world, but they are
mitigated by the writer's or painter's brain. "

and 

"It depends on what the photographer is claiming about the image. 

If you photoshop some fairies into your picture, claim that they really were
there at the bottom of your garden, and sell the photos to
the News of the World on that basis, then you're very obviously lying and it
would be no different to writing an article about the
aforementioned fairies and claiming that it was true. 

If on the other hand you sell the same picture as a whimsical fantasy image
then you're not doing anything wrong*.

Most people know the difference between fiction and reporting. It's not
wrong or immoral to write fiction*. The immoral thing is to claim
fiction as reporting.

It's not wrong or immoral to photoshop a photograph - the immoral thing is
to lie about it
[..]
generally speaking. There are, of course, situations where lying is a moral
thing to do, but going into detail here is stretching things a
bit."

The relevance to your photos is much the same. Rather than Photoshopping
stuff in you have set up a scene and photographed it. The scene really
happened, I assume, so the causal relation exists between the scene and the
photographs. But it was not an alien spacecraft that you photographed. If
you tell me it was then you are lying, not the photograph. If you show me
the photograph without making any claim about it I, as a skeptic, assume
it's a set-up. A set-up is not the same as a lie, any more than a
performance of Faustus is a lie.

Bob


> -Original Message-
> From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On 
> Behalf Of DagT
> Sent: 10 March 2009 23:12
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Subject: Re: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective 
> control (was:PESO:Church tower))
> 
> I agree with Christian, and maybe it´s time to show these again:
> http://photo.net/photodb/folder.tcl?folder_id=366144
> 
> Scanned from slides and not altered at all after scanning 
> they are not  
> manipulated according to the rules of photo.net, but they are  
> certainly results of an act of manipulation as they obviously do not  
> show anything that really happened.
> 
> DagT
> 
> Den 10. mars. 2009 kl. 23.59 skrev Bob W:
> 
> >
> > Bullshit.
> >
> >>
> >> The act of taking the photograph is an act of manipulation and is
> >> therefore always "dishonest"
> >>
> >> YOU CHOOSE what to include in every photograph you take and what to
> >> exclude.  YOU CHOOSE the angle it is shot from.  YOU CHOOSE
> >> the subject
> >> matter, etc etc etc.
> >>
> >> All these CHOICES are "manipulating" the photograph and telling the
> >> story that YOU want to tell.
> >>
> >> Whether you do it by composition, in photoshop, or in the darkroom,
> >> EVERY photograph is "dishonest."
> >>
> >>
> >> -- 
> >>
> >> Christian
> >> http://404mohawknotfound.blogspot.com/
> >>
> >> Nick Wright wrote:
> >>> Yes, it is. But somewhere along the line I came to view one as
> >>> "honest" and the other as "dishonest."
> >>>
> >>> Not that it's that simple though. Because I think that a 
> "straight"
> >>> photo can be dishonest as well.
> >>>
> >>> Which is something that I've also been thinking about in
> >> regards to my
> >>> original photo. I like my shot quite a bit, but I cycled past that
> >>> church again the other day and I realized that it is not an honest
> >>> photo.
> >>>
> >>> The reason I believe that is because in the photo the tower
> >> appears to
> >>> be much taller than the rest of the building, when in
> >> reality the roof
> >>> line to the right of the tower in the photo is higher.
> >>>
> >>> I didn't think about it when I shot it, 

Re: Happy Sheep

[Jack Davis]

That must have been some sort of photo nexus. Was in Gemco many times as well 
as San Jose Camera. Worked for Sunsweet (production control) at their main 
office at Market and San Antonio.
Shot with a Kodak "35", but absolutely "lived" golf in those days. 
That pretty much sums up my life. ;)

Jack 


--- On Tue, 3/10/09, Cotty  wrote:

> From: Cotty 
> Subject: Re: Happy Sheep
> To: "pentax list" 
> Date: Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 4:08 PM
> On 10/3/09, Jack Davis, discombobulated, unleashed:
> 
> >When we lived in San Jose, (1957-1975) we went to
> Scott's Valley several
> >times. Wasn't there a Santa's Village and
> amusement park located there?
> >Our girls (10 and 8 when we left) enjoyed that and a
> park named Frontier
> >Village on the south edge of SJ.
> 
> Holy mackerel. I was 15 in 1975 and I was there. I remember
> going to
> Frontier Village many times. Don't remember Scott's
> Valley, do recall a
> Santa's Village though.
> 
> I went on the first corkscrew rollercoaster at
> Marriott's Great America
> and my glasses were pulling off my face. My glasses came
> from Gemco on
> Steven's Creek Blvd. It's all coming back..
> 
> --
> 
> 
> 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.


  

--
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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was: PESO: Church tower))

[pnstenquist]

Your photo is honest in that from the place the photo was taken and with the 
lens that was used, that's the way it is recorded. But it doesn't matter a 
lick. I assume you weren't photograhing the church to document its appearance 
for a buyer or even record it as historical record. If, as I believe, you were 
simply trying to create an attractive phooto, you are ethically free to alter 
it in any way you please. In the pursuit of an artful image, there should not 
be any rules. Rendering an image in pixels or film shouldn't be any more bound 
by arcan rules than is rendering an image in oil paints. Artists, and those who 
aspire to art, should be free to experiment. If not, photography becomes a mere 
recording device rather than a true art form.
Paul
- "Nick Wright"  wrote:

> Yes, it is. But somewhere along the line I came to view one as
> "honest" and the other as "dishonest."
> 
> Not that it's that simple though. Because I think that a "straight"
> photo can be dishonest as well.
> 
> Which is something that I've also been thinking about in regards to
> my
> original photo. I like my shot quite a bit, but I cycled past that
> church again the other day and I realized that it is not an honest
> photo.
> 
> The reason I believe that is because in the photo the tower appears
> to
> be much taller than the rest of the building, when in reality the
> roof
> line to the right of the tower in the photo is higher.
> 
> I didn't think about it when I shot it, and then I didn't think about
> it when I got the negs back.
> 
> So what do you all think about that?
> 
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Bruce Dayton
>  wrote:
> > Isn't just changing the lens or the angle that you take the shot,
> > changing the perspective?  It would seem that if altering the photo
> > after the shot bothers you, then altering the photo before the shot
> > should to.  Just different methods of accomplishing the same basic
> > thing.
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Bruce
> >
> >
> > Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 5:06:20 AM, you wrote:
> >
> > NW> Thanks to all the folks who took time to comment on this last
> PESO of
> > NW> mine. I do appreciate the critiques.
> >
> > NW> One item I'd like to touch on is the concept of software
> perspective
> > NW> control. I'd been thinking about this recently before I'd posted
> my
> > NW> PESO and then Brian brought it up in his critique of my image.
> >
> > NW> I'm just amazed at how fast technology changes. The last time I
> was an
> > NW> active member of this list (granted that was 8 years ago) the
> only way
> > NW> to achieve perspective control was with a view camera or shift
> lens.
> > NW> Now you can get something of the same effect using photoshop.
> >
> > NW> I don't currently have any software with the ability to
> "correct"
> > NW> perspective, but an older laptop of mine had Elements 2 which
> did. I
> > NW> played around with it a bit but never could really get my heart
> into
> > NW> it.
> >
> > NW> I think it mainly has to do with all those years at the
> newspaper. Any
> > NW> alteration of a photograph like that just makes me cringe.
> >
> > NW> I'm curious to hear more of you all's opinions on the process?
> >
> > NW> On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Brian Walters
>  wrote:
> >>> Nice composition but the tower gets a  bit lost in the background
> sky.
> >>>
> >>> Also, I'd try a bit of perspective correction to make the
> verticals
> >>> vertical and the horizontals, er...horizontal.  It may not be an
> >>> improvement but worth investigating.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Cheers
> >>>
> >>> Brian
> >>>
> >>> ++
> >>> Brian Walters
> >>> Western Sydney Australia
> >>> http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 07:52 -0500, "Nick Wright"
> >>>  wrote:
>  Here's another PESO:
>  http://pedalingprose.wordpress.com/2009/03/08/church-tower-2/
> 
>  Comment welcome and appreciated.
> 
>  --
>  ~Nick David Wright
>  http://pedalingprose.wordpress.com/
> 
> >>> --
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> http://www.fastmail.fm - The way an email service should be
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> 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.
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> ~Nick David Wright
> http://www.nickdavidwright.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.

