Re: PESO I get paid to do this!
Well done. A sparkling delight! Paul via phone On Nov 12, 2014, at 2:53 AM, Rob Studdert distudio.p...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Team, A shot from a recent live performance, sometimes I love my job https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9304908/temp/1-IMGL84958.JPG Tech: K3 ISO6400 1/50s, DA 50-135/2.8 @115mm f3.2 Cheers, -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO I get paid to do this!
Nice work, Rob. On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Rob Studdert distudio.p...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Team, A shot from a recent live performance, sometimes I love my job https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9304908/temp/1-IMGL84958.JPG Tech: K3 ISO6400 1/50s, DA 50-135/2.8 @115mm f3.2 Cheers, -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO I get paid to do this!
Engaging portrait, with excellent detail. What is the small white dot at the base of he neck? It is a very minor distraction. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:53 AM, Rob Studdert distudio.p...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Team, A shot from a recent live performance, sometimes I love my job https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9304908/temp/1-IMGL84958.JPG Tech: K3 ISO6400 1/50s, DA 50-135/2.8 @115mm f3.2 Cheers, -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO I get paid to do this!
Lovely portrait, Rob. And why _shouldn't_ you love your job? :) Super niggly, but a dark, in-focus smudge just to the right of the woman's forehead (her right) distracts me. On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:53 AM, Rob Studdert distudio.p...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Team, A shot from a recent live performance, sometimes I love my job https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9304908/temp/1-IMGL84958.JPG Tech: K3 ISO6400 1/50s, DA 50-135/2.8 @115mm f3.2 Cheers, -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO I get paid to do this!
And you should too. You're pretty good at it. Alan C -Original Message- From: Rob Studdert Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2014 9:53 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: PESO I get paid to do this! Hi Team, A shot from a recent live performance, sometimes I love my job https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9304908/temp/1-IMGL84958.JPG Tech: K3 ISO6400 1/50s, DA 50-135/2.8 @115mm f3.2 Cheers, -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO I get paid to do this!
Dan, In India, above the equator, some women have a (dark) dot above the neck (on the forehead). In Australia, they have things upside-down, so the dot is below the neck... (and changed the polarity). ;-) Rob, nice work. I agree with others that a dark smudge to her right (actually there is also the second one, more faint, close to the edge), seems like a spot on the sensor, and that two white dots on her neck (especially the lower one) can be retouched. Igor Daniel J. Matyola Wed, 12 Nov 2014 07:25:41 -0800 wrote: Engaging portrait, with excellent detail. What is the small white dot at the base of he neck? It is a very minor distraction. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:53 AM, Rob Studdert distudio.p...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Team, A shot from a recent live performance, sometimes I love my job https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9304908/temp/1-IMGL84958.JPG Tech: K3 ISO6400 1/50s, DA 50-135/2.8 @115mm f3.2 Cheers, -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO I get paid to do this!
Hi Guys, Thanks for commenting. I generally do very little in the way of retouching performance images, generally global changes only like colour balance, contrast etc. but in this case I also desaturated and added a little vignette for effect. So the bright spot I expect is a specular reflection off some stray glitter, the spot beside her is one of four holes in the wall against which this (monthly) show is performed. If I was going to display the images stand-alone I would probably clone it out but if I spent time on each image it would take me an eternity. For this shoot I made 1782 exposures using two cameras over 2 hrs covering 9 acts plus audience shots, I delivered 298 images and found out that my K5IIs + Soigma 18-35/1.8 will bounce from about 1m without apparent ill effect. Cheers, On 13 November 2014 04:56, Igor PDML-StR pdml...@komkon.org wrote: Dan, In India, above the equator, some women have a (dark) dot above the neck (on the forehead). In Australia, they have things upside-down, so the dot is below the neck... (and changed the polarity). ;-) Rob, nice work. I agree with others that a dark smudge to her right (actually there is also the second one, more faint, close to the edge), seems like a spot on the sensor, and that two white dots on her neck (especially the lower one) can be retouched. Igor Daniel J. Matyola Wed, 12 Nov 2014 07:25:41 -0800 wrote: Engaging portrait, with excellent detail. What is the small white dot at the base of he neck? It is a very minor distraction. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:53 AM, Rob Studdert distudio.p...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Team, A shot from a recent live performance, sometimes I love my job https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9304908/temp/1-IMGL84958.JPG Tech: K3 ISO6400 1/50s, DA 50-135/2.8 @115mm f3.2 Cheers, -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
PESO I get paid to do this!
Hi Team, A shot from a recent live performance, sometimes I love my job https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9304908/temp/1-IMGL84958.JPG Tech: K3 ISO6400 1/50s, DA 50-135/2.8 @115mm f3.2 Cheers, -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
I paid $5000.00 for this
IIRC it sold new in 2000 for +- $7000 Canadian. http://toronto.en.craigslist.ca/drh/pho/1365229435.html I paid $5000 in 2001. Might as well keep it. Dave -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I paid $5000.00 for this
Totally. What a shame. eBay Germany was a crazy place last night, too - most of Germany was out shopping food for today's national holiday so stuff went for painfully low prices. Too bad there was nothing in it for me... Crisis? What crisis? Cheers Ecke 2009/10/3 David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com: IIRC it sold new in 2000 for +- $7000 Canadian. http://toronto.en.craigslist.ca/drh/pho/1365229435.html I paid $5000 in 2001. Might as well keep it. Dave -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I paid $5000.00 for this
Anyone want my .3MP Sony Mavica I bought in 1997? Paid over $1100 for it. I'll throw in 100 floppies. Just kidding. It's the best camera I ever owned. Just kidding. On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 7:19 AM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: IIRC it sold new in 2000 for +- $7000 Canadian. http://toronto.en.craigslist.ca/drh/pho/1365229435.html I paid $5000 in 2001. Might as well keep it. Dave -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
First Paid Wedding Gig
I'm scheduled to hit the road... well, 5 minutes ago actually. The wedding is 3 hours away. Rehearsal tonight, ceremony reception Saturday at 2pm. But before I head off, I just wanted to take a second and say thanks for all the information I've learned on this discussion board over the past seven years. Amidst all of the banter and foolishness (grin) you guys are more a part of this moment than you realize. Tidbits of information and boatloads of inspiration sometimes go a long way. Wish me luck! More info @ http://www.digitalshoebox.us/2008/04/first-wedding.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: First Paid Wedding Gig
Good luck, Jerome. Hope you have a great 1st wedding gig. Cheers, Christine - Original Message - From: Jerome [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pdml@pdml.net Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 9:08 AM Subject: First Paid Wedding Gig I'm scheduled to hit the road... well, 5 minutes ago actually. The wedding is 3 hours away. Rehearsal tonight, ceremony reception Saturday at 2pm. But before I head off, I just wanted to take a second and say thanks for all the information I've learned on this discussion board over the past seven years. Amidst all of the banter and foolishness (grin) you guys are more a part of this moment than you realize. Tidbits of information and boatloads of inspiration sometimes go a long way. Wish me luck! More info @ http://www.digitalshoebox.us/2008/04/first-wedding.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: First Paid Wedding Gig
Jerome -- Hope you survive :) Remember - get a shot of EVERYONE at the wedding - That's almost more important to the Bride and Groom than the quality of the photos, in the long run. ann(I hate shooting weddings) san Jerome wrote: I'm scheduled to hit the road... well, 5 minutes ago actually. The wedding is 3 hours away. Rehearsal tonight, ceremony reception Saturday at 2pm. But before I head off, I just wanted to take a second and say thanks for all the information I've learned on this discussion board over the past seven years. Amidst all of the banter and foolishness (grin) you guys are more a part of this moment than you realize. Tidbits of information and boatloads of inspiration sometimes go a long way. Wish me luck! More info @ http://www.digitalshoebox.us/2008/04/first-wedding.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: First Paid Wedding Gig
Jerome wrote: I'm scheduled to hit the road... well, 5 minutes ago actually. The wedding is 3 hours away. Rehearsal tonight, ceremony reception Saturday at 2pm. But before I head off, I just wanted to take a second and say thanks for all the information I've learned on this discussion board over the past seven years. Amidst all of the banter and foolishness (grin) you guys are more a part of this moment than you realize. Tidbits of information and boatloads of inspiration sometimes go a long way. Wish me luck! More info @ http://www.digitalshoebox.us/2008/04/first-wedding.html Good luck! Most important thing is, as the HitchHiker's Guide to the Galaxy says, Don't Panic. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: First Paid Wedding Gig
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 10:54 AM, Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jerome wrote: I'm scheduled to hit the road... well, 5 minutes ago actually. The wedding is 3 hours away. Rehearsal tonight, ceremony reception Saturday at 2pm. But before I head off, I just wanted to take a second and say thanks for all the information I've learned on this discussion board over the past seven years. Amidst all of the banter and foolishness (grin) you guys are more a part of this moment than you realize. Tidbits of information and boatloads of inspiration sometimes go a long way. Wish me luck! More info @ http://www.digitalshoebox.us/2008/04/first-wedding.html Good luck! Most important thing is, as the HitchHiker's Guide to the Galaxy says, Don't Panic. And if a bull dozer shows up at your front door, grab a towel. Good luck. Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: First Paid Wedding Gig
Jerome, may the Force be with you! :-) One more advice: don't forget to make sure that the bride's shoes are in the photos. I was almost killed by my friend's wife when she couldn't find her shoes on any photo from the first roll of film (this was 11 years ago). I was rehabilitated by the subsequent roll. :-) Good luck! Igor Fri Apr 25 11:12:20 EDT 2008 ann sanfedele wrote: Jerome -- Hope you survive :) Remember - get a shot of EVERYONE at the wedding - That's almost more important to the Bride and Groom than the quality of the photos, in the long run. ann(I hate shooting weddings) san Jerome wrote: I'm scheduled to hit the road... well, 5 minutes ago actually. The wedding is 3 hours away. Rehearsal tonight, ceremony reception Saturday at 2pm. But before I head off, I just wanted to take a second and say thanks for all the information I've learned on this discussion board over the past seven years. Amidst all of the banter and foolishness (grin) you guys are more a part of this moment than you realize. Tidbits of information and boatloads of inspiration sometimes go a long way. Wish me luck! More info @ http://www.digitalshoebox.us/2008/04/first-wedding.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Paid For
