Questions: was: Re: Digital competing with film?
Questions: Are your digital images crafted as well (refined, sharp, compositionally) as your film photos? Does digital imaging improve or diminish your photography expertise (excluding learning how to print digital prints)? Does ~(ANY)~ under $2,000USD digital camera let you do what a $200 Spot can do? When will Yeah, but or It's almost as good vanish from the digital lexicon? Mafud, the digital camera owner [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Questions: was: Re: Digital competing with film?
In a message dated 12/10/01 1:27:53 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The usual stupid Mafud response. Nothing in my post is a response but original questions. Why does my posting bother you so? And I'm stupid to ask a question? the original poster was satisfied with his digital experience...'nuff said. Why do you and other have to make your own statements third person? Or aren't you certain of what you're saying? he poster has no responsibility to answer when Mafud questions... But then, neither did you. Until you or someone by-damn takes me off this list, I'll post when and where I please, and on what topics I find a need to And why, 'Jerry in Houston, didn't you answer my legitimate, open questions yourself instead of starting something with me you can't finish? In a message dated 12/10/2001 9:56:47 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Questions: Are your digital images crafted as well (refined, sharp, compositionally) as your film photos? (excluding learning how to print digital prints)? Does ~(ANY)~ under $2,000USD digital camera let you do what a $200 Spot can do? When will Yeah, but or It's almost as good vanish from the digital lexicon? Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: More about portfolios photo essays
In a message dated 12/9/01 7:14:33 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: To try and ensure that the photographers returned with sufficient variety for the editors and layout people to be able to design an essay with pace, rhythm and variety, 'Life' recommended that the photographers try to get photos under 8 different categories, and this is what I believe is meany by variety. And they literally shoot hundreds-thousands of slides to make up one 4 to 12 photo layout. **I made nearly seven-hundred shots on my first Haiti layout. They printed 1 photo, of kids drinking water out of a spigot at the new well the contributors had donated. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Exciting project
In a message dated 12/7/01 2:16:56 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: (SNIP) So, the upshot of that ramble is: have several portfolios, edit ferociously, get help from experienced photographers who don't care if they upset you, get a thick skin, have a theme for each portfolio I have two, portraiture and industrial. Since I've formally retired, I won't have to submit my books for judging anymore. A jury from your local Guild should do the final culling. The very first edit of my submissions to a Guild jury saw them cull 541 photos down to 87, 31 of which were deemed only marginal. Other than the jury steward, you don't know who your jurists were, which helps you keep your cool at future Guild meetings. **Each book should be refreshed frequently, keeping abreast of modern techniques, including digital offerings. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: some interesting NG thoughts on digital consumers
In a message dated 12/5/01 11:45:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yup, and my Kiosk made over 100,000 dollars profit for the company that you are so proudly a shareholder of. Something to think about when you denigrate the work of others, is they are paying dividends to thankless jerks. William Robb Wal~Mart 3077 _ The only thing related to film I use at Walmart is the one-hour when I need to see or provide proofs for the day and it is past noon, when the local pro labs stop taking work of that kind. I tried Walmart a few times, shareholders profits strongly in mind. But no Walmart is discriminating enough to handle one ISO 400 or 800 film from another. What local Walmarts (we have 5 (five!) SUPER CENTERS within 32 miles of where I live) have done to some of my KODAK PORTRA and KODAK SUPRA film is criminal. No more, not even for the sake of profit sharing. And you want me to beileve you and your Walmart are the exception? **While you and I have had differences, whenever you spoke of lab before, I thought pro printer in a pro lab. No more. The illusion is complete, the magician... Anon. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: some interesting NG thoughts on digital consumers
In a message dated 12/5/01 11:49:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But you were complaining that Joe sixpack can't get his digital processed cheaply... Now I think you're just being argumentative. I've since learned that Joe can take his dinky digitals to Walmart. say that digital can't be processed inexpensivley, and then you say that a cheap place isn't a real lab so it doesn't count. As a long time (13 years and about five stock splits later) shareholder, Walmart pays for a lot of my personal indulgences. Thanks a lot and I mean that from the bottom of my avaricious heart. go to the local pro lab, he's going to go to Walmart, Walgreens, or any number of other cheap places where he can get his digital stuff printed cheaply. That is Joe's prerogative. But cheap in now way means or infers good, better or most importantly for~my~ paying clients, best; or consistency. consumer weather they drop off film or digital files, the end result is the same. They have prints to hand out and show Grandma, and it doesn't have to cost any more. That summation you describe is altogether different from those inferring that somehow cheap equates to quality. At least it doesn't here in the DC area, as well as most other urban areas in the US. Isaac Of course I most often speak as a professional, not a Joe. It is the insistence of Digital's supporters that small format digital somehow represents the same quality of digital taking and output of medium or large format digital that is most disingenuous. I am literally blown away by the digital work I see in visits to my pro lab. But sorry, the digital I ofttimes see is medium/large format. **Truthfully? Medium format digital shoots have the same disdain for 35mm or smaller digital that medium format film shooters have for 35mm film. I'm further blown away when I see what my lab can do with my 6x7 negs. Digitizing them, cleaning them up, printing them to specs impossible to achieve in the darkroom. But those instances of my film to digital to digital output are rare. I can do my own 24x30 prints. **My framing in the camera style means there's damn little I can't achieve over an easel. ***Thankfully I get my props from the work I do and my style. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: some interesting NG thoughts on digital consumers
In a message dated 12/6/01 1:07:10 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, aimcompute wrote: I think Mafud does have a point here. There's a difference between taking your digital camera into a department store and getting their run-of-the-mill prints back, and taking it to a pro-lab. Same with film. True, but that wasn't what the post was about. Mafud had said earlier that getting a lab to make prints from digital files was a lot more expensive than from film. Let me clarify: I use real pro labs, not Walmart. Had the original statement mentioned Walmart anyplace or as the source lab, I would not have commented. I asked him to name a lab that charged more for digital to see if he really place that charged an insane amount more, and he avoided the question completely by going into an irrelevant rant about Wal~Mart. Why would I answer the then and now pointless question in that we don't live in the same cities, so any prices I might give would be meaningless where you live? I live in a metro area of under 700,000 people. You might live in a larger or smaller metro. You might live in a metro with higer/lower wages, higher/lower retail rents, or a place where there are dozens of graphics/pro labs/printers or just a few. But you and others have been disingenuous by flatly asserting that a lab (even here we have differences about what a lab is) can or would print digitals as cheaply as film. Maybe Walmart can and does. *Though they are a retail giant whose sales (up 13% year to year since Thanksgiving), they sure as hoot aren't labs, not in the sense a professional classifies labs. **As a Walmart spouse, when I need regular film processing done, I sure as hoot don't go to Walmart. Nope, I go across the road to SAMs Club. Interestingly, the same processing that would cost you and me $4.99 at Walmart will cost us only $2.99 at Sam's. When I learned the same firm processed both Walmart and Sam's, I choose to save money at Sam's. **Even with my 10% spousal discount, sometimes Walmart costs to darn much! accuses people of saying stuff that they didn't say. :) Remember this: I'm under ~no~ obligation to answer pointed, Do you still beat your wife and other otherwise senseless, gratuitous questions. As to who said what: it's all mean spirited conversation or questions that as I have noted, don't deserve a direct answer. what lab he had in mind because he probably just made that bit of info up on the spot. :) chris A minilab sitting in the middle of a Walmart is ~NOT~ a photo lab but a photo processor. Calling one of them a lab is a needless and meaningless gilding of the Lily. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Rule 5
In a message dated 12/6/01 1:08:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mafud wrote: Cetainly you're not saying I can't vioce my opinion? Actually, nothing personal I assure you, but this is what many of us are now suggesting, at least with topics that fall under the purview of Doug's PDML Rule Number 5 Then you very well might have written me off-list, or is it, as it now seems to be, that I am being singled out for public chastisment? Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: The New French Anti-Photography Law - Change to OT title Please!
In a message dated 12/6/01 8:43:56 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There is no fight here, Mafud. His frustrated tone is the result of asking repeatedly. -Aaron I don't use filters. I peruse the topic when it is first posted. If it interests me, I may (or may not) join in, but do keep an eye on it. Further posting on that topic, once I have determined it does ~not~ interest me, I delete every instance of said post/topic. I watch many OT posts in that one can always glean something useful from them. Once they segue from the point of interest, I abandon them. Thus, I cannot understand why any post must be labeled. Don't like it? Ignore it. It's that easy. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: some interesting NG thoughts on digital consumers
In a message dated 12/6/01 8:48:31 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mafud has, however, six times now evaded the question of pricing at his lab of choice (though he took great pains to explain how expensive they are). We can only be forced to assume that he was making it up, and that there is, in fact, not a great price discrepancy between chemical and digital prints there. We don't live in the same town or even same region of the country, making comparisons of pro lab, maybe even Walmart lab prices, utterly meaningless. How are the prices at Media Specialties when you compare digital to chemical? If that is a question for me, I'm pleased at how elegantly you make my point. We don't ~have~ a Media Specialties where I live. How then could you (we) possibly compare Media Specialties prices with (any) pro lab I might name where ~I~ live? I see the trap: you pick a dinky, low priced so-called pro lab and I pick the pro lab I most often use. We then compare prices. You win. **But we could, using a disinterested intermediary, send our most frequented lab's catalog (your lab does have a catalog, yes?) to them. Let ~them~ make the comparison. Remember this: you're not my appointed inquisitor, nor instructor, nor, heavens forbid, boss, thus your question(s) are as meaningless as they are superfluous, as would be any comparison between pro lab prices. I, nor anyone, am not obligated to answer what more than likely would be, in the end, a rhetorical question. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: some interesting NG thoughts on digital consumers
In a message dated 12/6/01 9:20:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: . Or those that examine their 3 day prints, which cost a measly $4.00 for processing and printing, even 36 exp rolls, and want a credit for those which they don't like. Bill, KG4LOV [EMAIL PROTECTED] They've been spoiled by Walmart and SAM'S. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Take a Chill Pill, Dudes!
