Re: So What's So Great About HCB?
SB> And one guy from Magnum, expressing a personal opinion, now gives rise to a SB> generalization of the man's character? Most people, especially successful SB> and creative people, have detractors. To bring such a comment into a SB> conversation such as this - a conversation about a man's work and SB> creativity - tells more about you than HCB. Speak of what you know, of your SB> experiences, rather than spread tales told by unnamed characters. Shel, in case you didn't notice, there was a big smiley at the place where I wrote about old fart. Perhaps you should take email lists more lightly, as different people have different kinds of humour. That's what the smileys are for. If you really think I was generalizing about HCB, well, I can't help your opinion. Read my post again. Anybody falling for that tale about HCB and drawing 100% conclusion about HCB from it would be IMNSHO stupid. It's clear that it's a light comment used to "pepper" the discussion about an Icon. What was the my post about, in case you didn't notice, is how the religiosity around HCB is detrimental to perception of his work. Perhaps you would like to discuss this, what I wrote about? Frantisek
Re: So What's So Great About HCB?
g> Think about something here. HCB used a Leica. A Leica RF. A Leica RF's frame g> lines do not perfectly define the negative borders. There is no way he could g> frame his photos that precisely. But claiming that he did made him famous. There Hi Tom, great that somebody finally wrote this argument. It's very true. g> You know what? I just realized all this stuff, while photographic, is really g> about religion. Oops! Sad thing. It's more about him than his photographs. Everybody knows HCB and every aspiring "street shooter" (what usually amounts to stupid guys shooting completely mundane and boring street scenes) swears by his name, but few actually know his photography that well. The idiots who worship him diminish his photographic excellency, as they make him not into a photographer but into an icon. An icon so famous that in a little bit of time, everybody will know HCB but nobody will know his photographs. Just like your average person knows e.g. Dostoevski but has never read anything by him. To break this a bit, I have it personally from one Magnum guy I met on one assignent that HCB is (now was) a really annoying old fart ;) I admire lot of his photographs, but I hate the religious stuff around him. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Oh the gloom of it all
DS> Sorry to contradict a well known CEO but, DS> eyes, ears, hands, legs, reflexes, etc will remain hopelessly analog. ;-) DS> Thank ! Excuse the pun, but at least the fingers are digital ;-) As another obscure book reference, this time to D.Adams (H2G2). There the humans drive a computer almost crazy by counting... As long as we have our fingers, we can win over computers everytime ;-) Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: portable MP3/OGG recorder
Hi Rob, thanks! I literarly got drowned in all the thousands of pages dealign with MP3 players/recordes but very few outlining clearly the important features like in/out jacks. That Nex does seem interesting, especially as I do not need to pay stupid $ for included memory chips (which are overpriced by the time the device makes it to market, while CF cards are always falling in price/increasing in capacity). Adding a small powered microphone to it, and it meets most of my needs. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Storing film
Tuesday, August 3, 2004, 3:40:19 PM, Kostas wrote: KK> Hi folks, KK> I have repeatedly read here that it's best advised refrigerating or KK> freezing film. My probably silly question is if there is an issue KK> taking film out of the fridge or freezer for 2-3 days and then putting KK> it back in. To remove a parameter, assume that the film is well inside KK> (before) its use-by date. Well, if you didn't remove that parameter ;-), I would tell you I always heard it's not a good idea to defreeze the film and freeze it again. Best to use it up quickly after defreeze. But with still-fresh freezed film, I dunno. Fra
Re: I got published!
Good, Wendy! As a sidenote, be sure about the rights you give them. Some major magazines and newspapers are downright ugly what they want from poor freelancers, like all-the-rights-for-next-1000-years (NYT, etc). Fra
Re: cliches (was Re: UV filters on sexy lenses)
DC> zooms v primes DC> AF v MF DC> autoexposure v what it says on the inside of the kodak box DC> plastic v metal DC> diffusion v condenser enlargers (or fibre v RC, or glass v glassless DC> carriers, and other cutting edge technologies) DC> which local pentax distributor is crappeir But what would be left of the PDML then? Only thing left on the list would be cat and flower pictures ;-) (grin, duck & run) And I wouldn't have an opportunity to write an eloquent messages, boosting my ego with shooting down any Filter/NotFilter dicussions ;-) Fra
Re: UV filters on sexy lenses
DC> Apologies Frantisek, No, do not apologise :) My post was so long anyway that it surpassed the entire filter discussion in length, it was partly a joke (although the arguments stand). DC> I'm the cause of this. But the original thread came about because I'm DC> too vain to have a black mount filter on the 43mm LTD and I know I'm too I have an old chrome Summicron 50, which I have only a black filter for (plus a black metal hood). It sure looks interesting on a black Leica... But I would prefer an all black version as well (or all chrome). I think it was actually nicer with a silver filter (but the filter isn't seen much because the hood covers it almost all the time). As somebody said, it could be possible to strip the chrome and have the filter anodised black (or painted black, if it's brass) ;-) Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
OT: portable MP3/OGG recorder
Sorry for the OT but after many hours of searching with google and others, I couldn't find _any_ relevant info. All the results were stupid sites like CNET with overbloated design and ~1:10 signal to noise ratio... It's certainly harder to find good information on the internet now that it's full of marketing! Back to off-topic: I am looking for advice on a portable voice recorder, which uses preferably CF cards (I would think about models with 2.5" HDD but I do prefer CF), has MP3/other (anybody supports OGG/VORBIS yet?) format recording, has MICROPHONE/LINE-IN jack (sic! I need no stupid integrated mics), and a LINE-OUT jack would be nice (but not 100% needed). What it's for? Listening to music, and much importantly, making 1) voice notes on my photographs during an assignment 2) recording interviews. That's why I would prefer a model with possibility of external microphone. At one of my sometime clients (local BBC branch), I saw some very nice MP3 solid-state recording equipment, but I really do not need a deivice the size of a VHS casette, albeit it does have CANNON jacks and excellent audio electronics inside (not mentioning it costs around 1000-2000$)... So far I found Diva MP3, but it does have only built-in microphone. Thanks for any help! Good light, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Pentax Sighting
Small teaser for otherwise probably a horrible movie, when Pink Panther remake goes into cinemas (next year?), there might be a small scene with Pentax camera there. Just pure coincidence, as it was what one of the "crowd scene photographers" - who they chose for a detail shot - was using. I was one of the hired photographers to act as photographers, an interesting experience for a freelance photog like me ;-) Even though the original Pink Panther was not much good movie (IMO), it was one with Peter Sellers, who excelled in such like "Dr. Strangelove", or "Being there". I wouldn't like to see the remake. fra (don't mix me up with Frank, I am Frantisek - it's easy to differentiate, my posts aren't anywhere near as funny as Frank's )
Re: UV filters on sexy lenses
Graywolf wrote: g> Second, the FAQ only mentioned things that have achieved consensus g> opinion on the list. Not the Con***sus word again ;-) g> Third, you would miss out on writing a long e-mail stating g> your opinion on the matter for the umpteenth time. My post was somewhat tongue-in-cheek. It was a "filler" itself ;-) Good for spotting it. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Pentax Mirror Zoom
Monday, August 2, 2004, 6:47:02 PM, Peter wrote: PJA> I have one, it's not bad. I seldom use it and from my experience it's PJA> not very practical at 600mm but you can PJA> use it at that focal length in a pinch. IIRC, it has variable aperture f/8 to f/12 as you zoom. f/12 is really slow for a 600mm lens. Probably only usable for photographing nuclear blast tests ;-) (ok, it might be interesting for a landscape photographer for distant views like mountains where you might need zooming for tight compositions - the slow aperture will not be a problem there, and the lens might be small and light enough for a hiking bag) fra
Re: OT - File loss & recovery
Hi Anthony, would you please care to provide an URL? There is so many things containing the word "restoration" making it hard to find. TNX Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Tamron SP 70-210mm macro or Pentax 100/4 Macro ? (was RE: 100/4 Macro?)