Congratulations, DougF. It's nice when your work is really appreciated, isnt' ist? I recently sold a bunch of photographs to the local municipality - for use in publications, internet, advertisements etc. They paid enough to cover my K10D a couple of times :-) That's a great feeling :-) Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Doug Franklin Sendt: 14. november 2007 00:35 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Paid For Howdy, folks, Well, in a sense, my K10D just paid for itself and the *ist D and a couple of lenses, to boot. I shot a really big three-day amateur auto racing event this weekend, which I do every year. This is my second or third year shooting it on digital. Only this year did I really get into the digital swing of things, apparently ... I managed to take nearly 3,000 exposures home, not even counting the ones I deleted in the camera. The last time I shot film, it cost me about US$ 20 per 24-exposure roll for the film, developing, and medium res scanning. Had I been shooting film, last weekend would've cost me around US$ 2,500 in film and associated costs. But it wouldn't have ... on film, I'd never have tripped the shutter that many times. I think the most I ever shot in a four-day event on film was about 50 36 exposure rolls, which is 40% of 3,000 exposures. And I more commonly shot around 30 rolls of 36 each in a 4-day event. :-) I finally find that I'm doing more experimenting with digital as I'm finally getting it through my head that there's no significant additional cost per exposure. I'm taking shots I would never have tried before. I'm taking several of each shot so that hopefully I'll get an acceptable one. Tons of things that I'd never have been able to afford on film. That said, the chore of culling and post-processing 3,000 images is nothing to sneeze at. :-) -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.31/1128 - Release Date: 11/13/2007 11:09 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.2/1143 - Release Date: 11/21/2007 10:01 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Paid For
I have an SF-1 amd Super Program for sale. Dave On Nov 14, 2007 7:10 PM, Sandy Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 15, 2007 7:58 AM, Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I got the *ist D a couple of years ago, and haven't shot a frame of film since. So I don't know what the costs would be today. Got any good cheap film bodies to sell? -- Sandy Harris, Nanjing, China -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Paid For
I'm still paying off several Dslr's .LOL I do however find my self shooting my horse shows as if I was still using film. Just a few fences of the riders on course. Two, maybe three if the course is set up photographer friendly. I know several of the other people around here, machine gun and shoot every fence, good or bad, and galloping shots as well. Thats got to add up, cause they keep them all and try and sell them as a show day CD. Just can't seem to justify doing that, even for digital. Dave On Nov 21, 2007 12:48 PM, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Congratulations, DougF. It's nice when your work is really appreciated, isnt' ist? I recently sold a bunch of photographs to the local municipality - for use in publications, internet, advertisements etc. They paid enough to cover my K10D a couple of times :-) That's a great feeling :-) Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Doug Franklin Sendt: 14. november 2007 00:35 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Paid For Howdy, folks, Well, in a sense, my K10D just paid for itself and the *ist D and a couple of lenses, to boot. I shot a really big three-day amateur auto racing event this weekend, which I do every year. This is my second or third year shooting it on digital. Only this year did I really get into the digital swing of things, apparently ... I managed to take nearly 3,000 exposures home, not even counting the ones I deleted in the camera. The last time I shot film, it cost me about US$ 20 per 24-exposure roll for the film, developing, and medium res scanning. Had I been shooting film, last weekend would've cost me around US$ 2,500 in film and associated costs. But it wouldn't have ... on film, I'd never have tripped the shutter that many times. I think the most I ever shot in a four-day event on film was about 50 36 exposure rolls, which is 40% of 3,000 exposures. And I more commonly shot around 30 rolls of 36 each in a 4-day event. :-) I finally find that I'm doing more experimenting with digital as I'm finally getting it through my head that there's no significant additional cost per exposure. I'm taking shots I would never have tried before. I'm taking several of each shot so that hopefully I'll get an acceptable one. Tons of things that I'd never have been able to afford on film. That said, the chore of culling and post-processing 3,000 images is nothing to sneeze at. :-) -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.31/1128 - Release Date: 11/13/2007 11:09 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.2/1143 - Release Date: 11/21/2007 10:01 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
On 11/15/07, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 15/11/07, William Robb, discombobulated, unleashed: I recently purchased a new plasma television. One can insert an SD card into a slot on the thing and get a slide show of the contents (providing the contents are jpegs.). Yah, I have a hard disk recorder / DVD with this. I tried it and it works okay. We have a 26 inch LCD which seems small, but this in a quaint English cottage, so actually a good size. Controls are dorky though. Better to hook up Mac through one of the various interfaces (zillions of them) and run a 'slide' show through that. What i really want is a video projector, do a 'real' slide show ;-) We have a BW TV that only seems to show The Honeymooners and I Love Lucy. Can't find the SD slot. :-) Dave -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
Yes, there will be prints, just like there will be film. My wife is a scrapbooker - for her recent birthday, I got her a new scrapbooking program. But there are many more capabilities than just creating printed pages. You can email a scrapbook to someone else, you can create an html scrapbook to put on the web, you can create slideshows out of the scrapbook and burn them to cd/dvd, etc. The print won't go away, but it will be greatly diminished (already has). I was just talking to my lab the other day and they were telling me about when State Farm (they had the account) switched all their claims adjustors from film to digital. They quit developing and printing - the lab took a huge hit in volume when that happened. It continues to happen as all of us switch to digital. We will still make prints here and there, but the percentage of prints made will be very low. Even the concept of hand held devices to show pictures - it was said that you could give a print to someone who liked it - palm pilots have had the ability to beam files back and forth for quite a long time. If handheld picture viewers become the norm, you can bet they will be given the ability to do so - I believe the Microsoft Zune already has the capability. -- Best regards, Bruce Thursday, November 15, 2007, 8:01:14 AM, you wrote: Eac In a message dated 11/15/2007 12:23:27 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, Eac [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Eac I don't know. I've heard many people talk about how they miss their Eac family album now that they've switched to digital. Eac - T Eac === Eac I don't agree with everyone that the print will disappear, for the very Eac reason you mentioned. Eac Yes the print will become less important to a large degree. Like I show my Eac pictures online and have no need to print out most of what I show online. But Eac I still make prints to frame too, I would bet most hobbyists do. And that is Eac a fairly big market. Eac And definitely no when it comes to family albums. (A lot of people may get Eac their digital prints done by a store, not do them themselves.) Eac Ever heard of scrapbooking? Big industry. Especially aimed at mothers who Eac want to save pictures of their kids and family. It tends to mainly be a female Eac hobby, but I don't see any slacking off on that front. Eac Marnie aka Doe :-) I don't do it but have met many women who do. Eac - Eac Warning: I am now filtering my email, so you may be censored. Eac ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
Mark Roberts wrote: mike wilson wrote: From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] mike wilson wrote: He eliminated (many of) those in-camera. The point is still that 3000 files is not the same as 3000 prints or slides. Produce equal numbers of the same end product before you tell me that it is cheaper. It's cheaper because you don't *have* to produce *any* prints. There's something wrong with that logic. Once I work out what it is, I'll get back to you. There's nothing wrong with that logic because, odd as it may seem to old 20th-century farts like you and me, the print is no longer the preferred medium for viewing photographs, at least for most people. I don't know. I've heard many people talk about how they miss their family album now that they've switched to digital. In that sense, prints is what they *prefer*, it just doesn't seem to occur to them that they can still make them, or it's harder to get around to having them produced when they're no longer a part of the standard package. Then again, perhaps getting the prints from that envelope they give you at the lab into an actual album was also quite hard in the past... And of course, not all the prints went into the album in most cases. I've also been wondering what will happen after people have lost all their photos because they wiped out the entire hard disk enough times, or find that they have no idea where their favourite pictures are located because they've switched computers so many times since they were taken... - T -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
Toralf Lund wrote: I don't know. I've heard many people talk about how they miss their family album now that they've switched to digital. By talking about people who have *switched* to digital you've automatically excluded the age group I'm talking about :) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote Wed, 14 Nov 2007 19:03:03 -0800 Mark Roberts wrote: Personally, I *love* good prints. I love making good prints and viewing them. [...] the only time I make a print is when it's going to be 8 x 12 or larger. Same here. But I do occasionally make smaller prints too. There's something to be said for a pocket book of photos. :-) That's one of the things the new iPod was made for... Regards, Jim -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
But if someone really likes a print, you can just give it to them, I don't think I'd be giving away my iPod, (if I had one that is). Jim King wrote: Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote Wed, 14 Nov 2007 19:03:03 -0800 Mark Roberts wrote: Personally, I *love* good prints. I love making good prints and viewing them. [...] the only time I make a print is when it's going to be 8 x 12 or larger. Same here. But I do occasionally make smaller prints too. There's something to be said for a pocket book of photos. :-) That's one of the things the new iPod was made for... Regards, Jim -- The difference between individual intelligence and group intelligence is the difference between Harvard University and the Harvard University football team. -- P. J. O'Roark -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
Jim King wrote: Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote Wed, 14 Nov 2007 19:03:03 -0800 Mark Roberts wrote: Personally, I *love* good prints. I love making good prints and viewing them. [...] the only time I make a print is when it's going to be 8 x 12 or larger. Same here. But I do occasionally make smaller prints too. There's something to be said for a pocket book of photos. :-) That's one of the things the new iPod was made for... Regards, Jim A friend of mine uses his iPod Touch for exactly that. It's a superb solution for the pocket portfolio. -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
In a message dated 11/15/2007 12:23:27 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I don't know. I've heard many people talk about how they miss their family album now that they've switched to digital. - T === I don't agree with everyone that the print will disappear, for the very reason you mentioned. Yes the print will become less important to a large degree. Like I show my pictures online and have no need to print out most of what I show online. But I still make prints to frame too, I would bet most hobbyists do. And that is a fairly big market. And definitely no when it comes to family albums. (A lot of people may get their digital prints done by a store, not do them themselves.) Ever heard of scrapbooking? Big industry. Especially aimed at mothers who want to save pictures of their kids and family. It tends to mainly be a female hobby, but I don't see any slacking off on that front. Marnie aka Doe :-) I don't do it but have met many women who do. - Warning: I am now filtering my email, so you may be censored. ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