In a message dated 12/6/01 12:07:55 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It never takes too long for who and what you are to come out. Thanks for being true to form, Mafud. I'd advise you to find a good therapist, but Narcissists have no faults, and the cure rate is abysmally low anyway. GROAN How much are you going to bill me for that condescending, ersatz diagnosis Bob? As much as it's worth? Then I don't owe you squat. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: some interesting NG thoughts on digital consumers
In a message dated 12/6/01 12:49:01 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So, I assume that you know that all journalists accept that it is there responsibility to back up claims of fact that they make. Regards, Bob... The questions were disingenuous Bob, meant to elicit ~any~ kind of response, for which they would ask another or in some way find fault with my actual answer. **I'm disappointed that you too overlooked my response as to how I would resolve their question? Or have you too only fastened on what they ~said~ I said? I gave a specific respnose/challenge and not one of those buggers have addressed the challenge. Which lets me know they don't ~WANT~ an answer. And if you want to know, find my own proposal on how to settle the issue of digital Vs. film price(s). If and when you do, I'll think you want too know. If you can't find my challenge, then the fault will lay with them and perhaps you. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Variable aperture zoom question
In a message dated 12/6/01 12:49:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well that is correct except at the widest setting. If you have a 28-80/4-5.6 lens and set the aperture manually at F4 and zoom from 28 to 80mm you will end up at F5.6 even if the ring says F4. You're saying that a lens at f/4 ~migrates~ to f/5.6 in what is a no eletronic situation. The A setting closes (opens?) a circuit. Of the A the les is a manul lens. You must then explin how this phantom migration happens. setting the aperture ring is not involved in the actual diaphragm function. Yup. The insides of the lens barrel is what determines the aperture in that case. It's actually easy to see the effect. If you sit at 28mm and change the ring from 4 to 5.6 the shutter value will change. Goes without saying. and switch it between 4 and 5.6 the shutter value will not vary at all. Only if the one-stop movement does not interfere with the amount of light, though theoretically it should. that's because the amount of light is not changing because the barrel of the lens housing is already stopping the amount of light to around F5.6 anyway. OK, twisted, but OK. constant aperture zooms that are opened up at the short end. Zoomed to 80mm? That's the LONG end. design of a constant aperture zoom is nothing more than opening up the front element and lens barrel so that the diaphragm is not vignetted by the barrel at the long end. OK Kent Gittings _ -Original Message- Subject: Re: Variable aperture zoom question In a message dated 12/5/01 4:19:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: That's precisely the point - that because the zoom lens is variable aperture, I cannot be guaranteed that the amount of light admitted through the lens will be constant over the zoom range of the lens. IF you use a PK/A variable aperture lens with the lens in any position other than A, the aperture WILL NOT change, withthe exception of using TTL flash in the aperture AE mode. The way you decribe it, ~you're~ setting the aperture yourself. It won't change no matter how you zoom (with the one TTL flash exception noted). I'll say this and no more: when you ~manually~ set the aperture, the variable aperture becomes a preset (by you) aperture. Nothing you do while zooming will (can) change the aperture until (you) change it to a different setting. Specifically: when an A lens is not on A, the lens becomes either semi-manual? (aperture only) or full manual (aperture and shutter on manual setting). **And it does not matter whether you set it wide open or close it down all the way. The aperture CANNOT (does not) change until you change it-period. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: OT: SUV's - was: Illegal Street Photography?
In a message dated 12/4/01 10:39:58 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: That's why race cars run itty-bitty tires ~Which~ race cars run itty-bitty tires? If what you call itty-bitty is race cars whose tires measure up to 20 at the wheel, up to 14 wide on the ground itty-bitty, then you're right. The illusion of small is just that; an illusion. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: some interesting NG thoughts on digital consumers
In a message dated 12/4/01 10:42:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I agree 1000%. Until I can do everything with digital I can with film, until I can take digital media into a good lab and get great results, I am not inclined to invest any further in it. Let's see... I can spend my time messing wth software and printers, or I can let someone else do that part while I'm out pressing the shutter release. Valid points, but you *can* do this with good labs. Yes, but the expense is outrageously unreasonable for just a few prints. always argue that the price of printers, paper and ink need to be factored into comparing digital and film cameras? Precisely because you don't need the above to see prints. You don't even need a computer: go to the drugstore-etc., open package and look. And why do digital advocates always assume that Granny has a computer or some other means to see their ofttimes shabby product? good minilab into the purchase of your film camera? That's a Shibboleth. If you don't want to print them yourself, take the files to a good lab and let them do it...just like film. Don's Photo, for example, charges the same for prints from digital files as from film. This isn't a rant against you, Tom, but against those people who criticize digital cameras because of problems with home printing. Another good reason to shoot film: ~you~ only need a camera and eyes to shoot and Granny only need eyes to view them, the way it's been for more than a one-hundred years. What did ~you~ do before you had a digital? In that regard, the digital is equal to or better than film argument falls squarely on its expensive face. Those who argue the convenience of small format digital, without considering the cost to an individual, disregard one fundamental fact: small format digital owners pay, in terms of replacing or upgrading equipment, ink-etc., huge sums of money to get what are essentially dinky home printed images. Small format digital printing is expensive and for the most part, SUX. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: some interesting NG thoughts on digital consumers
In a message dated 12/4/01 11:30:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This is just a matter of time, though, and after some more years pass I fully expect to see kick-ass quality digital come down to affordable levels That may be years before ~small format~ digital gets to be as inexpensive as that $14.96 35mm autofocus PS at Walmart. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: What does The Prisoner say about anecdotal evidence? g
In a message dated 12/4/01 11:47:21 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ci·vil·ian (s-vlyn) n. A person following the pursuits of civil life, especially one who is not an active member of the military or police. adj.Of or relating to civilians or civil life; nonmilitary: civilian You and me are civilians (outsiders) to people in the medical field. We are civilains to ice carvers, carpenters, firefighters, professional ice skaters, NFL players, world class Chessmasters-etc. Get it: civilian = outsiders? Think of it this way: persons not part of the PDML are civilians. Get it now? - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: What does The Prisoner say about anecdotal evidence? g
In a message dated 12/4/01 11:48:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think you're reaching for a different word, Mafud. Maybe accredited or something similar? PJ's are employed by companies for a purpose, which differentiates them to some degree from casual shooters, but they're still civilians. chris Civilians: = outsiders. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: OT: SUV's - was: Illegal Street Photography?