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UN

Re: PESO: Being Watched

[Cotty]

On 10/3/09, Jack Davis, discombobulated, unleashed:

>
>I had noticed this barn in the past and thought I remembered where and
>which direction it faced. Decided to go looking for it early this AM. I
>wanted the sun at this angle, or lower.
>Was glad to see the resident moving about, so as to give me permission
>to drive in and photograph the barn. They asked me why, to which I
>responded. "I d'know, guess I just like old barns". That seemed to
>satisfy her.
>I shot a few from the diagonal, but wasn't pleased with all the "stuff"
>stacked around in the front and started to leave a little disappointed.
>As I made a "U" in the lot, I realized I was being watched. I lowered
>the window and took a couple just before he moved from the opening in
>the shed.
>
>Jack
>
>Comments always welcome
>
>http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=389

The ass makes it. Beautiful shot mate.

--


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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was: PESO:Church tower))

[DagT]

I agree with Christian, and maybe it´s time to show these again:
http://photo.net/photodb/folder.tcl?folder_id=366144

Scanned from slides and not altered at all after scanning they are not  
manipulated according to the rules of photo.net, but they are  
certainly results of an act of manipulation as they obviously do not  
show anything that really happened.


DagT

Den 10. mars. 2009 kl. 23.59 skrev Bob W:



Bullshit.



The act of taking the photograph is an act of manipulation and is
therefore always "dishonest"

YOU CHOOSE what to include in every photograph you take and what to
exclude.  YOU CHOOSE the angle it is shot from.  YOU CHOOSE
the subject
matter, etc etc etc.

All these CHOICES are "manipulating" the photograph and telling the
story that YOU want to tell.

Whether you do it by composition, in photoshop, or in the darkroom,
EVERY photograph is "dishonest."


--

Christian
http://404mohawknotfound.blogspot.com/

Nick Wright wrote:

Yes, it is. But somewhere along the line I came to view one as
"honest" and the other as "dishonest."

Not that it's that simple though. Because I think that a "straight"
photo can be dishonest as well.

Which is something that I've also been thinking about in

regards to my

original photo. I like my shot quite a bit, but I cycled past that
church again the other day and I realized that it is not an honest
photo.

The reason I believe that is because in the photo the tower

appears to

be much taller than the rest of the building, when in

reality the roof

line to the right of the tower in the photo is higher.

I didn't think about it when I shot it, and then I didn't

think about

it when I got the negs back.

So what do you all think about that?

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Bruce Dayton

 wrote:

Isn't just changing the lens or the angle that you take the shot,
changing the perspective?  It would seem that if altering the photo
after the shot bothers you, then altering the photo before the shot
should to.  Just different methods of accomplishing the same basic
thing.

--
Best regards,
Bruce


Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 5:06:20 AM, you wrote:

NW> Thanks to all the folks who took time to comment on

this last PESO of

NW> mine. I do appreciate the critiques.

NW> One item I'd like to touch on is the concept of

software perspective

NW> control. I'd been thinking about this recently before

I'd posted my

NW> PESO and then Brian brought it up in his critique of my image.

NW> I'm just amazed at how fast technology changes. The

last time I was an

NW> active member of this list (granted that was 8 years

ago) the only way

NW> to achieve perspective control was with a view camera

or shift lens.

NW> Now you can get something of the same effect using photoshop.

NW> I don't currently have any software with the ability

to "correct"

NW> perspective, but an older laptop of mine had Elements

2 which did. I

NW> played around with it a bit but never could really get

my heart into

NW> it.

NW> I think it mainly has to do with all those years at

the newspaper. Any

NW> alteration of a photograph like that just makes me cringe.

NW> I'm curious to hear more of you all's opinions on the process?

NW> On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Brian Walters

 wrote:

Nice composition but the tower gets a  bit lost in the

background sky.


Also, I'd try a bit of perspective correction to make

the verticals

vertical and the horizontals, er...horizontal.  It may not be an
improvement but worth investigating.


Cheers

Brian

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



On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 07:52 -0500, "Nick Wright"
 wrote:

Here's another PESO:
http://pedalingprose.wordpress.com/2009/03/08/church-tower-2/

Comment welcome and appreciated.

--
~Nick David Wright
http://pedalingprose.wordpress.com/


--


--
http://www.fastmail.fm - The way an email service should be


--
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.





--
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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was: PESO: Church tower))

[AlunFoto]

Nick,
these are just my 2 cents...

I think no photo is either honest or dishonest.
Only a photographer that can have such virtues...
If _you_ feel dishonest for presenting the photo, then take the
morally appropriate decision on what to do with your work. Put it in
the bit bucket and forget it is one alternative. Presenting it as is,
no questions asked, is another. Go to the same place and obtain a
rendering that is more true to your perception is yet another.

To me, as a viewer with no chance to check your "facts", the only
thing that matters is whether the presentation is believable. If you
can, by choice of perspective, exposure etc. or by your
post-processing, make me believe in your presentation, then you have
succeded in telling a story.

sincerely,
Jostein

2009/3/10 Nick Wright :
> Yes, it is. But somewhere along the line I came to view one as
> "honest" and the other as "dishonest."
>
> Not that it's that simple though. Because I think that a "straight"
> photo can be dishonest as well.
>
> Which is something that I've also been thinking about in regards to my
> original photo. I like my shot quite a bit, but I cycled past that
> church again the other day and I realized that it is not an honest
> photo.
>
> The reason I believe that is because in the photo the tower appears to
> be much taller than the rest of the building, when in reality the roof
> line to the right of the tower in the photo is higher.
>
> I didn't think about it when I shot it, and then I didn't think about
> it when I got the negs back.
>
> So what do you all think about 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: Happy Sheep

[Cotty]

On 10/3/09, Jack Davis, discombobulated, unleashed:

>When we lived in San Jose, (1957-1975) we went to Scott's Valley several
>times. Wasn't there a Santa's Village and amusement park located there?
>Our girls (10 and 8 when we left) enjoyed that and a park named Frontier
>Village on the south edge of SJ.

Holy mackerel. I was 15 in 1975 and I was there. I remember going to
Frontier Village many times. Don't remember Scott's Valley, do recall a
Santa's Village though.

I went on the first corkscrew rollercoaster at Marriott's Great America
and my glasses were pulling off my face. My glasses came from Gemco on
Steven's Creek Blvd. It's all coming back..

--


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: Q: Gels for Pentax flashes?

[Bruce Walker]

Bruce Walker wrote:

Quick question for the flash users ...