Thursday, July 29, 2004, 7:30:04 PM, Thibouille wrote: T> Alright, thanks. It is indeed a very good zoom. But focussing is a bit T> difficult with this one, I mean, you really need time because the ramp is T> long, very long. That's why I use it mainly for macro... 't was nothing :) I didn't help you much. Strangely, I did like the long throw focusing, it was easy to focus accurately. I agree quicker would be nicer in some situations. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 200/2.8
KK> Many thanks for the very detailed answer. Can you elaborate on the KK> passage above a bit, please: what do you mean "covers much larger KK> image circle"? Are you using a Pentacon 6 lens? I was think M42 KK> implementations. Lenses have an circle of acceptable* coverage, that is inherent in the lens design, and doesn't change with focal length. (*: acceptable means that the image is still usable, while the lens might still show more of the world outside this circle, it will be too much blurred or darker to be usable). For example, the 2.8/180mm Sonnar design has an angle of coverage of about 30 degrees. When scaled to 50mm lens, it will still cover just 30 degrees, the same when scaled to 300mm lens. The 1.5/50mm Sonnar is somewhat different design, made to cover ~50 degrees, thus making it a normal lens. 30 degrees with 180mm lens means that the 6x7cm film area still fits in the circle produced by the lens (if not obstructed by internal baffle or the lens barrel). The Olympia Sonnar, the 2.8/180mm was originally produced for Contax rangefinder camera (which could still focus a 2.8/180mm lens at longer distances like sports somewhat accurately!), but it was made so it covers even medium format film with ease. The second version (black, with large protruding tripod foot, pre-set aperture) actually had unscrewing rear mount which you could exchange for many other mounts. The third version, sold as 6x6cm lens for Pentacon 6, is still optically the very same, just in a barrel for P6. Longfocus lenses (whose physical length is the same as their focal length) often do have much larger coverage then the telephoto type lenses of same focal length (telephoto types have much shorter physical length then their focal length, extreme example is the mirror lens, which is 500mm focal length but much much shorter physically). Some longfocus lenses for 35mm film were often adapted for larger formats. However, the 2.8/200mm CZJ lens, is made specifically for 35mm film, and has (supposedly) less coverage. Anyway, one would have to change the barrel to avoid vignetting on larger format. >> If you are interested, I can send you a file from my 6MP DSLR shot >> with the 2.8/180 Sonnar. KK> Yes please :-) I will try to find a good one, at low ISO. Focusing that lens on APS dslr is a little hard (the Nikon has pretty bad viewfinder). Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 200/2.8
You will be loosing automatic aperture, which can be a pain or not. It
was for me, but then, I shot them mostly wide open. I would advise the
same, as it's a PITA to close the lenses manually before shooting (at
least the 180 has a pre-set aperture, which works better than the 200)
180 is great lens, but due its age, it can have lower contrast (it
also needs a really big lenshood), until f/4.5-5.6. Details are still
very well rendered, but the maximum black rendered is lighter. Depends
on light and lenshood a bit, and stopping down helps. It's big and
heavy. This lens is great even on Pentax 67, without any problems. It
does have a very nice and pleasing character, making me use it time to
time on a DSLR even if I have a good 80-200/2.8 zoom. Do get the MC
version, though. It's a Sonnar design, derived from Tessar, something
that can still hold its own pretty well (Leitz Elmarit 2.8/50, as well
as Voigtlander Cosina 3.5/50 Heliar, all counted among the best lenses
ever, are derived from Tessar designs)
200 is said to be even better, it is an gaussian design, Biotar in
fact. That is, it bears similarities to Planars of Western Zeiss. It's
supposed to be very good as well, but I never tried the lens myself
with film in camera.
Both of the lenses are true longfocus lenses, not telephotos. That
means that they are actually _faster_ at closest focus than a
telephoto of the same 2.8 aperture. The 180 also has some of the
nicest character I have seen. The fact that it covers much larger
image circle means there is little vignetting. However, they ain't no
SMC. But their low element count offsets that a little, as there
aren't so many reflections as in a big telephoto. However, their large
front elements do need a long lenshood. Otherwise, overall lowering of
maximum black will occur. Carl Zeiss Jena's multicoating ("MC" mark)
is pretty good, but not up to SMC or similar.
If you are interested, I can send you a file from my 6MP DSLR shot
with the 2.8/180 Sonnar.
Best regards,
Frantisek Vlcek
Re: CCD vs. CMOS
C> FYI, I was answering a question posted by John Forbes where he wanted to C> know why I chose a CMOS over a CCD and I gave my reasons. Technologies C> may have improved in certain areas, but there is no denying that a CMOS C> sensor uses less power than a CCD. But that is not to say that it is C> better, because the resolving power of the CMOS is less than the CCD (or C> so I am led to believe). C> There is no contest. I was simply explaining why I made a decision a C> couple of years ago :-) Hi Cotty, sorry I did step in :) My message was only meant as a side-note. Good light, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: CCD vs. CMOS
I do not believe anybody here has so much analyst background to prognose accurately which technology will prevail in the future. And that's because that's not a technical decision but a whole different matter. Like VHS/Beta and others. With complex technologies and big corporations, everything can change. I do not think battery power makes the big difference now, the new nikons can rung a long time on one battery, I think it's about the same like yours D60, Cotty. At least these I shot with were. Personally, I don't care whether it's CMOS/CCD/LBCAST/ETC... but how it shoots nad how it controls. I am not a prognosist, and frankly, I totally don't care. If I were debating whatever is a little bit better, I wouldn't shoot any pictures :-) I just shot some great shots with Leica and its super-sharp lens on 10 years old HP5+, which indeed is bit fogged. Did I mind :) ? Frantisek
My trip to Romania (long)
ot have the time or resources to travel Europe to visit you. I don't know. As with most things in life, it's a decision hard to decide. But it's better to make friends than just hosts. When I was younger, Czechoslovakia was a communist country. Most tourists came, who saw the city like a zoo. They saw only the "exhibit". Zoo. Apes in a cage. Others came, mostly young leftists, artists. They brought ideas, music, exchanged ideas. Helped. They broke their sterotypes, and broke ours as well. They learned that not all under Communism was great, as most young thought in the West. They spoke of it back home. They were friends, guests, not tourists. When we now hosted the children from Chechnya, some people here looked at them the same way. Apes in a cage. Stereotypes. Muslims. Terrorists. Apes. Others looked with their heart, and learned a big lot. So the hosts can learn a lot too, if you are a good guest. I will end. I don't know what I wanted to say anyway, or who I am saying it to. Some will understand, some will not. That's it. It was perhaps the return home which made me sad, bringing back memories of being a host myself, hosting guests from Chechnya, children from the refugee camps who fled from the war there. And how miserable and angry and helpless I felt when they left, and I was walking trough the centre of Prague, with the adverts and hotels and tourists knowing nothing... the whole machine going on and on. Our friends in Romania asked how we liked the country. I had to say (truthfully), that it was a great experience, and beautiful. And that I will speak of it when I return back. So here it is :) Next time you hear that the migrant workers from Romania or Ukraine or whatever "eastern" country are thieves and mafians, don't believe it :) We are neither, and it was said about Czechs in the West as well. The Romanian culture is ancient, its artists and writers famous (but maybe more by their country of refuge - mostly France - than their country of origin). And the people are great. Yes there were bad ones. But where aren't? And the good ones were very helpful. Thus, try not to be a tourist next time you go abroad. Be an interested but humle observer, be a friend. Be prepared to be shocked, to have your stereotypes broken, to think. From what I know of the people on this list, you are not tourists that much :-) so I am sorry for saying something obvious. But as I wrote, I was both sad and happy, and wanted to write something. Think what you think :) Good light, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Sv: Re: Digital vs Film