In a message dated 12/5/01 6:32:34 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Mafud, I was being facetious. The poster I was responding to said that the size of a tire's footprint doesn't affect braking. Paul Mea culpa-mea culpa-my bad! Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: some interesting NG thoughts on digital consumers
In a message dated 12/5/01 7:22:43 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Small format digital printing is expensive and for the most part, SUX. SUX=Airport code for Sioux City, Iowa. Bill, KG4LOV [EMAIL PROTECTED] Like I said: SUX :)) Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: The New French Anti-Photography Law
In a message dated 12/5/01 8:08:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: it adds up, doesn't it? Frantisek Yah. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: The New French Anti-Photography Law
In a message dated 12/5/01 8:08:11 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I am not sure as I am not in USA, but hasn't it gone away already a bit (freedom of the press) in war events? Yah, even the American press, itself filled to the brim with this newfound patriotism, has kowtowed to Bush on this war. The pabulum we're being spoon-fed from the Bush people in no way tells the story. We haven't heard an estimate of Taliban casualties, which may be approaching 12,000 DEAD. Have Americans or the world heard that? Do we know anything about what is happening inside Afghanistan except what the administration wants us to hear? No way! **Adminstrationn misdirection of hard news started in the Vietnam War, was refined in the Gulf War and has come to full fruition in this war. Death rides our bombs but we get more propaganda about the Taliban. We are being forced to listen to our side about Khadahar, where stupid Arab Taliban are making it easy for the stories to focus on them as opposed to what is actually happening. Our bombs are forcing the populations into minefields to escape them. Won't hear about that in our now cowardly American press. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Illegal Street Photography? - last from Cotty
In a message dated 12/5/01 8:08:33 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: One last thing, though - cars are cheap only because you (or fuel companies) don't pay the real costs - that in direct contrary to theory of market economics. With cars are associated many externalities like roads, wars over oil, degradation of human rights and nature and death of people from pollution, et cetera et cetera. These externalities are paid for by the nature and people not using cars (like genocidal practices against Ogoni tribe in Nigeria,...). If free market economics, than with externalities included in the price of product. Otherwise, it is all one big hypocrisy. Yup. I filled up last night at SAM'S CLUB for 90.9 cents per gallon (member price). Cheap fuel helps drive the SUV market too. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Variable aperture zoom question
In a message dated 12/5/01 8:53:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Subj:Re: Variable aperture zoom question (Hi, Fred wrote: Mike: Suppose I have a variable aperture zoom lens, say 28-80mm f3.5-f5.6 If I set the zoom at 28mm, and set the aperture wide open, it should be f3.5. If I then zoom to 80mm, the effective aperture goes down to f5.6, right? And if I zoom to 50mm, the aperture will be somewhere in between, say f4 maybe. Right. Right. Now suppose I set my zoom to 50mm @ f8. That's not an easy task. The aperture markings usually correspond to the widest aperture. So, if you set the focal length to 50 and the perture ring to where 8 is marked, you will have f/8 @ 28 and something like f/13.5 @ 80 mm. If I zoom out to 28mm, will the effective aperture stay at f8? If I zoom in to 80mm, will the effective aperture stay at f8? Nope, in both cases (although my understanding is that the relative differences in aperture at different focal lengths diminish as one moves away from wide open). If you did manage to set exactly f/8 @ 50 mm, the answer is no to both questions. In any event, if you're using TTL metering (which most of us use most of the time), then the exposure recommendation should automatically compensate for the variable aperture problem. This is, fo course, correct and the most important thing. The trouble with the variable apertures comes in play when you use manual flash, studio flash, etc.) Cheers, Boz _ Pardon me if I misunderstand the gist of you response: the operative question asked by Mike was : if I set... Are you (anyone) now suggesting that setting the aperture manually, somehow changes the aperture as you zoom? How? ***Taking the aperture ring off A makes it a ~manual~ lens, or are you (anyone) saying that somehow, the camera/lens changes what is a (preset) aperture anyway? How? Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: December PUG OT
In a message dated 12/5/01 9:14:20 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: . To many Europeans today, the current war with international terrorism is an American and Israeli problem, in which they see no reason for concern. That is what I was addressing. What if they had another war in Europe: do Europeans believe we (US) should interfere? Or let them twist and swing, slowly in the wind, hoisted by their own petard? Yup. Even if I did have the energy to fight, no way would I get on another boat or plane to go anywhere to fight anyone for anyone again. Land in south Florida, I'll join in. But to save someone else, especially in Europe? PLEASE! Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: The New French Anti-Photography Law
In a message dated 12/5/01 11:40:27 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There are numerous sources for additional information. You just have to look for them. You know I already knew that. But other sources can be slanted toward one or the other view and at the same time, be no more truthful: if a greens or right or left source, or Conservative or liberal source, the news will be filtered by the politics involved. What distresses me most is normally straightforward American news sources, including Television, simply have swallowed the administration's press releases whole, parroting the administration viewpoint, saying what the administration wants said. Bush has taken this opportunity to subvert some freedoms and subsume others. A Homeland Security agency sounds suspiciously like Fatherland Securitat to many, including myself. The combining of the CIA/FBI ought to scare the hell out of everybody, especially since no one will be watching either if them, not even Congress, our so-called elected overseers. That massive, invasive superspy agency will do mischief and the press, in bed with Bush, Cheney, Powell and Rice, will stand by muted by their own near treasonous complicity. This superagency will do what the popular attitude says they can: make America SAFE (at any cost), including taking away individual freedoms in the interest of national security. Having set up this all pervasive Securitat, Bush has ignored Congress anyway. Meanwhile our so-called free press stands by, hamstrung. **We're just damn lucky we have a dividied Congress or Bush and his cronies would have a real field day. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: some interesting NG thoughts on digital consumers
In a message dated 12/5/01 1:09:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Bill is talking about WAL-MART for crying out loud. Are you telling us that Wal-Mart is not a common store? -Aaron Ah, speaking my language. My wife is the front end manager for a Walmart Super Store. I'll check this evening. But you moved the target. ~You~ were speaking of ~LABS~. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: some interesting NG thoughts on digital consumers
In a message dated 12/5/01 1:32:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Agreed. That's why I'm continuing this on-list instead of taking it off-list as I usually do. Whether from ignorance or maliciousness, Mafud is spreading a lot of false information about the digital process. I don't want people to read that and become misinformed themselves. chris Ah, and now the Prime Minister speaketh. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: The New French Anti-Photography Law
In a message dated 12/5/01 3:24:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Actually, it was under the Clinton-Gore-Reno reign that the FBI purchased a bunch of silent phone switches, installed in many COs across the country, to listen in (with a warrant, of course) on conversations. ___ Ah see, you've turned my comments into something they were not: not political, not aimed at Bush but at what he and his inner circle have done to the nation. We may ~never~ know how far this thing has gone. The observation was aimed more at those handling Bush than at him. **But I see you couldn't discuss what I wrote in context. You just had to turn it into a conservative Vs. liberal name calling shooting war. I won't play. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: some interesting NG thoughts on digital consumers
In a message dated 12/5/01 8:42:55 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: And, while you're at it, what lab do you use that charges so much more for prints from digital media than from film, and what are their prices? First I laughed when you had the bald-faced audacity to advance ~any~ Walmart as a lab, laughing harder still that you really ~beleived~ a Walmart could be of lab quality. Then I considered you were deliberately being both obnoxious and obstreperous. If Walmart is what you, or is all you can advance as a lab, I now understand why you are so juvenile in your approach: put up or shut up. Walmart is to a pro level lab what a mutt is to a purebred. OK, they process film and/or digital. But that makes them film/pixel processors, not labs, not in the sense most serious people use when speaking of such. As to making a comparative analysis between a Walmart and ~any~ lab I know: my lab has an art department that charges $45 an hour for spotting negatives. What does Walmart charge? My lab routinely processes 30 x 40 prints and larger: how large a print can Walmart print (on site)? My lab occupies two whole floors of space in their own building and your Walmart? Fits in a 30 x 30 foot space you say? That's no lab: that's a kiosk. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Variable aperture zoom question
In a message dated 12/5/01 8:46:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So I think you're wrong here, but it'spossible that I'm misunderstanding what you're trying to say. chris What I've said is: the physical aperture does not change. What happens in the viewfinder I'm not clear since I don't own nor have I used all models of PENTAX SLR cameras, and since there have been more than a few issued I don't know about, there might be a change (in the viewfinder). But does the aperture itself change as you contend? Do this: look at the aperture as you zoom. Does the aperture change? Or does any PENTAX camera act differently? PENTAX exposure modes: Programmed AE: lens on A: shutter dial on A (Auto): camera automatically selects the most appropriate combination of shutter speed and aperture, changing them simultaneously... Aperture Priority AE: lens on any f: number: when the aperture is set manually, the shutter speed is automatically adjusted by built-in electronic circuitry according to the subject's brightness to provide appropriate exposure... Shutter Priority AE, the shutter speed is set manually and the aperture value is automatically controlled according to subject brightness... Metered Manual: lens on any aperture, shutter dial on M (manual) The combination of shutter speed and aperture is completely up to you. PENTAX flash modes: TTL auto flash: When connected with a PENTAX dedicated TTL Auto flash unit, the metering cell inside the mirror box will detect the light hitting the film plane and automatically control the flash output. If you use a TTL flash unit, and set the camera in the Aperture-priority AE mode, ~you can choose any aperture in the flash range, thereby achieving great control over depth of field~... Here is the ~ONLY~ instance shooting ~TTL~ flash where the camera will adjust the aperture: Programmed Auto Flash: ~If~ you use a PENTAX dedicated TTL flash unit with the camera in the Programmed AE or shutter priority AE mode, the camera will automatically select the proper aperture and automatically control flash output. But remember, the question was: If I set the aperture? And my response(s) fit that condition: If ~I~ set the aperture? Meaning? Setting the aperture yourself on a PENTAX body obviates both the programmed auto flash or shutter priority modes. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: OT crap
In a message dated 12/5/01 8:52:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Folks are starting to take this stuff personally, and quite frankly, history is just.history. You dismiss what has happened to millions of people, the destruction of entire civlizations in some cases as just being history? Now I am ~afraid~ of you and your values. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: OT: some interesting NG thoughts on digital consumers
In a message dated 12/4/01 1:56:41 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Besides i still think i take better film flash then digital flash. Dave I agree Dave. Lag time between pushing the shutter release and actuall firing is, as you note-atrocious. Most under $500 digital flash gives you that: shot in a dark room with ISO 100 film look. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: SUV's - was: Illegal Street Photography?