John Francis wrote: On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 08:56:16AM -0500, Mark Roberts wrote: Toralf Lund wrote: I don't know. I've heard many people talk about how they miss their family album now that they've switched to digital. By talking about people who have *switched* to digital you've automatically excluded the age group I'm talking about :) Digital is making inroads at the other end of the age spectrum, too. My mother (90 a couple of weeks ago) has severe arthritis, and would find turning the pages in a photo album a rather laborious process. But with a digital photo frame she can look at a few hundred images without lifting a finger, even though she is otherwise not a part of the digital revolution (no PC, no eMail, etc.). My brother and I coordinate so that either of us can produce an updated set of images on an SD card. While a VGA-resolution image at 72dpi may not be up to the standards of a high-quality print on archive paper I doubt if the difference is discernable to my mother's eyes. It's not really about the quality of the image. At least not directly. The problem would rather be that today's computer screens just feel less comfortable to look at than printed material and/or more stressful to the eyes. - T -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
Mark Roberts wrote: Toralf Lund wrote: I don't know. I've heard many people talk about how they miss their family album now that they've switched to digital. By talking about people who have *switched* to digital you've automatically excluded the age group I'm talking about :) Possibly. But if people who have tried both the old way and the new way and are actually quite excited about the modern variant (I was talking about some of those who are), still miss some aspects of the traditional approach, maybe it can have an appeal to today's fifteenyearolds, too. Not while they are fifteen, perhaps, but as they grow older and become more and more like their parents without really noticing... - Toralf -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
It's in the iPhone's address book if they're using it properly. G On Nov 15, 2007, at 11:15 AM, P. J. Alling wrote: If they remember their e-mail address, that is. Adam Maas wrote: But if it's an iPhone (Essentially the same as the iPod Touch, just with a phone and email) you can just email it to them ;-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 08:56:16AM -0500, Mark Roberts wrote: Toralf Lund wrote: I don't know. I've heard many people talk about how they miss their family album now that they've switched to digital. By talking about people who have *switched* to digital you've automatically excluded the age group I'm talking about :) Digital is making inroads at the other end of the age spectrum, too. My mother (90 a couple of weeks ago) has severe arthritis, and would find turning the pages in a photo album a rather laborious process. But with a digital photo frame she can look at a few hundred images without lifting a finger, even though she is otherwise not a part of the digital revolution (no PC, no eMail, etc.). My brother and I coordinate so that either of us can produce an updated set of images on an SD card. While a VGA-resolution image at 72dpi may not be up to the standards of a high-quality print on archive paper I doubt if the difference is discernable to my mother's eyes. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
But if it's an iPhone (Essentially the same as the iPod Touch, just with a phone and email) you can just email it to them ;-) -Adam P. J. Alling wrote: But if someone really likes a print, you can just give it to them, I don't think I'd be giving away my iPod, (if I had one that is). Jim King wrote: Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote Wed, 14 Nov 2007 19:03:03 -0800 Mark Roberts wrote: Personally, I *love* good prints. I love making good prints and viewing them. [...] the only time I make a print is when it's going to be 8 x 12 or larger. Same here. But I do occasionally make smaller prints too. There's something to be said for a pocket book of photos. :-) That's one of the things the new iPod was made for... Regards, Jim -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
- Original Message - From: John Francis Subject: Re: Prints (was: Paid For) Digital is making inroads at the other end of the age spectrum, too. My mother (90 a couple of weeks ago) has severe arthritis, and would find turning the pages in a photo album a rather laborious process. But with a digital photo frame she can look at a few hundred images without lifting a finger, even though she is otherwise not a part of the digital revolution (no PC, no eMail, etc.). My brother and I coordinate so that either of us can produce an updated set of images on an SD card. While a VGA-resolution image at 72dpi may not be up to the standards of a high-quality print on archive paper I doubt if the difference is discernable to my mother's eyes. I recently purchased a new plasma television. One can insert an SD card into a slot on the thing and get a slide show of the contents (providing the contents are jpegs.). William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
On Nov 15, 2007, at 3:51 PM, Cotty wrote: On 15/11/07, William Robb, discombobulated, unleashed: I recently purchased a new plasma television. One can insert an SD card into a slot on the thing and get a slide show of the contents (providing the contents are jpegs.). Yah, I have a hard disk recorder / DVD with this. I tried it and it works okay. We have a 26 inch LCD which seems small, but this in a quaint English cottage, so actually a good size. Controls are dorky though. Better to hook up Mac through one of the various interfaces (zillions of them) and run a 'slide' show through that. What i really want is a video projector, do a 'real' slide show ;-) Or an Apple TV ... drop JPEGs into iPhoto on your new laptop, view on the television without having to hook anything else up. ;-) Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
- Original Message - From: Cotty Subject: Re: Prints (was: Paid For) On 15/11/07, William Robb, discombobulated, unleashed: I recently purchased a new plasma television. One can insert an SD card into a slot on the thing and get a slide show of the contents (providing the contents are jpegs.). Yah, I have a hard disk recorder / DVD with this. I tried it and it works okay. We have a 26 inch LCD which seems small, but this in a quaint English cottage, so actually a good size. Controls are dorky though. Better to hook up Mac through one of the various interfaces (zillions of them) and run a 'slide' show through that. What i really want is a video projector, do a 'real' slide show ;-) That would involve buying a Mac.. I'm thinking I should run a cable from my computer over to the TV. The controls aren't that bad on my TV though. It's kind of strange that it doesn't just start a slide show when a card is inserted, since there really is no other reason to put one into the slot than to view a slide show. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
If they remember their e-mail address, that is. Adam Maas wrote: But if it's an iPhone (Essentially the same as the iPod Touch, just with a phone and email) you can just email it to them ;-) -Adam P. J. Alling wrote: But if someone really likes a print, you can just give it to them, I don't think I'd be giving away my iPod, (if I had one that is). Jim King wrote: Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote Wed, 14 Nov 2007 19:03:03 -0800 Mark Roberts wrote: Personally, I *love* good prints. I love making good prints and viewing them. [...] the only time I make a print is when it's going to be 8 x 12 or larger. Same here. But I do occasionally make smaller prints too. There's something to be said for a pocket book of photos. :-) That's one of the things the new iPod was made for... Regards, Jim -- The difference between individual intelligence and group intelligence is the difference between Harvard University and the Harvard University football team. -- P. J. O'Roark -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
On 15/11/07, William Robb, discombobulated, unleashed: I recently purchased a new plasma television. One can insert an SD card into a slot on the thing and get a slide show of the contents (providing the contents are jpegs.). Yah, I have a hard disk recorder / DVD with this. I tried it and it works okay. We have a 26 inch LCD which seems small, but this in a quaint English cottage, so actually a good size. Controls are dorky though. Better to hook up Mac through one of the various interfaces (zillions of them) and run a 'slide' show through that. What i really want is a video projector, do a 'real' slide show ;-) -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
William Robb wrote: I'm thinking I should run a cable from my computer over to the TV. The controls aren't that bad on my TV though. It's kind of strange that it doesn't just start a slide show when a card is inserted, since there really is no other reason to put one into the slot than to view a slide show. BTW: You can make a video slide show with Microsoft PhotoStory, an oddly-underpublicized bit of free software for Windows XP. http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/digitalphotography/photostory/default.mspx Not as good as Photo-to-Movie (which costs $50.00), but what the heck, it's free. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
Prints and iPod Touch viewing are different experiences. Both are quite good, however, just different. Godfrey On Nov 15, 2007, at 7:48 AM, P. J. Alling wrote: But if someone really likes a print, you can just give it to them, I don't think I'd be giving away my iPod, (if I had one that is). Jim King wrote: Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote Wed, 14 Nov 2007 19:03:03 -0800 Mark Roberts wrote: Personally, I *love* good prints. I love making good prints and viewing them. [...] the only time I make a print is when it's going to be 8 x 12 or larger. Same here. But I do occasionally make smaller prints too. There's something to be said for a pocket book of photos. :-) That's one of the things the new iPod was made for... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Paid For
Sorry Doug but that is a non-argument. You have done two different things. Would you have argued the same if you had taken a video camera and filled 10 DVDs with cine footage? Print the lot out, factor in your time at a reasonable rate, _then_ come back and tell us how much it cost. I'll let you off with capital costs.. 8-) From: Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2007/11/13 Tue PM 11:35:08 GMT To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Paid For Howdy, folks, Well, in a sense, my K10D just paid for itself and the *ist D and a couple of lenses, to boot. I shot a really big three-day amateur auto racing event this weekend, which I do every year. This is my second or third year shooting it on digital. Only this year did I really get into the digital swing of things, apparently ... I managed to take nearly 3,000 exposures home, not even counting the ones I deleted in the camera. The last time I shot film, it cost me about US$ 20 per 24-exposure roll for the film, developing, and medium res scanning. Had I been shooting film, last weekend would've cost me around US$ 2,500 in film and associated costs. But it wouldn't have ... on film, I'd never have tripped the shutter that many times. I think the most I ever shot in a four-day event on film was about 50 36 exposure rolls, which is 40% of 3,000 exposures. And I more commonly shot around 30 rolls of 36 each in a 4-day event. :-) I finally find that I'm doing more experimenting with digital as I'm finally getting it through my head that there's no significant additional cost per exposure. I'm taking shots I would never have tried before. I'm taking several of each shot so that hopefully I'll get an acceptable one. Tons of things that I'd never have been able to afford on film. That said, the chore of culling and post-processing 3,000 images is nothing to sneeze at. :-) -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. - Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Paid For