Are there coloured gels available for the AF540FGZ or AF360FGZ?  Do 
gels for Speedlights or other flashes fit or are able to be adapted?  
Or do you just get sheet gels, cut them to size and sticky-tape them 
in place?


I'm seriously considering getting into some flash photography and I'm 
considering the myriad options.


Thanks for all the great suggestions from Fernando, Nick and Peter.

Peter's suggestion, the Lumiquest FXtra (LQ-121) looks like a simple and 
inexpensive ($20 US) way to get gels in front of the Pentax flashes and 
avoid light leakage.  I'll likely go with that for a 360FGZ.


Thanks again all!

-bmw

--
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: Happy Sheep

[Jack Davis]

Hope you're able to get some sleep sometime before dawn. 
In your case, I wouldn't recommend counting sheep.

Jack


--- On Tue, 3/10/09, Cotty  wrote:

> From: Cotty 
> Subject: Re: Happy Sheep
> To: "pentax list" 
> Date: Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 4:00 PM
> On 10/3/09, Jaume Lahuerta, discombobulated, unleashed:
> 
> >Wow...maybe we should start using a new kind of mark
> for these great
> pictures:
> >
> >ANNUAL !!
> >
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >Jaume
> 
> ANAL!! ;-)
> 
> --
> 
> 
> 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.


  

--
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: Happy Sheep

[Bob W]

> 
> >Well, what do you call individual  cattle?
> 
> Darling.
> 

it's moosic to their ears.

Bob


--
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: Happy Sheep

[Cotty]

On 10/3/09, eactiv...@aol.com, discombobulated, unleashed:

>Well, what do you call individual  cattle?

Darling.

--


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: Happy Sheep

[Bob W]

> 
> > The shape of the hills is
> >unusual and captivating.
> 
> I knew you were a pervert Matthew.
> 

Leave the guy alone. We all like a nicely rounded pert little butte. It is,
after, the French word for mound.

Bob


--
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: Can't post to the list, Prague, Puerto Vallarta, Better beamer.

[Tim Øsleby]

The 540 and Better Beamer works great together. I mainly use it for
fill light at birds.

--
MaritimTim

2009/3/8 Gae‘tan Beauchamp :
> Hello everyone. I just can't post to the list. I receive well for sure. See
> below. I don't understand why all this is happening. Perhaps this one will
> make it. So here are my previous ones:
> 1) Did someone ever use a better beamer with a Pentax flash AF 540? Is it
> really working? I suppose that you have to be close to your subject (lets
> say 20 feet), isn't?
> Other question: what are must places for photos around Puerto Vallarta
> Mexico?
> 2) Is it normal to receive more than 20 posts a day from the list? I made
> the choice to receive the digest mode . Am I doing something wrong ? Is the
> list always fonctional? How come some of my posts don't go through and that
> I don't reveive a post acknowlegement message everytime I am sending a
> message? What are the rules to follow for sending post to the list? Does the
> list reject some posts?
> 3) Correct link to Prague photos
> http://photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=898729 Thank you Mr Brian Walters
> for indicating me a bad web link. And to answer your question, the guy with
> a red jacket and amonkey is begging, playing music to the crowd and selling
> cards if I remember well.
> 4) Finally, here are some other pictures of Prague, a very nice trip that we
> made my wife and me in July 2008. I took several pictures of all those
> beautiful architectural ornaments, of the open places so particular in
> Europe. I took also several pictures of St-Nicolas church, of the painting
> as well. All taken with a Pentax K20D, with a 200 mm lens for the most part.
> http://gallery.me.com/gaetanbeauchamp
> Thank you all.
>
> Gaetan B.

--
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: Being Watched

[Jack Davis]

Thanks for the word "crisp." I often use it myself and with the same intent, 
I'm sure.

Jack


--- On Tue, 3/10/09, Brian Walters  wrote:

> From: Brian Walters 
> Subject: Re: PESO: Being Watched
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
> Date: Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 3:44 PM
> That's a great looking barn.  Wonderful light and the
> image has a  very
> 'crisp' appearance (not sure if that's the
> right adjective but I think
> so)
> 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Brian
> 
> ++
> Brian Walters
> Western Sydney Australia
> http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 11:38 -0700, "Jack Davis"
> 
> wrote:
> > 
> > I had noticed this barn in the past and thought I
> remembered where and
> > which direction it faced. Decided to go looking for it
> early this AM. I
> > wanted the sun at this angle, or lower.
> > Was glad to see the resident moving about, so as to
> give me permission to
> > drive in and photograph the barn. They asked me why,
> to which I
> > responded. "I d'know, guess I just like old
> barns". That seemed to
> > satisfy her.
> > I shot a few from the diagonal, but wasn't pleased
> with all the "stuff"
> > stacked around in the front and started to leave a
> little disappointed.
> > As I made a "U" in the lot, I realized I was
> being watched. I lowered the
> > window and took a couple just before he moved from the
> opening in the
> > shed.
> > 
> > Jack
> > 
> > Comments always welcome
> > 
> >
> http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=389
> > 
> > K10, DA16~45
> > 
> -- 
> 
> 
> -- 
> http://www.fastmail.fm - mmm... Fastmail...
> 
> 
> --
> 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: Happy Sheep

[Cotty]

On 10/3/09, Matthew Hunt, discombobulated, unleashed:

> The shape of the hills is
>unusual and captivating.

I knew you were a pervert Matthew.

--


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: Happy Sheep

[Jack Davis]

Thanks, Brian! 
I'm learning so much more about sheep than I ever imagined.
It's been a little scary, actually.

Jack 


--- On Tue, 3/10/09, Brian Walters  wrote:

> From: Brian Walters 
> Subject: Re: Happy Sheep
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
> Date: Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 3:11 PM
> On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 10:16 -0700, "Jack Davis"
> 
> wrote:
> > 
> > This is a bit of a play on TV's incessant
> "Happy Cows" commercials which
> > have a similar look about them. Also, a little
> something for the
> > Australian friends among us. ;)
> > Taken this AM.
> > 
> > Jack
> > 
> >
> http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=388
> > 
> 
> 
> Great landscape.  The light and shadows on those centre
> hills is
> beautiful.
> 
> Could be anywhere in the central west of New South Wales
> :-)>
> 
> BTW, while Australia has lots of sheep, per head of
> population 'Recent'
> Zealand is the Baa Baa capital.
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Brian
> 
> ++
> Brian Walters
> Western Sydney Australia
> http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> 
> -- 
> http://www.fastmail.fm - Send your email first class
> 
> 
> --
> 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: Happy Sheep

[Cotty]

On 10/3/09, Jaume Lahuerta, discombobulated, unleashed:

>Wow...maybe we should start using a new kind of mark for these great
pictures:
>
>ANNUAL !!
>
>
>Regards,
>
>Jaume

ANAL!! ;-)

--


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: Experiments With Faith

[Bob Sullivan]

Bharath,
Welcome and thanks for sharing that galley with all those notes.
It's a part of the world I've never seen and enjoyed the pictures very much.
Some are simply stunning.
Regards,  Bob S.