>> yeah but he's a physicist - what's he going to do, *reason* me to death? If I only had a pound for every obscure Monty Python relation here on PDML... ;-) * * * (spoiler: King Arthur and the Green Knight) Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
AFK - unsubscribing
Hi, I will be Away From Keyboard the following weeks, as I am going to Serbia and possibly Romania (if time permits as I have an assignemt for the end of month). I am unsubsribing right now, as I am having troubles (again) with my computer's hardware so I will do it in this rare hour that it actually work without crashes. Any "good luck" wishes please to my private address direct, this is the last message I will read on PDML for some time :) Good light, Frantisek Vlcek
Romanian PDML
Buna Ziwa! in around 10 or 14 days, if I am not lost in Serbia, I am going to cross to Romania. I have already been there, and it was very nice. I am asking if any of the Romanians on the list would like to meet. My schedule is not yet clear at all (as when you are 'hiking, you don't know much where the winds of fate will blow you), but I would like to visit Bucurest this time, which I missed the last time, and will probably be seen in Timisoara and Arad/Oradea on my way back home (as that's the best route back). I have heard about a nice bar in Bucurest by the train station, which I wouldn't want to miss. Thanks! Mail me off-list please If anybody is interested in a little meeting (warning though, I will be traveling light so without any Pentaxes, just a small camera :) Good light, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: lens cleaning
>> I would end with some funny punchline from Monty Python to make this >> less serious (is that even possible ?), but my memory is failing >> me... Please, others, put some nice MP reference here :) BW> The song (click "Download Here"): BW> http://www.pythonline.com/plugs/idle/index.shtml BW> The lyrics: BW> http://macartisan.typepad.com/cupertino/2004/05/eric_idles_fcc_.html Now THAT's nice ;-) Thanks! Another keeper from great Mr.Idle. Incidentally, both Terry Jones and Terry Gilliam are coming for a summer film festival here in Czechia (well more likely Moravia), and John Cleese will be seen in Prague next week! It's a pitty I am on my way to Romania and Serbia (if all goes well) at the end of this week. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: lens cleaning
OMG, not THAT debate again :-) Let's just say that fast shooters, PJs, similar almost always use filters (no time to remove lens caps, "cleaning" the lens with your dirty handkerchief because no time for something better, care more about the moment that slight unsharpness, modern xMC filters - Nikon, Pentax, SHMC, etc are pretty good and do not add much flare at all). I fall into that category as I shoot people. Some need the very best details, have time to clean the lens in the field and protect it with lens caps that are hard to remove, have time to use bellows lenshoods, and are slowshooters of things that do not spit on your lens or throw rocks and teargas back at you (incidentally, the only ones throwing rocks at journalists were the policemen at all the IMF/WB/... rallies I was attending...The rioters at least knew how to not aim at journalists ). Such as that nature shot with tripod, using polarisers, et cetera. My friends who shoot architecture on large format do precisely that, and they carry their gear in big metal trunks, unlike myself, who carry it in an old worn Domke which is not so much protected...but much preferable for my style of shooting. Again, De Gustibus Non Est Disputandum (meaning loosely, your mileage may vary). Both approaches, To Filter or Not To Filter, are fundamentally different for different kind of photography. I would end with some funny punchline from Monty Python to make this less serious (is that even possible ?), but my memory is failing me... Please, others, put some nice MP reference here :) Good light, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: I think i need a metering course.long
With the digital, I had to return to my old slide shooting habits. I mostly use CW metering, as the Matrix is somewhat unpredictable even on a (nonpentax) body using state-of-the-art RGB CCD in the viewfinder (I never did believe the advertisement ), especially in classic high-contrast situations with lot of dark background (church wedding, concert,...). The gurus always said - for slides, meter upwards. Meaning get more of the sky in frame for metering, as the slide is better just a bit underexposed (=~ properly exposed). For negatives, meter downward (as negs are more safely overexposed). With digital, I use CW metering a lot, in the more difficult situations, and either meter off a surrogate subject (e.g. grass), or include more of the highlights in the metering area. Best, take a day off and try metering with CW - it has to be learned as everything, it's not just "CW metering underexposes". That's a nonsense. It really depends what and how you meter. CW metering needs some brain, but not that much. With digital, the learning curve is quick. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: After Theriault's visit all we need is myrrh
MR> Well according to Monty Python's "Life of Brian" (my standard reference MR> for information on Christianity) it's an ointment. But isn't it a dangerous animal ;-) ? Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Sigma 12-24
TG> 15-30, there is no chance of using any filter on the front lens cover ring. TG> it vignettes noticeably until zoomed to at least the 20mm mark with just the TG> ring attached. not being able to use a filter is limiting, but not as TG> limiting as it could be. With the 15-30, I found the ring vignetted most of the time. Same with 14 sigma. I think it was made for a DSLR with bigger crop (like the early sport Kodaks or Sigma's SD9). Filing away corners to make it sort-of tulip shaped helps. TG> tell myself never again. however, it's the only program that knows how to TG> read the lens information from the EXIF. I think there are others like Exifer and similar, who can decode (some) of the manufacturer's hidden EXIF data. They are continually updated so they could know the IstD's already. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: lens cleaning
I think that any lens cleaning fluid which contains surface detensioning agents (surfactants) is to be avoided. In plain speech, that's your typical dishwasher agent, and such concotions using it in cleaner form sold for higher prices. Why? Because surfactants are notorious for sticking on any surface, including metal, glass and plastic, over some period of time. And because of their properties (they are, after all, surfactants) ,you are unable to remove them. Anybody developing film themselves will tell you that the surfactants used for developing film without water marks will over time leave a sticky residue even on stainless steel reels. I would be a little afraid what that buildup might do on my lens fron element. Frantisek
Re: 43 Limited (WAS: Opinions wanted: 16-45 vs. 20-35 vs. 24-90)
RS> My current lens kit has been formed by a process of "distillation" and the 43mm RS> LTD wasn't "magic" enough to entice me to keep it even in glorious jet black. De gustibus non est disputandum. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: off-brand lenses they didn't make
ks> When I received my 24-90 I noticed that the long end was actually shorter than ks> my M 2/85. In the 'communication' I then had with Pentax Europe about this, I think it was discussed a lot on B.Dimitrov's site that lenses with some form of internal focusing (not moving the whole lens in/out, but just part of the lens), often shorten the actual focal length when focused nearer than infinity. Not to mention some other issues IF might bring. So perhaps that's exagerrating the situation even more, the 90mm end is 5% off and when focused closer it's even more off... Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: What's the best zoom(s) for M42?
Thursday, July 1, 2004, 11:22:07 PM, John wrote: JCOC> Zooms are continuous, to carry "equivalent" JCOC> primes you have to carry them all. the prime JCOC> list below IS increments...No focal lengths JCOC> are duplicated. Yes, but _nobody_ in their sane mind, unless looking for a very special effect (about 0.01%%) would ever carry all such similar focal lengths to be "equivalent" to a zoom. Or do you ;-) ? Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: M80-200 vs F70-210 ?