True but then, you can eliminate the shots which are garbadge and you won't print those. Film don't let you filter those garbage shots (on a cost POV). So that's not the whole story but there's already an economy IMO. On Nov 14, 2007 10:03 AM, mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry Doug but that is a non-argument. You have done two different things. Would you have argued the same if you had taken a video camera and filled 10 DVDs with cine footage? Print the lot out, factor in your time at a reasonable rate, _then_ come back and tell us how much it cost. I'll let you off with capital costs.. 8-) From: Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2007/11/13 Tue PM 11:35:08 GMT To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Paid For Howdy, folks, Well, in a sense, my K10D just paid for itself and the *ist D and a couple of lenses, to boot. I shot a really big three-day amateur auto racing event this weekend, which I do every year. This is my second or third year shooting it on digital. Only this year did I really get into the digital swing of things, apparently ... I managed to take nearly 3,000 exposures home, not even counting the ones I deleted in the camera. The last time I shot film, it cost me about US$ 20 per 24-exposure roll for the film, developing, and medium res scanning. Had I been shooting film, last weekend would've cost me around US$ 2,500 in film and associated costs. But it wouldn't have ... on film, I'd never have tripped the shutter that many times. I think the most I ever shot in a four-day event on film was about 50 36 exposure rolls, which is 40% of 3,000 exposures. And I more commonly shot around 30 rolls of 36 each in a 4-day event. :-) I finally find that I'm doing more experimenting with digital as I'm finally getting it through my head that there's no significant additional cost per exposure. I'm taking shots I would never have tried before. I'm taking several of each shot so that hopefully I'll get an acceptable one. Tons of things that I'd never have been able to afford on film. That said, the chore of culling and post-processing 3,000 images is nothing to sneeze at. :-) -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. - Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille -- K10D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Paid For
He eliminated (many of) those in-camera. The point is still that 3000 files is not the same as 3000 prints or slides. Produce equal numbers of the same end product before you tell me that it is cheaper. From: Thibouille [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2007/11/14 Wed AM 10:15:32 GMT To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Paid For True but then, you can eliminate the shots which are garbadge and you won't print those. Film don't let you filter those garbage shots (on a cost POV). So that's not the whole story but there's already an economy IMO. On Nov 14, 2007 10:03 AM, mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry Doug but that is a non-argument. You have done two different things. Would you have argued the same if you had taken a video camera and filled 10 DVDs with cine footage? Print the lot out, factor in your time at a reasonable rate, _then_ come back and tell us how much it cost. I'll let you off with capital costs.. 8-) From: Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2007/11/13 Tue PM 11:35:08 GMT To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Paid For Howdy, folks, Well, in a sense, my K10D just paid for itself and the *ist D and a couple of lenses, to boot. I shot a really big three-day amateur auto racing event this weekend, which I do every year. This is my second or third year shooting it on digital. Only this year did I really get into the digital swing of things, apparently ... I managed to take nearly 3,000 exposures home, not even counting the ones I deleted in the camera. The last time I shot film, it cost me about US$ 20 per 24-exposure roll for the film, developing, and medium res scanning. Had I been shooting film, last weekend would've cost me around US$ 2,500 in film and associated costs. But it wouldn't have ... on film, I'd never have tripped the shutter that many times. I think the most I ever shot in a four-day event on film was about 50 36 exposure rolls, which is 40% of 3,000 exposures. And I more commonly shot around 30 rolls of 36 each in a 4-day event. :-) I finally find that I'm doing more experimenting with digital as I'm finally getting it through my head that there's no significant additional cost per exposure. I'm taking shots I would never have tried before. I'm taking several of each shot so that hopefully I'll get an acceptable one. Tons of things that I'd never have been able to afford on film. That said, the chore of culling and post-processing 3,000 images is nothing to sneeze at. :-) -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. - Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille -- K10D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. - Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Paid For
mike wilson wrote: He eliminated (many of) those in-camera. The point is still that 3000 files is not the same as 3000 prints or slides. Produce equal numbers of the same end product before you tell me that it is cheaper. It's cheaper because you don't *have* to produce *any* prints. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Paid For
mike wilson wrote: Print the lot out, factor in your time at a reasonable rate, _then_ come back and tell us how much it cost. I wasn't printing them then, either. That per-roll cost was purely for the film, developing, and medium resolution scanning. I'll let you off with capital costs.. 8-) Cap costs weren't part of the equation. I'm looking purely at the incremental cost. As a computer geek by trade, I didn't have to buy any computer stuff just for the photography. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Paid For
These comparisons are fun. When I bought my first digital camera I built a spread sheet that calculated my total cost per shot for both film and digital. More or less the same thing, just expressed differently. Cost per shot on digital continues to decrease with time. Cost per shot on film levels off and remains relatively constant. If you keep your equipment long enough, digital cost per shot is lower. By the way, I didn't include the cost of my computer or photoshop. I use it for both digital and film. When computing the cost of film I didn't include the cost of the plumbing in my darkroom. It came with the house. See you later, gs http://georgesphotos.net On Nov 14, 2007 7:22 AM, Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: mike wilson wrote: Print the lot out, factor in your time at a reasonable rate, _then_ come back and tell us how much it cost. I wasn't printing them then, either. That per-roll cost was purely for the film, developing, and medium resolution scanning. I'll let you off with capital costs.. 8-) Cap costs weren't part of the equation. I'm looking purely at the incremental cost. As a computer geek by trade, I didn't have to buy any computer stuff just for the photography. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Paid For
- Original Message - From: George Sinos Subject: Re: Paid For These comparisons are fun. When I bought my first digital camera I built a spread sheet that calculated my total cost per shot for both film and digital. More or less the same thing, just expressed differently. Cost per shot on digital continues to decrease with time. Cost per shot on film levels off and remains relatively constant. If you keep your equipment long enough, digital cost per shot is lower. By the way, I didn't include the cost of my computer or photoshop. I use it for both digital and film. When computing the cost of film I didn't include the cost of the plumbing in my darkroom. It came with the house. I'm pretty sure I would still be on my second computer (I'm up to #5 now), had it not been for digital photography and it's ever increasing vacuuming up of resources, so for me I can add around 7K for that, plus another 2K for a laptop for onsite use. However, I like toys, so I don't begrudge that, but I seem to be spending a lot more time in front of my computer working on digital imaging than I spent in the darkroom producing silver prints, and am producing fewer pictures of lower quality than I did when I was shooting medium and large format film. The tendency to shoot more has some drawbacks. When I was shooting film, I might have shot 10 rolls of 120 film on a portrait session, now I'll shoot 4-6 times that amount of digital frames, and have to sort through that many pictures, at 4-6x more time. My keeper % was way higher with film, approaching 100% with 4x5, 20-25% with 120 film. I'm finding my keeper % with digital is around 5%, and I'm having to fish through a lot of images to find them. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Paid For
William Robb wrote: I'm pretty sure I would still be on my second computer (I'm up to #5 now), had it not been for digital photography and it's ever increasing vacuuming up of resources, so for me I can add around 7K for that, plus another 2K for a laptop for onsite use. However, I like toys, so I don't begrudge that, but I seem to be spending a lot more time in front of my computer working on digital imaging than I spent in the darkroom producing silver prints, and am producing fewer pictures of lower quality than I did when I was shooting medium and large format film. The tendency to shoot more has some drawbacks. When I was shooting film, I might have shot 10 rolls of 120 film on a portrait session, now I'll shoot 4-6 times that amount of digital frames, and have to sort through that many pictures, at 4-6x more time. My keeper % was way higher with film, approaching 100% with 4x5, 20-25% with 120 film. I'm finding my keeper % with digital is around 5%, and I'm having to fish through a lot of images to find them. William Robb Ironically, it's film that has been driving my computer upgrades lately. Digital requires much less storage, RAM or processing power than manipulating high-res scans. My MF scans are easily in the 150MB range, and even 35mm is ~60MB. That's a big difference from 10-20MB RAWs. LF is even worse. Opening a single 4x5 scan brings my system to its knees. I actually have to downsize it to save a JPEG, otherwise PS runs out of RAM on a 2GB system. And I'm only scanning at 1200dpi (Scanning Fuji pack film prints). -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Paid For
Mike, I bought the Panny L1 and an Olympus 11-22 mm lens in mid-May. A week later I shot a job on spec with them. Last month I closed a licensing deal on one exposure from that shoot that paid 70% more than the total cost of the equipment. I've not produced any paper prints at all, the publishers took the product as a digital file. That's certainly a lot cheaper than if I'd been shooting film for that job. (BTW, I shot the job with both the K10D and L1. The particular photo selected was made with the 11-22 @ 11mm focal length, about the same FoV as the K10D + DA14. It just chanced that they preferred the particular framing I captured with the L1 ... I was actually just testing the L1 and shooting side by side to see if the image quality was up to snuff for my work. :-) Godfrey On Nov 14, 2007, at 3:14 AM, mike wilson wrote: He eliminated (many of) those in-camera. The point is still that 3000 files is not the same as 3000 prints or slides. Produce equal numbers of the same end product before you tell me that it is cheaper. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Paid For
I've saved a huge amount of money shooting digital, but i've been frugal in regard to computer equipment. My dual 1.25 Mac G4 is perfectly adequate for processing the 16-bit 144 meg digital images that my RAW conversions yield. I've had it for quite a few years. I bought it at least a couple of years before I started shooting digital, perhaps seven years ago. It labored a bit more processing 4800 dpi scans from MF 6x7, but I was getting by with those as well. Last week I shot 120 frames of web pics for a bowling alley and 600 frames for a model portfolio. I probably would hae chosen to shoot at least the model portfolio on MF when I was still shooting film. I probably would have settled for about 120 to 200 frames. That might not have been enough, as the biggest problem I encountered was in getting nice expressions. I needed all 600 frames. (I don't know if that was my fault or the models, but I needed every frame I shot to get twenty selects that I'm happy with.) I would have spent at least fifty dollars on film alone and more on processing. Just for recreational shooting, I was averaging at least a roll a day when I shot film. That adds up in a hurry. I've purchased three DA lenses since I switched over to digital, but I'm sure I would have purchased at least that many lenses had I continued with film. For me, the cost savings have been very substantial. Paul -- Original message -- From: Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] William Robb wrote: I'm pretty sure I would still be on my second computer (I'm up to #5 now), had it not been for digital photography and it's ever increasing vacuuming up of resources, so for me I can add around 7K for that, plus another 2K for a laptop for onsite use. However, I like toys, so I don't begrudge that, but I seem to be spending a lot more time in front of my computer working on digital imaging than I spent in the darkroom producing silver prints, and am producing fewer pictures of lower quality than I did when I was shooting medium and large format film. The tendency to shoot more has some drawbacks. When I was shooting film, I might have shot 10 rolls of 120 film on a portrait session, now I'll shoot 4-6 times that amount of digital frames, and have to sort through that many pictures, at 4-6x more time. My keeper % was way higher with film, approaching 100% with 4x5, 20-25% with 120 film. I'm finding my keeper % with digital is around 5%, and I'm having to fish through a lot of images to find them. William Robb Ironically, it's film that has been driving my computer upgrades lately. Digital requires much less storage, RAM or processing power than manipulating high-res scans. My MF scans are easily in the 150MB range, and even 35mm is ~60MB. That's a big difference from 10-20MB RAWs. LF is even worse. Opening a single 4x5 scan brings my system to its knees. I actually have to downsize it to save a JPEG, otherwise PS runs out of RAM on a 2GB system. And I'm only scanning at 1200dpi (Scanning Fuji pack film prints). -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Paid For