In a message dated 12/4/01 7:14:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: And there is nowhere in the USA where you can cruise at 110mph in a sportscar let alone a van. Ah Bob, you've got to get out more! Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, Montana-a lot of western states have areas where flying along at 140mph+ is considered local sport! Remember, the state of Nevada had ~no~ speed limit until recently. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: OT: some interesting NG thoughts on digital consumers
In a message dated 12/4/01 11:06:20 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Digital is very cool, but a real pain in the ass. Glad ~you~ said that! BSEG Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: December PUG
In a message dated 12/4/01 6:35:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This is the first attack by a non-American on mainland US soil since the war of 1812. You better not tell all those Alaska combat Veterans of Kiska and Attu Island that. The Japanese not only invaded US soil, they kicked butt-for about a minute. You said mainland. Then there were thousands of Japanese balloon firebombs. Japanese subs roamed all up and down the West coast, some of them raiding inland. Some of the Japanese subs even dropped off spies. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: What does The Prisoner say about anecdotal evidence? g
In a message dated 12/4/01 9:35:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You use the term photojournalist, and civilian as if they are separate entities. I have seen this usage of teminology before from time to time. They [we] (PJs) are ~not~ civilians. We are separate and apart. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: What does The Prisoner say about anecdotal evidence? g
In a message dated 12/4/01 9:35:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Why do photojournalists, who are rarely members of a military organization feel they have the right to call non photojournalists civilians in a context that would have us believe that they themselves are not civilians. We're different. We see the world with minds and eyes jaded by the weird, the disgusting, the bad things in life. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Computer Upgrade
In a message dated 12/3/01 10:51:42 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: True, I didn't check Intel's nomenclature to find the preferred abbreviation, but that was not the gist of my post. I was addressing the use of P1V rather than P-IV or P4 or any other permutation of that name. To help clear up what was merely a typo (mine) I hit the 1 instead of l. So lV became 1V. Now I see why so much time is spent on, as Bill Owen once put it: Parsing minutiae. *And yes, the lV was deliberate (though wrong). Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: OT OT OT
In a message dated 12/2/01 2:26:23 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Why was she in that particular situation? She was much more concerned with her appearance than she was with her personal safety, thus, she eschewed wearing that nasty seat belt which might wrinkle her pretty party dress. Answer carefully, because why she was in a car going 85mph through a tunnel in Paris is very germaine to why she died. You're wanting to infer that the people chasing the car were at fault. Let's look at the same situation, but this time, it's a drunk running from a police officer. When s/he cracks up their car, do we say it was the fault of the police officer? Of course not, unless your logic says this: if the police officer hadn't chased them, them wouldn't have cracked up their car. The damn fool drunk driving the car lost control of the car being the of the accident. It was he who was rushing though the streets of Paris at night driving like a mad hare, he whose drunken sotted brain drove the car into the stanchion. **Had the car missed or glanced off the stanchion, she possibly would have escaped injury altogether. But the car ~did~ hit the stanchion and she died because she wasn't wearing a seat belt. As has been previously noted, ~everyone~ in the car without seat belts died. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: shooting holiday lights
In a message dated 12/2/01 9:03:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Thanks for the tip! I picked up a copy in Chapters yesterday. It's a nice little book. Hey Wendy! What size is the book now? Before it was this tiny 3 x 4.5 thing that slipped into any crack, or pocket/purse/camera bag. Have they enlarged it to the size someone could sell it? and does it still fit in small places? Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: OT OT OT
In a message dated 12/2/01 9:32:24 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Use boomshanka instead. It means may the seed of your loins have fruit in the belly of your woman. dave bummer That's not what ~I~ heard. My understanding was boomshanka meant: May the fleas from a thousand Camels invade you private parts. :)) Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: HELP: my MZ-5 thinks 1/60th is a great flash sync speed!
In a message dated 12/2/01 9:52:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This shot used flash sync of 1/60. Note the static objects are fine, but the moving prople are blurred. And they just happened to move a bit as I tripped the shutter. The flash was bounced off the cathedral ceiling. Slow flash sync ~always~ calls for panning with the moving object, releasing the shutter in the process, meanwhile blurring the background. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: OT OT OT
In a message dated 12/2/01 10:16:46 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Some folks do indeed die due to stupidity. JFK ordering the bubble top to be removed being one such act. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: OT OT OT
In a message dated 12/2/01 10:21:40 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The impact is just the injury event, __ And (along with no seatbelt) what killed her. Everything else is part of the investigation. You'r talking of the extenuating circumstances leading up to the crash. As an investigator coming upon the scene, I would have called in my location. I would then look in the car to determine if there were survivors (or not). Then I'd call for rescue and ambulance(s) then called in a brief summary of what I had observed. (As a former part-time forensic photographer, having arrived, I would have begun to photograph the evidence/scene. What I shot is what I saw. My report thus becomes part of the larger investigation. Any specualtion on my part about what happended would be superfluous and unprofessional). My photogrpahs would have revealed that an automobile, (allegedely traveling at a high rate of speed; thought nice to know, such information has no bearing on what a forensic photograher does), entered an underpass at a hgigh rate of speed. The construction of the underpass (townward sloping ramp that ended rather abruptly in flat pavement) was such that the car bottomed out, bounced viollently-ecoming became airborne, fell back to ground. Careening along along out of control, the vehicle then smashed into the stancion, coming to a rest there. There were four persons in the vehicle, one person was still breathing. the other occupants appeared to be dead or comatose. As I walked away form the scene, retrieving and storing exposed film, I would know one thing with a certainty carved in stone: the automobile hit the stanchion. The resulting impact seriuosly hurt one passenger, and caused extensive trauma to the other three. Summary? A car hit a stanchion and the people inside were [hurt] or [killed]. The lone survivor was the only passneger wearing a seat belt. -30- Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: flash stuff
In a message dated 12/2/01 11:45:21 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The formula is get out my Sekonic and check. I'd bet a dozen doughnuts that my exposure will be more accurate than yours, unless you remembered your tape measure. Seriously, you'd go to a professional gig with no meter? Or is that broken too? -Aaron Aaron, three things really tick me off: cold coffee, wet toilet paper and a wise *ss like you. That said, you misaddressed the first post then totally ignored the content of the second. The topic was manual flash, not flash meters or even flash meter accuracy. Can we say: Manual flash? Since you've brought your own foul brand of vitriol to the discussion then descended into your 'obnoxious' act, I'll sign off this topic. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: HELP: my MZ-5 thinks 1/60th is a great flash sync speed!
In a message dated 12/2/01 11:46:30 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sun, 2 Dec 2001 10:49:46 EST, mafud wrote: Slow flash sync ~always~ calls for panning with the moving object, releasing the shutter in the process, meanwhile blurring the background. Panning helps with slow flash sync, if one judges the speed and direction correctly, just as you say above, but only if the subject is moving in a known direction, and only if you know in advance that the subject is moving, and only if one pans the lens closely in line with the subject movement. John, ~any~ serious photographer, and I'd include the entire PDML list, knows you're correct. That being something we might agree on, the human brain and a little experience calculates all your given parameters in milliseconds and makes the decisions you (we) need to make the photo. Shotgunners, bowlers and other endeavors which demand hand-eye coordination and instinctive targeting call it follow through. Panning using slow flash sync is not much help if multiple subjects are moving in different directions, or, if one does not know in advance that the subject(s) are going to move, or, heaven forbid, if one does not want to blur the background. Again you're correct, given your conditions. But I say the experienced shooter, knowing who and what s/he wants to be or ~is~ the main subject, will ~not~ be confused by all the extemporaneous movement. Slow flash sync is best for static or very slowly moving objects. Panning could help keep a portion of the frame in focus under certain circumstances. A more reliable and permanent solution to image blur caused by slow flash sync is a faster flash sync rate. But... but slow sync is most often ~only~ used on static subjects, the main reason for using the technique being to allow for ambient exposures. But panning is a learned technique which every competent shooter should practice. ***We know that (most) PENTAX cameras, with the exception of the PZ class, all four of whom have 1/250th flash sync, have flash syncs of 1/125th or slower. As I remember, high speed flash sync was instituted by and for the pro camera genre even before the advent of ISO 400, 640 and 800 speed films, the combination of which, with fast, f/2.8 or better pro lenses, did not easily accommodate outdoor slow sync. Fast lenses and fast film forces the shooter to close down their apertures, sometimes to f/22 or smaller, meaning getting bokeh in a shot impossible, especially for wildlife. LX owners often decry their atrociously slow LX flash sync, but for different reasons. -- Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Smoking Killed George Harrison
In a message dated 12/2/01 1:19:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It's a good opportunity to talk to your kids yet again about smoking. Right on Mike! Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: OT OT OT
In a message dated 12/2/01 2:03:21 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The official investigation by the French government concluded that his life was saved by the passenger-side airbag. --Mike And because he was held stationary by his seat belt. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: The New French Anti-Photography Law
In a message dated 12/2/01 4:02:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Very thoughtful comments, Bob. In regard to your last paragraph, the fact such a law would clearly violate the constitutional freedom of the press. And, because the press has lots of money to fight it. One would think that any such legislation would quickly be overturned. --graywolf I think Bush, the FBI Director and the Homeland Defense Minister-err, Secretary, might have something to say about what and which of the freedoms we Americans take pride in go next. What with all the public freedoms they are temporarily whisking under the carpet and have unconstitutionally subsumed already until this war is over, photojournalists and freedom of the press might very well be next. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: flash stuff
In a message dated 12/2/01 8:49:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: basicly Well what would you do without your fancy gear? You'd be lost because you aren't a real photographer... At least that's how it seemed to me, and apearently I'm not the only one... Isaac You're wrong. I never said or hinted at what you infer here. I did not, or have not inferred such. I ~did~ insist we talk about manual flash instead of the what ifs put forth to fend off answering my question regarding manual flash. Too many times, and your response here adds to the observation, someone gratuitously chimes into something that does not involve them. As my remarks were not addressed to you, you might have simply observed where the conversation was headed. Again, just because I'm opinionated, does not, at the same time, mean I can't be corrected. Had you yourself wanted to add to the manual flash tangent the thread had taken, instead of attempting to upbraid me, we might have moved on to something else. But you insisted... And I'll say it again: knowing manual flash photography can get you out of trouble when your TTL or automatic flashes fail. That is what you needed to dispute. Moreover, there are times when TTL or automatic flash will not produce the desired results where manual flash will. Over dependence on TTL or automatic flash has meant lousy results for too many. Not being able to shoot manual flash means that too many times, otherwise competent photographers have to pass up shots, especially in early morning and late evening. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: kodak photoguide
