RE: PESO: Moon Under the Yardarm

[Malcolm Smith]

Daniel J. Matyola wrote:

> Another Mykonos Scene:
> http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=18240435

You're really on form Dan. Another excellent image.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: A couple photos of Lizzy dancing

[Malcolm Smith]

Larry Colen wrote:
 
> I took these at the weekly dance on Sunday. We had a live band, with
> great music, and a fun time was had.
> 
> I was trying to get some good promo shots for the venue, so when I
> noticed that the light outside was close to the same level as inside, I
> moved the sign to where I could photograph it with the musicians, and
> asked this couple to dance where I could get them in the frame too.
> 
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/27351977966/in/album-
> 72157669165096955/

Really like these; the light balance of inside and outside the building is
well captured, in addition to the action going on.

Malcolm 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Slide & film copying - yet again....

[Malcolm Smith]

John Coyle wrote:

> The fastest slide copier I've ever used is an Otek, which must use a
> sensor covering the whole field of a 35mm frame (negative or slide),
> and uses an internal light source and flat field lens: each frame takes
> less than a second to copy to a CF card.  The drawback is that the
> illumination is slightly uneven, so there is a vignetting effect.  If
> the manufacturers were able to develop the system to eliminate that, it
> would be a winner.  It has been marketed under various brand names, I
> think.
> I've used bellows and flash arrangements before, and the significant
> issues have tended to be evenness of illumination and getting the
> subject aligned so that there is no focus fall off at any edge of the
> frame.
> 
> I'm currently using an Epson V500 to digitise my archives, and there is
> no doubt it is a slow process.  There is also the need to correct the
> scans in PS for dust removal, as I found that using ICE technology (at
> the medium setting) blocked up shadow areas, so that, for example, a
> child's eyes looked like something out of a horror movie!

I still have my film bellows set and Pentax slide copier A. I have, on
occasion, used it with a K7 and found it fantastically frustrating to set
up. I have produced some good captures from it, but taken far longer than if
I'd just scanned them - and without all the setting up time, getting angry
and having to go for a walk.

I'm using the V600, and I spend ages trying to ensure the slide is as dust
free as I can before scanning, as it is another job to remove visible dust
and correct other horrors!

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Slide & film copying - yet again....

[Malcolm Smith]

Bill wrote:

> Something to consider for slide copying would be a pro grade slide
> duplicator such as this:
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/pro-beseler-model-4102-deluxe-dual-mode-slide-
> duplicator/171687681022?hash=item27f9621bfe
> 
> They use a T mount adapter, so there is no problem mounting the camera
> of choice, and as the price on this one shows, they can be had pretty
> cheaply, as the market for them is next to zero.
> A local lab that went out of business here a few years ago gave me
> their duplicator for free.

Noted. I'm looking at all options. I need to find something like this in the 
UK. I've seen various duplicators more frequently on eBay USA, but the issue 
for buying one is not only customs charges, but they operate on 110V and not UK 
240V mains.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Slide & film copying - yet again....

[Malcolm Smith]

Mark C noted:

> Regarding scanners - I'd second Godfrey's recommendation. I use a Nikon
> LS 8000, the model which preceded the 9000, and it produces consistent
> and reliable results. 99% of what I scan is B and Vuescan does a
> great job with it.  I do not find that I need to do much tweaking with
> B - I just make sure that the full tonal range of the B film is
> captured (no clipping of the highlights or shadows) and proceed. With
> 35mm I batch scan 12 exposures in a single pass. I can then make
> adjustments in Photoshop. I scan everything I shoot. I have scanned
> close to 4000 frames so far in 2016 (all but 200 or so being 35mm.) The
> scanner is not fast but it is on a dedicated PC and just chugs along in
> the background when I am working on the primary PC.
> 
> Color negatives remain a more time consuming exposure by exposure
> process though, but I shoot only about 10 rolls of  medium format per
> year these days.
> 
> I don't know what Epson scanner you are using, but I would expect that
> you should be able to get good results with 35mm slides. I had good
> luck with batch scanning 35mm color Ektachrome slides using a Canon
> Canoscan
> FS4000 in the past. As I recall, more contrasty and saturated films
> (Velvia and E100VS for example) needed more tweaking. But could batch
> scan E100S and Provia with few problems. Canon had its own version of
> IR dust removal (I think it was called FARE) that worked pretty well.

I'll take a good look at this. The Epson V600 is the one I have, although I
wish I'd found a V850 (although my V600 was a bargain). The slide film I
used, particularly in the late 70s/early 80s, was chosen on price at the
time. I often bought 10 rolls of discount film and batch processed them when
a good processing deal came up. As a result, I have many types of film, each
of which requires tweaking a different way.

Another reason why I'm keen to speed this process up, is that despite
careful storage, some batches of film are starting to deteriorate (often
it's the more expensive films), and whilst I can now restore such film
fairly successfully, it's yet more time to each image.  

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Slide & film copying - yet again....

[Malcolm Smith]

Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
 
> Well, if you don't want to send things out and have 35mm to medium
> format to scan, a good Nikon medium-format film scanner is likely the
> most efficient way to get a number done In semi-automated way. The
> Nikon SuperCoolscan 9000 ED produces excellent scans at 4000 dpi
> resolution (35mm slides up to five at a time, 35mm film strips up to 12
> at a time, 4x 645, 3x 6x6, 2x 6x7 or 6x9 per load with the different
> standard film carriers). There are also ANR glass carriers for more
> complex film loads and odd formats, and some folks make accessory
> carriers for them (I have one that lets me load an entire 40 exposure
> roll of Minox 8x11 film, for instance). NikonScan is long out of
> development, but VueScan drives this scanner beautifully and it can
> make the scanner do lovely tricks with a bit of experience and
> practice.
> 
> The only downside to this route is that these scanners are not cheap
> (about $2000-4000 depending on condition and included accessories), nor
> are they particularly fast (but faster and higher quality than flatbed
> scanners). The good thing is that the VueScan software, particularly in
> its pro version, provides excellent flexibility and will apply the
> basic inversion for negatives for you automatically, which saves a
> massive amount of time when doing a largish number of scans.
> 
> I haven't used mine in a while and should probably put it on the market
> (it's a lot of cash to have tied up in something that you're not using
> actively, never mind being a bulky thing to store). But every time I
> think to do it, I run into a situation where it is the best, if not
> only, way to get it done and I wonder what I'd do if I didn't have it.
> 
> And that's why my closets are so stuffed full the way they are !

The first scanner I bought for film was the Nikon Coolscan IV with 'ICE'
technology; it's OK, very slow and doesn't compare favourably to The Epson
V600 I use now. I said I would sell it on when I got the Epson, but closets
are meant to be filled!

I'd certainly look at the 9000ED now from your observations. Mine would
certainly get the use your one isn't.

The one thing scanning these images in will finally do, is being able to
find them quickly. Once in Lightroom, apart from being able to process the
images, the biggest thing is finding what I want. Right now there are a
small number of slides that, ideally, I'd like to do next. I could spend all
day looking with not much chance of success of finding them at present.

Time is the killer. I don't sleep well, so I find I have time to scan but
I'd like a quicker method, plus of course, I'm still taking pictures every
day.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Slide & film copying - yet again....

[Malcolm Smith]

Darren Addy wrote:

> I shared the link to it when it was mentioned at photorumors.com on
> 2/5/14 (subject line: In addition to the 1.4X TC and the new 645D...)
> and again when it was shown at CP+ on 2/13/14 (subject line: Pentax
> images from CP+ yesterday )

I even remember the subject lines Darren (thanks), but for some reason this 
item escaped me. It seems no one here has bought one though?

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Slide & film copying - yet again....

[Malcolm Smith]

Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:

> You're welcome.
> 
> There is no truly "fast" way to scan negatives and transparencies while
> still getting the best quality from them. The best I've been able to
> come up with in 20 years of scanning practice are reasonably quick ways
> to do a few scans of 35mm, or fewer of medium format, or a couple of
> Polaroid prints, at high quality.
> 
> For medium format, I've taken to using an old Leitz copystand device
> coded the BEOON: it fits either my M-P or SL (with appropriate
> adapter), a Leica M 50mm (or Micro-Nikkor 55mm with adapter) lens, and
> lets me copy 35mm up to 6x9 film as fast as I can switch frames
> underneath it, focus, and make an exposure, netting 24 Mpixel raw
> captures to work with. Very rigid, very nicely made, rather specific to
> either a Leica M bayonet or thread mount body. I used a Sony A7 with it
> too, with an M -> A7 mount adapter. The results are excellent with
> transparencies, but take time with both B and color negs to invert
> and get the tonal scale right. I have several LR presets and custom
> camera calibrations setup to help with it, but it's still time
> consuming.
> 
> For "thousands and thousands" of film exposures to scan, I'd just bite
> the bullet and go to ScanCafe.com to have them all scanned at pro grade
> resolution. They do an excellent job at a reasonable price, and with
> that volume to scan, well, I'd rather work on culling and finish
> rendering the scans than the tedious job of scanning. That's worth the
> money to me; my time is more valuable than that.

You have answered a question I was about to ask about scanning other
formats. I've been left, or have taken over the decades, a number of
different film/slide formats to digitise. Each has their own issues, but the
bulk are 35mm slides.

You are right about the time to scan them and what it is worth. I have tried
two companies in the UK in the past with 50 slides each to scan, and I
wasn't happy with the results. I've found I need to look at each and decide
its fate, and I generally conclude that most are worth scanning, either in
part as a now historical family or local area matter, or I can use the
images in some way in Elements for part of the image. As I'm not happy
farming them out to be done, any way of making a good useable image and
saving time is worth exploring, hence the interest in the new Pentax film
duplicator. I have to say I think it's a lot of money for what it seems to
be, but I can't imagine there is a huge market for this, all these years
after the introduction of DSLRs.

Numbers of slides: I have boxes which take 36 bags of approx 200 each, and I
have at least 5 of them fullway more than I first thought, now I have
them all in one storage system, such as it is

More to think about, thanks Godfrey.

Malcolm




-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Slide & film copying - yet again....

[Malcolm Smith]

mike wilson wrote:

> Same thing, much cheaper:
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/BOWENS-COPYTRAN-TRANSPARENCY-COPIER-W-MANUAL-
> /181469069059,

What a sinister looking device; the electrified naughty step for bad film.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Slide & film copying - yet again....