From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2007/11/14 Wed PM 12:44:03 GMT To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Paid For mike wilson wrote: He eliminated (many of) those in-camera. The point is still that 3000 files is not the same as 3000 prints or slides. Produce equal numbers of the same end product before you tell me that it is cheaper. It's cheaper because you don't *have* to produce *any* prints. There's something wrong with that logic. Once I work out what it is, I'll get back to you. - Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Paid For
No, but he's not comparing it to 3000 prints or slides. He's comparing it to 3000 frames of neg film (before the prints). Consumers are the only ones to print every frame individually. Even his typical shooting (30x36exp rolls) would cost $600 for the event. That's essentially the cost of a K10D right now. -Adam mike wilson wrote: He eliminated (many of) those in-camera. The point is still that 3000 files is not the same as 3000 prints or slides. Produce equal numbers of the same end product before you tell me that it is cheaper. From: Thibouille [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2007/11/14 Wed AM 10:15:32 GMT To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Paid For True but then, you can eliminate the shots which are garbadge and you won't print those. Film don't let you filter those garbage shots (on a cost POV). So that's not the whole story but there's already an economy IMO. On Nov 14, 2007 10:03 AM, mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry Doug but that is a non-argument. You have done two different things. Would you have argued the same if you had taken a video camera and filled 10 DVDs with cine footage? Print the lot out, factor in your time at a reasonable rate, _then_ come back and tell us how much it cost. I'll let you off with capital costs.. 8-) From: Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2007/11/13 Tue PM 11:35:08 GMT To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Paid For Howdy, folks, Well, in a sense, my K10D just paid for itself and the *ist D and a couple of lenses, to boot. I shot a really big three-day amateur auto racing event this weekend, which I do every year. This is my second or third year shooting it on digital. Only this year did I really get into the digital swing of things, apparently ... I managed to take nearly 3,000 exposures home, not even counting the ones I deleted in the camera. The last time I shot film, it cost me about US$ 20 per 24-exposure roll for the film, developing, and medium res scanning. Had I been shooting film, last weekend would've cost me around US$ 2,500 in film and associated costs. But it wouldn't have ... on film, I'd never have tripped the shutter that many times. I think the most I ever shot in a four-day event on film was about 50 36 exposure rolls, which is 40% of 3,000 exposures. And I more commonly shot around 30 rolls of 36 each in a 4-day event. :-) I finally find that I'm doing more experimenting with digital as I'm finally getting it through my head that there's no significant additional cost per exposure. I'm taking shots I would never have tried before. I'm taking several of each shot so that hopefully I'll get an acceptable one. Tons of things that I'd never have been able to afford on film. That said, the chore of culling and post-processing 3,000 images is nothing to sneeze at. :-) -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. - Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille -- K10D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. - Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Paid For
From: Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2007/11/14 Wed PM 03:10:26 GMT To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Paid For No, but he's not comparing it to 3000 prints or slides. He's comparing it to 3000 frames of neg film (before the prints). Consumers are the only ones to print every frame individually. Even his typical shooting (30x36exp rolls) would cost $600 for the event. That's essentially the cost of a K10D right now. -Adam For me, it would have been about £180. The K10D is about £690, here. So now factor in the cost of your time, sitting in front of a screen (yawn) for the extra number of images. Let's say 2000 (extra) images to assess and deal with. How long will that take? Or, to put it another way, how much effort will you be willing to put into that sort of assessment? It's not all about the upfront cost for many people. mike wilson wrote: He eliminated (many of) those in-camera. The point is still that 3000 files is not the same as 3000 prints or slides. Produce equal numbers of the same end product before you tell me that it is cheaper. From: Thibouille [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2007/11/14 Wed AM 10:15:32 GMT To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Paid For True but then, you can eliminate the shots which are garbadge and you won't print those. Film don't let you filter those garbage shots (on a cost POV). So that's not the whole story but there's already an economy IMO. On Nov 14, 2007 10:03 AM, mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry Doug but that is a non-argument. You have done two different things. Would you have argued the same if you had taken a video camera and filled 10 DVDs with cine footage? Print the lot out, factor in your time at a reasonable rate, _then_ come back and tell us how much it cost. I'll let you off with capital costs.. 8-) From: Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2007/11/13 Tue PM 11:35:08 GMT To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Paid For Howdy, folks, Well, in a sense, my K10D just paid for itself and the *ist D and a couple of lenses, to boot. I shot a really big three-day amateur auto racing event this weekend, which I do every year. This is my second or third year shooting it on digital. Only this year did I really get into the digital swing of things, apparently ... I managed to take nearly 3,000 exposures home, not even counting the ones I deleted in the camera. The last time I shot film, it cost me about US$ 20 per 24-exposure roll for the film, developing, and medium res scanning. Had I been shooting film, last weekend would've cost me around US$ 2,500 in film and associated costs. But it wouldn't have ... on film, I'd never have tripped the shutter that many times. I think the most I ever shot in a four-day event on film was about 50 36 exposure rolls, which is 40% of 3,000 exposures. And I more commonly shot around 30 rolls of 36 each in a 4-day event. :-) I finally find that I'm doing more experimenting with digital as I'm finally getting it through my head that there's no significant additional cost per exposure. I'm taking shots I would never have tried before. I'm taking several of each shot so that hopefully I'll get an acceptable one. Tons of things that I'd never have been able to afford on film. That said, the chore of culling and post-processing 3,000 images is nothing to sneeze at. :-) -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. - Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille -- K10D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. - Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. - Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail
Re: Paid For
- Original Message - From: Adam Maas Subject: Re: Paid For Ironically, it's film that has been driving my computer upgrades lately. Digital requires much less storage, RAM or processing power than manipulating high-res scans. My MF scans are easily in the 150MB range, and even 35mm is ~60MB. That's a big difference from 10-20MB RAWs. LF is even worse. Opening a single 4x5 scan brings my system to its knees. I actually have to downsize it to save a JPEG, otherwise PS runs out of RAM on a 2GB system. And I'm only scanning at 1200dpi (Scanning Fuji pack film prints). I'm more begrudging of the time than the equipment, which is one of the reasons I upgraded my computer again recently. Faster computer = less time spent on image processing. When I count in my time, digital is a huge resource user. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
I have seen exactly that in both my own children's shooting habits and my wedding/portrait work. I'm seeing less and less print ordering, but lots of web galleries or computer based slideshows. The digital angle makes this much easier, as the natural medium for it is a computer monitor. The cost to produce and view the image is pretty small that way compared to having to print it out. Also, you can easily share with people who are not immediately in the vicinity. Think of web galleries and email. -- Bruce Wednesday, November 14, 2007, 1:11:21 PM, you wrote: pcn Well put. pcn Paul pcn -- Original message -- pcn From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] There's nothing wrong with that logic because, odd as it may seem to old 20th-century farts like you and me, the print is no longer the preferred medium for viewing photographs, at least for most people. As the transition from film to digital was taking place it was widely noted in the trade publications that the number of prints being made from film was plummeting. The number of digital prints being made was rising... but not nearly enough to make up for the decline in film prints. What's been happening is people more and more thinking of a computer monitor as the normal way of viewing photographs. A print is something you settle for when you're forced to - like when you have to carry some around to show people where there's no computer available. The kids of today will grow up considering the print to be an optional extra. Indeed, they seem to be doing so already. Recently, I had thought that came out of the blue so unexpectedly it really startled me: They're *right* in their preference! I've always preferred projected slides to prints: An additive, RGB image always looks brighter, more vibrant than a reflective, subtractive CMYK image. It's more appropriate to the way we see. An image on a monitor is an additive, RGB image, like a slide. In the past this viewing medium has been at a disadvantage because of limited contrast, limited resolution, limited size and great expense. But monitors are getting bigger, better and cheaper all the time and the trend isn't going to stop soon (2000 x 5000 monitor resolution is expected to become common within a few years). Personally, I *love* good prints. I love making good prints and viewing them. But I'm the kind of intellectual geek who visits art galleries and spends time thinking about... well, things like this. This means I'm in a minority far separated from the average snapshooter who drives the industry. And the only time I make a print is when it's going to be 8 x 12 or larger. I think the print is almost dead as the default product of the average snapshooter and it's becoming more of a special item. But I've come to think that this isn't necessarily a bad thing. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