In a message dated 12/2/01 9:04:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At 13:15 2-12-2001 -0500, you wrote: Subject: Re: shooting holiday lights [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Thanks for the tip! I picked up a copy in Chapters yesterday. It's a nice little book. Hey Wendy! What size is the book now? Before it was this tiny 3 x 4.5 thing that slipped into any crack, or pocket/purse/camera bag. Have they enlarged it to the size someone could sell it? and does it still fit in small places? Mafud It's a 4x5 spiral bound, card covered book. So pretty small. They have, however, packaged it in a removable card outer cover approx 8x10 so it looks like you're getting twice as much book for your money. Dinky little book with lots of tables and dials and the peculiar use of the words backlighted and frontlighted. Oh, and you have to know what feet and inches are, of course. Wendy That's a shame. A perfectly good advice manual, once in the hands of Pixel Press, becomes a dinky kind of shelf book, too large to slip in a shirt pocket. I believe when KODAK first published it, they intended for it to travel with you, taking up as little space as possible, but still affording you the quick refrence data you needed. Now... Thanks, Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: flash stuff
In a message dated 12/1/01 1:55:59 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This is pretty far-fetched. What if your much-vaunted K1000 breaks down, leaving you with access to only a pinhole camera and flashlight? Should you really have to be prepared for all possibilities? Personally, I'd rather carry a spare TTL flash. :) I carry all types of flashes with me. Since assignments won't be dragging me all over the place anymore, I get to choose. As noted, I shoot portraiture most times now and the strategically placed adjustable flash adding pops of manual flash will do when all the TTL flashes in the world won't. But then, that comes from my being comfortable and competent with manual flash. But I repeat the question: how would ~you~ handle the situation I proposed? What's the formula to get a properly exposed shot with a broken 283 and a K1000, subject distance 11.5 feet? [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: shooting holiday lights
In a message dated 12/1/01 7:11:15 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom.Can you get this book from Kodak,or would most bigger camera stores supply them. They are rare now. (Back in the days), most serious photo store and labs kept them around. Whether they are available from your local pro lab or store or even KODAK is questionable. They were a freebie pass-out from KODAK to dealers (which means a lot of chintzy small dealers and pro shops were too cheap to pay for the shipping). Try your larger labs or pro shops for copies. Or go on-line to KODAK and search KODAK publications. Great, GREAT little (free) book. (and no, you can't have mine) Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: flash stuff
In a message dated 12/1/01 11:34:36 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well, now we have wireless P-TTL that can fire one or more flashes strategically located and utilize TTL. The assumption being everyone (who can afford it) will own a P-TTL camera/flash. I only engage in this exercise about flash to see what people are doing and shooting. Remember, PDML or any camera list members may own 4-5 flashes of various types while our friend Joe (Six-pack) doesn't own any, unless we count the tiny built-in pip-squeak on his PS. As for (manual) studio flash: I'd venture that without their light meters, most studio shooters don't know diddly about shooting manual flash, which is, of course, what they do, but with light and color meters. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Re[2]: Illegal Street Photography?
In a message dated 12/1/01 2:06:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The seatbelt would have not made any difference, IMHO. Of course it mattered. The bodyguard sitting in front of her was wearing a seat-belt. Though he suffered grievous injuries about the head, chest and face, he is alive and working at his craft. Wearing a seat belt, Di might have only suffered bruising and to a lesser degree than the bodyguard. Without a seat belt, her 110 pound body became an 85mph missile slamming into an immovable object. Someone more brilliant that me should do the math but that much soft tissue hitting a stationary object at 85mph had to be generating tons of force on impact. Death was instantaneous and guaranteed. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: shooting holiday lights
In a message dated 12/1/01 8:30:57 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Rittenhouse wrote: Dave, any bookstore should be able to get it for you. I got my current copy from a local camera store. It is called: Kodak Pocket Photoguide. fourth edition. 2001. Publication AR-21. ISBN 0-07985-807-9 $14.95 US $21.95 Can I'm wondering when the guide went on sale. Through 1997, it was a part of the literature my KODAK freely dealer passed out? Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: flash stuff
In a message dated 12/2/01 12:02:39 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well, I know all about guide numbers, but what happens if the battery in my calculator goes dead? --graywolf It would be just your luck your pen ran out of ink right about then or your pencil broke or the only paper around was wet or there was no wet sand around or Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: OT OT OT
In a message dated 12/1/01 10:59:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It was guaranteed, but it wasn't instantaneous. She was talking to some of her rescuers and was still alive when she reached the hospital. There was just nothing that could be done, is all. So you might say she was doomed to die from the moment of impact. --Mike Sorry Mike, she never talked to anyone. More urban rumors. We've all heard she asked about her children or talked to the ambulance attendants or said: tell me-mums I love her... Didn't happen. She died on impact, arteries torn from her heart. She was ~not~ alive as people tried to get her out. The only one alive (or concious) was the bodyguard; driver, Dodi and Di, all dead. What the Paparzzi did (or not) had nothing to do with her death. She died only because she hit the back of the front seat at 85mph. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Illegal Street Photography?
In a message dated 11/29/01 10:00:49 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Greetings from Portland everyone... The recent discussion about Robert Payne's Arrest photo started me thinking about the legal implications of street photography. Are there locations and/or subjects that are just off-limits to uninvited photography? The generally accepted term literally meaning in the streets, most times a public event (arrests, fights, celebrities and the like) are fair game. If the photographer is suspected of observing a crime, s/he might be asked to surrender their film (to be receipted and returned). In matters of national security, (or some such declared emergency), a photographer is often asked to give up their film (no return). ~ANY~ commissioned officer can ask any civilian, (as opposed to a working PJ/journalist) for their film (to be returned). Recent events since September 11 has seen such a tightening of security that the places I once took for granted as being safe to shoot, may not be anymore. *I've noted before that I generally didn't point my camera at any police for any reason, especially when overseas, where the even vaunted power (and privileges) of the press usually don't mean diddly. The photo in question seems to have been taken by a non-zoom lens, maybe 35 to 50mm prime lens (because the interest, though at the center of the photo, was not clearly defined). **I don't remember if the photographer noted what lens he used. something they shouldn't have? I welcome comments, stories, whatever... Yup; in Haiti, The Sudan, South Africa, Utah, New York, Philadelphia, Thailand, a NATO base in The Netherlands, Vietnam... *After refusing to turn over my film, me and my film (and gear) have been bodily encouraged to accompany police to a police lab where the film was developed, printed, surveilled and returned. Overseas, the problem is you simply don't know who the particulars are in any photo. You may have captured an illegal transaction, or government spy or criminal in your lens. One can scream I'm an (pick one) citizen, I have my rights all you damn well pleased, but if they (police or security or gangsters) ~really~ want it, they'll have your film (and you). ***There are corporate campuses where you ought not be seen with a camera. We learned from the OJ mess that it is legal (in the US at least) to shoot from ~public~ property onto private or government holdings without fear of recriminations. (Better not try that around US Air Force bases or any military facilities though). Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Censorship-not,
In a message dated 11/30/01 4:07:32 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mike is perfectly right. (SNIP) BTW This has nothing to do with censorship but acting like a grown up. Pål ___ The problem with that Mike, is that those kind of responses very quickly turn any list into hell. (SNIP) the list to something other than the list I subscribed to and love, go ahead. It will just no longer be a list where I want to hang out. __ Pål, I don't recall you or anyone coming to my defense when PDML members attacked ~me~ in ~on-topic~ posts. Day after weary day the attacks went on and... silence from the PDML or, when someone got p*ssed, the complainant complained about ~me~ defending myself. Already since I've been back, a number of PDML members have tried mightily to start a flame war with me. NOT ONE PDML member, including yourself, said one #%## W@ $%$##$ word to the provocateurs. But now you guys want to complain about what has been not even a flame war but an OT thread gone a little awry? Surely we must have order, but the complaints on this thread are disingenuous if not supercilious when you and others practice double standards. **When ~topical~ threads drone on and on, the postings wandering far afield, never even tangentially related to the thread heading, why isn't there a whoa called for them? OTs die of their own inertia and as has been suggested, ignore the thread. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: flash stuff
In a message dated 11/30/01 2:00:56 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You guys should really try TTL flash, or better yet P-TTL if you have the new FA360FGZ and MZ-S. It really makes your approach redundant. Even with my AF280T and plain old TTL I find well balanced exposures. If I have some highly reflective foreground, I use bounce to even out the light; try that with manual calculations. Cheers, Mike. Hey Mike! You forgot your camera and there is a function you could shoot but you only have access to a 283 with a broken sensor and a K1000, meaning raw manual flash shooting if you hope to get any photos at all. And since the 283 does not have a distance scale, what are ~you~ going to do? We know me and Bill can get along just fine but what are ~you~ going to do without at least a rudimentary background in shooting manual flash? Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Computer Upgrade
In a message dated 11/30/01 4:26:10 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's a MOBO? What's a P1V and a Dragon ATX? Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Computer Upgrade
In a message dated 11/30/01 4:26:10 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's a MOBO? MOtherboard. What's a P1V and a Dragon ATX? PlV = Pentium 4, Dragon ATX are both high performance Motherboards. You can buy either w/processors for under $300. **Add a 400 watt case ($80) and RAM and you could be running a 1.4 GIG scream-machine for under $450. You'd load your OS and a new HDD (hard disk drive), then reload all your programs, about two days work part-time. Of course I recommend partitioning your drives (old or new) first then load the OS. *The new Pentium 4 motherboards run at a bus speed of 400, the ATXs at up to 266. **A SYK7ADA ATX Socket A Motherboard w/1.4 GIG Athlon processor, bus speed up to 266, sells for $260. It takes 3GB of DDR RAM. A 4-port Firewire card for the computer is $60. Of course there are other more expensive or cheaper MOBO/processor combinations than what I suggest above, any real, serious upgrade ~starts~ with a new Motherboard/processor. **And while some RAM is inexpensive as in $24 for 256MB of SDRAM (PC100/133, 168 pin), some RAM, like 256MB of DDR RAM costs $60. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: why EI-2000 is total CRAP, UNUSABLE for anything but strong daylight!