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Bruce Dayton  wrote:
> Welcome to the list.  I found your gallery fascinating to look
> through.  The comments helped as well.  I look forward to you sharing
> more.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Bruce
>
>
> Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 7:51:56 AM, you wrote:
>
> BM> Greetings,
>
> BM> I joined a couple of days ago and I must say it is a relief to find so
> BM> many "Pentax People". I am tired of explaining to people that there
> BM> are many more camera manufacturers than just Nikon and Canon!
>
> BM> And without further ado, here's my first attempt at sharing a gallery.
>
> BM> http://picasaweb.google.com/itinerant.observer/ExperimentsWithFaith
>
> BM> I shot this in Varanasi and Omkareshwar - these are two of the most
> BM> holiest places in Hinduism and both have major temples dedicated to
> BM> the God Shiva. I am not the least bit religious, but was curious to
> BM> find out why so many millions (and often extremely poor) travel
> BM> thousands of miles to see these places. Pictures were shot over 7
> BM> days, enduring atrocious North Indian weather, one mugging and a half
> BM> broken camera!
>
> BM> -- Bharath
>
> BM> --
> BM> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> BM> PDML@pdml.net
> BM> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> BM> 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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was: PESO: Church tower))

[Cotty]

On 10/3/09, Christian, discombobulated, unleashed:

>YOU CHOOSE what to include in every photograph you take and what to
>exclude.  YOU CHOOSE the angle it is shot from.  YOU CHOOSE the subject
>matter, etc etc etc.
>
>All these CHOICES are "manipulating" the photograph and telling the
>story that YOU want to tell.
>
>Whether you do it by composition, in photoshop, or in the darkroom,
>EVERY photograph is "dishonest."

I calculcate a 14.5% JCO infiltration factor in the above text over the
course of one post. At this rate Christian will morph beyond repair in
less than 12 hours..

--


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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was: PESO:Church tower))

[Bob W]

Bullshit.

> 
> The act of taking the photograph is an act of manipulation and is 
> therefore always "dishonest"
> 
> YOU CHOOSE what to include in every photograph you take and what to 
> exclude.  YOU CHOOSE the angle it is shot from.  YOU CHOOSE 
> the subject 
> matter, etc etc etc.
> 
> All these CHOICES are "manipulating" the photograph and telling the 
> story that YOU want to tell.
> 
> Whether you do it by composition, in photoshop, or in the darkroom, 
> EVERY photograph is "dishonest."
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Christian
> http://404mohawknotfound.blogspot.com/
> 
> Nick Wright wrote:
> > Yes, it is. But somewhere along the line I came to view one as
> > "honest" and the other as "dishonest."
> > 
> > Not that it's that simple though. Because I think that a "straight"
> > photo can be dishonest as well.
> > 
> > Which is something that I've also been thinking about in 
> regards to my
> > original photo. I like my shot quite a bit, but I cycled past that
> > church again the other day and I realized that it is not an honest
> > photo.
> > 
> > The reason I believe that is because in the photo the tower 
> appears to
> > be much taller than the rest of the building, when in 
> reality the roof
> > line to the right of the tower in the photo is higher.
> > 
> > I didn't think about it when I shot it, and then I didn't 
> think about
> > it when I got the negs back.
> > 
> > So what do you all think about that?
> > 
> > On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Bruce Dayton 
>  wrote:
> >> Isn't just changing the lens or the angle that you take the shot,
> >> changing the perspective?  It would seem that if altering the photo
> >> after the shot bothers you, then altering the photo before the shot
> >> should to.  Just different methods of accomplishing the same basic
> >> thing.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Best regards,
> >> Bruce
> >>
> >>
> >> Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 5:06:20 AM, you wrote:
> >>
> >> NW> Thanks to all the folks who took time to comment on 
> this last PESO of
> >> NW> mine. I do appreciate the critiques.
> >>
> >> NW> One item I'd like to touch on is the concept of 
> software perspective
> >> NW> control. I'd been thinking about this recently before 
> I'd posted my
> >> NW> PESO and then Brian brought it up in his critique of my image.
> >>
> >> NW> I'm just amazed at how fast technology changes. The 
> last time I was an
> >> NW> active member of this list (granted that was 8 years 
> ago) the only way
> >> NW> to achieve perspective control was with a view camera 
> or shift lens.
> >> NW> Now you can get something of the same effect using photoshop.
> >>
> >> NW> I don't currently have any software with the ability 
> to "correct"
> >> NW> perspective, but an older laptop of mine had Elements 
> 2 which did. I
> >> NW> played around with it a bit but never could really get 
> my heart into
> >> NW> it.
> >>
> >> NW> I think it mainly has to do with all those years at 
> the newspaper. Any
> >> NW> alteration of a photograph like that just makes me cringe.
> >>
> >> NW> I'm curious to hear more of you all's opinions on the process?
> >>
> >> NW> On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Brian Walters 
>  wrote:
>  Nice composition but the tower gets a  bit lost in the 
> background sky.
> 
>  Also, I'd try a bit of perspective correction to make 
> the verticals
>  vertical and the horizontals, er...horizontal.  It may not be an
>  improvement but worth investigating.
> 
> 
>  Cheers
> 
>  Brian
> 
>  ++
>  Brian Walters
>  Western Sydney Australia
>  http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/
> 
> 
> 
>  On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 07:52 -0500, "Nick Wright"
>   wrote:
> > Here's another PESO:
> > http://pedalingprose.wordpress.com/2009/03/08/church-tower-2/
> >
> > Comment welcome and appreciated.
> >
> > --
> > ~Nick David Wright
> > http://pedalingprose.wordpress.com/
> >
>  --
> 
> 
>  --
>  http://www.fastmail.fm - The way an email service should be
> 
> 
>  --
>  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.
> 
> 


--
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: Ad-Hoc PDML London meet

[Bob W]

> 
> >I'll give you a call tomorrow if I can make it - it depends 
> on what time I
> >can escape from Alcatraz and how knackered I feel
> 
> I'll be up in the garden and about 6.30 ish for 7. Got to pick up a
> tumble dryer in Slough. Do not even think about asking
> 

I've picked up far stranger things in Slough, believe me.

Bob


--
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.

What's the best thing about Sainsburys?

[Bob W]

It keeps the scum out of Waitrose.

A very interesting and witty piece here from Stephen Fry about the internet:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7926509.stm

I particularly like his comparison of the web with a city, and why it
doesn't need to be regulated.

Bob


--
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: Chicago on Acid? - was: Peso: Warning - cat photo (chicago stuff now)

[Bob Sullivan]

Tim Leary thought it did.
Others had different conclusions.
Regards,  Bob S.

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 3:49 PM, frank theriault
 wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 4:48 PM, Bob Sullivan  wrote:
>> A drug pioneered by Harvard Divinity School students seeking to get
>> closer to God.    Bob S.
>
> Did it work?
>
> cheers,
> frank
>
> --
> "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson
>
> --
> 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: Ad-Hoc PDML London meet

[Cotty]

On 10/3/09, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed:

>I'll give you a call tomorrow if I can make it - it depends on what time I
>can escape from Alcatraz and how knackered I feel

I'll be up in the garden and about 6.30 ish for 7. Got to pick up a
tumble dryer in Slough. Do not even think about asking

--


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: Ad-Hoc PDML London meet

[Cotty]

On 10/3/09, Cotty Cottington, discombobulated, unleashed:

>Count me in.
>
>Freakishly tall in Jolly Olde,
>antiCotty

Oh boy, I'm calling in the heavies to deal with you

--


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: PESO - Dying for a Puff

[Scott Loveless]

On 3/10/09, frank theriault  wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 1:06 AM, ann sanfedele  wrote:
>
>
>  > Frank, you may be safe after all
>
>
> Scott doesn't scare me...