Well put. Paul -- Original message -- From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] There's nothing wrong with that logic because, odd as it may seem to old 20th-century farts like you and me, the print is no longer the preferred medium for viewing photographs, at least for most people. As the transition from film to digital was taking place it was widely noted in the trade publications that the number of prints being made from film was plummeting. The number of digital prints being made was rising... but not nearly enough to make up for the decline in film prints. What's been happening is people more and more thinking of a computer monitor as the normal way of viewing photographs. A print is something you settle for when you're forced to - like when you have to carry some around to show people where there's no computer available. The kids of today will grow up considering the print to be an optional extra. Indeed, they seem to be doing so already. Recently, I had thought that came out of the blue so unexpectedly it really startled me: They're *right* in their preference! I've always preferred projected slides to prints: An additive, RGB image always looks brighter, more vibrant than a reflective, subtractive CMYK image. It's more appropriate to the way we see. An image on a monitor is an additive, RGB image, like a slide. In the past this viewing medium has been at a disadvantage because of limited contrast, limited resolution, limited size and great expense. But monitors are getting bigger, better and cheaper all the time and the trend isn't going to stop soon (2000 x 5000 monitor resolution is expected to become common within a few years). Personally, I *love* good prints. I love making good prints and viewing them. But I'm the kind of intellectual geek who visits art galleries and spends time thinking about... well, things like this. This means I'm in a minority far separated from the average snapshooter who drives the industry. And the only time I make a print is when it's going to be 8 x 12 or larger. I think the print is almost dead as the default product of the average snapshooter and it's becoming more of a special item. But I've come to think that this isn't necessarily a bad thing. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Paid For
There's no argument that some aspects of digital photography have the capacity to be cheaper than using film. But you could have sold the rights to an image made with film for the same profit level and used the same argument to prove that buying new film gear was worth it. It still seems, to me, that you either accept poorer image quality or invest a lot of time and resources, not to mention capital, in postprocessing to get the best out of digital photography. Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: Mike, I bought the Panny L1 and an Olympus 11-22 mm lens in mid-May. A week later I shot a job on spec with them. Last month I closed a licensing deal on one exposure from that shoot that paid 70% more than the total cost of the equipment. I've not produced any paper prints at all, the publishers took the product as a digital file. That's certainly a lot cheaper than if I'd been shooting film for that job. (BTW, I shot the job with both the K10D and L1. The particular photo selected was made with the 11-22 @ 11mm focal length, about the same FoV as the K10D + DA14. It just chanced that they preferred the particular framing I captured with the L1 ... I was actually just testing the L1 and shooting side by side to see if the image quality was up to snuff for my work. :-) Godfrey On Nov 14, 2007, at 3:14 AM, mike wilson wrote: He eliminated (many of) those in-camera. The point is still that 3000 files is not the same as 3000 prints or slides. Produce equal numbers of the same end product before you tell me that it is cheaper. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Paid For
William Robb wrote: I'm pretty sure I would still be on my second computer [...] had it not been for digital photography and it's ever increasing vacuuming up of resources [...] Not an issue for me. I had to increase my storage considerably when I started digitizing my film photos. I also had to buy a film scanner. With a DSLR, the storage costs are way lower, since it's a 6/10 MP RAW (~12 to 15 MB) instead of a 24 MP 16-bit TIFF (~120 MB). Shooting more is almost consuming that difference, though, since I keep more master images than I did with film. And I don't need the film scanner with the DSLR. The tendency to shoot more has some drawbacks [...] My keeper % was way higher with film, [...] Yep, and mine, too. But now I'm (finally) experimenting more, as I mentioned in the original post that started this thread. Yes, it does take more time to weed them out. However, I'm learning things quicker just by dint of practicing them more. I'm getting keepers of things I wouldn't have shot on film due to incremental costs. I'm getting more keepers of stuff you can't predict and just sort of have to machine gun. So, /for me/, the swap works out reasonably well, though I'm going to have to manage my trigger finger better in the future. Or hire staff to help with the cull and postprocess phase. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
Mark Roberts wrote: mike wilson wrote: From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] mike wilson wrote: He eliminated (many of) those in-camera. The point is still that 3000 files is not the same as 3000 prints or slides. Produce equal numbers of the same end product before you tell me that it is cheaper. It's cheaper because you don't *have* to produce *any* prints. There's something wrong with that logic. Once I work out what it is, I'll get back to you. There's nothing wrong with that logic because, odd as it may seem to old 20th-century farts like you and me, the print is no longer the preferred medium for viewing photographs, at least for most people. As the transition from film to digital was taking place it was widely noted in the trade publications that the number of prints being made from film was plummeting. The number of digital prints being made was rising... but not nearly enough to make up for the decline in film prints. What's been happening is people more and more thinking of a computer monitor as the normal way of viewing photographs. A print is something you settle for when you're forced to - like when you have to carry some around to show people where there's no computer available. The kids of today will grow up considering the print to be an optional extra. Indeed, they seem to be doing so already. Recently, I had thought that came out of the blue so unexpectedly it really startled me: They're *right* in their preference! I've always preferred projected slides to prints: An additive, RGB image always looks brighter, more vibrant than a reflective, subtractive CMYK image. It's more appropriate to the way we see. An image on a monitor is an additive, RGB image, like a slide. In the past this viewing medium has been at a disadvantage because of limited contrast, limited resolution, limited size and great expense. But monitors are getting bigger, better and cheaper all the time and the trend isn't going to stop soon (2000 x 5000 monitor resolution is expected to become common within a few years). Personally, I *love* good prints. I love making good prints and viewing them. But I'm the kind of intellectual geek who visits art galleries and spends time thinking about... well, things like this. This means I'm in a minority far separated from the average snapshooter who drives the industry. And the only time I make a print is when it's going to be 8 x 12 or larger. I think the print is almost dead as the default product of the average snapshooter and it's becoming more of a special item. But I've come to think that this isn't necessarily a bad thing. Er, some of that is precisely what I have been arguing for some time now and have been roundly vilified here for saying so. It may be true in some parts of the world but not everywhere, by a long way. I don't _think_ you are confused regarding size and resolution (2000x5000 is a size, not a resolution) but the things that I don't like about the trend are the poor resolution of the images so shown, of whatever size, and the lack of ability to show really large images easily. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Paid For
Adam Maas wrote: No, but he's not comparing it to 3000 prints or slides. He's comparing it to 3000 frames of neg film (before the prints). Exactly. That's why my original message explicitly said the per-roll costs were for the film itself, the developing, and the medium res scanning. No mention of prints there. Had I been printing the cost would've been about US$ 0.25 per frame higher. Even when I was having my film scanned, I didn't get prints. If I wanted a print, I wanted something 8 x 10 or larger. Those I rescanned on my film scanner at high resolution and printed myself, or sent it somewhere like Shutterfly if I wanted something bigger than my printer could produce. Shortly before I got a high-res film scanner, I stopped getting prints with developing. Even his typical shooting (30x36exp rolls) would cost $600 for the event. That's essentially the cost of a K10D right now. Well, I was paying US$ 20 per roll for 24 exposure rolls. The 36 exposure rolls ran about US$ 25 per roll. So 30 rolls would run me about US$ 750. And I still had to rescan the good stuff at high resolution and post-process the scan. I got the *ist D a couple of years ago, and haven't shot a frame of film since. So I don't know what the costs would be today. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Paid For
On Nov 15, 2007 7:58 AM, Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I got the *ist D a couple of years ago, and haven't shot a frame of film since. So I don't know what the costs would be today. Got any good cheap film bodies to sell? -- Sandy Harris, Nanjing, China -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
Mark Roberts wrote: Personally, I *love* good prints. I love making good prints and viewing them. [...] the only time I make a print is when it's going to be 8 x 12 or larger. Same here. And I surely don't need a print of every frame I shoot. The 3,000 shots I took last weekend are going to turn in to several groups of 20-30 each for several potential customers, with a lot of overlap, so maybe 50-60 total shots. Then another maybe 300-400 will end up in a everything but the kitchen sink gallery so the drivers, families, friends, etc., can see the on-track action for their boy/girl. Since I'm not the best at panning and such, probably 1,000 to 1,200 will go in the trash after a glance for glaring technical or composition issues. A similar number will go in the second cull. The final cull is to pick the best of similar shots, which is part of what I missed when I made my 2007 Petit le Mans gallery; several more of those should've been culled. Now, why in the world would I want prints of 2,000 photos I don't think are up to snuff? The only bunch I /might/ want small prints of would be the ones that survived the first two culls. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Paid For
On Nov 15, 2007 8:51 AM, Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: William Robb wrote: I'm pretty sure I would still be on my second computer [...] had it not been for digital photography and it's ever increasing vacuuming up of resources [...] Not an issue for me. I had to increase my storage considerably when I started digitizing my film photos. I also had to buy a film scanner. With a DSLR, the storage costs are way lower, since it's a 6/10 MP RAW (~12 to 15 MB) instead of a 24 MP 16-bit TIFF (~120 MB). Shooting more is almost consuming that difference, though, since I keep more master images than I did with film. And I don't need the film scanner with the DSLR. Pray you never catch the panorama bug. My 10 frame RBAR Pano that I recently posted, the layered masked .psb file is in the order of 1.5GB A grunty computer is a must when working on files that large. :-) Cheers, Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Paid For
Sandy Harris wrote: Got any good cheap film bodies to sell? Well, I've got a K-1000 and a ZX-5 (U.S. version of the MZ-5) with battery grip. The LX isn't for sale, ever. ;-) -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
Doug Franklin wrote: Now, why in the world would I want prints of 2,000 photos I don't think are up to snuff? The only bunch I /might/ want small prints of would be the ones that survived the first two culls. Sometimes we forget that in the pre-digital world there were a lot of prints made that *shouldn't* have been. Perhaps most. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
At 09:38 AM 15/11/2007, Mark Roberts wrote: Doug Franklin wrote: Now, why in the world would I want prints of 2,000 photos I don't think are up to snuff? The only bunch I /might/ want small prints of would be the ones that survived the first two culls. Sometimes we forget that in the pre-digital world there were a lot of prints made that *shouldn't* have been. Perhaps most. Yeah, I have boxes full of wasted photographic paper. Cheers, Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Paid For