RK> zooming - with constant aperture zooms as well as variable aperture zooms. Hi Raimo, I am sorry for Andre that the thread has evolved into this, but could you please tell me how constant aperture zoom changes exposure during zooming? I would really like to know that. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: First smc-DA14/2.8 impressions
Thursday, July 1, 2004, 2:01:33 PM, Alan wrote: AC> I just got a little touchy lately... :-) Sorry for that :) I meant no harm. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: PAW - Homage to WES
Now that's something beatutiful! B&W in its finest. Another one from your fine archive, or a new one? Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: First smc-DA14/2.8 impressions
AC> the same when the lenses are extended to closest focus. But geez, I must be AC> stupid to think that way, I know. Oh, Alan, don't get so worked up ;-) Isn't this all just fun? Personally, I have more lively issues than determining if the Nikon and Tamron lenses are the same or not, or how much do they differ, practically or otherwise. I mean, I am not losing my job over these, is it? Initially, this just reminded me of buyer-justification which is so common on other lists. This list is a relaxation for me. For God's sake, all the Pentax lenses could be made by chinese Seagull for what I care. I would still use them if they were good. I am certainly not questioning your erudicity, it would be dumb to think something about one's knowledge just from a mailinglist. So why are you so worked up when you replied to my post? I posted my opinion of the matter, and you get quite hot. A wrong day or what? :-) Good light, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: M80-200 vs F70-210 ?
Wednesday, June 30, 2004, 8:22:38 PM, Raimo wrote: RK> If adjusting exposure is PITA why do you use manual camera in the first RK> place? Adjustment can be done with shutter or aperture or both. And exposure RK> readings change when zooming even if you use constant apeture zooms. Try it RK> so you´ll understand. Oh Raimo :) I have been using manual cameras all the years I photograph, from Prakticas & Rollei, Pentaxes & Leica, and I can adjust the aperture and speed instantly. I can often tell the light and adjust blindly with good enough results. Read my message again. "Adjusting exposure with a variable aperture zoom is a PITA", not adjusting exposure is a PITA. Exposure readings can change when zooming, if you do not know what you do. But the _exposure_ doesn't change. But with variable aperture zoom, it's not only the reading but the _exposure_ that changes. Unpredictably. Variable aperture zooms are sometimes PITA even on AF AE cameras. Especially now on digital, where exposure is unforgiving, I shoot in manual a lot of time, when the light is constant. I shot a wedding that way, which was much better than to trust some advanced multisegment RGB sensor to properly expose with all the candles and bright church windows in the background. I was using a 2.8 zoom, shot wide open, with manually set speed. If it was variable-aperture, I would have to rely on camera's autoexposure, which was at times quite off, or use AE lock, metering off the floor or something other than the subject, which can be slow at times. All the point about photographic equipment is that it shouldn't get in the way of photography! Variable aperture zoom does exactly that. That's not a crusade of mine against variable zooms, use them if you like them, whatever. De gustibus non est disputandum. It almost seems like some people took up the crusade quickly. Perhaps I should have interspeded my earlier text with 20x IMO and IMHO? Isn't it obvious that something I write is my opinion, but backed by my experience? So, **IMNSHO, Variable aperture zooms hoover totally** ;-) Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: First smc-DA14/2.8 impressions
Wednesday, June 30, 2004, 9:06:39 AM, Alan wrote: AC> I checked their optical diagrams and they look identical. Interestingly, the AC> AF Nikkor 105/2.8 macro also has the same optical diagram as the Pentax AC> F/FA100/2.8 macro. You can't tell from the diagrams. They are very simplified, do not show precise curvature, do not show the type of glasses used, do not show exact spacing... Tessar from one company looks the same as Tessar from another company (yet their performance might differ greatly). Your typical 6/7 1.4/50mm lens has about the same diagram as another 6/7 gr/el 1.4/50mm lens. But in fact, that's just because they evolved from the same design, and are today the peak of that design. Modern lenses like Leitz's turned off from Gaussian design, just because it was "depleted" of novel design ideas. What counts is the manufacturing quality, choice of special glasses, control quality, mount quality... Your typical 2.8/14mm lens is very probably the same design as well, you just can't make such ultrawide in many different ways. You just tweak it here and there. Rumors like that surface time to time, and mostly, are meaningless. Not that 3rd party lens makers can't make excellent lenses, they can - given enough money, though. Fra
Re: Looking for 2nd hand pentax
Tuesday, June 29, 2004, 11:41:58 PM, Fred wrote: >>> I'm looking for a second hand AF Pentax body. [snip] Would an SFX >>> or Z70/PZ70 do the trick? >> Other than the freight train sound my SF-1 makes when the shutter >> is tripped,and the film advances,'m pretty satisfied with that >> one. F> ...and the SF1n/SFXn is significantly ~much~ quieter... Huh? When I still had SFXn, it was _more_ louder than even friend's Canon EOS1v (that's the proverbial cannon with 8 fps or so)! No of the SF cameras were quiet... OTOH, they are nice (if bit ugly) cameras with very good build quality compared to more recent models. The internal chassis is metal, they have good viewfinder. But they lack features like aperture display in viewfinder, more metering modes, faster drive. And are loud, did I mention that :) Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: M80-200 vs F70-210 ?
AL> M is easier to use with manual focus because it has only one ring and AL> a good grip, but if F is substancially better optically, I'll go for I do not think that the F is substantially better. I once tried out the 80-200 (or which it was - there were several from K to M) and it was pretty good. Also, it will be better suited for Mongolia than some part-plastic F zoom (I have seen them broken). Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: M80-200 vs F70-210 ?
The F is a variable aperture zoom, that means it is _useless_ on both MX and LX in manual mode. Presto. Take the M - it is a very good zoom. With the F, you will get _wrong_ exposure during zooming unless in auto mode. Fra
Re: Model lines
PJ> in anything resembling volumes. Eg. the Nikon F series cameras PJ> have less than 5% pro share. Hasselblad less than 10%. Obviously PJ> the high-end is totally dependent on amateurs willing to spend. PJ> However, amateurs willing to spend $15 000 on a digital back are PJ> rare indeed. Hi Pal, do you have any hard evidence for that? Before most agencies and papers migrated to digital, most used either F5 (F4 before that) with F100 (F90/F801s) or equivalent EOS bodies for day to day work. Given how many agencies, newspapers and photojournalists there are, I feel it hard to believe that less than 5% of Nikon F cameras was owned by amateurs. I have seen the evidence myself, working as PJ some of the time, and knowing many even from agencies. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Lighting for ebay sales?
JB> The slave flash seem to work with a digital camera like my Sony F717 - but JB> for slow speeds only - from app. 1/2 second and above! So it's no good for JB> digital portraits or things like that. For stills, it's fine, though (long JB> shutter speeds). Someone here might care to explain this digital flash JB> phenomenon to me? Digicams use pre-flash not true TTL to measure flash output. So your pop-up flash flashes a litte bit before the actual exposure to measure the scene, than flashes the full exposure. It's fault of the cameras, not flashes. The optical slave sees the first pre-flash, so it triggers, but that's actually before the main exposure. Either use synch cord (there should be some even for the 717, doesn't it? It does have a hotshoe), or use a specialised digital P&S optical slave, like one from Metz - it has settings to flash on second flash, ignoring the preflash. fra
Re: Pentax F-series lenses - Contrarian
Two words here are professional standards. You wouldn't want to shoot a wedding without a 2.8 lens, in a church. With a fast lens you do not have to use flash (or can use it just to spicy up the photographs, not as a sole means of illumination). Of course many slower lenses are as good optically, some even mechanically (although an exception). It's always easier to design a slower lens to be good. But market thinking creeps here. Pros want 2.8 glass, so most other glass is not built for pros but for "amateurs". Thus expect lower build quality and (sometimes) worse performance. I shot with both 2.8 and 3.5-4.5 short zoom (20-35) and the faster lens made a whole lot of difference. No matter where I shoot, I mostly used the lens wide open inside. So the speed paid for itself. That to say, I liked Pentax for providing quality alternatives, for example for hiking - 2.8 zoom is to heavy to lug around when you hike, and Pentax always had high quality lenses for those people. 24-35 f/3.5, FA 20-35 f/4, and similar. To the mountains, I would not take a 2.8 zoom for issues of weight. For the occassions I need fast glass there, I would take a small fast prime. Frantisek
Re: *istD firmware wishlist (open letter?)