In a message dated 11/30/01 8:06:52 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mafud, it seems it just depends on what the photographer photographs... if I shot studio-like shots, I would do manual flash of course. Since I don't, I almsot don't do manual flash. I am glad there is one less variable I have to think about... Yah, I still shoot available light portraiture, usually with the AF400T on a tripod, set at from 1/25 to 1/16 power to brighten shadows and give that desirable catchlight in the subject's eyes. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Flash
In a message dated 11/30/01 8:21:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: (but won't I feel like I'm cheating?!) Not if you remember that every once in a while, you ought to dance with the one that brung you (manual flash)! Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: AF360FTZ - First Impressions
In a message dated 11/28/01 11:05:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I too wondered about the lack of the swivel head and the vertical grip. I hope to do some test shots in the next couple of days. OK, I know this is subjective, but how many times does the ~AVERAGE~ photographer swivel their flash head? Not talking about we serious hobbyists mind you, but average photographers. *For that matter, what percentage of people, in this world of one-use and P Shoot cameras w/built-in flashes, even ~own~ a stand alone flash? Scene: a Botanica. A man is shooting flowers with what was the first PENTAX Program Plus another PENTAX owner had ever seen. After introducing himself, the now curious photographer asks: Q: Hey mister, did you get a flash for that fancy camera of yours? A: Duh-yeah, but I don't know how to operate the darn thing. Q: The flash? A: No, the camera. Q: Where's the flash, you could sure use it on those flowers in the shade? A: Still packed in the box it came in. Q: Wanna sell it? A: Uh-uh...yeah, I don't use it...how much you offering? Q: What is it? A: Umm, a 280 something. Q: Like a 280T? A: Yeah, I think so. Q: I'm a little strapped now said the curious photographer, (in that era before ATMs); Would $30 do? A: Nope, I'll have to mail it and that costs money. Q: Curious photographer asks: Q: $35? A: OK. 11 days later, me, the curious photographer, opened up the box holding the first AF280T I'd even seen**. **Ill-gotten gains are never enjoyed: I walked off from a flight bag holding the 280 in the Philadelphia airport. By the time I got back to where the bag had been... DRAT!! Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: why EI-2000 is total CRAP, UNUSABLE for anything but strong daylight!
In a message dated 11/28/01 11:05:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: That does suck. Is there an option on the camera to lock the aperture? The CP990 has a variable aperture, but there's an option to lock it so it simulates a constant aperture zoom. The Pz-1p has the same ability with variable zooms. While I agree, no serious photographer should own or use a non-dedicated flash with variable aperture zooms. **a dedicated flash sets the aperture per the film speed. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: what I think of current digital cameras
In a message dated 11/28/01 12:08:09 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It's a lot tougher to take good pictures with a 6x7 than with a 35mm. That's why the vast majority of us use 35mm. I wonder why that would be the case. Are you saying it's because they're not as spontaneous? I can see that would be true depending on the subject matter. Please explain more. With the right finder/lens combination, my 67ll was as fast to point as any 35mm. But shooting 6x7 for the most part is a contemplative endeavor, with no need to hurry, unless one is trying to capture a gorgeous setting sun. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: When good enough ain't: was Re: what I think of current digital cameras
In a message dated 11/28/01 12:13:52 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But it can hardly be used to selectively focus on one subject, with a blurred background. It has strengths, it has weaknesses, just like any other format. But the basic quality of the images is every bit comparable to the best scan I can get using a 2820 dpi scanner and 35mm film. I find one thing that is a constant feature with quality taking (making?) instruments: as you point out, a camera with which the shooter cannot blur the background is no more than a sophisticated point and shoot*ps*. *ps*Again, for ~me~, an $800 PS (yep, they make such a beast) which won't let me move the aperture, defeats the purpose of my making photos. ***a movable aperture make the difference in all formats. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Firewire scanner?
I decided in favor of USB2 and Firewire for my next round of peripherals, including a new scanner. Which Firewire scanner though? Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Not to beat a dead horse...
I wonder: What with a real, not imagined US (soon to be World-Wide) recession out there, and with Joe Six-packs wanting to guard their disposable resources more carefully, sales of what electronics will be affected most: 1. Wide screen TVs? 2. $899 1 GIG computers? 3. $500 digital cameras? 4. $50 PSs? Will the PC and digital camera industries ever recover from the coming slump? Besides HP, which PC maker(s) will get wiped out in the recession? Besides HP and Polaroid, which digital camera companies will ~not~ survive the economic downturn? Will EarthLink survive? Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Street Photography ?
In a message dated 11/27/01 10:51:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I did a little cropping a put the results here to demonstrate how getting in closer can change the impact of a image. Actually, that is why PJs carry Xmm to 200/210mm f/2.8 zooms and shooting ISO 800+ film. (and any PJ worth their salt would have made that very same shot but in their viewfinder. :)) I Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Street Photography ?
In a message dated 11/27/01 11:23:34 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The impact of the photograph is definitely changed by the crop - it's diminished. The cropped photo stands alone, without a caption. Any PJ worth his/her salt captions his photos. I understand the shooter was ~not~ a PJ and besides, the shooter only did what any good photo editor (me) would have done: ruthlessly crop the original photo until there was a story which could be told with that small, missing caption. Q: how do you carve an Elephant out of a big block of stone? A. you keep carving until an Elephant appears! Q: how do you edit a photo so it tells a story? A: you keep cropping... Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: My Perfect Camera
In a message dated 11/26/01 5:39:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well, how many megapixels? I don't know. Just for the record, how many megapixels are there in a 24x36 film frame? More than in an APS sized digital? Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Film for ballet performance
In a message dated 11/26/01 5:52:45 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ballet can be a difficult subject forphotography, I rate it alongside Rock'n'Roll photography for degree of difficulty. Ballet takes at least a 180-200mm lens to isolate the performers from their background. Same for Rock and roll. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: My Perfect Camera
In a message dated 11/26/01 6:10:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Re: Anything left out? Yes - autofocus capability. Sometimes my 67 year-old eyes need it. What Ed M said Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: What Zoom?