[Malcolm Smith]

Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:

> For 35mm transparencies and negatives, a Spiratone Dupliscope II with
> the negative accessory (can't recall the name) is commonly available on
> EBay for $35-60 and does an excellent job. These units have a dedicated
> flat-field macro lens and use a T-mount to fit to nearly any camera.
> 
> In my experience, more than the equivalent of about 4000 dpi scan nets
> no additional advantage with most films. Only with some very high
> resolution films (exposed to maximize resolution with sturdy support,
> etc) is there any real value gained from the increased scan/capture
> resolution. In fact, the vast majority of hand-held work on standard
> color or B emulsions sees very very little gain between 2400 and 4000
> dpi capture resolution. There's just very little additional real data
> there ...

Godfrey, Igor & Mark,

Thanks for your comments.

In my case, I pretty much know I'm looking for the impossible; a much more 
rapid way to transfer slides to digital images. I know that the Epson I use 
does a great job, but it's a slow process, and I have thousands and thousands 
still to do. As I've found from the Epson, larger dpi scans above 4000 tend to 
show up imperfections in - or rather on - slides, such as really tiny specs of 
dust which even with decent cleaning and dust reduction still show, giving more 
work in Lightroom at a later date.

A K3 sensor sized image is really all I need, but it is keeping the quality 
that the scanner provides that is the issue. Some of these scans from slides I 
enlarge to A3 prints after work to correct all the howling errors, such as 100% 
level horizons etc have been adjusted all these years on. The fact I can 
restore or improve pictures taken in the 1970s still amazes me, but now I want 
it faster. Some people, you just can't please.

Malcolm

 


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

Slide & film copying - yet again....

[Malcolm Smith]

Much to my surprise, I've only just discovered that Pentax have a product in
this market for slide and film copying, which was shown in Japan in 2014 as
a prototype but is on sale now - no idea how long it has been out, but it
costs approx £850 without accessories in the one place I've found it in the
UK.

Product link: http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.uk/en/duplicator.html

Further info:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2014/04/21/pentax-film-duplicator-helps
-you-scan-35mm-and-medium-format-film-quicker

It looks very much like the bellows set of old reinvented for the digital
age, and given it was launched before the K1, talks about set up with K3 &
645 lenses. Usefully, it's capable of taking images of film of various
formats (provided you buy the relevant accessories to do so).

A product that once again Pentax is very much late to the party for, but
their products are normally well worth the wait. I wonder if anyone has seen
this and can tell us more.

I'm really interested in this.

Malcolm 




-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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 - some unsorted pictures

[Malcolm Smith]

DagT wrote:

> As I´m delurking a little I might as well show some new pictures :-)
> http://www.thrane.name/Pictures/photos-2/Unsorted.html
> The 15 at the bottom are from this year.


Love the use of negative space.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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 2016 - 096, 097 - GDG

[Malcolm Smith]

Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:

> Another memento with Impossible I-1 and the cyanographic film:
> 
>   https://flic.kr/p/HqYPXp
> 
> And an exposure with some regular 600 color (v3 beta) to show that
> "normal" photos are also possible with the I-1:
> 
>   https://flic.kr/p/HqYPKR
> 
> I ordered twelve more packs of color film yesterday… 96 exposures for
> roughly $250. There's a reason to sharpen your eye …! :-)
> 
> Of course, I placed that order two hours before I discovered that the
> tires on my car have worn themselves down past the tread safety marks,
> so there goes another $800. =8^o
> 
> enjoy!
> G

Ouch! to the film cost & unwelcome extra expense.

Costs permitting, keep them coming. There is really something about these 
images.

Malcolm 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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 2016 - 094 - GDG

[Malcolm Smith]

Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
 
> I'm having a lot of fun learning and experimenting with the new I-1
> instant film camera. This one from a pack of Impossible 600
> Cyanographic film … a low-contrast film which has only a cyan layer.
> 
>   https://flic.kr/p/GtEhh4
> 
> The camera does well with it, but it is a tricky film to use
> nonetheless because of the kind of rendering … subject matter becomes
> key. One other frame from this pack may be interesting to post.
> 
> enjoy!

In a world where images are taken and immediately shared on social media etc, I 
initially wondered where such a camera has a place in 2016. These images are 
very different and really offer something new.

I particularly like this cyan image and (although it moves away from the 
printed image size intended) I can imagine this printed at poster size in a 
gallery. Very interesting.

Malcolm  


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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 - from the archives

[Malcolm Smith]

John Coyle wrote:
 
> I've come to the conclusion that I will not have an opportunity to do
> much wet processing of older photos, particularly given the size of the
> archive, which goes back 49 years!  So, now I am scanning only those
> worth preserving and probably leaving to my son, as they will be the
> main family history photos.  The link below is of a shot I just scanned
> from 1972 - I think the quality holds up well.
> 
> http://www.members.iinet.net.au/~jcoyle/PESO15.html
> 
> Comments welcome

Wonderful image & project.

I'm going through the images I took when I was small and family photos. I've
decided not to make a call on what is worth doing and what isn't, and I'm
just plodding through doing the lot as and when I have spare time. At the
moment my boys don't see any real importance in family history or photos,
and assume it will take care of itself in the future. It won't. I'm doing
them now and sending those applicable to other parts of the (now somewhat
geographically spread) family. Someone, at some future point may find them
of interest. The real issue is getting sidetracked by some images!

Malcolm  


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Support the PDML

[Malcolm Smith]

> >Now might be a good time to remind you to throw some cash into the
> PDML
> >kitty, since it is currently as empty as campaign promises.

Done.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Camera bags.

[Malcolm Smith]

Larry Colen wrote:

> If it's worth doing, it is worth overdoing:
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00O6JU2UO/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_dp_ss_3?pf_rd_p=1944
> 687742_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-
> 1_rd_t=201_rd_i=B00AFP5FM8_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER_rd_r=15B15DMZ
> 1X68R2Q80SV6

Ah! Another product from the zombie apocalypse range.

Malcolm



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Lightroom mistakes

[Malcolm Smith]

Larry Colen wrote:

> A series of tutorials showing how to screw up your photos in lightroom.
> http://petapixel.com/2016/05/09/10-common-lightroom-mistakes-fix-avoid/

I've seen some of these mistakes win competitions locally Larry. There were
some dreadful HDR photos used on website to promote Yorkshire (I think Bob W
pointed this out).

Personally, I am in no need of a tutorial on how to screw up photos in
Lightroom, as I've mastered the technique.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Camera bags.

[Malcolm Smith]

Jostein wrote:
 
> I remember I wondered for a while if Peter-in-Brighton's last name was
> Toodle-Pip... :-)
> 
> One site that has a collection of bags outside the mainstream is here:
> http://www.fotobag.no/en/
> 
> No idea if their prices compare internationally, but maybe you get
> ideas you can look up from UK vendors. I also happen to know the couple
> who run the shop. Two pharmacists who abandoned the rat race, went
> rural and started this. I don't get commission though... :-)
> 
> Good hunt.
> 
> Jostein

Toodle-pip - of course!

Thanks Jostein, a very interesting range of high quality bags. I hope they
do well but my feeling is they are too nice for my purpose.

Malcolm  


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Camera bags.

[Malcolm Smith]

Igor wrote:

> I suspect you might be talking about a bag similar to my Tamrac bag
> that I bought and use just for local, car-based trips where I need the
> convenience of easy access to multiple cameras and/or lenses, and being
> able to lay down a camera with the attached flash.
> 
> If I were buying a new bag for 2 DSLs, I would consider Vaguard bags.
> I've written on this list that I am VERY happy with Vaguard Up Rise II
> - 33, which is a messenger bag, which made it to several countries on 4
> continents.
> What I like about Vanguard bags is thoughfulness of the design.
> Besides other advantages, this bag feels big and spacious without being
> overly bulky.
> (The main shortcoming of that bag that I discovered is the awkward rain
> cover.)
> 
> Vanguard has other lines designed for 2 DSLRs. I haven't seen those
> personally -- only on the web site:
> http://www.vanguardworld.us/photo_video_us/products/camera-
> bags.html?bag_configuration=1150
> 
> It seems to me that XCENIOR 41 and XCENIOR 36 might fit the description
> of what you are looking for:
> http://www.vanguardworld.us/photo_video_us/products/camera-
> bags/xcenior-41.html
> http://www.vanguardworld.us/photo_video_us/products/camera-
> bags/xcenior-36.html
> (I don't think they are THAT much looking as photo bags.)

Thanks Igor. The Tamrac bag I have would be suitable for a professional
carrying everything for every contingency, but I wouldn't use it even going
somewhere by car. I am delighted with it nonetheless as a storage unit I can
find everything in at once.

The bag I need must be big enough for 2 DSLRs with lenses attached, a little
extra space for spare batteries and sundries, but not greatly bigger than it
needs to be. It needs to be comfortable to carry - my photography walks are
generally in the 5 to 8 mile range - and waterproof rather than shower
proof.

I'll take a good look at their website. I have a good understanding of why
photographers have so many bags, and yet none of them are just quite right.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Camera bags.

[Malcolm Smith]

Steve Cottrell wrote:

> Right here maybe?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mine is the smaller brother and I carry 2 mirrorless and 5 lenses.

Seen and put in the probably not pile. The darn bag looks too good.

Malcolm 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Camera bags.

[Malcolm Smith]

Bob W wrote:

> Yes, it's similar in size and dimensions to some of the Carradice
> saddle bags.
> 
> Don't use one as a saddle bag though. A few years ago I did some
> touring around Rouen, and used a Domke F-5XB as a bar bag. It worked
> reasonably well, but quickly wore a hole in the bag where it rubbed
> against the head tube.
> 
> http://www.web-options.com/Rouen2013/content/P0300019_large.html
> 
> Proper saddle and bar bags are cheaper. It's better to put the camera
> bag inside the saddle bag.

My daily ride is this:

http://www.cinelli.it/site/components/com_virtuemart/shop_image/product/Gazz
etta_della_s_55fc1b4eaf853.jpg

I am working on a website at present, so no doubt you'll see the real thing
in due course. I bought one when they first came out a few years ago, and
the rear carrier wasn't included (I added one) and it came with a better
groupset than it's currently sold with. The front rack usually carries my
small camera bag, and I can get quickly to it to stop and take pictures.

An expensive bag I would certainly put inside a saddle bag.

Malcolm 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Camera bags.