On Nov 14, 2007, at 2:59 PM, mike wilson wrote: There's no argument that some aspects of digital photography have the capacity to be cheaper than using film. But you could have sold the rights to an image made with film for the same profit level and used the same argument to prove that buying new film gear was worth it. Certainly. But the price would have been quite a bit higher to account for the additional cost of film and processing, processing time, scanning time if I wanted it to pay for the equipment and consumables. I made 700 exposures of the site over the course of four days shooting time. Even with 35mm, that would have been 20 rolls of film, at [EMAIL PROTECTED] minimum, plus 20 rolls of negative processing at [EMAIL PROTECTED] minimum, plus additional time in scanning, etc. It adds up, fast. It still seems, to me, that you either accept poorer image quality or invest a lot of time and resources, not to mention capital, in postprocessing to get the best out of digital photography. I spend far less time and resources producing photographs with digital capture and image processing than I ever did with film, and at lower cost. The proof of this is that the number of saleable photographs I produce per year has gone up by a factor of ten and the cost of producing them has remained the same or become less since moving to an entirely digital capture workflow according to my accounting records. In my opinion, the quality of the work has improved over what would be achievable with 35mm film as well. For prints in the range of 11x14 to 16x20 inch, I see very little difference between what I get from a 7.5 Mpixel DSLR (the L1 full format or the K10D cropped to 3:4 proportions) and the Pentax 645. Godfrey Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I bought the Panny L1 and an Olympus 11-22 mm lens in mid-May. A week later I shot a job on spec with them. Last month I closed a licensing deal on one exposure from that shoot that paid 70% more than the total cost of the equipment. I've not produced any paper prints at all, the publishers took the product as a digital file. That's certainly a lot cheaper than if I'd been shooting film for that job. (BTW, I shot the job with both the K10D and L1. The particular photo selected was made with the 11-22 @ 11mm focal length, about the same FoV as the K10D + DA14. It just chanced that they preferred the particular framing I captured with the L1 ... I was actually just testing the L1 and shooting side by side to see if the image quality was up to snuff for my work. :-) Godfrey On Nov 14, 2007, at 3:14 AM, mike wilson wrote: He eliminated (many of) those in-camera. The point is still that 3000 files is not the same as 3000 prints or slides. Produce equal numbers of the same end product before you tell me that it is cheaper. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Prints (was: Paid For)
Mark Roberts wrote: Personally, I *love* good prints. I love making good prints and viewing them. [...] the only time I make a print is when it's going to be 8 x 12 or larger. Same here. But I do occasionally make smaller prints too. There's something to be said for a pocket book of photos. :-) Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Prints (was: Paid For)
mike wilson wrote: From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] mike wilson wrote: He eliminated (many of) those in-camera. The point is still that 3000 files is not the same as 3000 prints or slides. Produce equal numbers of the same end product before you tell me that it is cheaper. It's cheaper because you don't *have* to produce *any* prints. There's something wrong with that logic. Once I work out what it is, I'll get back to you. There's nothing wrong with that logic because, odd as it may seem to old 20th-century farts like you and me, the print is no longer the preferred medium for viewing photographs, at least for most people. As the transition from film to digital was taking place it was widely noted in the trade publications that the number of prints being made from film was plummeting. The number of digital prints being made was rising... but not nearly enough to make up for the decline in film prints. What's been happening is people more and more thinking of a computer monitor as the normal way of viewing photographs. A print is something you settle for when you're forced to - like when you have to carry some around to show people where there's no computer available. The kids of today will grow up considering the print to be an optional extra. Indeed, they seem to be doing so already. Recently, I had thought that came out of the blue so unexpectedly it really startled me: They're *right* in their preference! I've always preferred projected slides to prints: An additive, RGB image always looks brighter, more vibrant than a reflective, subtractive CMYK image. It's more appropriate to the way we see. An image on a monitor is an additive, RGB image, like a slide. In the past this viewing medium has been at a disadvantage because of limited contrast, limited resolution, limited size and great expense. But monitors are getting bigger, better and cheaper all the time and the trend isn't going to stop soon (2000 x 5000 monitor resolution is expected to become common within a few years). Personally, I *love* good prints. I love making good prints and viewing them. But I'm the kind of intellectual geek who visits art galleries and spends time thinking about... well, things like this. This means I'm in a minority far separated from the average snapshooter who drives the industry. And the only time I make a print is when it's going to be 8 x 12 or larger. I think the print is almost dead as the default product of the average snapshooter and it's becoming more of a special item. But I've come to think that this isn't necessarily a bad thing. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Paid For
Howdy, folks, Well, in a sense, my K10D just paid for itself and the *ist D and a couple of lenses, to boot. I shot a really big three-day amateur auto racing event this weekend, which I do every year. This is my second or third year shooting it on digital. Only this year did I really get into the digital swing of things, apparently ... I managed to take nearly 3,000 exposures home, not even counting the ones I deleted in the camera. The last time I shot film, it cost me about US$ 20 per 24-exposure roll for the film, developing, and medium res scanning. Had I been shooting film, last weekend would've cost me around US$ 2,500 in film and associated costs. But it wouldn't have ... on film, I'd never have tripped the shutter that many times. I think the most I ever shot in a four-day event on film was about 50 36 exposure rolls, which is 40% of 3,000 exposures. And I more commonly shot around 30 rolls of 36 each in a 4-day event. :-) I finally find that I'm doing more experimenting with digital as I'm finally getting it through my head that there's no significant additional cost per exposure. I'm taking shots I would never have tried before. I'm taking several of each shot so that hopefully I'll get an acceptable one. Tons of things that I'd never have been able to afford on film. That said, the chore of culling and post-processing 3,000 images is nothing to sneeze at. :-) -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: K10D ordered and paid!
Thanks Godfrey. I doubt it very much. For each face I will have perhaps 200x200 pixel. Most likely less. This Flickr set illustates my point: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72157594491741789/ I admit neither of these images are very good, but this is the choise of technolgy I have available today. (Only 6MP camera and only an EPSON 3200 flatbed scanener). And they help payin my bills :-) I still prefere the 6x6 version. Don't you? PS: The scanned image was croped out of a 200x300 mm print version (300ppi) (14 MB). The original scan size is possibly even better. Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Godfrey DiGiorgi Sendt: 21. januar 2007 00:40 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: K10D ordered and paid! You'll have no problem. Even 6Mpixel will do that without a problem. G On Jan 20, 2007, at 3:33 PM, Jens Bladt wrote: Thanks, Godfrey. Regardsless of the print size, the resolution has to be sufficient enough to show each face well in a group of 30 people. IMO 35mm is not good ebough for this - so I normally use 6x6, which is almos good enough (considering my flatbed scanner, an EPSON Perfection 3200 Photo, whic is not really a film scanner. I actually don't do prints (except for exibition og competition), only computer files (jpeg's). The images will be used for the www and for local television. This one wasn done with a Pentacon Six: http://www.jensbladt.dk/Nykoege/images/Byraad-gruppe-20x30-web.jpg Hard to say ... depends on what size print you need to make. 13x19 or 16x20 inch should be no problem. Bigger than that, it depends. I hope to be doing some nice goup shots of the new city council in Koege on January 30th. - in appr. 9 days! For shots like this I'd normally use a 6x6 camera. I hope the K10D can actually compete? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.1/640 - Release Date: 01/19/2007 16:46 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.3/642 - Release Date: 01/20/2007 22:31 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
K10D ordered and paid!
I expect delivery at the end of this month :-))) A few years ago I bought everything new abroad. My *ist D I got from Foto Porst in Berlin, Germany. I payed considerably less than I would have in a Danish store. Today things have changed. I can actaully buy from a Danish company (on line) and even save money. This is a totally new thing. A few years ago Danish photodelaer and on-line dealers could not compete - at all. Now they can :-) I even saved 50 USD by buying it locally. I expect www.webfoto.dk has a better import deal than any other Danish photo dealer :-) I hope to be doing some nice goup shots of the new city council in Koege on January 30th. - in appr. 9 days! For shots like this I'd normally use a 6x6 camera. I hope the K10D can actually compete? Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.1/640 - Release Date: 01/19/2007 16:46 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: K10D ordered and paid!
I don't really hate you, but you are at my envy list Jens. I'm struggling to find the founds needed. I want to go to England to visit my son, and to buy the K10. Common sense says I can't do both, but I'm not common ;-) Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jens Bladt Sent: 20. januar 2007 10:07 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: K10D ordered and paid! I expect delivery at the end of this month :-))) A few years ago I bought everything new abroad. My *ist D I got from Foto Porst in Berlin, Germany. I payed considerably less than I would have in a Danish store. Today things have changed. I can actaully buy from a Danish company (on line) and even save money. This is a totally new thing. A few years ago Danish photodelaer and on-line dealers could not compete - at all. Now they can :-) I even saved 50 USD by buying it locally. I expect www.webfoto.dk has a better import deal than any other Danish photo dealer :-) I hope to be doing some nice goup shots of the new city council in Koege on January 30th. - in appr. 9 days! For shots like this I'd normally use a 6x6 camera. I hope the K10D can actually compete? Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.1/640 - Release Date: 01/19/2007 16:46 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D ordered and paid!
On this list you'll soon have no cents... Tim Øsleby wrote: I don't really hate you, but you are at my envy list Jens. I'm struggling to find the founds needed. I want to go to England to visit my son, and to buy the K10. Common sense says I can't do both, but I'm not common ;-) Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jens Bladt Sent: 20. januar 2007 10:07 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: K10D ordered and paid! I expect delivery at the end of this month :-))) A few years ago I bought everything new abroad. My *ist D I got from Foto Porst in Berlin, Germany. I payed considerably less than I would have in a Danish store. Today things have changed. I can actaully buy from a Danish company (on line) and even save money. This is a totally new thing. A few years ago Danish photodelaer and on-line dealers could not compete - at all. Now they can :-) I even saved 50 USD by buying it locally. I expect www.webfoto.dk has a better import deal than any other Danish photo dealer :-) I hope to be doing some nice goup shots of the new city council in Koege on January 30th. - in appr. 9 days! For shots like this I'd normally use a 6x6 camera. I hope the K10D can actually compete? Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.1/640 - Release Date: 01/19/2007 16:46 -- -- The more I know of men, the more I like my dog. -- Anne Louise Germaine de Stael -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D ordered and paid!