You haven't seen me without a smoke.

-- 
Scott Loveless
Cigarette-free since December 14th, 2008
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: Being Watched

[Brian Walters]

That's a great looking barn.  Wonderful light and the image has a  very
'crisp' appearance (not sure if that's the right adjective but I think
so)


Cheers

Brian

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



On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 11:38 -0700, "Jack Davis" 
wrote:
> 
> I had noticed this barn in the past and thought I remembered where and
> which direction it faced. Decided to go looking for it early this AM. I
> wanted the sun at this angle, or lower.
> Was glad to see the resident moving about, so as to give me permission to
> drive in and photograph the barn. They asked me why, to which I
> responded. "I d'know, guess I just like old barns". That seemed to
> satisfy her.
> I shot a few from the diagonal, but wasn't pleased with all the "stuff"
> stacked around in the front and started to leave a little disappointed.
> As I made a "U" in the lot, I realized I was being watched. I lowered the
> window and took a couple just before he moved from the opening in the
> shed.
> 
> Jack
> 
> Comments always welcome
> 
> http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=389
> 
> K10, DA16~45
> 
-- 


-- 
http://www.fastmail.fm - mmm... Fastmail...


--
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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was: PESO: Church tower))

[Christian]

The act of taking the photograph is an act of manipulation and is 
therefore always "dishonest"


YOU CHOOSE what to include in every photograph you take and what to 
exclude.  YOU CHOOSE the angle it is shot from.  YOU CHOOSE the subject 
matter, etc etc etc.


All these CHOICES are "manipulating" the photograph and telling the 
story that YOU want to tell.


Whether you do it by composition, in photoshop, or in the darkroom, 
EVERY photograph is "dishonest."



--

Christian
http://404mohawknotfound.blogspot.com/

Nick Wright wrote:

Yes, it is. But somewhere along the line I came to view one as
"honest" and the other as "dishonest."

Not that it's that simple though. Because I think that a "straight"
photo can be dishonest as well.

Which is something that I've also been thinking about in regards to my
original photo. I like my shot quite a bit, but I cycled past that
church again the other day and I realized that it is not an honest
photo.

The reason I believe that is because in the photo the tower appears to
be much taller than the rest of the building, when in reality the roof
line to the right of the tower in the photo is higher.

I didn't think about it when I shot it, and then I didn't think about
it when I got the negs back.

So what do you all think about that?

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Bruce Dayton  wrote:

Isn't just changing the lens or the angle that you take the shot,
changing the perspective?  It would seem that if altering the photo
after the shot bothers you, then altering the photo before the shot
should to.  Just different methods of accomplishing the same basic
thing.

--
Best regards,
Bruce


Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 5:06:20 AM, you wrote:

NW> Thanks to all the folks who took time to comment on this last PESO of
NW> mine. I do appreciate the critiques.

NW> One item I'd like to touch on is the concept of software perspective
NW> control. I'd been thinking about this recently before I'd posted my
NW> PESO and then Brian brought it up in his critique of my image.

NW> I'm just amazed at how fast technology changes. The last time I was an
NW> active member of this list (granted that was 8 years ago) the only way
NW> to achieve perspective control was with a view camera or shift lens.
NW> Now you can get something of the same effect using photoshop.

NW> I don't currently have any software with the ability to "correct"
NW> perspective, but an older laptop of mine had Elements 2 which did. I
NW> played around with it a bit but never could really get my heart into
NW> it.

NW> I think it mainly has to do with all those years at the newspaper. Any
NW> alteration of a photograph like that just makes me cringe.

NW> I'm curious to hear more of you all's opinions on the process?

NW> On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Brian Walters  
wrote:

Nice composition but the tower gets a  bit lost in the background sky.

Also, I'd try a bit of perspective correction to make the verticals
vertical and the horizontals, er...horizontal.  It may not be an
improvement but worth investigating.


Cheers

Brian

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



On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 07:52 -0500, "Nick Wright"
 wrote:

Here's another PESO:
http://pedalingprose.wordpress.com/2009/03/08/church-tower-2/

Comment welcome and appreciated.

--
~Nick David Wright
http://pedalingprose.wordpress.com/


--


--
http://www.fastmail.fm - The way an email service should be


--
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: Just call me "Speck"

[Bob W]

> Went Googling for references to the PDML book and came across 
> this one:
> http://www.picstips.com/pentax/the-pdml-pentax-photo-book-came
> ra-price-reductions-and-pma-rumors.html
> 
> Looks as if it's been through a couple of computer translators, from 
> English to something else and back, to wonderful effect :)
> 

Just call me sad, but I love trying to figure out how they've arrived at
some of the translations. Cafe Press, for example, comes out as Cafe Implore
as well as Cafe Entreat. Cafe Entreat would be quite a good name for a place
where you treat yourself and others, whereas the proprietor of Cafe Implore
sounds rather too desperate for our custom. But why has it chosen two such
similar translations for a word which has so many possibilities? Just my
small dictionary has 14 different meanings for 'press' as a verb, without
even taking phrasal verbs into account. I can understand it choosing say
Cafe Implore once, but if it's going to choose a different word the second
time, why not Cafe Squeeze or Cafe Iron, Cafe Newspapers or maybe Cafe Push?

It demonstrates how much we use context to determine meaning. Most people
don't realise how good we humans are at language, what a miracle it is.

Bob


--
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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was: PESO: Church tower))

[Brian Walters]

G'day Nick

Back in August last year I asked a simple question "When is a little
Photoshoppery too much Photoshoppery?".  This produced a flood of
responses which pretty much covered the whole gamut of opinions on the
'honesty/dishonesty' question.

You might find it interesting to  read through that thread in the
archives.

http://pdml.net/pipermail/pdml_pdml.net/2008-August/thread.html



Cheers

Brian

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


On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 16:51 -0500, "Nick Wright"
 wrote:
> Yes, it is. But somewhere along the line I came to view one as
> "honest" and the other as "dishonest."
> 
> Not that it's that simple though. Because I think that a "straight"
> photo can be dishonest as well.
> 
> Which is something that I've also been thinking about in regards to my
> original photo. I like my shot quite a bit, but I cycled past that
> church again the other day and I realized that it is not an honest
> photo.
> 
> The reason I believe that is because in the photo the tower appears to
> be much taller than the rest of the building, when in reality the roof
> line to the right of the tower in the photo is higher.
> 
> I didn't think about it when I shot it, and then I didn't think about
> it when I got the negs back.
> 
> So what do you all think about that?
> 
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Bruce Dayton 
> wrote:
> > Isn't just changing the lens or the angle that you take the shot,
> > changing the perspective?  It would seem that if altering the photo
> > after the shot bothers you, then altering the photo before the shot
> > should to.  Just different methods of accomplishing the same basic
> > thing.
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Bruce
> >
> >
> > Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 5:06:20 AM, you wrote:
> >
> > NW> Thanks to all the folks who took time to comment on this last PESO of
> > NW> mine. I do appreciate the critiques.
> >
> > NW> One item I'd like to touch on is the concept of software perspective
> > NW> control. I'd been thinking about this recently before I'd posted my
> > NW> PESO and then Brian brought it up in his critique of my image.
> >
> > NW> I'm just amazed at how fast technology changes. The last time I was an
> > NW> active member of this list (granted that was 8 years ago) the only way
> > NW> to achieve perspective control was with a view camera or shift lens.
> > NW> Now you can get something of the same effect using photoshop.
> >
> > NW> I don't currently have any software with the ability to "correct"
> > NW> perspective, but an older laptop of mine had Elements 2 which did. I
> > NW> played around with it a bit but never could really get my heart into
> > NW> it.
> >
> > NW> I think it mainly has to do with all those years at the newspaper. Any
> > NW> alteration of a photograph like that just makes me cringe.
> >
> > NW> I'm curious to hear more of you all's opinions on the process?
> >
> > NW> On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Brian Walters  
> > wrote:
> >>> Nice composition but the tower gets a  bit lost in the background sky.
> >>>
> >>> Also, I'd try a bit of perspective correction to make the verticals
> >>> vertical and the horizontals, er...horizontal.  It may not be an
> >>> improvement but worth investigating.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Cheers
> >>>
> >>> Brian
> >>>
> >>> ++
> >>> Brian Walters
> >>> Western Sydney Australia
> >>> http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 07:52 -0500, "Nick Wright"
> >>>  wrote:
>  Here's another PESO:
>  http://pedalingprose.wordpress.com/2009/03/08/church-tower-2/
> 
>  Comment welcome and appreciated.
> 
>  --
>  ~Nick David Wright
>  http://pedalingprose.wordpress.com/
> 
> >>> --
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> http://www.fastmail.fm - The way an email service should be
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> 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.
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> ~Nick David Wright
> http://www.nickdavidwright.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.
-- 