[Malcolm Smith]

Bob W wrote:

> I think his surname is Blake. I've just looked at the archives, and
> this subject came up in September 2006, so we're a bit early for the
> 10th anniversary.
> 
> The best camera bags for shooting are still the Domke F series. The F-2
> in particular was designed specifically for shooting with two bodies,
> and I've used mine for twenty years for that.
> 
> http://www.tiffen.com/displayproduct.html?tablename=domke=700-
> 02B
> 
> You can configure the innards different ways, eg one config for
> storage, another for shooting. For shooting I divide the interior into
> two parts, one per camera, and use the bag's pockets for accessories,
> although generally that's only for transport - when I'm shooting I have
> my cameras on my shoulders. On a strap, obviously; I can't attach
> tripod mounts to my shoulders.
> 
> Hmm. Maybe I've just had a business idea... It's crazy, but it might
> just work.

Thanks Bob, I'll take a look at that first thing tomorrow; it looks the best 
option I've seen. Very much like a cycle saddle bag at first glance, although 
it may be I'm just tired.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Camera bags.

[Malcolm Smith]

Rick Womer wrote:

> I think I have the same gigantic Tamrac. I bought it when I was
> traveling to the UK about 10 years ago, and BA allowed only one carry-
> on item. I also use it as a storage locker now.
> 
> A two-DSLR bag that doesn't look like a camera bag? Lots of luck.

Yes, that will be the one, it's like a bottomless pit! As regards the search, I 
know...

Finally moved several Tb of photos today onto one drive in Lightroom, a 
thankless but successful task that started at 4AM and finished 13 hours later, 
so time for bed. I have the joy of an identical back-up tomorrow, although I 
still have copies - just to be safe.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Camera bags.

[Malcolm Smith]

Stanley Halpin wrote:
 
> I have no help re your bag quest - all 7 of mine are almost but not
> quite suited to the purpose but I am sure #8 will be perfect!

> > I'm still on the search for a decent bag. The last time I bought a
> bag
> > I really liked, was a gigantic Tamrac from a list member on the south
> > coast of the UK (Brighton? Peter?) who I believe had a shop there and
> > moved to Japan (is that right?)
> 
> But I did want to confirm your recollection. It was Peter in Brighton.
> I too am blocking on his full name but I spent a very pleasant day with
> said gentleman wandering the byways of SE England on one of my
> occasional visits… His name came up again shortly after the tsunami
> when Bob Sullivan was looking for contacts in Japan who could help him
> establish the status of a friend who might have been affected by the
> disaster.

Thanks Stan, it's just it was such a long time ago! The bag hunt is quite a 
challenge.

Thank you Mike for providing his surname.

Malcolm


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

Camera bags.

[Malcolm Smith]

I'm still on the search for a decent bag. The last time I bought a bag I
really liked, was a gigantic Tamrac from a list member on the south coast of
the UK (Brighton? Peter?) who I believe had a shop there and moved to Japan
(is that right?) - this was many moons ago when a Pentax digital camera of
any sort was just speculation. Great bag, I store my film cameras in it etc,
but only useful otherwise day to day if you have some poor devil to cart it
around for you. I have a backpack which I got as a free gift with a DSLR
body that is too small, and another free bag which just takes a body and a
50mm lens attached. 

Over the years from film, I've noticed that many bags have moved away from
being able to house two camera bodies. I assume that because you now have
variable ISO, manufactures don't feel you need to have two bodies, as you
might once have done using different film. The thing is, what I want is a
bag that is capable of housing two bodies with lenses attached and enough
room for spare batteries and all the sundries of the digital age. Many of
the places I take photos, especially in the Summer are dusty environments
(horse stables for a start), and frankly, I don't want to be changing lenses
on site. I normally have one body set up with the 16-85 & the other with a
55-300.

What I am fed up doing, is carrying a bag which doesn't suit, and a shopping
bag for the other camera. I don't really want a larger backpack, or a bag
which screams that it contains camera equipment inside. I'm not sure there
is anything out there that fits the job I want done.

Any ideas?

Malcolm 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Old cars with a new camera.

[Malcolm Smith]

Paul Stenquist wrote:

> http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=18229161=lg

Thanks Paul. Rats, that's good. I can see this K-1 is going to be a real
wallet buster and credit card exterminator

Malcolm 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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 - Alpine Penny-cress

[Malcolm Smith]

Jostein wrote:

> http://www.alunfoto.no/innhold/alpine-penny-cress/lightbox/

Astonishingly good, like it has been caught in a heavy storm, not of rain
but of light.

Malcolm 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Old cars with a new camera.

[Malcolm Smith]

Bill wrote:

> http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrphoto/pictures/cars2/index.html

Very much enjoyed these and those by Paul S.

Has anyone tried out really high ISO pictures yet? I regularly take images
late in the evening - not an issue with the longer days at present - and
anything that allows me to not use a flash, is a real plus. I've been
impressed with what the K3 can do for late night street photography; is the
K1 noticeably better?

Malcolm 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Temptation comes Malcolm Smith's way?

[Malcolm Smith]

Darren Addy wrote:

> London Camera Exchange Horsefair Bristol (by Debenhams) has tweeted
> that they have the K-1 in stock.
> 
> Also Aden Camera in Toronto, on this side of the pond.

You may remember a thread on slide copying; one of the methods I used was a 
Nikon D800, 60mm macro lens and Nikon ES-1 slide copier attachment. One of my 
friends bought the camera when it was released, but realised very early on that 
it was way too much camera for him and it spent most of its life in a cupboard. 
Last week he bought a Canon bridge camera and is delighted with it. We came to 
deal on the D800 body, which he knows he won't use again (he sold the lenses he 
bought at the time a while back, the 60mm lens and slide attachment are my own) 
and I now have that as my full frame camera, albeit with only one lens.

This will keep me happy for a while, and no doubt I will part exchange this in 
for a K-1 nearer Christmas, or one of those days later in the year they do 
major discounts.

Malcolm  




-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: May PUG - Golden Hour is UP

[Malcolm Smith]

Brian Walters:

> As usual you'll find the gallery here:
> 
> http://pug.komkon.org/

Excellent as usual, two that particularly caught my eye:

Bathed In Gold - Don Guthrie

Time For A Sundowner - John Coyle

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: My K1

[Malcolm Smith]

Mark Roberts wrote:

> First user reports are very encouraging. If you have enough willpower
> not to order (or have already ordered) a K-1 check out this one on DP
> Review: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57683769
> 
> "The lack of noise at high ISO is absolutely staggering as others have
> said. It seems about three or 4 stops cleaner than a K3 i.e. ISO
> 800-1600 seems like ISO100 on a K3!! This thing will be a low light
> monster!"

My credit card is in hiding this month. At the mention of the K-1 it
disappears.

The low light capability is really something. I've compared the spec with
the D800 I use from time to time, and K-1 really seems to be well ahead. I
look forward at some point to holding one in a shop, as the D800 is quiet
large and I like that. I hope that this camera is a huge success for the
company. 

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: My K1

[Malcolm Smith]

Steve Cottrell wrote:

> I better put the oven on :-(

When you made that offer, I thought it was highly unlikely for millinery
goods to become munchables.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: My K1

[Malcolm Smith]

Bill wrote:

> Apparently was shipped from Mississauga yesterday. There is a remote
> possibility of it showing up tomorrow, otherwise Monday or Tuesday next
> week.
> I hate waiting.

SRS in the UK were posting them out next day delivery yesterday, so there
should be happy people today. Those who collected from stores yesterday are
already posting pictures from a look on the web this morning.  Hurry up and
get your K-1 in action Bill.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Shipping notice from B

[Malcolm Smith]

John wrote:

> That would be cool, although I hope Pentax sells a shit-pot load of K-
> 1s, enough that they do need to order more sensors.
> 
> I realize that's probably just a dream, but it's my dream.

I hope they sell a stack of them as well, including one to myself just
before the end of the year.

Malcolm 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Lightroom - change of storage drive question.

[Malcolm Smith]

John wrote:
 
> You should be able to have Lightroom move them to the new drive, so it
> would already know where the photos are located. I know you can do that
> with Adobe Bridge, so Lightroom should have the same capability.

Going to do this mid-week. Fingers crossed.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: K-3 II shooting video: No Card In the Camera (Wanna bet?)

[Malcolm Smith]

Larry Colen wrote:

> The first time I tried video on a DSLR I realized something.  I was
> photographing a musician on my Kx with my 77/1.8, so it was a rather
> shallow depth of field.  I realized that "home movies", whether super
> 8, camcorder, or cell phone have always been done on small sensor
> systems, which give a lot of depth of field.  Everything I'd ever seen
> with shallow depth of field was professional, either movies or TV, so
> just by having shallow depth of field my mind associated it with
> "professional quality".

Noted. I've seen a lot of this shallow depth of field on YouTube but for me
it is pretty much the opposite of the deep depth of field I need. Then
again, I'm not a professional.

Malcolm 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Lightroom - change of storage drive question.

[Malcolm Smith]

Stanley Halpin wrote:

> I've gone through this many times.
> 
> 1. Make a back-up of your images before you do anything.
> 2. If you use Lightroom to move the photos to the new location, then
> there is no need to reassociate your LR database/catalog with the
> images because LR knows where it put them.
> 3. I presume you are just moving the images to your new drive, not the
> LR application or catalog? Those two should stay on your main drive for
> the sake of processing speed.
> 
> 4. If you want to get really wild and crazy…
>   a. you can split the location of your images. I don’t think LR
> cares.
>   b. On my internal hard drive, I currently have my 2016 and 2015
> folders. The 2014 and earlier have been moved to a secondary drive.
>   c. My logic is that I am much less likely to be accessing the
> older files, and so the extra search/retrieval of secondary storage
> doesn’t become an issue all that often. And so far I have been able to
> accommodate the two most-recent years’ images within my primary drive.
> As files get bigger I may need to start doing six-month rather than
> one-year chunks.

Thanks Stan. I'm doing very regular backups to hard drive(s). The main computer 
is on the way out; it's long past the time that I generally replace a computer, 
it won't run all the software I have and a number of things, such as the DVD 
drive no longer work. I'm therefore moving as much off it as I can until I get 
a replacement - with a much larger hard drive, in case of sudden failure. 

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Lightroom - change of storage drive question.

[Malcolm Smith]

Matthew Hunt wrote:

> If you do the move within Lightroom, the catalog is updated as part of
> the move. That's the advantage of doing the move in Lightroom--it knows
> that you're moving the photos and keeps everything straight.

Thanks, that's excellent news.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Lightroom - change of storage drive question.

[Malcolm Smith]

Matthew Hunt wrote:

> Drag and drop them within Lightroom. That way you won't have to "fix"
> anything in Lightroom.

