Re: Ford claims ownership of images
Bob Sullivan writes... Automobiles and cheap gasoline over the past 100 years have fostered a very low density development pattern. Home densities do not support economical public transit, so everyone drives a car. The demand for gasoline is very in-elastic. We buy gas whatever the price because we must have it to drive to work. The only changes come when we buy new vehicles that are more efficient. It's not just the cheap gas. It's also the relatively cheap land, which would be impossible to find in most of Europe. In every city in the world, as soon as the middle class wealth reached the point where cars were possible, traffic congestion exploded as did suburban development. Many people just prefer not to live in a high-density situation. Middle-class people in the U.S. can often afford a country home, where in Europe it's not nearly as available. That has led to a different cultural outlook. But the cultural prediliction for using that wealth to obtain open space is more deep-rooted than cars, gasoline prices, or development laws. Reminds me of the difference between Navajo and Hopi culture in the Southwest. Navajo culture prizes solitude, and the people think they are living in the right spot when they can't see any neighbors. That's a tough standard for them--many have a view in the dozens of miles. The Hopis and other Pueblo cultures live in high-density villages in the uplands of the Colorado Plateau. The Navajo are recent immigrants (relatively) having moved to the area only 600 or 700 years ago. 700 years is a long time, and most Americans are far closer to their ancestors who moved here to find religious freedom and cheap land. Yet those fundamental cultural differences remain. Studded snow tires are excellent when the road is covered with snow and ice. They were banned here over 30 years ago. We were living in Milwaukee, Wisconsin at the time (population 1,000,000+) and the 6 lane super highways began to have tire ruts down the lanes, not in the snow - in the concrete! Studs are hard on pavement, and pavement is hard on studs. Where you have snow and ice most days during the winter, they are practical. Here in the DC region, we have snow on the roads perhaps a dozen days out of the year, and ice more rarely than that. Studs are not practical. But I'm sitting in my office, and it is currently snowing. I will have to get home, and I'm glad my vehicle has a relatively high ground clearance and all-wheel drive. But I'm also glad it has a low center of gravity (it's a Subaru Outback). Rick in the transportation biz Denney --- 645 and 6x7 user -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Ford claims ownership of images
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes... Excellent, Ken. Please take the stand:-). I find it very entertaining that so many people, who know so little about automobiles, are always ready to trash the US auto industry. It's been a popular indoor sport since Ralph and company kicked it off in the late sixties with another misinformation campaign. It's not just the U.S. auto industry that gets the 60 minutes treatment. Rick a former owner of a 1984 Audi 5000 Denney --- 645 and 6x7 user -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Going price for photo licensinng
Folks, A charitable organization in Texas is using some of my photos in their materials. I support their cause and am happy to provide them the photos for free. But I want it shown as a charitable donation so I can get a deduction on my taxes. Question is: How to price the licensing of photos for use in print materials. I want to claim a credible price--something an organization like that would legitimately pay if everyone was so inclined. They are using half a dozen of my photos in their fund-raising brochures, which they will be putting the San Antonio Missions NHP gift shops and visitor's center. I expect the print run to be in the tens of thousands. Craving advice. Rick appreciative Denney --- 645 and 6x7 user -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Going price for photo licensinng
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes... I would claim $300 per photo, which is the average price of royalty-free stock. If an organization like that were to license commercial photos that would undoubtedly purchase royalty-free stock and would probably look for a better price than what I've quoted. But you can legitimately claim $300 per. Paul, thanks. I had guessed $250 and you have confirmed my guess. Rick thinking most charities look for 'free' Denney --- 645 and 6x7 user -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: 645D vs Canon vs Nikon vs Hassy
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes... I think there's a market for the Pentax 645D. If it's anywhere close to the Canon full frame in price, it will be very successful. It has to have better noise characteristics, given the relative pixel density. I agree, and for a couple of reasons. One is that workaday commercial photographers often have a bunch of 645 stuff still in the cupboard. Another is that the same number of pixels in a 36x48 sensor has more potential than in a 24x36 sensor (I said *potential*--which means it may not be realized in a specific implementation). Those are the reasons often reported. But there's a bigger reason a 645D would succeed if priced competitively with Canon, and that is that many commercial photographers need to use impressive looking equipment. This flies in the face of artistic sensibilities, but many fat brides are already outside the realm of art and just want their photographer not to look like Uncle Harry. And Uncle Harry has a Canon 350D or a 30D, which to the bride looks no different than the photographer's 5D or 1DsII. I think this fact sold more Hasselblads than any other. If you showed up with a Hassy, you are a pro. In the Fashion District, being fashionable isn't just for the models. But the high-end pros I've heard express an opinion on the subject like the Hassys as much for the Zeiss lens designs as for the label. Even my lowly Carl Zeiss Jena 180mm/2.8 lens for the Pentacon Six mount has a look to it that is distinctive, and being able to adapt that one lens to the 645 was a priority for me. My wife and I bought a couple of photographs at the Alaska State Fair from a photographer who used a large digital Canon, and the quality was very good. But when he told us what he used, our opinions were indeed undermined. On the other hand, the photographer two booths down who used a 6x7 retained our admiration a bit more. I could not help that reaction despite all my years of experience and despite that I know better. Amateurs who equip themselves to impress people will emulate those pros, as they always have. Hasselblads are probably rented by pros more than bought, but I'll bet they are bought by many more amateurs than pros. The question is: Are there enough workaday professional photographers left to drive a market of amateur wannabes? Rick seeing fewer every year Denney --- 645 and 6x7 user -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: 135LS or 150 for 645