ein> Neither my Nikon D100 nor my Nikon D1H display ISO in any of the ein> normal displays. It'd be real tempting to say "manufacturers didn't ein> anticipate the desire to see the freely-changeable ISO number in ein> the normal displays of a digital camera", except that my Nikon F5 Even the D1H? They at least added it in the D2, which shows it. Personally, I would much like to see ISO and WB in the viewfinder (although I do not qualify, as I use different DSLR than IstD ) Still, anything to better the IstD is good :) Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: OT - test
C> Oh yeah, is it working fine. It's really weird to be getting PDML C> messages in real time. Hah! So can we except to read more cottisms now on PDML ;-) ? Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: M 75-150 and social theory
I had this lens, and liked it. It was small, very small, but produced good results. Of course maybe I got a best-of-the-flock specimen while Shel had a bad one. It was sharp, and while not super contrasty, it was still good in contrast. I have many slides shot with it, it was excellent travel lens in the mountains. The primes I had alongside were better, but still, it IMO is better than consumer zooms. Only think I disliked was the push-pull design, which (although damped well) exhibited zoomcreep when held vertically (which is a pita on a tripod shooting something straight up or down). But plain rubber band can solve it, and the AF Nikkor 2.8/80-200 (1 ring) had much much much worse zoom creep. It also has rotating front, which is pita with polariser. But I do not use polarisers much, so I didn't mind. The built-in hood is just for fun though. I can recommend this lens. It was perfect on MX, along with a wide prime or 24-35. The Tamron SP 70-210 3.5 is slightly better, and the 2.8 pro zooms are better, but not by that much. And it has better coating than the Tamron. It's also very well built. Test it if you can before buying, as indeed some old lenses can be mistreated. Fra
Re: Pentax F-series lenses??
ND> I have never owned a A70-210/4 but I notice everyone seems to have agood ND> opinion of it even though www.photodo.com gives it only a grade 2.2. By ND> comparison the F 70-210/4-5.6 is given a rating of 3.4. Could it be that Just do not believe all lens tests. Simple. Judge for yourself. There were big discussions about photodo some years back here IIRC, but it's lost from the archives probably. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: FA* 80-200/2.8 discontinued?
AC> even what I consider the most believable results from photodo doesn't give AC> that good score (and their results seem to match my experience so far). Well, they didn't mine. Photodo is, by now, old, they do not explain enough how they test the lenses, and where did they get the lenses (some of them are discontinued). The worst is they claim to be scientific, by using MTF testing, but that's cr*p still untill you know precisely how they tested it. Lens testing is a bunch of cr*p, unless you do a real world test with your lenses, and still it doesn't tell so much about other sample of the lens, with some new lenses having quite loose tolerances. And some of the long discontinued lenses - how many samples did they test, anyway? Just one? etc. That to say, that was a comment made on photodo and lens testing, not at you :-) From all the past, I respect you quite a lot. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: *istD firmware wishlist (open letter?)
ND> Actually, I was right the first time because ISO goes to 3200 (4 digits) and ND> remaining number recordable images display only has 3 digits - so it can't ND> be done. Ugh Ogh. How about 1.6K or 3.2K ? Is it too hard to understand ? ;-) Or similar... I don't think though trash would be the best button for it. One could easily forgot he is in PLAY mode and try to change ISO there... Perhaps one of the four PLAY mode buttons? Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: A question for Muvo2 mutilators
RB> Just be thankful you didn't buy a recent one whith a card which wont RB> work in your camera either! Hi Rob, would you happen to know, if there is any way to know (by S/N or something) if the MuVo employs the camera-incompatible microdrive? Thanks... Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Earl Grey, was: Re: O.T.: Wine (Hungarian, Romanian)
Tuesday, June 22, 2004, 4:09:57 PM, Steve wrote: SD> I only use a press for coffee. (These are often called French presses, SD> BTW) From my point of view, this is an extraction process and the SD> press represents an effective version of the "soak and filter" method. SD> I realize this makes me a bit pedestrian in this regard, and that the SD> preparation of tea has cultural overtones as well. After all, look at SD> complexity of the Japanese Tea Ceremony. Why pedestrian :) ? As much as I like to prepare tea and coffee in the more traditional way, as an addicted drinker of tea I do drink a lot of it a day, so I usually just make a big pot of tea without any bells and whistles... Although it makes a special morning to make a good coffee in Dzjazwa, or tea in the special Chong pot. Such special moments (and every similar ones, be it whatever you like) make life bearable, and are an excellent start of otherwise gray day. BTW, to see how "pedestrian" I am as well, I would love to get a good but small presso coffeemaking machine in my home :) Fra
Re: Earl Grey, was: Re: O.T.: Wine (Hungarian, Romanian)
SD> A similar (identical?) gizmo can be used to make coffee. You've SD> probably seen these somewhere being used for coffee. It maximizes SD> contact between the grind/leaves and can make good, strong coffee or SD> tea, and the plunger has a metal mech in it to pres out the grin/leaves SD> before drinking. Interesting. Would I trust some FTGFOP Darjeeling to something like that? Don't know. When it comes to tea, I am an elitIST ;-) Does it work well for coffee? I frequently do not have time to make good traditional coffee in arabic Dzjazwa, so a coffee press would look nice. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: PAW: Window Washers
Looking forward to your next! Frantisek
Re: PAW: Window Washers
SB> Sorry, Frank, this one just doesn't make it. Sometimes it's better to know why it doesn't make it, like you wrote, than just knowing it makes it :) Nice critique Shel! I have enough of similar shots which would have benefited from more thinking. fra
Re: Battery flash question
Hi Butch, why should there be any problems? All flashes can use rechargable batteries. I have powered my big Sunpak (can't remember the number, but it was their second-best model) with custom-built NiMH batterypack, without any problems. If I remember Sunpak even sold a "batterypack" which was nothing else than just 4 AA or C NiMH cells together in custom casing for some ridiculous amount of money. Get some good NiMH cells, ones recommended for RC models, as the flash can draw several amperes a second when charging, which can be too much for some older/cheaper cells, which have higher internal R. I have even added one more cells (5 in total) to decrease recharge time of the flash. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: OT: Wine (Hungarian, Romanian)
Saturday, June 19, 2004, 4:43:06 PM, graywolf wrote: g> The Chinese and Japanese do not drink "strong tea". The British drink it about You have never tasted Phu-Erh :-) Smells like ten years old socks...and is drunk quite strong :) I remember English tea fondly from my stay in the UK. And the breakfasts... aah Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Question: Minilab processing of digital files
Saturday, June 19, 2004, 4:57:26 PM, graywolf wrote: g> Well, there are certain laws of physics involved here. Reflected light images g> (prints) will never match transmitted light images. sRGB is designed to g> approximate reflected light imaging. If your output is primarily going to be >From what I read, sRGB is the colour space of HDTV and average computer monitors, there is no connection to printing at all. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: OT: SciFi was:Re: Camera Bag Enabled
DF> A buddy and I used to muse about making "Dune" into movies, but we DF> figured that to do it right would require far more money than even the DF> most expensive movies so far, and some technology not yet developed to DF> allow the viewers to "get inside the heads" of the characters. DF> Especially the later books, like "God Emperor", "Heretics", and DF> "Chapterhouse". Ah, total nonsense :) Just a great director and storyteller. It would not be Dune as the book, but it could have been great movie. Like the beforementioned adaptation of (Lem's) Solaris by Tarkovskij. Both are quite different but both are the works of geniuses. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: OT: Wine (Hungarian, Romanian)
>>Unless they might live on our northeast coast. >>Proper tea drinkers drink it strong and "neat," just like their whisky... C> One word to describe that, and it starts with B and ends with ollocks. What ;-) Proper tea is always drunk without sugar or milk, look at the Chinese and Japanese! It was up to the British to ruin worldwide reputation of tea with their strange custom of milk and sugar... "What have the British ever done for us, except Monty Python?" ;-) Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek P.S.: although most probably tea with milk got into England by way of India. I certainly do like Dhati and similar spiced tea concotions.