In a message dated 11/26/01 6:23:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tokina AT-X 90mm 2.5 macro. Cotty Do they make it in PENTAX autofocus? Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: New Position (semi-OT)
In a message dated 11/26/01 9:10:14 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hello all, Just wanted to let you all know that I got the photography editor's position at a small local daily paper... I'm sooo excited! This post is only semi-OT because I use all Pentax equipment. W H!!! Nick So now you'll get to do the dirty part of the PJ field: what to publish when you only have one spot for the lead story. You'll also become a dragon, easily tearing though spools of exposed film, picking not the best photo(s), but the ones which, along with a good caption (written by the PJ), tell the story. And congratulations! Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: what I think of current digital cameras
In a message dated 11/25/01 3:45:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: One hindrance slowing digital down, is that it's closely associated with computers. Not everyone wants or cares about them. Precisely my point. high percentage of people who buy digital cameras, also have computers. The rest, also a significant number, don't care and will continue using film cameras. Um-hm. hink it's only a matter of time before digital imaging becomes the rule, as opposed to the new-fangled exception. I would add, as you proposed above, for those who have computers. At what point computers stop their penetration into the American home is not known, but the saturation point is near, with a huge percentage of new computers being replacements as opposed to being bought by those who don't already own at least one computer***. ***I own four computers: 3 dead and 1 (this one) working. As the sales of new owner PCs steadily decline, fewer and fewer devices used by computers will be sold. One thing forgotten in the debate is most PDML members are well educated, with steady, good paying jobs and with a good degree of disposable income, a factor always considered when buying a computer. But PDML members probably represent PC/MAC owners more than they represent average or lower middle class Americans, the Joe Six-packs. As a class, PDML members have monies to indulge many of their whims, hobby photography, the Internet and digital imaging being a few. But it is outrageous for the few of us to believe we somehow know how non-computer, non-digital camera owners feel or will do in the future. In this debate, we have imperiously superimposed our own various indulgences on the American public, the vast majority of whom do ~not~ own computers or digital anything. As America's massive layoffs continue, even fewer PCs/digital cameras/handheld devices will be sold. **America's youth, formerly the prime candidates for new desk/laptops, have chosen instead to go handheld wireless, with no or limited need for a computer for their basic communications, including Email, note taking, class/date/test scheduling, all tasks previously done with computers now being performed by wireless devices. *Some handheld wireless devices have digital imaging add-ons. Even there, it is a matter of economics and the availability of repeaters for wireless devices. As long as computers require electricity and ISPs who demand more and more of people's disposable dollars** for their services, computers will penetrate so far and no more. *A $899 1 GIG computer is no bargain for the indigent family. There are growing concerns among American educators who see their poorer students using computers at school but are students who do not have access to computers at home for whatever reason. As the story goes: Aye, there's the rub. **I pay $7.99 a month for my ATT ISP/long distance service, nearly one-hundred dollars a year that many of our poor simply don't have. There's a catch there also. You need phone service to a known (fixed) street address to have an ISP. Too many Americans still don't have regular telephone service. I'm STILL going to go down, belly on the ground, pounding my fists and kicking my feet. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
When good enough ain't: was Re: what I think of current digital cameras
In a message dated 11/25/01 8:43:52 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Don't sit around and dismiss it because it's not like the old tools you have at hand. One of the first things I learned back in 1982 when I was first introduced to writing code for computers was the phrase: GI=GO (garbage in equals garbage out). Not that digital is garbage, at least not my own device(s), but when making a print from small format digital files, small format digital simply does not input as much raw data as film. Scanning a negative or slide, (and realizing most under $10,000 printers can't begin to utilize ~all~ the inputted small format film data), gives you an embarrassment of riches datawise. Not so with small format digital. Perhaps then, digital devotees ought to simply note that, beside using a Polaroid, small format digital is another quick and easy way of making images, rather than Digital's supporters seeing (promoting) small format digital as a direct competitor to small format (35mm) film, which it most certainly isn't. ***Current and future small format digital cameras hold the same unenviable position to 35mm film as small format film does to medium format film. More raw data makes better, denser prints. Scan small format digital images by whatever method or machine you choose, then drum scan 35mm negatives or slides and film wins hands down. Further, digitize a small format film drum scan, then output it digitally and the comparisons weigh even more heavily in favor of film. You can make any comparisons you want, as long as you realize you won't (can't) achieve near the same data input from small format digital what you get from 35mm film, the exact same discussion steadily raging between medium Vs. small format film supporters. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Famous Last Words
In a message dated 11/24/01 9:41:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In the same time period, film photography will have changed little. Absolutely right. And a sobering thought. We actually have no real notion of where film photography will be in 3 or 5 or 10 years. Who would have thought (dared hope) that most modern ISO 400 film would seriously challenge the older ISO 100 films? Or that some ISO 1600 films produce nearly the same images grainwise many ISO 400 films did just three years ago? Film actually doesn't have to advance very much to stay way ahead of ~small format~ digital. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Digital cameras are FREE
In a message dated 11/22/01 10:40:17 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Most of the big catalog guys in Toronto have moved to digital. Even the smaller studios are considering it. -Aaron Yes. I expect that given the rapid advance in technology, meduim format will be all digital in the next 2-3 years. But are you saying even fashion is being shot with MF digital? Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Re[2]: Digital cameras are FREE
In a message dated 11/22/01 2:56:58 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'd guess that you could count the number of computers, etc., in private hands in Ethiopia in the low thousands, in a total population of about 60 million. We may never learn the true extent that computers have penetrated Ethiopia. But the low thousands surely can't be correct in that the nation has electricity, but not near the degree of America. I'm reminded that electricity is all over Europe, but outdoor toilets still prevail in some areas. Some areas of western Europe have more private telephones than indoor toilets. So electricity is not the benchmark to measure Most of the country doesn't have electricity to run these things. Most of the people couldn't afford batteries even if they were available. Again, you must not have traveled in the small metro areas I've been in. Bear in mind that the average family income in these countries is less than US$ 100- per year. I'm not going to get into a p*issing match here, but your figures are far too low and border on the ludicrous. Maybe we travel to different countries. Poor does not indicate Destitute, though some countries in eastern Europe qualify for the title, as well as a nation like Ethiopia. My remark was not intended to explain poverty. I made the original remark in context with being able to view pictures in those countries without a vast network of electricity. Eastern Europe come easily to mind. More succinctly: you need electricity to use a computer or view images on it. To view photographs, one only needs ~light~. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Re[2]: Digital cameras are FREE
In a message dated 11/22/01 3:06:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Harlem is a poor country. A cutting, vulgar reference Robb, and unforgivable. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Depreciation of assets
In a message dated 11/22/01 3:19:24 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The entire depreciation arguement is a straw man. By what you said in your post Robb, you seem not to have grasped the finer points of business depreciation of capital equipment. Or you're exaggerating. When any business gets 100% amortized deductions for equipment purchases or the cost of doing business, the equipment does not cost you or your business one thin dime, not even for the maintenance of said equipment. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Re[2]: Digital cameras are FREE
In a message dated 11/22/01 5:59:09 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: He meant Harlem, Saskatchewan. Tom C. Am I the dunce, that I should believe you? Anon. The goegraphical references were crystal clear to me Tom, choosing both Ethiopia and Harlem to relate to poverty. My remarks stand. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Depreciation of assets
In a message dated 11/22/01 6:24:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Deductions are not 100% money-in-the-pocket. It depends on your tax bracket. 100% amortized for a person in a 28% tax bracket means only that you have recouped $280 on the $1,000 you have spent, so you are still out of pocket by $720. Work out the math. Maris Maris, IN THE UNITED STATES, if you pay $1,000 for an item used ~in your business~, you have two ways to amortize the cost: regular or accelerated depreciation. Either way, you bought $1,000 worth of business equipment and can (IRS says you must) depreciate the total cost, plus the cost of maintenance on the equipment, choosing the standard which best fits into the accounting methods you first chose when you started your business. As for taxes: corporations don't have IRS tax brackets, only individuals. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Digital cameras are FREE
In a message dated 11/22/01 8:20:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Had you qualified your remark I may have let it stand, but as stated, it is flat out wrong. I spend as much as six weeks a ~year~ (April, October) in the environs of the Department Du Nord (Milo, Lambert and the northern capitol, Cap Haitien), [a short commute on Tiger Air from Ft. Lauderdale] Haiti, the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere by most accounts, with occasional forays into the Dominican Republic (same island: Hispaniola) and Cuba. Milo, where my Uncle lives, has municipal electricity only about six hours a day (he has his own HONDA generators). Does that qualify me? And Shel, you (nor Robb) will get no more point for point, parsing minutiae responses from me. The topic here is (was) ~not~ Mafud, as you and Robb seem to want to make it. Stick to the topic (or moment) of discussion. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Why is Kodak Gold Max evil?
In a message dated 11/22/01 11:51:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: See now, if you printed digitally, you could remove those casts easily... (ducking for cover...) I do print digitals on occasion. But doing an 11x14 portrait digitally is beyond my capabilities. And nope, even with smaller digital prints, you only trade one tone/cast for another, never getting what you want (referencing ~only~ Black skin and purple-brown shadows in FUJI films). Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Why is Kodak Gold Max evil?