Scott Loveless writes... Hey, gang. I'm contemplating a portrait lens for the 645. If you don't mind being silly, there is a non-Pentax option that is interesting and inexpensive. For many years, Carl Zeiss Jena built a variation of the famed Olympia Sonnar for the Pentacon Six mount. It is the MC Sonnar 180mm/f2.8. The lens is a classic Sonnar design with the enormously thick center elements, which means it's a bit heavy. The rendering of this lens has a real old-world look, and the bokeh is truly world-class. The lens works best for portraiture wide open to get the narrow depth of field, and it is quite sharp at all apertures. The later multicoated version has a black body and an external slide switch that allows manual aperture control. The 86mm filter ring can be accommodated by the old Hassy Pro-93 compendium shade, but it also comes with a reasonable screw-in plastic shade. They typically cost under $300 on ebay, though I haven't tracked them in a while. There is also a 300mm f/4 version that may be even better. The adapter to mount Pentacon Six lenses on a 645 is made by DVDTechnik and is also available on ebay, usually for under $40. It does not provide aperture coupling, but if you are using it wide open anyway it does not matter. The adapter has no optical elements and retains infinity focus. The focus confirmation light on the 645n and nII will still work fine, as will automatic metering in aperture-priority mode. Like I said, it's a silly suggestion, but if you are looking for something a bit different that is optimized for portraiture, it might suit you. Rick for whom this is the standard portrait lens Denney --- 645 and 6x7 user -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
New member with old (I'm sure) question
Greetings, folks. After years of hearing about this list from its members who are on other lists in which I participate, and after realizing that a high percentage of my film photography uses Pentax equipment, I've finally joined. I'm an amateur photographer with former professional experience and about 35 years of practice, not necessarily doing the right things. I've have everything from a Canonet 28 to 4.5 Cambo. My digital work is done using SOB (some other brand--Canon), but most of my film work is done using either a 645N, 645NII, or a 6x7. I also have a modest collection of ex-Soviet stuff just for fun, and frequently use the better of the lenses for that system on my 645 with an adapter. I also have some old and now retire Mamiya and Rolleiflex TLR's. I live in Northern Virginia after growing up in Texas. Whatever I might have earned by introducing myself will now be dashed by asking a question that I'm sure has been discussed to death. But searching the archives seems to be quite difficult in that one must do a lot of downloading, etc. So, I'll just ask it and beg for forbearance. What is the latest scuttlebutt on a Digital 645? The latest I heard, from my dealer but not seen in print anywhere, is that they are re-engineering it with a 31MP sensor. I have also heard that it will be offered in Japan only and not North America. I'm holding off on buying a new digital camera and have been waiting for this one for a long time, and though I believe a larger sensor in a 645 body would provide superior image quality to anything in a 24x36 or smaller format, I'm starting to lose heart. A link to something specific in the archives would be appreciated if you don't want to rehash. Rick itchy fingers Denney --- 645 and 6x7 user -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: New member with old (I'm sure) question
Cotty writes... On 10/01/08, Rick Denney, discombobulated, unleashed: Rick itchy fingers Denney welcome to the list, Fingers. Pull up a stool. You'll be on it a while waiting for the D645 ;-) So it would seem. It would appear that the paltry information I found in a quick web search is all there is to know, at least for people not employed by Pentax. Knowing what I know about the difference between price and cost, I suspect Pentax (Hoya) may have found that they can't make it cheap enough to sell it for what they should sell it for to compete with Canon (and perhaps Nikon) offerings. That will kill a project faster than mere technical infeasibility. The itching happens whenever I contemplate a Canon 5D. No, it's not 31mp, but I don't need 31mp and generally don't want to have to store it. I would have been happy with 18 million larger pixels in the Pentax. I have no means of scratching the itch when contemplating an 18mp Canon, but a Pentax at a similar price might force me into penury. I have plenty of lenses either way, but generally I think larger is better even with digital. I'm happy with what I get from film except that the time it takes to scan it keeps me from doing very much of it. On to more important pursuits: Finding an affordable 45mm lens for the 6x7. Rick glad not to be the only one who is discombobulated and unleashed Denney --- 645 and 6x7 user -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: New member with old (I'm sure) question
Doug Franklin writes... Welcome! Get your tinfoil hat and fire extinguisher ready! Oh, and don't believe anything Frank or Cotty say. :-) I'm never without same. I own an Exakta 66, a Pentacon Six, three Kiev 60's, a Kiev 88CM, and various other ex-Soviet junque. That brings an unusual combination of paranoia and thick skin. And please Google search for and read the PDML FAQ. Done before I posted--it was earlier on the Google search than the page with subscribing instructions. ... Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) Hey, time to upgrade that license, heh, heh. Rick KR9D Denney --- 645 and 6x7 user -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: New member with old (I'm sure) question
William Robb writes... On to more important pursuits: Finding an affordable 45mm lens for the 6x7. I have one and you don't HaHa HaHa I have one and you don't Ha HaHa Ha Ha G. Rick who has a 45 for the Pentacon Six mount and finds the 55 for 6x7 not wide enough Denney --- 645 and 6x7 user -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: New member with old (I'm sure) question
graywolf writes... That should have been No one can point to... Heh, heh. I'm long experienced in Internet fora, and from my own menu of common errors I automatically converted like to link. Rick whose fingers are only occasionally connected to a brain, and then it gets really bad Denney --- 645 and 6x7 user -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