Re: film question (Konica Chrome R-100)
DB> I used the Konica Chrome R-100 a couple of times, and I found it to be far DB> from Sensia, in my taste. Grainier and lower resolution, I think. Agree. I disliked it. The colours were worse as well. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Question: Minilab processing of digital files
FV>> Just either set up both to the same colour space, or shoot in WR> This presumes something that is in conflict with the original WR> poster's question. WR> The requirement is that the files go straight from the camera to the WR> photolab. Hi Bill, and what then I am talking about on the first line ;-) Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Question: Minilab processing of digital files
Well, when both devices use different colour spaces and you do not _convert_ between them their colour will be different. Just either set up both to the same colour space, or shoot in AdobeRGB, do the editing (if any) and than _convert_ to sRGB (which is the colour space _assumed_ by Frontier and Noritsu printers). Benefit of shooting AdobeRGB set camera is that sRGB is rather limited for some tones, so if you do any adjustments to the image, it's better to work in the larger colour space. At least that's my understanding of it, and it works. fra
WTB: pentax flash AF160
Hi, I am looking for the pear-shaped Pentax AF160 flash. Please, only the version with "power-saving" circuitry. Anyone here with an extra? Thanks! Good light, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Analog vs digital by Herbert Keppler
Thursday, June 17, 2004, 9:29:52 PM, Jostein wrote: J> If you ever consider buying, say, a 300/2.8 or a 70-200/2.8, it actually pays of J> to take a flight to NYC, buy it there and fly back. J> The FA*300/2.8, for example, is four plane tickets cheaper at B&H than in Norway J> or Sweden. :-) *see the World, make your buying abroad* ;-) Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: War Photographer: James Nachtwey
SB> There's also a segment of Nachtwey working with his printer to finalize a SB> print for an exhibition. The amount of time and detail that went into The scene where he points to the huge print tacked on the wall, and tells them - burn in there some more, and they tear it away? Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: OT: Other Pentax News
ban> TOKYO (Nikkei)--Pentax Corp. (7750) aims to strengthen its ban> endoscope business by teaming up with TeraRecon Inc. Pentax endoscope anyone? There could be some at Ebay :) Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
OT: Wine (Hungarian, Romanian)
Hi, I decided to bring some life to PDML, with something else than Pentax vs Canon discussion ;-) And with only Beer being drunk at the GFM PDML Central, how about some wine? I am editing a lot of photographs from digital instead of watching a nice film in my favourite club cinema (sigh!) *anybody - Staveni by Milos Zabransky it's in Czech though : <http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0304752/> * ... so I bought myself a bottle of Hungarian wine to go with it. As I don't like computers that much, working on one for extended time is certainly easier with some wine to sip for me! I admit, fellow Hungarian PDMLers wouldn't probably recommend it, it's the normal stuff we get imported here... Cabernet Franc Rose from Alföld region. What would you recommend (except excellent Tokaj of course, that goes without saying!) to smuggle back with me when I go trough Hungaria this summer? From heavier, red wines, probably? As I will be traveling to Romania (Buna Ziwa!), I will also bring back some of my favourite Romanian ones. If any of the PDMLers from Hungary or Romania would be interested in a meeting, I would very much like to! Timeline and schedule is still very sketchy, though. Probably going trough Buda & Pest to Arad and then deciding. Probably Bucurest as well. There is a shadowy bar at the trainstation that every friend who had been there recommends. Emilia or similar name? I can't remember just now. Multumesk! Good light, Frantisek Vlcek P.S.: if you see some derranged Frank Theriault-like posts from me in a few hours, you will know that I have finally succumbed to both the Janis Joplin music on my record player and the wine, missing the tomorrow's deadline... Editing photos on the computer can be so streinous sometimes :-)
Re: Analog vs digital by Herbert Keppler
PJA> offering both IMHO. It seems Europeans, at least PJA> Germans are being ripped off. Bah, you should have seen the prices here in Czechia ;-) Real prices depend a lot on the country, importer and the mother organisation. For example, Pentax here isn't true Pentax subsidiary, it's just a small importer. That's why the IstD prices in Czechia are high. But for example even some higher-end (2.8) Sigma lenses, and all Cosina lenses, are about 20-30% (!) cheaper here than in Germany. And I could get (if I was into studio photography that much) Kodak DCS Pro SLR/n for ~3000 Euro (new!). Try to match THAT!!! :) Sadly, most other equipment (photographic) is cheaper in the US. Except the Cosina Voigtländer lenses, most items are about 30% less in the US. Generally (except the UK), US "official" prices (from the producer) are about the same as here in the EU, but one price is in $, the other in Euro. Which makes a realworld difference quite big, because dollar is currently quite lower than Euro. I am considering getting some items (flashes) from the US. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: interesting piece of gear
Cosina makes one (if it's similar) for their "Voigtländer" line of rangefinders. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Camera Bag Enabled
Thursday, June 17, 2004, 4:15:19 PM, Steve wrote: SD> Just to get back on topic for a second (sorry) I got a Domke F1 a few SD> years ago. It's a little big, but I really do like it. It's about OK size if you need to put full assignment gear into it. They are nice bags, I have myself F2 and F803 (or 802?). I think they go well with my ragged (or rugged? ) self ;-) I have been trough assignments in heavy rain for hours with them (they are made of cotton) and not a drop inside. OTOH for some people they are too unprotective. Depends on how you (ab)use your cameras. BTW, I heard they are either out of business (was it Tiffen that acquired Saunders which acquired Domke bags years ago?), or doing badly. Czech importer (Kodak!) stopped carrying them two years ago, and I haven't seen them much in Europe as well. If that's true, I will just have to make my own. I am getting a good supply of (technical!) super-heavy-grade hemp cloth so be prepared to see some Stoned (TM) camera bags at next EuroPDML ;-) Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: SV: Film and Development
Hi, at the lab I go to they used ethylalcohol to clean the really cruddy negs the customer thomped upon (or whatever). Sometimes it worked. Sometimes not. If the crud is embedded in the emulsion, you are 90% out of luck. There are some commercial negative cleaners made by Tetenal, but I believe them to be alcohol as well. Washing the negative in distilled water wouldn't harm it either. Especially with the alcohol, try it out on some crap before :) Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
PAW - street fashion
oops, forgot to add the link url... http://fotof.wz.cz/paw fra
PAW - street fashion
Hi, I missed on few PAWs probably as I still haven't recovered the computer enough to access old archives and I have not been shooting anything interesting to use new photos for PAW. This is from an paintings exhibition opening, where there was this "fashion" show (the people doing it were not taking themselves seriously though). It was quite late (both in the evening - 21:15h, and in wine), thus it's not the best. But the paintings inside were excellent, as was the wine ;-) Comments welcome. Especially on the omission of model's feet :) Good light, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: OT: SciFi was:Re: Camera Bag Enabled
Wednesday, June 16, 2004, 4:53:19 PM, Peter wrote: PJA> He died young with no one to protect his legacy. (If you want to see an PJA> adaptation that hoovers read Heinline's Starship PJA> Troopers before you see the movie, I have nothing but revulsion for the PJA> sequel, not yet released). I did (read it), years before the film. I agree, that must be one of the worst movies after a book. I have watched the film with some kind of freakish fascination. Interestingly, Heinlein and Dick were friends. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Traveller's questions
AH> don't disturb much. Maybe they add some hazyness but most often the images AH> get quite hazy anyway at those heights. For B&W, just use yellow, orange or red filter. Lot of the haze should be removable by it. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: OT: SciFi was:Re: Camera Bag Enabled