-- 
http://www.fastmail.fm - Access your email from home and the web


--
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: Happy Sheep

[Brian Walters]

On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 10:16 -0700, "Jack Davis" 
wrote:
> 
> This is a bit of a play on TV's incessant "Happy Cows" commercials which
> have a similar look about them. Also, a little something for the
> Australian friends among us. ;)
> Taken this AM.
> 
> Jack
> 
> http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=388
> 


Great landscape.  The light and shadows on those centre hills is
beautiful.

Could be anywhere in the central west of New South Wales :-)>

BTW, while Australia has lots of sheep, per head of population 'Recent'
Zealand is the Baa Baa capital.



Cheers

Brian

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



-- 


-- 
http://www.fastmail.fm - Send your email first class


--
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: Just call me "Speck"

[Bruce Dayton]

Hey Speck!   There, I've done it.

-- 
Bruce


Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 7:26:30 AM, you wrote:

MR> Went Googling for references to the PDML book and came across this one:
MR> 
http://www.picstips.com/pentax/the-pdml-pentax-photo-book-camera-price-reductions-and-pma-rumors.html

MR> Looks as if it's been through a couple of computer translators, from 
MR> English to something else and back, to wonderful effect :)


MR> --
MR> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
MR> PDML@pdml.net
MR> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
MR> 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: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was: PESO: Church tower))

[Bruce Dayton]

Your 'honest' comment struck a chord.  It has been interesting to
watch several people I know transition from film to digital.  When on
film they did not do their own darkroom work so relied on a lab.  As
they first moved to digital, they felt that any manipulation was
'bad' and 'dishonest'.  Then they learned that the image captured was
not shown to it's best potential and by minor tweaking (contrast,
saturation, etc) they were able to get a better image.  This is quite
similar to picking a film to best deal with a situation you are going
to photograph.  Then even further, they have learned to do more post
processing to get the image they are really after.

I think what happens is while shooting film, for these people, the
act of shooting was the major portion of their involvement.  Now with
the ability to post process reasonably, there is more to finishing an
image than simply taking the picture.  The taking of the picture is
only one step in several to produce the image that they have in mind.

-- 
Best regards,
Bruce


Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 2:51:36 PM, you wrote:

NW> Yes, it is. But somewhere along the line I came to view one as
NW> "honest" and the other as "dishonest."

NW> Not that it's that simple though. Because I think that a "straight"
NW> photo can be dishonest as well.

NW> Which is something that I've also been thinking about in regards to my
NW> original photo. I like my shot quite a bit, but I cycled past that
NW> church again the other day and I realized that it is not an honest
NW> photo.

NW> The reason I believe that is because in the photo the tower appears to
NW> be much taller than the rest of the building, when in reality the roof
NW> line to the right of the tower in the photo is higher.

NW> I didn't think about it when I shot it, and then I didn't think about
NW> it when I got the negs back.

NW> So what do you all think about that?

NW> On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Bruce Dayton
NW>  wrote:
>> Isn't just changing the lens or the angle that you take the shot,
>> changing the perspective?  It would seem that if altering the photo
>> after the shot bothers you, then altering the photo before the shot
>> should to.  Just different methods of accomplishing the same basic
>> thing.
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Bruce
>>
>>
>> Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 5:06:20 AM, you wrote:
>>
>> NW> Thanks to all the folks who took time to comment on this last PESO of
>> NW> mine. I do appreciate the critiques.
>>
>> NW> One item I'd like to touch on is the concept of software perspective
>> NW> control. I'd been thinking about this recently before I'd posted my
>> NW> PESO and then Brian brought it up in his critique of my image.
>>
>> NW> I'm just amazed at how fast technology changes. The last time I was an
>> NW> active member of this list (granted that was 8 years ago) the only way
>> NW> to achieve perspective control was with a view camera or shift lens.
>> NW> Now you can get something of the same effect using photoshop.
>>
>> NW> I don't currently have any software with the ability to "correct"
>> NW> perspective, but an older laptop of mine had Elements 2 which did. I
>> NW> played around with it a bit but never could really get my heart into
>> NW> it.
>>
>> NW> I think it mainly has to do with all those years at the newspaper. Any
>> NW> alteration of a photograph like that just makes me cringe.
>>
>> NW> I'm curious to hear more of you all's opinions on the process?
>>
>> NW> On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Brian Walters  
>> wrote:
 Nice composition but the tower gets a  bit lost in the background sky.

 Also, I'd try a bit of perspective correction to make the verticals
 vertical and the horizontals, er...horizontal.  It may not be an
 improvement but worth investigating.


 Cheers

 Brian

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



 On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 07:52 -0500, "Nick Wright"
  wrote:
> Here's another PESO:
> http://pedalingprose.wordpress.com/2009/03/08/church-tower-2/
>
> Comment welcome and appreciated.
>
> --
> ~Nick David Wright
> http://pedalingprose.wordpress.com/
>
 --


 --
 http://www.fastmail.fm - The way an email service should be


 --
 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

Re: Happy Sheep

[John Francis]

Not from those ones, no.

Mind you, they might enjoy it if you tried ...


On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 04:09:24PM -0400, Ken Waller wrote:
> Got Milk ?
>
> Nice capture also !
>
> Kenneth Waller
> http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
>
> - Original Message - From: 
>
> Subject: Re: Happy Sheep
>
>
>> In a message dated 3/10/2009 10:16:59 A.M.  Pacific Daylight Time,
>> jdavi...@yahoo.com writes:
>> This is a bit of a play on  TV's incessant "Happy Cows" commercials which
>> have a similar look about them.  Also, a little something for the  
>> Australian
>> friends among us. ;)
>> Taken this  AM.
>>
>> Jack
>>
>> http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=388
>>
>> K10,  DA16~45
>>
>> =
>> Nice, Jack. Pretty, green.
>>
>> I'll see your  sheep and raise you some  cows.
>>
>> http://www.mapphotography.com/PAWS/pages/cows.htm
>>
>> Taken in  Scott Valley, my favorite place in the world. (So I think they
>> actually are  pretty happy.)
>>
>> I've seen milk cows in the Central Valley that are not  happy at all.  
>> (Living
>> in very muddy, small plots of land.)
>>
>> Marnie aka Doe
>
>
> --
> 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: Just call me "Speck"

[John Francis]

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:26:30AM -0400, Mark Roberts wrote:
> Went Googling for references to the PDML book and came across this one:
> http://www.picstips.com/pentax/the-pdml-pentax-photo-book-camera-price-reductions-and-pma-rumors.html
>
> Looks as if it's been through a couple of computer translators, from  
> English to something else and back, to wonderful effect :)
>

... the PDML lot are donating their spoils to the Schooldays Tumour Base


All your base are belong to us?