For once, I am planning to do as much as possible within Lightroom. Moving
the photos within Lightroom I don't think will be the issue, it's checking
the catalogue still knows where everything is, which I assume is also an
update of details within Lightroom, so it knows where to look for the
pictures on a different drive. This I'm sure I can find how to do in my
book. I'm just hoping that someone has done this here before and swapping
drives really isn't an issue.

Malcolm 


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

Lightroom - change of storage drive question.

[Malcolm Smith]

My taking photos every day project has started to fill up hard drive space
so quickly, to the extent that I need to move it somewhere bigger. This
doesn't even cover the scanning of photos & slides. I have backup drives
which are large, but I've just got a 5Tb drive to move Lightroom onto. 

Now, I'm not the best at computer related activities, but it seems I can set
up said new drive as a new folder within Lightroom, and drag and drop the
contents of the old drive onto the new. This will take some hours to move
the images. Having relocated the pictures, I then have to tell Lightroom to
recognise that all the pictures are there, and that's where it should look
for them. I have no doubt the procedure is hidden in a large book on
Lightroom I have.

All I really want to know is if someone here has already had to do this, and
aside from the long copying time, did all go OK?

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: K-3 II shooting video: No Card In the Camera (Wanna bet?)

[Malcolm Smith]

Darren Addy wrote:
 
> I haven't been much of a video shooter, but I thought I would try
> capturing video of the sun today. But when I tried it (with two
> different cards) when I went to start recording it gave me a "No Card
> in Camera" message. Same cards record video fine in the K-01.
> 
> As I was typing this, it occured to me: Does video only go to Slot 2?
> Or is that something I set in menus, maybe? I didn't think of it at the
> time or I would have tried it.
> 
> Just tried the card in Slot 2 NOW and it records fine. So I must have
> set it up that way (or it is that way by default). Decided to still
> send this to the group in case knowing this is useful to anyone else.
> I'm never afraid to run my ignorance up the flagpole for the Greater
> Good.
> :)

I'd be very interested to know how you get on with video Darren.

I've not really had any use of the cameras(s) that have video capabilities, as 
I've had no real interest. However, this morning, a 'phone call from friend 
suggested making a short video on the changes in my area over the last 25 years 
(basically since he left my area), which although he mentioned as a joke, it's 
something I'd like a go at.

As the function is there, I should at least give it a try. Our family was not 
much into home movies; I've got a dozen or so 8mm films from the late 60's my 
father made (not seen since I was a teenager) and two mini Betamax video 
cassettes from a camera which probably had one hour of use in the time my 
parents had it.

Malcolm  


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: PDML: Where are you located? (Lurkers also welcome to reply.)

[Malcolm Smith]

Darren Addy wrote:
 
> I'm curious as to where in the world PDML people are located. A few of
> you I may know (or know approximately) but this thread would be a handy
> way for people to just hit "reply" and provide their
> region/city/country. One practical use: It might help all of us to know
> where prospective meet-ups might be scheduled when traveling, etc.
> 
> As you may know I'm in South-Central Nebraska U.S. - near Grand Island.

London, UK.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: You can never have too many lenses?

[Malcolm Smith]

Stanley Halpin wrote:

> I have a spreadsheet. I keep track of things like purchase price,
> current retail value new and used (updated every 6-9 months), filter
> size, focal length and FOV. It wasn’t my primary intent, but such a
> list does help me maintain my inventory as I begin to notice
> unnecessary redundancy in FOV. I’ve recently moved several lenses from
> the Active portion of the sheet to the To Be Sold portion, while also
> pulling back the 135/2.5 and A-200/4 for possible use.

I like that Stan. Might have to give my current list an upgrade.

Malcolm 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: You can never have too many lenses?

[Malcolm Smith]

Darren Addy wrote:

> To be clear, it wasn't the making of lists I was commenting on. It was
> the broadcasting of them.

Agreed. They do have their use for a photographer within the home, rather than 
on the web. 

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: You can never have too many lenses?

[Malcolm Smith]

Darren Addy wrote:


> It is always a little sad when someone thinks they are being impressive
> when they broadcast lists like this.

A list can be useful of gear you have. A few years ago, I made such a list and 
then wrote beside it the date that a lens/whatever was last used. Reviewing it 
some months later, if you haven't updated the list against an item, perhaps you 
no longer need it. I sold on a number of lenses after that exercise, and the 
ones I sold on I've not missed.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Changes (aging) new beginnings

[Malcolm Smith]

Mark Stringer wrote:
 
> I was very happy with the K-1 specs. Pentax did not disappoint.  Maybe
> one day I will give the full frame a try. The K-1 is really what got me
> excited.  K-3II seems to be the K-1 just a little smaller. I can see
> myself toting it around.  It is not the camera so much as the
> camera/lens combo in full frame.
> 
> The K-1 with the 70-200 is a  great setup and I almost pulled the
> trigger on the lens.  After watching lot of youtube stuff and seeing
> the size of the full frame gear side by side to alternatives I realized
> it was not to be at this time.
> 
> Now I want to see the HD stuff vs the regular smc lens, use what I have
> and update my lens kit.  My lens collection is very good but older.
> There is talk the older FA for film may not provide what newer lens can
> on the new digital sensors.  I will see.  I don't want to be
> disappointed and will go for the newer lens which are probably smaller
> and better.
> 
> Boning up on my Lightroom skills also.  I have LR 5.  It will never the
> the "old days" ME Super, 67 and lots of time in the darkroom but I am
> looking for the "new days" now.
> 
> You know I think I paid about what a K-1 costs for my *istD.  I still
> have it.

I do see your point and how this will work for you.

For myself, those same points make me wonder more about the K-1. I fully
agree that the latest lenses designed to go with full frame are likely to be
better. I cut back my lens collection a while back, but I still have a
number of lenses from my film days that could be used whilst I save up. I
get to use a Nikon D800 from time to time, and I can't say the larger camera
or heavier lens combination is an issue - for me. Of course it depends on
what you are doing; up until about 18 months or so ago, most of the time I
was carting about a tripod as well as a camera bag for landscapes, but now
I'm trying to shoot more street and urban, so a K-3 and a smaller lens is
ideal. A K3 with a 40mm pancake lens fits in my coat pocket.

Lightroom I'm finally getting to grips with, but I'm struggling with
Elements (13) at present. I think the K-1 is fractionally cheaper than I
paid for my *ist D.

No doubt the folk here will tell us what we are missing when they have the
K-1 in their hands.

Malcolm  


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Changes (aging) new beginnings

[Malcolm Smith]

Mark C wrote:

> I don't think you can go wrong with the K-3II. As Paul says, the APS-C
> cameras are superb.
> 
> In terms of getting out and shooting - I gave myself a photo-a-day
> assignment for 2016 - rather spontaneously around 4 PM New Year's day
> while contemplating that I hadn't dome much of any photo work in the
> preceding month. I've stuck to it and while much of what I've come up
> with is crap it has really forced me to shoot. In even just 3 months in
> there have been plenty of days where I have trudged out to get a photo
> when I would otherwise have stayed put. I highly recommend a PAD or PAW
> project to stimulate to photographic activity.

I certainly don't regret buying the K-3ii. I also started to take pictures
every day on the first of January this year, without fail; I've already
braved the high wind and rain today to take some. I'd like to say that I had
some grand plan, but the truth of the matter is that I needed to force
myself out every day to exercise and deal with some back issues (successful
so far), and also because it's pointless owning such a camera and not using
it. The next purchase is another 4TB hard drive, as the smaller drive I use
day to day is almost at capacity, as a result of daily photography.

I do regret not pre-ordering a K-1. From what I've seen and read, it is
pretty much exactly what I would have wanted from a full frame camera. I'd
also feel confident about the purchase being right first time, whereas some
cameras that are new get recalled to get things fixed - isn't the Nikon D750
(certain batches?) on a second recall? 

Malcolm 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Cleaning mouldy 35mm slides.

[Malcolm Smith]

John wrote:

> Naphtha & 98% alcohol dry really fast. You have to be careful you're
> not just sliding the dirt & fungus around, and if the surface dries
> while you're still rubbing, there's a risk of scratching the emulsion.
> 
> If you're going to be removing the slides from their mounts &
> remounting them after cleaning, you might try using something like pre-
> moistened eyeglass cleaning wipes.
> 
> http://www.walgreens.com/store/c/walgreens-pre-moistened-lens-
> wipes/ID=prod6191605-product
> 
> I've also used a lens cloth wetted with Photo-Flo followed by dipping
> in Photo-Flo followed by distilled water to rinse & hanging them to dry
> before remounting.

Luckily - or is that really lucky? - I have some fairly mouldy slides of no
consequence to practice on first. I suspect that after a few goes I'll get
some idea of the skill involved to remove, rather scoot the mould/dirt/fluff
etc about.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: April PUG Countdown

[Malcolm Smith]

Bob W-PDML wrote:
 
> Storm Thorgerson got there first:
> 
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/24/PinkFloyd_ANicePair.jpg

Fantastic body of work, especially the cover for The Cranberries album 'Bury
the hatchet'.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Cleaning mouldy 35mm slides.

[Malcolm Smith]

Darren Addy wrote:

> Kodak's advice:
> http://support.en.kodak.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/33120/~/remove-
> mold%2Ffungus-from-negatives-or-slides/selected/true
> This site also says that naptha can be used:
> http://www.old-photo.com/pages/35mm-slide-cleaning.htm
> 
> Pure alcohol. Would that mean you could also use Everclear?

Interesting, thanks. I'd concluded that the slides would have to be removed 
from their mounts to clean them effectively. In an eBay lot I bought some years 
ago, I got a stack of new mounts. I'm fairly sure I have a slide mount press 
with them as well. I'm right at the cutting edge of modern technology.

Malcolm 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Cleaning mouldy 35mm slides.

[Malcolm Smith]

Paul Stenquist wrote:

> You can still buy PEC-12, a liquid film cleaner, from most camera
> stores and numerous web sources. Not as good as the old stuff, which
> contained a chemical that's now banned, but it does a decent job.
> Paul via phone

Thanks Paul, I've just ordered some. I've already got a supply of lint free
wipes. 

Malcolm


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

Cleaning mouldy 35mm slides.

[Malcolm Smith]

I've just been given 3 x 100 boxes of slides in sealed trays which date back
to the 1970s. They have been poorly stored and some of the slides (about
half) have some measure of mould damage or other damage. They are mostly of
family and local area of the period and are time worthy for me to try and
repair as best as possible.