In a message dated 11/20/01 8:12:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mafud, Do you think, perhaps, that it's KODAK's game you are playing? I say this in half-jest, half-seriousness. Any professional, in any field, will be known for many attributes, one of them is consistency. Another is repeatability. Can you (anyone) reproduce the same level of excellence consistently? KODAK is still in consumer film only because FUJI came along. They have stayed because of ego. **No one ~today~, especially people to young to have lived in a world without FUJI, ever wonder how FUJI, a rank upstart in the business, shouldered their way to if not the top, to parity. Surely not with shoddy products. How then, did FUJI become so well known so quickly? The same way Japanese products, especially automobiles, took over so many markets. Not with shoddy products but with government subsidies. FUJI, like other Japanese firms, made its decision to enter the US market as a Niche film. FUJI has succeeded in almost every attempt. The operative word for nearly all Japanese penetration of world markets being niche. Once a year, when the entire KODAK imaging catalog is released, I am thunderstruck by the depth and breadth of KODAK's photographic film offerings. From tiny consumer APS to giant ~sheets~ of special order film. KODAK offers ~every~ imaginable film product while upstart FUJI has just begun to penetrate medium and large format film. My point? KODAK, giant that it is, sometimes slips ~behind~ the curve. As I remarked before, KODAK doesn't need to be in consumer film to make it, bolstered by it vast array of films that address every known use for film and film products. Do you think that KODAK knows they are the largest, greatest brand recognition, most heavily advertised film mfr. in the world? For consumer film, yes. Do you think that KODAK would release a shoddy KODAK product knowingly, or on accident? Maybe both. Do you think it's because they view customer loyalty more as an asset, or something to be taken advantage of? The cynicism that permeates the US today adds mightily to our difficulties at communications. Really, your question, worded as so many questions are today, makes the correspondent judge and jury in that your question is meanly, intentionally rhetorical: either way I answer, I seem like I 1. Agree that KODAK has mindless followers or 2. that KODAK is a mindless corporate machine that does and intends to, dupe the world. Cynicism playing its dastardly part again. Ugly question. Ask me what I think of KODAK, flat out, without the rhetorical mine field you laid out. I'm not arguing whether KODAK produces ANY good products. I'm just saying we shouldn't believe it just because KODAK says it. Don't like the way KODAK does business? Don't use their products. And what does KODAK say about their products you ~SHOULD NOT~ believe? POP Photography just because they say it and because KODAK advertises in it. There's that cynicism again. I read Readers Digest faithfully. That Reader's Digest represents America the beautiful conservative Christian style, does not turn me off. Month after month, RD produces article and features (increase your word power!) being one of my favorites. I don't believe or hold to 98% of what RD publishes. I have a choice: read it or not. Same with KODAK, use it or not. I mentioned consistency and the ability to consistently reproduce your works. KODAK, over the years, has provided my the means to be that kind of professional, consistently turning out quality products. I stay out of consumer film talk in that I don't use consumer film. Occasionally, film talk here turns to professional emulsions. I strongly comment on the products that, like the lady says at the dance: I gotta dance with the one that brung me (to the party) and that is KODAK. FOR MY PURPOSES, shooting people of color requires emulsions which faithfully reproduce the underlying skin tones of my clients, the vast majority of whom are people of (all) color. In two words: FUJI sucks at that job. Repeat: FUJI sucks at that. there is no professional photographer who bemoans the passing of the EKTAPRESS emulsions. As you will soon see in my EKTAPRESS GALLERY, EKTAPRESS utterly nailed people of color. FUJI lead the charge into saturated emulsions and KODAK stupidly followed. I know you know this already, but here goes anyway: I personally don't know of any (ANY) FUJI emulsion which can faithfully reproduce the skin tones of people of color. FUJI, and now KODAK emulsions, are all formulated to give even bone white complexions a glow, if not an outright tan. FUJI's film offerings have surrendered color fidelity in (consumer) film for color saturation. THAT SUCKS. KODAK, with their PORTRA and SUPRA offering, tried to fit those films in the niche where EKTAPRESS once lead but failed in that all of them saturate photos
Re: Why is Kodak Gold Max evil?
In a message dated 11/20/01 9:24:18 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mafud, lets do try to keep it professional, shall we? What ~are~ you referring to? Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: The true cost of free digital?
In a message dated 11/20/01 11:17:58 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ? I think just about everything computer has turned to junk in the last few years, or atleast on the PC side of things. But one thing is definently true about computers, you get what you pay for. Computers have to be custom built to get what you want. After fooling with a small computer maker for nearly six months (them telling me you're next for most of that time), I decided to build my own: Plll 1.2 GIG, 1.5 GIG RAM, 266MHz, new 300 watt case and all for under $400. I then spent the next five days reinstalling the OS and other programs and another four days ducking blue screens of death. All's well that ends well. I'm up and running a machine I know inside out, and one that is performing flawlessly. DELL, HP; who dat?! Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Why Kodak Gold Max is evil?
In a message dated 11/20/01 11:21:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If I had access to the newer Supra/Portra 800 I suspect I would find one or both of them more to my liking, tho. Hey Bill! I shoot a ~lot~ of PORTRA 800 (NC). Of course the next suggestion is get it from BH. I've found PORTRA 800 to be the nearest thing to the old EKTAPRESS emulsions KODAK makes. It does have that mediu contrast EKTAPRESS was famous for. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Digital cameras are FREE
In a message dated 11/21/01 4:29:40 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Now tell me I'm not running cheaper than you are. I think everything considered it's a _lot_ cheaper. --Mike P.S. To Mafud's earlier comment that I'm running through AA alkalines at a steady clip, no way. I have two sets of 1800mAh rechargeable AAs. The two sets with the charger cost about 50 bucks in initial investment. No more battery costs after that. I keep one set of Lithium replacement batteries in the camera bag for emergencies, but they came with the camera and I've never used them. __ Mike, as long as you have to replace supplies and depreciate equipment, it is costing you any way you say it. Every time you use the item it loses value or usefulness. I have no idea of what rechargeable batteries you use, but ~any~ rechargeable battery has a buy-in price equal to at least 12x the cost of regular batteries. And with use, your rechargeable batteries must be replaced. Aha, another free item which costs to buy and replace. As for production: to depreciate a $49.99 PS 35mm camera, one only has to walk out the door and it loses 100% of its value, (unless you leave it in the box and never use it. In 50 years, the collectible value of the camera might reach $50). But that's all the depreciation involved in that device. Moreover, with care, and assuming film and batteries are available for it 20 years from now, it will still be useable. Thus, the by now worthless camera is not only useable, but still producing photographs as it did 20 years ago. You dare not try to say the same for any part of your digi-taking-printing-storing setup. As to long lived production: can we say Brownie? Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Why Kodak Gold Max is evil?
In a message dated 11/21/01 8:41:22 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Where? Sheesh, they cost us $11.25 wholesale. -Aaron Four packs (three plus one free) cost $9US any Walmart. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Why is Kodak Gold Max evil?
In a message dated 11/21/01 8:45:36 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If you haven't shot it, Mafud, I think you really owe it to yourself to try a roll of either NPS or NPH from Fuji. They are gorgeous, smooth, natural, low contrast negative films, with exceptionally tight grain for their speeds. But I have. Like most FUJI film, they still give brown to bluish to greenish shadows on people of color, especially dark skinned people. Worse, really dark skinned people take on a orangey-red undertone. It's that let's make sure all white people have a tan, or at least a glow fixation film makers use to please their majority white clientele. Not beating up on white people mind you, but telling it like it is. Whereas milky white skin was once prized, today it is the bronzed look, thin bodies and perfect ABS look that is prized. So film, in search of that goal, now produces perfectly blue skies and brilliant white clouds in the backgrounds, brilliant greens, fierce reds and ... orange to pink white people. *Just an observation mind you, no slams or flames intended. **FUJI is the most egregious violator of the way white and colored skin should really look. And don't let the mini-lab be one scintilla off in processing or those black backgrounds or they themselves turn brownish-blueish-yuck colored. ***Remember, KODAK-AGFA et. al. also violate the skin fidelity theorem, but not to the degree FUJI does. Grain: there are thousands of wedding and portrait artists who use KODAK PRO 1000 just for that purpose, to give the Bride or subject that dreamy look, while at the same time, nailing her eyes. PRO 1000 has defined the look for years now, well before any maker, including KODAK, made fast film available. ***PORTRA 800 is easing itself into the fast film for wedding portrait photographer's bags of tricks too. Shoot the Bride or subject with a 6x7, print either PORTRA 800 or PRO 1000 on 20 x 24 matte paper. You get that painterly look that make checkbooks open...wide. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Digital cameras are FREE
In a message dated 11/21/01 9:06:59 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Unfortunately, AFAIK, this doesn't apply to amateurs But hey, we all know that in the heart of every amateur beats the heart of a pro. :)) Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: The true cost of free digital?
In a message dated 11/21/01 9:07:19 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: He says that without much exception his major architectural clients are not happy with the amount of info captured by 16 MP digital backs when a good 4x5 film plate can get more than 64 MP when scanned if they want a digital product. When I speak about medium format digital, I mean (or meant to say) film to drum scanned medium format. I was astonished at the size of the files when I had my 6x7 negs scanned the first time. They eat up ZIP 250 disks. Unless of course you are shooting in a field like PJ in 35mm format where a loss in info capture isn't important due to the media result it is used in. Agreed. Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