Bah...you can see your son anytime. Even better, buy the K10D and then lay the guilt on your son for not coming to visit you. :) - Original Message - From: Tim Øsleby [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' pdml@pdml.net Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2007 9:11 AM Subject: RE: K10D ordered and paid! I don't really hate you, but you are at my envy list Jens. I'm struggling to find the founds needed. I want to go to England to visit my son, and to buy the K10. Common sense says I can't do both, but I'm not common ;-) Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jens Bladt Sent: 20. januar 2007 10:07 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: K10D ordered and paid! I expect delivery at the end of this month :-))) A few years ago I bought everything new abroad. My *ist D I got from Foto Porst in Berlin, Germany. I payed considerably less than I would have in a Danish store. Today things have changed. I can actaully buy from a Danish company (on line) and even save money. This is a totally new thing. A few years ago Danish photodelaer and on-line dealers could not compete - at all. Now they can :-) I even saved 50 USD by buying it locally. I expect www.webfoto.dk has a better import deal than any other Danish photo dealer :-) I hope to be doing some nice goup shots of the new city council in Koege on January 30th. - in appr. 9 days! For shots like this I'd normally use a 6x6 camera. I hope the K10D can actually compete? Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.1/640 - Release Date: 01/19/2007 16:46 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D ordered and paid!
Jens Bladt spake: I expect delivery at the end of this month :-))) I'm sure you'll enjoy it. ... It's an excellent camera. I hope to be doing some nice goup shots of the new city council in Koege on January 30th. - in appr. 9 days! For shots like this I'd normally use a 6x6 camera. I hope the K10D can actually compete? Hard to say ... depends on what size print you need to make. 13x19 or 16x20 inch should be no problem. Bigger than that, it depends. G -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D ordered and paid!
Tim, your son is much more impottant than anything else. If you really want a K10D, I suggest you get an assignment photographing - make your photographs pay for the camera. I did some photographs for a brewery along with my fellow camera club memebers. The owner - an amateut photographer himself - liked my photographs a lot. He suggested that I should pay a visit to a restaurant near by - and ask them if they needed some photographs. Luckily they did. I photographed all thier dishes, the guests, the buffet etc. That job paid for 50 % of my K10D :-) So, I aim to make my hobby pay for it self. I haven't quite succeded yet - but I will, eventually. Good luck - and have a nice trip to England too! Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Tim Řsleby Sendt: 20. januar 2007 23:12 Til: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' Emne: RE: K10D ordered and paid! I don't really hate you, but you are at my envy list Jens. I'm struggling to find the founds needed. I want to go to England to visit my son, and to buy the K10. Common sense says I can't do both, but I'm not common ;-) Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jens Bladt Sent: 20. januar 2007 10:07 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: K10D ordered and paid! I expect delivery at the end of this month :-))) A few years ago I bought everything new abroad. My *ist D I got from Foto Porst in Berlin, Germany. I payed considerably less than I would have in a Danish store. Today things have changed. I can actaully buy from a Danish company (on line) and even save money. This is a totally new thing. A few years ago Danish photodelaer and on-line dealers could not compete - at all. Now they can :-) I even saved 50 USD by buying it locally. I expect www.webfoto.dk has a better import deal than any other Danish photo dealer :-) I hope to be doing some nice goup shots of the new city council in Koege on January 30th. - in appr. 9 days! For shots like this I'd normally use a 6x6 camera. I hope the K10D can actually compete? Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.1/640 - Release Date: 01/19/2007 16:46 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.1/640 - Release Date: 01/19/2007 16:46 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.1/640 - Release Date: 01/19/2007 16:46 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: K10D ordered and paid!
Thanks, Godfrey. Regardsless of the print size, the resolution has to be sufficient enough to show each face well in a group of 30 people. IMO 35mm is not good ebough for this - so I normally use 6x6, which is almos good enough (considering my flatbed scanner, an EPSON Perfection 3200 Photo, whic is not really a film scanner. I actually don't do prints (except for exibition og competition), only computer files (jpeg's). The images will be used for the www and for local television. This one wasn done with a Pentacon Six: http://www.jensbladt.dk/Nykoege/images/Byraad-gruppe-20x30-web.jpg Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Godfrey DiGiorgi Sendt: 20. januar 2007 23:45 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: K10D ordered and paid! Jens Bladt spake: I expect delivery at the end of this month :-))) I'm sure you'll enjoy it. ... It's an excellent camera. I hope to be doing some nice goup shots of the new city council in Koege on January 30th. - in appr. 9 days! For shots like this I'd normally use a 6x6 camera. I hope the K10D can actually compete? Hard to say ... depends on what size print you need to make. 13x19 or 16x20 inch should be no problem. Bigger than that, it depends. G -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.1/640 - Release Date: 01/19/2007 16:46 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.1/640 - Release Date: 01/19/2007 16:46 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D ordered and paid!
You'll have no problem. Even 6Mpixel will do that without a problem. G On Jan 20, 2007, at 3:33 PM, Jens Bladt wrote: Thanks, Godfrey. Regardsless of the print size, the resolution has to be sufficient enough to show each face well in a group of 30 people. IMO 35mm is not good ebough for this - so I normally use 6x6, which is almos good enough (considering my flatbed scanner, an EPSON Perfection 3200 Photo, whic is not really a film scanner. I actually don't do prints (except for exibition og competition), only computer files (jpeg's). The images will be used for the www and for local television. This one wasn done with a Pentacon Six: http://www.jensbladt.dk/Nykoege/images/Byraad-gruppe-20x30-web.jpg Hard to say ... depends on what size print you need to make. 13x19 or 16x20 inch should be no problem. Bigger than that, it depends. I hope to be doing some nice goup shots of the new city council in Koege on January 30th. - in appr. 9 days! For shots like this I'd normally use a 6x6 camera. I hope the K10D can actually compete? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT - Free antirus program AVG now paid only?
http://free.grisoft.com/doc/2/lng/us/tpl/v5 Googling avg free gave that link. The download is on the upper right. -- graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- John Forbes wrote: I recommended AVG to a friend, and it appears they have gone pay-only. I've always used a free version. Does anyone know if it is still possible to get a free version, or do they have any other recommendations? TIA John -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
OT - Free antirus program AVG now paid only?
I recommended AVG to a friend, and it appears they have gone pay-only. I've always used a free version. Does anyone know if it is still possible to get a free version, or do they have any other recommendations? TIA John -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT - Free antirus program AVG now paid only?
The free version is still listed on their site: http://www.grisoft.com/doc/289/lng/us/tpl/tpl01 and http://free.grisoft.com/doc/1 As for a recommendation I've been using Avast Home Edition on my new machine (Norton was driving me nuts on my old computer): http://www.avast.com/eng/avast_4_home.html Dave On 10/2/06, John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I recommended AVG to a friend, and it appears they have gone pay-only. I've always used a free version. Does anyone know if it is still possible to get a free version, or do they have any other recommendations? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT - Free antirus program AVG now paid only?
I got a new version of the free AVG a couple of weeks ago. Don John Forbes wrote: I recommended AVG to a friend, and it appears they have gone pay-only. I've always used a free version. Does anyone know if it is still possible to get a free version, or do they have any other recommendations? TIA John -- Dr E D F Williams www.kolumbus.fi/mimosa/ http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams/ 41660 TOIVAKKA – Finland - +358400706616 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT - Free antirus program AVG now paid only?
Thanks, David. There seem to be several different sites for AVG, presumably aimed at different markets, and the ones I looked at didn't list the free version. But I knew I'd find the answer here! Thanks again. John On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 11:35:19 +0100, David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The free version is still listed on their site: http://www.grisoft.com/doc/289/lng/us/tpl/tpl01 and http://free.grisoft.com/doc/1 As for a recommendation I've been using Avast Home Edition on my new machine (Norton was driving me nuts on my old computer): http://www.avast.com/eng/avast_4_home.html Dave On 10/2/06, John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I recommended AVG to a friend, and it appears they have gone pay-only. I've always used a free version. Does anyone know if it is still possible to get a free version, or do they have any other recommendations? -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT - Free antirus program AVG now paid only?
Last time I tried to find AVG Free the free version was well hidden. However a search in google for AVG Free and a bit of poking around eventually will get you here: http://free.grisoft.com/doc/avg-anti-virus-free/lng/us/tpl/v5 John Forbes wrote: I recommended AVG to a friend, and it appears they have gone pay-only. I've always used a free version. Does anyone know if it is still possible to get a free version, or do they have any other recommendations? TIA John -- Things should be made as simple as possible -- but no simpler. --Albert Einstein -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT - Free antirus program AVG now paid only?
Right down the bottom of the products page: http://www.grisoft.com/doc/products-avg-anti-virus-free-edition/lng/uk/tpl/tpl01 From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/10/02 Mon AM 10:15:56 GMT To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net Subject: OT - Free antirus program AVG now paid only? I recommended AVG to a friend, and it appears they have gone pay-only. I've always used a free version. Does anyone know if it is still possible to get a free version, or do they have any other recommendations? TIA John -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT - Free antirus program AVG now paid only?
I recommended AVG to a friend, and it appears they have gone pay-only. I've always used a free version. Does anyone know if it is still possible to get a free version, When AVG came out they promised to always maintain a free personal version. They have, but they are finding better ways to hide it on their web site. Still worth finding and works great with auto updates. Powell -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT, but taken w/ a pentax - My first paid gig
Aaron asked: This site takes you to my first paid photography gig. Essentially, I got to eat everything I shot. You lucky bastard. ;) Looks good! How was it lit? It was late afternoon, only skylight above. My wife and I essentially ate from 3pm till 9 that night. You may notice a half-drunk tankard of beer. The three of us finished 4 rolls of film, 3 bottles of wine (2 white) and 2 sixes of Yingling Lager. It's a wonder the pics are in focus! - 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, but taken w/ a pentax - My first paid gig
Slobber slobber drool! Why did I look at that before lunch? :) Deb --- Chris Niesmertelny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This site takes you to my first paid photography gig. Essentially, I got to eat everything I shot. It was a good day for Pentax, a better day for my belly. These were taken about 3 years ago w/ a ZX-M. http://www.compfoods.com He just got the website up and running, though I wish I could do some re-shoots (I'm kinda hungry). Best, Chris - 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 . Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games http://sports.yahoo.com - 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 .
OT, but taken w/ a pentax - My first paid gig
This site takes you to my first paid photography gig. Essentially, I got to eat everything I shot. It was a good day for Pentax, a better day for my belly. These were taken about 3 years ago w/ a ZX-M. http://www.compfoods.com He just got the website up and running, though I wish I could do some re-shoots (I'm kinda hungry). Best, Chris - 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 .