Wednesday, June 16, 2004, 12:15:47 AM, Yefei wrote: YH> Who's directing the film? It may end up the same disaster as YH> Hollywood's "Solaris" -- Average movie goers got bored by it, YH> fans of Tarkovsky's version despised it, and fans of YH> Stanislaw Lem's book hated it ( many of them felt Tarkovsky's YH> version fell short as well ). But since Will Smith is doing YH> the action, maybe average movie goers will like "I Robot". YH> Yefei OMG, a film version of I,Robot? I must have completely missed the news. If the Solaris analogy applies, I would dislike it, because I am a lover of Tarkovskij version. And of Stanislaw Lem. BTW, how many US PDMLers know St. Lem? Or brothers Strugackijs? These are one of the world's best SF writers, from Poland and SSSR. I am interested how well are they known outside. More on the film versions, poor great PK Dick must be rotating in grave because of all the bad adaptations of his work into movies. Except Blade Runner, all of the other movies "hoovered" big time. It's strange that of all writers, his were adapted often, but very badly. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Camera Bag Enabled
How about P.K.Dick, anybody? :) _fra_ Tuesday, June 15, 2004, 11:43:03 PM, Peter wrote: PJA> That's something to look for... PJA> Cotty wrote: >>On 15/6/04, GIANFRANCARLO, discombobulated, offered: >> >> >> [* I had a brilliant job today - met one of my all-time >>>heroes - Gerry >>> >>> Anderson. >>>You lucky guy! He's one of my myths! >>> >>> >>> I'm such a Sci Fi geek... >>>So am I... >>> >>> >> >>I just heard that Larry Niven has a new novel out...Ringworld's Children :-) >> >> >> >>Cheers, >> Cotty >> >> >>___/\__ >>|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche >>||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps >>_ >> >> >> >> >>
OT: Art confiscated by FBI
Sorry. I rant about it and now I do the same mistake. My previous message should have been marked OT. I must have been really tired when sending it, unthinking. What a fool you are, Frantisek! Now you had probably started just another political debate... never! No way this was a political comment! Please... Just ignore it, that would be best ;-) Or ignore me today completely, I am not feeling my usual self... ;-) Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Art confiscated by FBI
Apparently the FBI confiscated an art exhibition and subpoenaed eight authors. http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/storyprint.asp?StoryID=256845 http://www.caedefensefund.org/ OMG, what next?!? That's just plain crazy. Good light, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Real ugly artifacts on print enlargements
MM> change a lot, still ugly artifacts and over sharpness. The artefacts look a MM> bit like maximum JPG compressed but with a violet tint on larger uniform MM> areas an the black and white photos? Hmm, that does remind me of how overly compressed jpeg might look like. As you sent uncompressed JPEGs, they might have been too large for their system and they recompressed them behind your back ? Dunno. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: FW: Film and Development
Hi, see below... DM> into another problem as the times start to get close to or below 5 minutes. DM> We were told that the film has a reciprocity of at least 5 minutes to DM> perform correctly, thus diluting becomes necessary to extend development DM> times. Reciprocity? I don't understand what you mean to say... I have always understood it that short developing times (under 4min according to some) are bad because of inconsistencies in pouring in and pouring out the developer from the tank, tank sizes, etc. 10 second at 180 sec development are much more critical than 10 seconds at 360 sec development. 5 minutes is a good lower limit for this. DM> Remember in B&W a clear cloudless sky, or a cloudy one with no texture to DM> it, will almost always look blown too a point in B&W and require burning. DM> One quickly learns that minimizing sky is a good thing. You know you messed DM> the film up however when it takes you 2 minutes to burn in the sky however DM> under an enlarger. :-) There are some choices of developer and film combinations which are very good even under such conditions. Usually films with nice old S shaped curve which curtails the highlights and two-bath developers. There is too much discussion about it bordering on religious, but it works. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Film and Development
BW> Of course, they are not up to the best standards of professional BW> hand-made prints (chemical or digital), but in my opinion and BW> experience the quality of standard prints has improved significantly BW> since the introduction of digital mini-labs. I have a different opinion. Both the Frontier or Noritsu labs aren't up to average good standards of optical machine prints in pro lab. The resolution of the scanning part is really low and shows grain aliasing even with 400 iso film. Another thing is banding, which shows due to 8-bit nature of these. With dark slides. So I really like much more good optical prints. YMMV, of course. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Developing tanks (yes, it's not digital!)
WR> Jobo wants you to buy their biocide. Usual marketing :) I am pretty much immune. WR> If you can still get old style C-41 stabilizer, a wee bit of that WR> will do it (it's formadehyde). WR> Of course, it smells awful and is relatively toxic. WR> I just put a very small amount of chlorine bleach (a really small WR> amount, just a few drops) into the water bath. Thanks. Probably small amount won't hurt. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Developing tanks (yes, it's not digital!)
Saturday, June 12, 2004, 5:08:14 AM, Butch wrote: BB> We actually use chlorine bleach in water to clean the stabilizer tanks if BB> they get too scummy with algae. I agree with Mike that changing the water BB> regularly would be the best option. How hard is draining and refilling the BB> water bath on a JOBO? I would consider draining after each session and BB> refilling if it's not a PITA. In labs I've worked in that have drained the BB> stabilizer tanks monthly there has not been an algae problem. In labs that BB> didn't we'd have to drain and clean the tanks a couple times a year. Hi, presently, changing the water is a PITA, because of placement of the tank (I don't have that much space where it is now) nearly on floor, and the drain is of course the lowest point. When I manage to put it elsewhere, it will not be such a big problem. It is interesting to know if the silver buildup on bottles with old fixer is sufficient to act as biocide. Chlorine bleach probably the easiest way, it's "brute force" and working well :) But I was a bit afraid of trying it because of JOBO's warnings. What if the whole tank melts ;) Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: OT:For my fellow Reagan fans.
Now you have blown it. This doesn't belong on the list anymore than the other accusations. President speeches offend me. Please do not do so. Thanks fra
Re: OT secure storage
Hi Rob, thank you for your very informative post! I also had too many mysterious software failures and hangs which many could be attributed to badly designed key components. Like in enlarging, one component in the chain (e.g. vibration of table or badly painted wall) can ruin the whole print, no matter how good Focomat with S-Planar you have, I have had failures whhich were due to poor fitting connectors and other such things. I will have to give the power supply a good consideration now, as I will be building a new computer soon. Thanks! Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: OT secure storage
Hi Rob, that's interesting. Would you please share some power supply knowledge with us? As it is not so much OT by now many people archive their pictures digitally. Is there anything one can do to minimise chance of such catastrophic failure? Thanks -fra-
Re: Samples from DA14/2.8!
RS> Herein lies the key to our differences in the perception of what's sharp and RS> what's not I guess. Did you notice that all the images were made with the RS> contrast on hard, the saturation high and the sharpening on hard? Even RS> discounting the CA they are dreadful examples IMHO. Well, all of Pentax Japan sample pictures were awful pieces of sh*t. But that's just because they were taken by a really incompetent stupido. It's not the fault of the camera or the lens. When I saw the picture it seemed to me like a heavily interpolated shot from 3.3 MP P&S... We'll have to wait for some real samples. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Some Adobe PS CS issues fixed?