Some of them are clear of overall mould but spotted; these I can scan and
repair in Lightroom or Elements. The others still have a mould growth over
the entire film surface, and I want to clean them up before scanning and
digital repair. The image behind nearly all of them is good enough to try
and repair. In the days of local photography shops (happy days, the four
local ones to me are all long closed) I believe there was a liquid film
cleaner that could be bought, although I have no idea if it was up to this
sort of job anyway. Is there anything I can acquire from a chemist, or some
household cleaning product I could use, possibly diluted, that is gentle
enough to remove the mould before drying and scanning?

Malcolm 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Pentax Full Frame Review (August 1981)

[Malcolm Smith]

Darren Addy wrote:

> A little trip down memory lane?
> https://goo.gl/fsXjRi
> or
> https://books.google.com/books?id=vN2DsQuik3oC=PA101=%22Lab%20Rep
> ort%22+%22Popular+Photography%22=en=X=0ahUKEwj6seD3wdLLAhWBto
> MKHTpCAoQQ6AEIOzAB#v=onepage=%22Lab%20Report%22%20%22Popular%20Photog
> raphy%22=false

I have one in fairly regular use, along with a K2 DMD.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: a photographer

[Malcolm Smith]

John wrote:

> He showed a number of short videos of National Park, National Forest &
> BLM lands that were taken using drones.
> 
> To the best of my knowledge, using a drone in National Parks requires
> written permission from the park superintendent. His presentation
> didn't include any information on how, if or when he acquired
> permission.
> 
> He did acknowledge the general FAA regulation that drones cannot be
> operated beyond line of sight of the operator, but I couldn't determine
> if that acknowledgement included a "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" or not.
> 
> My reservations regarding drones is entirely concerning irresponsible
> operators. There have already been instances where careless operators
> have injured bystanders on the ground. Luckily, no fatalities.
> 
> 
> But, I think it's only a matter of time before some idiot flies one
> into the path of a commercial aircraft & causes a crash.

As Jostein pointed out, despite regulations and common sense (which isn't
that common it appears) idiots hell bent on owning one will obtain one.

Photographers using new technology sensibly is all it requires, but
legislation is a catch all. I would imagine that your speaker's images have
enhanced the reputation of said National Park.

In the example I described, the idiot using a drone, chose to do so on a
narrow strip of land designated as a footpath on a windy day, between a
field of horses one side, and a reservoir with pylons alongside the other.
How he only lost it in the reservoir was a mystery.

Aside: The last meeting I attended was a competition. Within a few images it
was clear the judge had an eyesight issue, as he dismissed an excellent
capture of an otter eating as a model otter staged near a stream, and a
shapely girl in the background of another as a man! From there on in, the
evening wasn't about the images, but what he saw them as. Hardly the quality
of evening you're used to.

Malcolm   




-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: FSF teaser

[Malcolm Smith]

Larry Colen wrote:

> My goal is to get a K-1 as soon as I reasonably can, at which point I
> will likely sell either my K-3 or this K-3ii

I need someone to give a convincing discount, preferably with one of the new
lenses. I've thought long and hard about part exchanging either the K-3 or
the K-3ii to help with the purchase and I'm not prepared to do it. I have a
set up that works for me, and it's like the film days again where I had an
LX and an MX in the camera bag and all was well. The K-1 body is a much
better price than I had hoped; it's the reassuring heavy and expensive
lenses that I need to go with them that poses the issue. I'd end up using
the camera in crop mode for some time to come with the current lenses in my
bag, which rather defeats the point of owning a 36MP camera.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: a photographer

[Malcolm Smith]

John wrote:

> Plus he's doing a lot of drone photography.
> 
> I'm still not sure how I feel about drones. He's getting some great
> photos - photos I aspire to take.
> 
> But, there's a lot of other drone users out there who are
> irresponsible.

Great photography club, where you get this level of speaker.

I like the photos provided by drones, but regret not buying some months ago.
Due to the idiots which seem to use 90% of them locally, I'm expecting a ban
or strict restrictions to be imposed very soon on drone usage. All this
could have been sorted at point of sale, with dealers not selling to people
too stupid to use them safely. Having said that, I wouldn't have missed for
the world the reaction from the twerp who ditched his in a reservoir, which
I had the pleasure of watching late last year.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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 2016 - 051 - GDG

[Malcolm Smith]

Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: 

> They come so close you feel they might knock your hat off …
> 
>http://flic.kr/p/DHauHV
> 
> enjoy!
> G

Indeed, I do enjoy these pictures you post.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: 1st color film scan on new Epson V600

[Malcolm Smith]

Christine Aguila wrote:

> Thanks, Malcom.  I just posted that I found that same link.  Logic
> would have it that I should research first, then ask the question, but
> logic seems to be out to lunch on me today :-).

I also have the V600. Very pleased with it I am too, and seems to cope really 
well with anything it is supposed to scan.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: 1st color film scan on new Epson V600

[Malcolm Smith]

Hi Christine,

http://www.taphilo.com/Photo/kodakfilmnumxref.shtml

May help.

Malcolm

> Hi Everyone!
> 
> I’ve had my new Epson V600 scanner for a few months now, and ironically
> I’ve been using it more for document scanning than film.
> 
> But today I’ve stole some time to try it out on some color film.  This
> was taken with my Pentax MX, and along the film edge it says Kodak
> Safety Film 5035.  Anyone have any idea what that means?  If I once
> knew, I’ve long since forgotten.
> 
> Of this series, this has always been my favorite.  I did some dust
> removal, but I can see more work needs to be done.  Also, does it look
> like theres a bit of a blue color cast to it?  Or does it look ok to
> you guys?
> 
> Scanning quality doesn’t look too shabby for a $200 scanner, though if
> the expertise of the list says otherwise, I’m willing to be schooled.
> 
> Comments welcome.
> 
> http://caguilaphotography.com/1stv600scan/content/hot_air_balloon_scan_
> large.html
> 
> 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: Camera size has the K-1 available for comparison.

[Malcolm Smith]

P.J. Alling wrote:

> It's quite a bit smaller than the Nikon D810.
> 
> http://camerasize.com/compare/#659,557

I know I'm in the minority, but I like the size of the D810. If you have
large hands, this continual race to make a smaller camera results in tiny
buttons to press. Nothing wrong with a Pentax 67 sized camera.

I take it the latest battery grips come with a warning that it may make your
camera look fat.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: K1 ordered

[Malcolm Smith]

Boris Liberman wrote:

> Lovely... Now you will have to share with the team, 'cause it would
> seem you're going to be the earliest adopter here...
> 
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Paul Stenquist 
> wrote:
> > I had planned to wait awhile for the price to drop before buying a
> K1, but at $1800, I figured, why not now! Ordered from B because they
> know how to ship cameras and are good when there's a problem.
> > Since I had expected to spend 3K for the K1, this opens the door for
> the 24-70/2.8 real soon.

Sadly, I won't be buying one early either.

Get well soon Paul. I look forward to seeing pictures from the new Pentax FF
camera.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: A photograph that lies without being faked

[Malcolm Smith]

> > 2016-02-18 16:28 GMT+02:00 Mark Roberts :
> >> Check it out:
> >> http://petapixel.com/2016/02/16/real-estate-photo-illegal-false-
> adver
> >> tising/ I'm pretty sure that there's no Photoshop involved here: The
> >> photographer just got very close with a wide angle lens and then
> >> positioned the camera fairly low to the ground. (You can see from
> >> other photos that the p[hotographer would have to have been *very*
> >> close to the house to be on the lawn.)

Only just seen this. I thought that was standard agent photography. Plenty
of dodgy pictures of property locally on a regular basis. Best thing I've
seen UK wide though, was an isolated bungalow that seemed in a beautiful
area - until a local journalist posted the full scene in the shadow of a
nuclear reactor (Sizewell B?).

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Slide Copying With Bellows

[Malcolm Smith]

Kim Tang wrote:

> I recall someone was recently exploring digitizing slides with with a
> DSLR and bellows. May I please ask, how did that work and what was the
> setup?
> 
> How does it compare quality-wise to a flat-bed scanner or film scanner?

In recent times I've tried several methods of scanning slides. In reverse
order from worst  to best in my opinion:

4. Bellows and Slide Copier A - just too fiddly setting it up for one slide
at a time.
3. Nikon Coolscan IV film scanner - better products available now and this
is slow, one slide at a time.
2. Nikon D800, tripod, 60mm lens and slide copier attachment. For good
slides, a good method, but again one at a time.
1. Epson V600 flat bed scanner. Excellent results and scans 4 slides at a
time. In hindsight, a V850 would have been better, as I understand it
tackles 12 slides at a time, both are great with negatives and photograph
scanning.

Overall, time has moved on and the best results come from scanning with the
Epson, and has none of the setting up issues that using a camera has.

Malcolm  


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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 2016 - 022-031 - GDG

[Malcolm Smith]

Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:

> It was good to get out with a camera again yesterday. I was in a dreamy
> mood, the morning was gray at first and brightened later. Three of the
> ten photos I've posted:
> 
>   https://flic.kr/p/CJhPAU
>   https://flic.kr/p/CJpBNv
>   https://flic.kr/p/DeFGAN
> 
> Set of ten photos available @ https://flic.kr/s/aHsktJAg9w

Another excellent set, I really like these.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Please Do Me a Favor

[Malcolm Smith]

Bruce Walker wrote:

> I use(d) LinkedIn to manage and host my resume, and it is(was) my
> professional addressbook. As my link into The Old Boys Network I
> indirectly got jobs through it. I use the present(past) tense as I'm
> retired from IT but I still don't have my head fully around that. :)
> 
> But I hate the UI and its terrible builtin messaging. It's even worse
> than Facebook. And the groups features - gah! Useless. It's just not a
> very sociable social network.

It's been interesting reading the replies. These discussions about LinkedIn
happen from time to time; in another group last year full of electronics and
other engineers, (amateur radio topics and UK subscribers mainly) all that
anyone seemed to get were requests to join. No one seemed to get more from
it than that. I've lost count of the (rejected) requests to join I've had
over the years, but I assume someone here in the UK has found it of benefit?
Do these social networks have an expiry date and people move to the next
fashionable version?

Malcolm  


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Please Do Me a Favor

[Malcolm Smith]

John wrote:

> Correction - it's LinkedIn without a dash.
> 
> It's not just one PDML list member. I've received multiple invites on
> multiple occasions to join LinkedIn from multiple list members.
> 
> I don't think the list members are sending them intentionally, but the
> SPAM does appear to come from the list members' LinkedIn accounts.
> 
> Anyone who is a member of LinkedIn, please check your account settings.

I've had no end of these darn e-mails. I've spoken to a couple of people
who've (supposedly) sent them, and they have no idea how regularly or how
many of these messages are sent. The one thing I did ask was how they
benefitted from membership, and no one has told me anything positive; it's
usually being sent other membership requests!