--
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.

Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control (was: PESO: Church tower))

[Nick Wright]

Yes, it is. But somewhere along the line I came to view one as
"honest" and the other as "dishonest."

Not that it's that simple though. Because I think that a "straight"
photo can be dishonest as well.

Which is something that I've also been thinking about in regards to my
original photo. I like my shot quite a bit, but I cycled past that
church again the other day and I realized that it is not an honest
photo.

The reason I believe that is because in the photo the tower appears to
be much taller than the rest of the building, when in reality the roof
line to the right of the tower in the photo is higher.

I didn't think about it when I shot it, and then I didn't think about
it when I got the negs back.

So what do you all think about that?

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Bruce Dayton  wrote:
> Isn't just changing the lens or the angle that you take the shot,
> changing the perspective?  It would seem that if altering the photo
> after the shot bothers you, then altering the photo before the shot
> should to.  Just different methods of accomplishing the same basic
> thing.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Bruce
>
>
> Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 5:06:20 AM, you wrote:
>
> NW> Thanks to all the folks who took time to comment on this last PESO of
> NW> mine. I do appreciate the critiques.
>
> NW> One item I'd like to touch on is the concept of software perspective
> NW> control. I'd been thinking about this recently before I'd posted my
> NW> PESO and then Brian brought it up in his critique of my image.
>
> NW> I'm just amazed at how fast technology changes. The last time I was an
> NW> active member of this list (granted that was 8 years ago) the only way
> NW> to achieve perspective control was with a view camera or shift lens.
> NW> Now you can get something of the same effect using photoshop.
>
> NW> I don't currently have any software with the ability to "correct"
> NW> perspective, but an older laptop of mine had Elements 2 which did. I
> NW> played around with it a bit but never could really get my heart into
> NW> it.
>
> NW> I think it mainly has to do with all those years at the newspaper. Any
> NW> alteration of a photograph like that just makes me cringe.
>
> NW> I'm curious to hear more of you all's opinions on the process?
>
> NW> On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Brian Walters  
> wrote:
>>> Nice composition but the tower gets a  bit lost in the background sky.
>>>
>>> Also, I'd try a bit of perspective correction to make the verticals
>>> vertical and the horizontals, er...horizontal.  It may not be an
>>> improvement but worth investigating.
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Brian
>>>
>>> ++
>>> Brian Walters
>>> Western Sydney Australia
>>> http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 07:52 -0500, "Nick Wright"
>>>  wrote:
 Here's another PESO:
 http://pedalingprose.wordpress.com/2009/03/08/church-tower-2/

 Comment welcome and appreciated.

 --
 ~Nick David Wright
 http://pedalingprose.wordpress.com/

>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> http://www.fastmail.fm - The way an email service should be
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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.
>



-- 
~Nick David Wright
http://www.nickdavidwright.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 - Dying for a Puff

[frank theriault]

On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 1:06 AM, ann sanfedele  wrote:


> Frank, you may be safe after all

Scott doesn't scare me...

cheers,
frank



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

--
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: Book - Looking in Robert Frank's the Americans

[ann sanfedele]

Fernando wrote:


Actually Ann, that's useful information, because now I know that if I
get this book, it has to be the latest edition ;-)

Every now and then I say or do something useful - doesn't happen often, 
but glad it did this time :-)


ann



Fernando - who has already exceeded his photo book budget for the year

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 11:33 AM, ann sanfedele  wrote:
 


I have the 1986 printing no contact sheets in the back... a straight
reprint of the original with the Keourac intro...
no contact sheets in the back...  though I remember one of the photo mags
doing a series on contact sheets and
what was selected , back in the 80's...

Thanks for bringing it up--- I'm enjoying revisiting my copy...

ann


Bob W wrote:

   


If you have the chance take a look at this book at your local
bookstore, in the last chapter it includes contact sheets of Frank's
photos with his picks, you can also in which case he took more than
one photo, and which one got picked, and some crops (e.g. I didn't
know that this photo was originally shot in landscape orientation:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3013/2708910256_5239f73252_o.jpg ). I
found the whole exercise highly educational.

http://www.amazon.ca/Looking-Robert-Americans-Sarah-Greenough/
dp/3865218067/ref=pd_sim_b?ie=UTF8&qid=1236649263&sr=8-1


   


Thanks for pointing that out, and thanks to Amazon for 1-Click ordering!

Bob


--
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: OT PESOs: Two more snaps from last night

[frank theriault]

On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 5:59 PM, Derby Chang  wrote:
>
> http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc/09/09_03/09_03_rose/01.htm
> http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc/09/09_03/09_03_eleven/01.htm
>
> Torontons(sp?) have Canadian Music Week next week, and my friend Loene
> (being kissed in the first pic) will be there. Highly recommended
> http://www.canadianmusicfest.com/artists.asp?artistletter=L

I like 'em both, but especially the second (B&W) one.

CMW is pretty cool, but kind of pricey (for paupers like me anyway).
Long line ups, not getting into the shows you want and if you get into
see your faves, you get like an hour (one set) of music.  Then you
might as well listen to a bunch of performers you may not be
interested in, because trying to get to another venue to see another
act you're interested in may only lead to another line up and standing
in the cold (without ever getting in) for a couple of hours.

I'm more of a "see a favourite band at a regular concert and spend the
whole evening with them" type.

cheers,
frank


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

--
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: ...and so to blog

[Bob W]

> 
> > True, but they had office drudges:
> >
> > "Friday 2 March 1665/66
> > Up, as I have of late resolved before 7 in the morning and 
> to the office,
> > where all the morning, among other things setting my wife 
> and Mercer with
> > much pleasure to worke upon the ruling of some paper for 
> the making of books
> > for pursers, which will require a great deale of worke and 
> they will earn a
> > good deale of money by it, the hopes of which makes them 
> worke mighty hard."
> 
> Does he use Dave Brooks' spellchecker?
> 
> cheers,
> frank
> 

He misunderstood the term email.

Bob


--
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: Happy Sheep

[Jack Davis]

Suggest you "steer" her straight there son.

J


--- On Tue, 3/10/09, Bob W  wrote:

> From: Bob W 
> Subject: RE: Happy Sheep
> To: "'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'" 
> Date: Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 1:16 PM
> > 
> > I'll see your  sheep and raise you some  cows.
> > 
> > http://www.mapphotography.com/PAWS/pages/cows.htm
> > 
> > Taken in  Scott Valley, my favorite place in the
> world. (So I 
> > think they 
> > actually are  pretty happy.)
> > 
> > I've seen milk cows in the Central Valley that are
> not  happy 
> > at all. (Living 
> > in very muddy, small plots of land.)
> > 
> > Marnie aka Doe  
> > 
> 
> I ain't no country boy, but I don't think yer
> lookin' at cows there, Ma'am.
> 
> Bobby Joe
> 
> 
> --
> 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: OT: ...and so to blog

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "frank theriault"

Subject: Re: OT: ...and so to blog



On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 7:06 PM, Bob W  wrote:


True, but they had office drudges:

"Friday 2 March 1665/66
Up, as I have of late resolved before 7 in the morning and to the office,
where all the morning, among other things setting my wife and Mercer with
much pleasure to worke upon the ruling of some paper for the making of 
books
for pursers, which will require a great deale of worke and they will earn 
a
good deale of money by it, the hopes of which makes them worke mighty 
hard."