Apparently, they have fixed some issues with the scratch disk and screen refresh, see here: http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=2552 Good light, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Lighter, Slower, More Expensive (more lens tests)
JT> Conclusion: Ths Sigma's poor performance wide open, along with its size JT> and weight, mean that it will not be part of my traveling kit. I tested three specimen of the lens as well, and can only agree. The lens gets nice by 2.8 and quite better at 4-5.6, but from 1.8-2.8 it's unusable for large amounts of coma and veiling all over the image. Not mentioning the 2/3 stop light loss wide open even in the center of the frame. All this makes me think it's just a 2.8 design overstretched to 1.8, which is not a good thing. I am still considering the lens though, even tho I will probably not want to use it more open than 2.8 for the lack of performance. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Old film
Monday, June 7, 2004, 10:05:07 PM, Henri wrote: HT> Quick question, how fast does negative film stop being useful after its HT> expiration date? HT> I got an offer to buy a dozen rolls of superia that had the exp. date of HT> autumn 2002. HT> I would get them at about $1-1.20/roll, so it's not bad, but I don't HT> want pale and crappy pics either. That's a little too old for my taste, especially if it was not frozen. It's a risk. Especially faster films deteriorate quickly. With B&W film, you can experiment more and I have used 10 year old film which was still well if developed properly. But for C41, tough luck. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Tokina AT-X AF Pro 80-200/2.8
Hi, I did try the Nikon version (as, unfortunately, my Pentax stuff is only M42 by now, but which I still enjoy). I haven't had time to use it seriously, so take my comments with a grain of salt and pepper :) Build quality seemed excellent. Heavy, metal, good. I wouldn't fear about the lens (although I had unpleasant experience with the cheaper Tokinas, both 3.5-4.5/20-35 - awful, broke thrice before money return under guaranty; and the new cheap 2.8/28-70 ATX SV - zoom ring was tight in some spots). I took only few shots at 2.8 on digital, which were sharp enough. The specimen I tried out (it was used) had quite slow AF, though. Not small AF adjustments, but it was slow going the whole cycle. Which can be a paint when the camera's AF system misses and the lens hunts. the old Sigma (not HSM) and Nikkors (not SWM) were about noticably faster, and the new HSM/SWM/... lenses are pretty fast. But it was only a quick test, and the lens might have been a bad specimen. Manual focus was OTOH very fast, some might say loose, but I did like it. So I wonder, if there was anything wrong with that lens' AF gearings. That's not much help is it :) Fra
Re: Shooting these pesty birds :)
Friday, June 4, 2004, 3:40:18 PM, Daniel wrote: DJM> I believe that it is a device for listening to, and recording, bird songs. Hi Daniel, I haven't thought of that! I thought it was an upload link to nearby computer, maybe ;-) Switching CF cards might not be pleasant when you are in a swamp... Or film :) Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Scanning Software: Nikonscan v Vuescan
Friday, June 4, 2004, 3:09:06 PM, Shel wrote: SB> Which begs the questions, what platform are you using, and how's it set up? SB> Processor, speed, etc. Well, my setup was slow. Enough of memory, but slow processor (Pentium 200). But compared to the SilverFast, which was instanteous even on my old machine. And on a better computer, you would be still scanning still bigger files than I did when I used the scanner. OTOH, as they said, VueScan is quite capable. It does things many OEM softwares do not. I had received SF with the scanner, and the OEM software (Microtek's) was totally unusable. Without the SF I would have returned the scanner. That the VueScan's controls are awful is my opinion. YMMV, as always on this list. But I stand behind it :-) It would be much better software if Ed Hamrick got better controls into it. But you can judge for yourself - the VueScan has got a trial version, which is the same as the full version, only limited by watermarking your image. Thus you can try before you buy. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
PAW - Caged worker
My last PAW: http://fotof.wz.cz/paw Hi, I finally managed to put my malformed (and recently almost exploded) computer into something slightly more akin to order. As I am lagging behind in work and PAWs, and not yet having restored most of the disks, I submit just an old picture with minimal editing, although my SCSI (not yet attached) drive is full of new photographs I think are good :) At least I submitted the photos to a client just before I had the computer crash. In the more or less historic center of Prague, heavy underground collector building is underway. The state's biggest building company is in fact just a lobbyist and subcontracts all the work to smaller companies and groups of season workers, coming from surrounding, mostly eastern states. They work very hard, but nor the state neither the companies or mafia do care much for them. I do not know if this one is one of them. My biggest fault with this photo is the lack of background. It is only a street photograph. I didn't speak with the man, I just hurried by and saw a good picture (at least I like it ) opportunity. Having only smiled to him, I had to continue on my way. Please criticize freely :) BTW, the photo is a heavy crop. I didn't think the large area around would work well with a small picture size for the web. I may later post the whole version. Perhaps the crop is too heavy - I was just doing editing with IrfanView, the only program I have left at the moment. Which is nice but not for exact work. BTW again, after I get things in order, I will submit another version of my last one - News by the wall. I am curious if that second frame I shot will be liked or not. Good light, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Pro uses pop-up flash!
I do not use it much, but time to time, it comes handy. I didn't like
the slow recycle time, though. One does have to watch for it. But I do
carry a flash even with the Leica (a small Vivitar). In fact, I think
the best flash for Leica is the AF160, the one which is not square
shaped but sort of pear-shaped. It's really small and fits Leica
nicely ('cause these rangefinders are awkward to use with some flashes
because of their shutter speed dial positioned very near the hotshoe).
Best regards,
Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Pt. Pelee birds
Hi, so even though the lack of really long big glass, you did get close enough to the little buggers ;-) Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: SV: PAW: Street Portraiture
Hi Jens, nice portrait! At first glance the background seemed too simple for me, but it contrastes nicely with her eyes. Although for my taste the blurring is too much, you have captured her expression very nicely. One point, though - I do like more portraits with some background which complements the picture more than just the blue wall (although, as I said, it makes her blue eyes really stand out. You didn't photoshop them did you ). OTOH, there are no distracting forms, the portrait is nicely composed of only several smooth planes. Frantisek
Re: Is it Real or is it PhotoShop?
Friday, May 28, 2004, 12:08:40 PM, Alan wrote: AC> I really don't think anyone really cares what the original scene looked AC> like. Every photo we have seen in magazines have been heavily "enchanced" to AC> capture our attention. Just look at those super saturated National AC> Geographic photos! Btw, Auto Contrast seldom works for me. It has the AC> tendency to overdo. Hi Alan, when you get into the Levels or Curves window, press the Options button to customise the way AutoLevels and AutoColour and AutoContrast work. I suggest replacing the 0.5% clipping values with something much smaller, 0.2% for really low contrast images or 0.1% (or less) for images where you get heavy clipping of shadows/highlights using the Auto command.This applies to Photoshop and almost all other programs using autolevels/... If I have time, I may get into this discussion of "reality". Perhaps later :) But some manipulation is inherent in the medium of photography, which is not real. It's not capturing whole reality (like some painters were afraid first time photography came out), it's about capturing its small slice. Good art uses any medium to its advantage, so photography benefits from reductionary approach, IMO. Just capturing a vista as the eye saw it is impossible (because eye sees in many many small movements, while it sees the photograph printed as a whole), and if anybody tried that (all the superlarge posters of waterfalls), it usually accounted to no art and no reality as well! Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Let's get into real cameras
QUOTED FROM THE ARTICLE: > "You have to ask the question, 'What's the point of painting a scene > like this when you can reproduce it with no loss of resolution?'" > says Conor Foy, a 36-year-old painter. "The resolution of this seems > to be more than anything I've seen before." [...] > But Ross remains focused on art. "I want to give people the > feeling that they have when they are overpowered by the grandeur and > the beauty of nature," he says. "It's the kind of thing that artists > have been trying to do for hundreds and hundreds of years." Just another ultrarealist painter? I thought they vanished centuries ago ;-) Gimme the art! Where's the ART? Frantised