Malcolm 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: K-1 Sensor

[Malcolm Smith]

My concerns are about everything short of the FF body. From time to time, I
get to use a Nikon D800 (which I love but isn't relevant). 

To use a FF cameras a lot of the time, would mean I would have to check my
SDHC/CF cards were of a suitable size and speed, lenses would have to be top
notch to record the extra detail and my computer would have to be upgraded
to deal with the larger file sizes. As it is, I notice how much longer
images from the K3 take to process than the K7, and the D800 at 36MP really
slows down my computer to the point of Lightroom running out of memory. I
end up having to close it down and re-start it to finish anything when it is
dealing with large file images.

The above may not be an issue to you; you may update things far more often
than I do, but a camera producing huge file sizes would mean a lot of
upgrading and renewal here.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Off We Go for 2016! January PUG is UP!

[Malcolm Smith]

A lovely set of images.

My three favourites in no particular order:

St Louis Courthouse - Rick Womer
Once Upon A Morning - Bruce Walker
Floating - Don Guthrie

Malcolm



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: January PUG - Last Call

[Malcolm Smith]

Brian Walters wrote:

> Just a reminder that this one closes on Friday evening, Sydney time.
> About 17 submissions so far.

Is mine one of them Brian? This time I didn't get a submission
acknowledgement, and it isn't on any Spam folder.

Thanks,

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Bombarded by news of new Nikons.

[Malcolm Smith]

Darren Addy wrote:

> Nikon has lots of adherents and spends lots of advertising dollars, so
> it is not surprising that whatever Nikon rolls out gets lots of
> attention. Also, blogs and photosites are beasts that need to be fed,
> so ANY photographic new is grist for the mill, particularly when it is
> from one of the Big Dogs.
> 
> However, these announcements hold very little interest for me. I don't
> own Nikon mount glass (other than a couple of older screw-AF Nikkors
> that I plan to sell, a 50mm f1.8 and a 70-210mm f/4-5.6. Oh, and an old
> AI 135mm manual focus). The only people who really might have more than
> a passing interest are those who can afford to sell everything in one
> mount and reinvest in another (and that certainly isn't me).
> 
> I remain quite pleased with the current Pentax offerings (frankly,
> anything since the K-5 remains a superb choice for virtually ANY photo
> enthusiast). Cameras are like automobiles in some respects. If one
> wants to focus on what one doesn't have or can't afford (like a
> Lamborghini or Bugatti (then one can go through their whole life
> unhappy and envious).
> 
> I'm at the point where I would really only LIKE another one or two
> lenses (the DA* 200mm f/2.8 and a fast Rokinon ultrawide -either 14mm
> or 16mm) and I really couldn't ask for much more. I'm ready to turn my
> attention to trips and taking photos more than acquiring gear.
> 
> So "bully for Nikon". There will always be a "later & greater" but I
> have more than I can reasonably use now. In any event, even these
> latest Nikons don't have things I  currently enjoy with the K-3 II,
> like in-body image stabilization (with even vintage lenses on front),
> and things like no AA filter/microblur AA, and built-in AstroTrack.

I've had a fair bit of e-mail in about the new D500 & D5, including my
pre-order sales communication from the shop I usually deal with.

I'm aware that that there has been a lot of calling for a replacement for
the D300s, and had I a large number of DX Nikon lenses, I expect I'd have
been one of those shouting. 

If I'd been looking for a new DX DSLR without a collection of lenses to any
brand, for what I take pictures of, I'd have still gone with the K3/K3 II. I
like the larger sensor size, and as I don't generally take photos of moving
wildlife, motor racing etc, my camera is normally set with 1 AF point. This
seeming race for a zillion AF points and shooting vast rates per second
isn't what I need. Others might.

The only thing I don't like about the D5 is the price. I'm still not sure
I'd prefer a mint D3X though if I was in the market for this sort of camera,
and I still wish I'd bought a D700 when it was launched. With FX format, I'd
always need to buy a new set of glass, and the wait for Pentax/Ricoh to do
the deed and launch an FX body has none of the relevance it did for me
waiting for the *ist D with loads of glass at the time to use them
immediately.

The most important thing that I need to upgrade is my computer. Large
picture file sizes need processing with a much more powerful computer. This
for me this year, is a higher priority to whatever is launched by camera
manufacturers. No use having 40-50 MP pictures if you can't process them!

Malcolm 

 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Looking back at very difficult year

[Malcolm Smith]

Boris Liberman wrote:
 
> It seems that the 2015 has been one of if not the most difficult year
> in my life so far. Back in March, just a few days after we signed a
> contract for our own apartment, my father passed away from cardiac
> arrest. It was unexpected, it was very quick, it wash shocking and very
> painful for my mother, my brother and myself.
> 
> Some of you I contacted privately on this when the wound was still very
> fresh. And to some of you I owe great debt now. I don't think that it
> is possible to fully recover from the death of someone dear and close,
> especially from the closest family. At least, as time goes by, I could
> regain most of my self, although my outlook at many things now has
> changed a lot.
> 
> As it learned later, about the same time a good friend of mine, former
> class-mate from my school in Moscow also died. He was among the people
> of whom I wouldn't even dare think that something like this could
> happen. Apparently, he wasn't very healthy and few weeks after his
> mother passed away, he followed...

I'm very sorry to hear of your loss Boris. 

I never know what to say, despite several occasions of terminal care to
those close to us in the last few years. Even when you know you are going to
lose someone close, it is still a profound shock. My own parents died after
long illnesses; it was both a relief they were finally free of pain, yet
utterly heartbreaking. Years on their absence still catches me out at times.

Malcolm 






-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: How did you celebrate New Year's Eve?

[Malcolm Smith]

Daniel J. Matyola wrote:

> Folks my age can't take much celebration.  We stayed home, had some
> good food, watched parts of "It's a Wonderful Life," tuned in the
> broadcast from Times Square for 15 minutes each side of midnight, and
> polished off a bottle of champagne between the two of us.
> 
> It seems half the planet descended on Times Square.  What is amazing is
> that it is an entirely alcohol-free zone.
> 
> I understand that in Britain the celebrations of more restrained,
> cultured and refined:
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/picturegalleries/12077199/A-heavy-
> night-New-Years-Eve-revellers-in-pictures.html

A belated Happy New Year folks.

I spent most of the Xmas and up to the new year period in bed. Not great.
Whilst the bells were ringing in the arrival of 2016, I had the access
covers up for the drains in the drive, clearing a blockage. 

Photography is much like drains: what you get out of it, depends on what you
put into it.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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 - Tumbleweed Crossing

[Malcolm Smith]

Rick Womer wrote:

> I had never seen tumbleweed before my Salt Lake City trip. The first
> day there was very windy, though, and some blew into town. It's fun to
> watch, because it really does tumble most acrobatically.
> 
> http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=18127930=lg
> 
> (K-5, DA 40/2.8 Ltd.)
> 
> This specimen =almost= made it across the road, but then a truck
> reduced it to sawdust.

Really like this.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: A weekend up North

[Malcolm Smith]

Bob W wrote:

> By 'eck, it were grim.
> 
> http://www.web-options.com/York2015/

I enjoyed looking at these. Not short of water up there!

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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 ~ Portrait of a self-portrait

[Malcolm Smith]

John wrote:

> I used the L-408 as an example because it's the one I'm most familiar
> with. I'm sure there are other meters just as good.
> 
> The thing about using an incident meter is it lets me expose for the
> light falling on the subject, which generally gives me an image with
> the light parts light, the dark parts dark and the mid-tones properly
> exposed, without having to figure out where the in-camera meter is
> getting it's information from and having to compensate if it's getting
> its reading from the wrong place.

No doubt there are other meters which are as good but the L 408 caught my
eye as well. The water resistant bit added to the appeal! For all the
reasons you mention and more, I need to replace my meter, which I doubt
doesn't even get close to the accuracy of the K3's own metering. I'd like a
reliable, modern and accurate method of working out exposure off camera. 

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: For Frank

[Malcolm Smith]

Larry Colen wrote:

> Bob W-PDML wrote:
> > Can't see the point of pedalling all that unnecessary weight round.
> Just ride a bike.
> >
> 
> I suspect that on flat ground, the improved aerodynamics would make up
> for the excess weight. Plus it might be more comfortable in the rain.
> The problem isn't so much the extra forty pounds in weight, as much as
> the extra four thousand pounds in cost.
> 
> I am a bit perturbed that they make it difficult to find out many
> details of it, such as weight.

These things give you a false sense of security, in something that offers no
real protection at all and gives you loads of blind spots. It might be
substantially heavier than a normal cycle, but it offers a lot of surface
area to throw you sideways into traffic in a crosswind. Buy a normal cycle.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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 ~ Portrait of a self-portrait

[Malcolm Smith]

Bruce Walker wrote:

> Good to hear, Malcolm. And the great thing is you can start out pretty
> cheaply too.
> 
> One of my favourite tricks is to create what appears to be ambient
> window light where there is none so the shot looks "natural". I do that
> with one or more cheap manual flashes and some white reflector card, or
> even just white walls.
> 
> Like this shot:
> http://off-axis.brucemwalker.com/image/85678223657
> 
> At a quick glance everyone says, "okay: a big window camera-left,
> right?"
> 
> Nope. A big v-flat made of white foamcore with three $50 Neewer flashes
> firing into it. One is radio triggered ($20 Cowboy Studios) and the
> other two are slaved to the "master". This arrangement can be used to
> light up a group of people standing, at f:5.6 ISO 100.
> 
> Your black subject on black background is a good example of a tricky
> _metering_ situation, but you could easily light that with just window
> light. :)
> 
> I think you'll enjoy getting into these more interesting photo
> challenges. It sure keeps me busy. :)

Thanks Bruce. I have to admit this is something which has caught my
imagination, and I can start with an open mind. I'll take a look around for
the things I need to make a start shortly. I have from a purchase of a job
lot some two or three years ago ended up with about 6 working flashes. They
will be ideal for remote by cord (they are old units) and I have several
reflectors and spare foamboard from print mounting - it's just lights as the
main expense, and I have a place to use this in good weather - I have an
empty 12' x 8' timber shed, which I can practice lighting objects in, with
no fear of people tripping over anything I set up. You have to start
somewhere!