Does he use Dave Brooks' spellchecker?


I always assumed that Dave's writing was fluent Middle English

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: Happy Sheep

[Jack Davis]

Welshmen won't even pop for dinner first?

J


--- On Tue, 3/10/09, Bob W  wrote:

> From: Bob W 
> Subject: RE: Happy Sheep
> To: "'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'" 
> Date: Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 1:12 PM
> I've never seen better Buttes - utter beauts. 
> 
> The sheep are only happy because there are no Welshmen in
> the vicinity.
> 
> Bob
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net
> [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On 
> > Behalf Of Jack Davis
> > Sent: 10 March 2009 18:51
> > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> > Subject: Re: Happy Sheep
> > 
> > 
> > "Background" hills are the Sutter Buttes.
> Located in Sutter 
> > Co., CA, they are considered "The Worlds Smallest
> Mountain 
> > Range." Years ago, when I asked what defines a
> mountain 
> > range, the immediate local answer was, "their
> size is 
> > sufficient enough to generate their own weather".
> True or 
> > not, they certainly do that.
> > 
> > Jack
> > 
> > 
> > --- On Tue, 3/10/09, Toine
>  wrote:
> > 
> > > From: Toine 
> > > Subject: Re: Happy Sheep
> > > To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
> 
> > > Date: Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 11:11 AM
> > > Great capture. The hills in the foreground look
> very
> > > strange, what
> > > exactly do I see?
> > > 
> > > Toine
> > > 
> > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 6:16 PM, Jack Davis
> > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This is a bit of a play on TV's
> incessant
> > > "Happy Cows" commercials which have a
> similar look
> > > about them. Also, a little something for the
> Australian
> > > friends among us. ;)
> > > > Taken this AM.
> > > >
> > > > Jack
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=388
> > > >
> > > > K10, DA16~45
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > 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.
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> --
> 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: Happy Sheep

[Jack Davis]

Yuba "City" slicker? Rim shot!!!
Take a bow Marnie.

Jack (soundly beaten)


--- On Tue, 3/10/09, eactiv...@aol.com  wrote:

> From: eactiv...@aol.com 
> Subject: Re: Happy Sheep
> To: pdml@pdml.net
> Date: Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 1:09 PM
> In a message dated 3/10/2009 12:38:31 P.M.  Pacific Daylight
> Time, 
> jdavi...@yahoo.com writes:
> Okay, I call. ;)
> Cute  little critters when young. BTW, what's the story
> on that l o n g tail 
> on that  black one out there in the middle?
> 
> Jack
> 
> =
> You  win.
> 
> I thought of another response. 
> 
> WHAT? You've never seen a  long tailed cow before?!?
> Boy, are you a city 
> slicker.
> 
> Marnie aka Doe  ;-)
> 
> -
> Warning: I am now  filtering my email, so you may be
> censored.  
> 
> **Worried about job security? Check out the 5
> safest jobs in a 
> recession. 
> (http://jobs.aol.com/gallery/growing-job-industries?ncid=emlcntuscare0002)
> 
> --
> 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: Ad-Hoc PDML London meet

[Bob W]

I'll give you a call tomorrow if I can make it - it depends on what time I
can escape from Alcatraz and how knackered I feel

Bob

> 
> I have to be up in London on Wednesday night (tomorrow) for early
> business Thursday morning. Staying in Covent Garden so if anyone is
> around and wants to meet up maybe by the river for a drink 
> and chinwag,
> let me know.
> 
> 07836 694831
> 
> --
> 
> 
> Cheers,
>   Cotty


--
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: ...and so to blog

[frank theriault]

On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 7:06 PM, Bob W  wrote:

> True, but they had office drudges:
>
> "Friday 2 March 1665/66
> Up, as I have of late resolved before 7 in the morning and to the office,
> where all the morning, among other things setting my wife and Mercer with
> much pleasure to worke upon the ruling of some paper for the making of books
> for pursers, which will require a great deale of worke and they will earn a
> good deale of money by it, the hopes of which makes them worke mighty hard."

Does he use Dave Brooks' spellchecker?

cheers,
frank

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

--
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: Happy Sheep

[Jack Davis]

I was wishing there had been some "artistic clouds" and in their absence, I 
cropped quit a bit off the sky and a slight bit of the foreground.
I looked at reducing the amount of sky, but doing so gives me a claustrophobic 
feeling even though I don't actually suffer from it.

Thanks for comments and suggestion, Ken.

Jack


--- On Tue, 3/10/09, Ken Waller  wrote:

> From: Ken Waller 
> Subject: Re: Happy Sheep
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
> Date: Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 1:05 PM
> Very nice Jack.
> 
> If this were mine I'd try to minimize/omit as much of
> the sky as possible since it doesn't add anything IMO
> (it needs clouds to be included).
> 
> A rectangular crop from the bottom edge to just above the
> top of the highest ridge, to minimize the blank sky is a
> definite improvement, again, IMO.
> 
> Kenneth Waller
> http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
> 
> - Original Message - From: "Jack Davis"
> 
> Subject: Happy Sheep
> 
> 
> > 
> > This is a bit of a play on TV's incessant
> "Happy Cows" commercials which have a similar look
> about them. Also, a little something for the Australian
> friends among us. ;)
> > Taken this AM.
> > 
> > Jack
> > 
> >
> http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=388
> > 
> > K10, DA16~45
> 
> 
> --
> 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: Perspective control (was: PESO: Church tower)

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Bruce Dayton" 
Subject: Re: Perspective control (was: PESO: Church tower)



Isn't just changing the lens or the angle that you take the shot,
changing the perspective?  It would seem that if altering the photo
after the shot bothers you, then altering the photo before the shot
should to.  Just different methods of accomplishing the same basic
thing.


It's one of those Foundview things that is no longer relevant.

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: Experiments With Faith

[Bruce Dayton]

Welcome to the list.  I found your gallery fascinating to look
through.  The comments helped as well.  I look forward to you sharing
more.

-- 
Best regards,
Bruce


Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 7:51:56 AM, you wrote:

BM> Greetings,

BM> I joined a couple of days ago and I must say it is a relief to find so
BM> many "Pentax People". I am tired of explaining to people that there  
BM> are many more camera manufacturers than just Nikon and Canon!

BM> And without further ado, here's my first attempt at sharing a gallery.

BM> http://picasaweb.google.com/itinerant.observer/ExperimentsWithFaith

BM> I shot this in Varanasi and Omkareshwar - these are two of the most  
BM> holiest places in Hinduism and both have major temples dedicated to  
BM> the God Shiva. I am not the least bit religious, but was curious to  
BM> find out why so many millions (and often extremely poor) travel  
BM> thousands of miles to see these places. Pictures were shot over 7  
BM> days, enduring atrocious North Indian weather, one mugging and a half
BM> broken camera!

BM> -- Bharath

BM> --
BM> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
BM> PDML@pdml.net
BM> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
BM> 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.