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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 ~ Portrait of a self-portrait

[Malcolm Smith]

John wrote:

> You don't have to have studio strobes to start with. In fact, it might
> be easier to learn what you need to learn with continuous lighting.
> When I was in school, we started with hot lights. Didn't get to strobes
> until the second year.
> 
> Nowadays, you don't even need the hot lights.
> 
> You can learn a lot using CFL bulbs & cheap clamp-on fixtures. Learn to
> vary the light quality & intensity on the subject by moving the lights
> around.

And:

> Get yourself a good light meter and a copy of "Light Science & Magic"
> by Fil Hunter and Paul Fuqua.
> 
> Work your way through it.
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0240812255?*Version*=1&*entries*=0
> 
> I have two of this model because I consider them the best combination
> of features & cost. It does (reflected) spot & incident light readings,
> along with flash, multiple flash (build up exposure using repeated pops
> of the strobes) and it does it either connected with a PC cord or
> cordless.
> 
> Most bang for the buck I've seen in a meter, plus it's water resistant.
> 
> https://www.keh.com/284901/light-meters-sekonic-l-408-multimaster-ambi-
> flash

Thanks John. I don't intend to go nuts with equipment and I'll start off
small. I'd not seen 'Light Science & Magic' but the 5th edition is on its
way to me now. Nothing I have goes into any real detail, and I'd like to
read the book before buying anything else. Having said that I have seen the
Sekonic L 408 light meter. My light meter comes from another age, certainly
film days and I suspect a while before Pentax introduced the K lens mount! I
know for certain that needs to be updated.

Malcolm 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Waterhole scene

[Malcolm Smith]

Alan C wrote:

> A randy elephant bull (look closely!) cooling off in a fast
> disappearing waterhole. Scroll left for a close up of the birds. There
> is a hooded vulture at the front, a saddlebill stork at the back & a
> flock of egyptian geese in between.
> 
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/wisselstroom/22345178863/
> 
> K7 with the HD 55-300

I thought with the positioning of the hoses, it was an elephant shaped water
filter.

Regardless, great photos.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Deleting folders from Lightroom navigator

[Malcolm Smith]

Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:

> Sorry if this doesn't answer your questions directly. Unraveling a
> slightly mucked up Lightroom catalog database takes time and
> persistence. You need to look at a lot of things, one at a time, to
> determine what the state of a particular catalog is and what files it
> is looking at. Always look from catalog to file system, and then the
> other way, to determine issues that need to be fixed.

It's so important to get Lightroom to set the catalogue database right from the 
start. I thought I understood that, and I also thought that at least the images 
I had from DSLRs were in a logical order. 

Well, it turns out that knowing where to find the images on the hard disc (or 
spare drive) to view is one thing, but having a logical catalogue which makes 
sense as you add to it, work on them - and make them available for web or 
printing is something quite different. Only after I got a sizeable amount of 
the catalogue sorted did I realise that not all the images were present, but 
the whole way I stored them on the computer no longer made sense.

This became a circular problem, as I would have liked to have worked these 
issues out before making a Lightroom catalogue, yet until I was well into 
making it, I would not have known the issues!

It's taken me a while to enable Lightroom to find where the 'missing' folders 
or files went, but I have learnt a lot about the software in the process, and I 
now have the files laid out in a manner which makes sense to me and can grow 
with as I add scans of slides and negatives, as well as my latest digital 
pictures.

For someone organised, starting with Lightroom should be a big help, but if you 
don't know what it is you want until you start, you have to live with and 
correct the errors that you make!

Malcolm




-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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 ~ Portrait of a self-portrait

[Malcolm Smith]

Bruce Walker wrote:

> Molly Fassbender has a fascination with self-portraits, so I brought my
> little collection of vintage cameras along to our shoot last Thursday.
> 
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/bruce_m_walker/22923705145/lightbox/
> 
> 645Z, DFA645 90mm f:2.8 Macro, f:11, 1/125th sec, 100 ISO, handheld.
> 
> One light: Buff 86" extreme silver PLM boomed directly overhead.
> 
> Model: Molly Fassbender
> Hair & makeup: Judi Willrich

There's much to like here. It's striking image, an unusual but well thought
out composition, and as usual, the lighting is spot on.

I looked at a local gallery display recently of portrait photography by a
large number of different amateurs, and you could instantly spot those who
had and understanding of the subtle and suitable lighting. A look at the few
I have taken over the years, reveals I'm in the 'have not got the
understanding' category.

Malcolm  


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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 - What's in the color?

[Malcolm Smith]

Igor wrote:

> But then this happened:
> http://42graphy.org/misc/Rose/_IR28909-3.jpg
> (And my daughter liked this one the most.)


Mine also. I like this sort of photographic art.

Malcolm 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: My Wife, Marlene

[Malcolm Smith]

paul stenquist wrote:

> As many of you know, my wife, Marlene, succumbed to cancer yesterday in
> our home, without the angst of a hostpital environment. She has been my
> inspiration and partner for 45 years, and I can’t believe she’s gone. I
> keep thinking I have to go check on her, but then remember she’s no
> longer here. Her passing was peaceful and apparently painless and for
> that I am eternally grateful. Kudos to the doctors at Karmanos Cancer
> Center and Angela Hospice. The hospice nurses were constantly available
> and at my side during those last days. I can’t thank them enough.
> 
> This is my favorite photo of her. She was 23 years old here and just
> bubbling over with life.
> http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=17112934=lg

No words can convey how sad I am to hear of your loss.

Beautiful photograph.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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 ~ Portrait of a self-portrait

[Malcolm Smith]

Bruce Walker wrote:

> Anyway, my point is that considering how important light is to great
> photographs, I think everyone should spend more time focussing on
> perfecting it. It's not so very difficult, you know. :)

Ha!

I spend a lot of time thinking about light Bruce. I really do my best to
avoid artificial light, and I am so pleased that you can bump up ISO a bit
now with the latest cameras, tripods give you longer shutter times and
reflectors are so useful.

However, that has got to change. I read that really difficult subjects to
correctly light for are black objects on black backgrounds; how you light
them gives them their shape and separates them from the background. I'm
going to invest in some lighting equipment nearer the end of the year and
overcome this reluctance to this subject, and give problem lighting
situations a go. Seeing I wait ages for the right light sometimes, the
opportunity to create my own actually sounds a great idea!

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Deleting folders from Lightroom navigator

[Malcolm Smith]

Bob W wrote:

> I don't mean to imply that your process is 2nd-rate - I apologise if it
> seemed like that to you, just that hierarchical folders per se are not
> usually the best way of organising most things on a computer, whether
> it's photos or just general files. We don't always have any option
> though.
> 
> You can make this quicker for yourself in your circumstances though by
> importing directly from the SD card into LR and let it put them
> automatically into date-based folders. That would save you a lot of
> time and effort.
> 
> I'd consider doing something similar for scanned photos too. Scan them
> always onto the same unstructured folder and import directly from
> there.
> I've been in computing for well over 30 years so it's not really a
> question of enjoyment, just of knowing how to do stuff to make it work
> well for me, and being able to do it quite quickly.

Thanks Bob. To horrify you further I shoot jpeg on one card and RAW on the
other on everything I shoot, so I download two images to the drive. Most of
my friends aren't remotely interested in photography but like copies of
pictures if we've been out together, so a quick image I can quickly reduce
in size to e-mail bypassing software altogether is actually useful for me as
well. 

I will look at doing as you suggest above, but it will mean me getting used
to a new process when it's pass the computer. In the early evening, it can
often take me two goes to type as much as this, as someone needs this for
homework etc..

Time for bed.

Malcolm 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Deleting folders from Lightroom navigator

[Malcolm Smith]

Eric Weir wrote:

> Thanks, Malcolm. As I said in my previous post, I’ve never done
> anything with my catalog. The notion of an “organized” catalog
> intrigues me. Again, I have only one. Every image I’ve ever taken has
> been just dumped into it. There’s no structure whatsoever. Curious
> about how you're going about organizing yours.

Not sure how this will help you, as generally I work in a very different way to 
most folk. Anyway, this is it:

When I first got Lightroom, I imported my digital pictures from the hard disc, 
to allow it to connect to the full image on the disc. At that point, all my 
work was in date order. As I still write a daily diary (and here I assume most 
people don't) this was a sensible way to do things for me. However, at some 
point under an entirely different heading on the spare drive, I found about 
2000+ images I thought I'd lost some time ago. It must have been a hangover 
from a transfer from an earlier computer, but with this and the continual 
adding of new pictures, the date order system could no longer work. 

I therefore rearranged the files on the hard disc into category and made a sub 
folder for each new set coming in to the relevant category. This allowed me to 
slot in the lost images and have a home for the new as they arrived in a 
logical order. What I became aware of very quickly, is by moving things around 
on the disc, whilst it made it easy for me, Lightroom could no longer find a 
large number of the pictures, so I had some fun (ongoing) to restore the links. 
It's quite a simple process and I do it when I find the one I'm looking for has 
a broken link. As I said earlier, if I'd known ahead of time how things would 
turn out, I'd have re-organised before importing.

Lastly, I don't import directly into Lightroom. Because I share the computer, 
it drives my wife nuts that photos automatically want to go in via Lightroom 
and some are hers and that's not what she wants. I have my images moved to new 
or relevant files and then import from there. Takes a few minutes longer but it 
works for me and I have no trouble importing that way. As I'm importing files 
regularly now from slide or negative scans, doing it this way also helps me to 
categorise pictures I took up to 30 years ago.

Now you need to get a reply from someone who uses it the way Adobe intended you 
to!

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Deleting folders from Lightroom navigator

[Malcolm Smith]

Bob W wrote:

> My view, which I implemented from v0.n beta of LR because it is a sound
general principle, is that you should not confuse the physical organisation
(i.e. on the disk) and > the logical organisation, in the catalogue.
Therefore I have a completely flat unstructured set of photographs on disk,
in one folder (but see below), and I use LR to > catalogue it. That's
the point of a catalogue - to make multiple independent groups independently
of the physical organisation, so that they are easy to find and to view 
> in different ways. Folder structures on disk are a 2nd-rate attempt to do
something similar - you don't really need two ways to do it. Occam's law
applies.

> However, my installation of LR itself does create subfolders on the disk
whose name is based on the file date, but I suspect I set it up this way
while I was drunk, or> perhaps it was the default setting, when I first
got LR. It's unnecessary, but quieta non movere trumps Occam.

And:

> You should import the photos directly from the SD card into Lightroom
> and let LR put them into the folder you've designated. In the Import
> dialog specify the keywords that apply to most of the photos (who,
> what, where - when is already in the metadata), and use a standard
> metadata thing for your static details.
> 
> When it has finished importing use the Latest Import collection, or
> whatever it's called, to identify the photos, then fine tune the
> keywords on a per-photo basis as needed. If you have time you could
> also quickly rank them and / or create a collection for the ones you
> want to come back to later.
> 
> If you're reasonably clever with your keywords you can always find what
> you want.

Bob, I don't disagree with any of that. I did in my earlier post to Eric
state that someone who uses it correctly should post and follow their
advice.

In an ideal world I would have my own laptop set up for myself and I could
use the software a better way. Sadly, as someone who shares the use of this
computer with several family members, I have to do things in a way that if I
am interrupted I know where I last was. I also expect people are
considerably more computer literate than I am, and as one who doesn't overly
enjoy computer programmes and dislikes computer games, I have two 400+ page
books at close hand to use either Lightroom or Elements. I am far more at
home with a fountain pen and paper. I accept that to you how I am doing this
is second rate, but I'm OK with that because I can make this work for me.
I'm still getting to grips with creating a website a bit at a time, because
whilst I'll be delighted with the finished result, it's beyond me how people
actually enjoy creating this sort of thing.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: On Two Wheels

[Malcolm Smith]

Collin B wrote:

> Somehow my submission got lost.  Probably in the server pre-failure
> stages.
> Things happen.  No big deal.  This *would have been* my submission.
> K5, F50/1.7
> 
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/55001392@N08/22912036302/in/album-
> 721576587219
> 11284/

Glad we got to see it now, I like that a lot.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: November PUG - On Two Wheels - is now up

[Malcolm Smith]

Brian Walters wrote:

> As usual you'll find the gallery here:
> 
> http://pug.komkon.org/

My two favourites:

In The French Quarter - Ann Sanfedele
Bike Parking - Henk Terhell

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Pentax fill-frame camera on display again

[Malcolm Smith]

P.J. Alling wrote:

> Wow, talk about muddying the waters. What with the MR-52/MZ-D having
> been re-branded as the K-1, at least unofficially by someone and
> Pentax, and the K-01, I guess there will be some interesting on line
> conversations.

Interesting choice of name if it is the K-1. From the sequence of new top of
the range models, it implies that this is a replacement for the K-3 range
and the top crop sensor frame camera in their line up is being dropped for a
FF replacement. If you were designing a replacement for the K-3 range, you
would surely want to call that a K-1.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Photo hosting web sites and other websites for personal use.

[Malcolm Smith]

Mark Roberts wrote:

> >Mark - True, some don't hold them forever, just as long as you have
> >content on their servers, but some also sell them on whilst you're a
> >customer
> 
> Wow. I've never heard of that happening! Do you have details?

You can't find the details directly on the internet (without going through
the process of *almost* signing up for an account), but I came across one
when I was about to press the button on accept terms and conditions; to
which there was a link and a huge document which I can't believe people read
in any depth, if at all. I then decided to ask the question here before
going any further.

Since your question above I've had another look at what various sites do,
this for example is of interest:

http://www.embeddedmetadata.org/social-media-test-results.php

Now I accept with a free service for a provider to either add advertising,
or limit the amount of capacity your website has - or both - but the
impression I am given is that buried in the terms and conditions are often
conditions which most of us would find wholly unacceptable. Maybe some
people don't care what they do with their content if they don't get a
monthly or annual fee and accept it as a trade off? I'm not claiming that
any of them do what they have signed over to them (possible future planning
so they don't have to come back and ask?), but it appears that many rights
can be signed away by the click of a button. I think it would be really
interesting to compare really accurately exactly what hold and for how long
each provider has over the material uploaded to each site, and what each
organisation wants, certainly by someone who understands the legal jargon
well enough to seek out and translate into everyday language what we really
want to know.

In the meantime, I'm happy to put my hand in my own pocket, so they don't
have to look for income elsewhere.

Malcolm   


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Snapchat also uses your photos perpetually (Re: Contracts for pro band photographers.)

[Malcolm Smith]

Igor wrote:

> I am not using it, but here is what Snapchat included with the new
> terms of service:
> http://thenextweb.com/apps/2015/10/30/snapchats-new-terms-let-it-store-
> and-reuse-your-photos-but-they-arent-scary/
> 
> You grant Snapchat a worldwide, perpetual, royalty-free, sublicensable,
> and transferable license to host, store, use, display, reproduce,
> modify, adapt, edit, publish, create derivative works from, publicly
> perform, broadcast, distribute, syndicate, promote, exhibit, and
> publicly display that content in any form and in any and all media or
> distribution methods (now known or later developed).
> 
> 
> Given the fact that Snapchat (at least initially) was aimed at
> "private"
> messaging (or was it messaging privates?), that type of TOS is even
> more disturbing (compared, say, to photohosting services).

Unlike the 'Foo Fighters' contract, at least it seems to be limited to just
this planet.

Shocking really, but with that catch all at the start they never have to
come back to you to ask permission to use your stuff in any way, as by
signing up and accepting their terms and conditions, they have it. Just
shows how much you have to examine the fine detail if you are using a
service, or providing a photographic service to a third party to see what
rights they expect to strip off you.

Malcolm


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

Contracts for pro band photographers.

[Malcolm Smith]

A (fair) bit of swearing but with a message:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GwWAW2UW59o

 


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

Photo hosting web sites and other websites for personal use.

[Malcolm Smith]

I've had a look at getting images on line again but I'm appalled by their
terms and conditions (Flickr, Facebook, Wix to name but a few).

Most of them go on about use that the individual should do to comply with
posting images - your own work etc etc - fair comment, but then go on to say
(when you look very carefully at their terms and conditions), that they can
use whatever you load without asking for pretty much any purpose they want,
often in perpetuity, pretty much as if they held the copyright themselves.

Now I don't imply for a moment that my particular images would taken and
used in such ways, but I'm not happy to sign up to one of these sites with
such a set of conditions.

Are there any sites out there that don't impose such conditions? I'm not
fussed if they want to add advertising, annoying though that is, and I'm
happy to pay a small annual fee if it removes such conditions being imposed.

Malcolm  


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Photo hosting web sites and other websites for personal use.

[Malcolm Smith]

Thanks to Ann, Yolanda, Bob, Mark, Larry, Paul & Stan for your replies.

I know and don't expect a free lunch with this!

Ann, Yolanda, Bob & Stan - Thanks, I will be looking at your recommendations
this morning. As it has taken me 11 months so far just to get comfortable
with Lightroom & Elements, I'll be looking for the most user friendly (or
one I feel I have a shot at!).

Mark - True, some don't hold them forever, just as long as you have content
on their servers, but some also sell them on whilst you're a customer, so it
can still be an issue. To really get to grips with who might do whatever
with your content I'd have to write a spreadsheet!

Larry - A great idea but way beyond my computer skills.

Paul - I did investigate my free ISP web space, but I'm not sure how much
longer we will stay with them. We regularly have no service or a notable
reduction in speed worthy of living in the back of beyond, rather than the
outskirts of a major city. I'll look at dropbox too.

Thanks,

Malcolm  



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

[Malcolm Smith]

Stanley Halpin wrote:

> If you aren’t going to use it, maybe you should send it back? Where are
> your priorities?!?

Exactly where my wife left them!

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

[Malcolm Smith]

David Mann wrote:

> But equipment is such a good substitute for skill!

*Sigh!* If only

Anyway, many thanks for your replies. I can report a rather nice parcel has
arrived with a 16-85mm WR lens. As is the way of things, I'm now in and out
of the house doing family jobs until tomorrow night, so I won't get a chance
to try it out until Monday. Typical!

Malcolm 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Haven't been paying attention: Anybody own a K-3 II?

[Malcolm Smith]

Darren Addy wrote:

> I just (today) realized a great way to take advantage of the pixel-
> shift resolution of the K-3 II and so I'm seriously considering
> upgrading from my K-3.
> 
> Those of you who own one... what model did you upgrade from?
> Also, can anybody speak to whether the SR is actually better on the K-3
> II?
> 
> Thanks for any input!

For some reason, this ended up in my Spam folder which having cleared out
(and found others that were clearly not Spam) I now answer, somewhat late to
the party.

I sold a fair bit of stuff to fund the purchase of a K3 II. I wanted a
modern additional body. I would be wary of calling it an upgrade from a K3
as the two models are close enough, yet different enough to appeal to two
different buyers. The lack of a built in flash may be enough for some to
choose a K3 over the K3 II; I personally welcome the removal of the flash
and the integration of other technology - others may not. Dual card slots in
both models is also a big win for me, along with the 24mp sensors, which
whilst I like to crop *before* I press the shutter, I know that cropping in
Lightroom will still leave me a large image.

The improved SR was a deciding factor. I have only used it once with a long
focal length mirror lens (SR really shows up in use here) and I can only say
at this time it is as good as the K3. That alone is impressive, but I'll
find out in the coming months with the shorter days and longer shutter
times, as I use flash as a last resort. 

My intention has and still remains to team this up mostly with the 55-300mm
WR lens. I regularly take pictures of horse jump practice lessons in an
indoor school - some 20M x 80M in size - and I can only set up at one end so
most of the time the action is 50M+ away from me. One side of the building
is open, and the sessions are generally in the morning which produces very
harsh light on one side and dark shadow along the far wall. Even with a
sturdy tripod and pushing the ISO, I rely strongly on the SR to help me out
and get acceptable images. I greatly appreciate that the SR is built into
the body by Pentax.

I've not tried out the pixel shift yet, but I have one or two landscape
shoots in mind which will provide me with opportunity to try it out, as the
camera will be tripod mounted. I've also taken pictures over the years from
around the same spots with the *ist D, the K7 and the K3 (and film of
course) and so I look forward to seeing the changes.

I can't easily see where Pentax progresses with this range from here. 24mp
is really useful, but I can't really see the point of enlarging the numbers
without increasing the size of the sensor, so one for the new FF camera. The
only thing I would have liked was a screen just like the Nikon D750; that
range of movement and no touch screen function.

Malcolm


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Fighting Enablement - Lens Choice Question

[Malcolm Smith]

Bipin Gupta wrote:

> Congratulations Malcom, You now have an excellent lens in the 16-85 WR,
> that Ricoh-Pentax could have labelled "STAR".
> 
> I am glad that I had pointed you out to this lens as your first choice.
> Suggest you check it out thoroughly as some manufacturing defects have
> been discovered. The latest one is a shift in the image downwards after
> focusing. In the viewfinder you will notice the frame drops down a bit
> after the lens has focused.
> 
> Enjoy your new baby.

Thanks Bipin, I will check this out carefully on Monday.

Malcolm


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