On Fri, 02 Aug 2002 00:21:18 -0700 Arthur Entlich ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
But Jean-Pierre, in terms of list postings, this is all ancient history.
Yes. And best left that way please!
Regards
Tony Sleep
http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info
I was advised to disable the right click by another photographer who has had
problems with her images getting stolen and used on the web.
I'm aware that people can do Alt Prt Scr to grab the images, or disable the
browser. However another site that I used to run had a similar feature where
it
My files are ordered in a geographical folder hierarchy:
i.e: europe/southern europe/italy/rome/cityscapes
Does anyone know how to batch process (image size, tiff to jpeg, etc.) the
whole hierarchy and save the results into the same hierarchy(overwriting the
original files) or into an identical
Hi Julie all,
I totally agree. I knew how easy it is to copy a picture. I disabled the
right-click anyway only for education. Now my visitors get a copyright
notice, learn what it means and most of them write to ask permission. These
people are now aware that there are copyrights in Internet,
unsubscribe filmscanners
spam problem
Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
Quite right... anytime i find a site that disables right click... i usually
exit... forthwith.
By disabling right click you, as a website, are interfering with my right to
view the internet/site as i wish and as i find convenient. If you don't
respect my right, i'm not interested in your site.
Disabling right click will not stop any of the ones you mention from using
your pix if they so choose.
So, what's your point?
On the other hand, disbaling right click is an irritant... it stops me from
doing a whole lot of things easily... like, opening in new window... like
e-mailing the page
Shunith writes:
Disabling right click will not stop any of
the ones you mention from using your pix
if they so choose.
I know. I don't disable anything.
Furthermore, it seems a bit egotistical to me when photographers go to
extreme lengths (downloadable ActiveX controls and plug-ins, etc.)
Recently, I've been having focus problems with my SS4000+, which I use on a
Mac, firewire and OS9.2.
When I purchased the unit, the scans were razor (grain) sharp using both
silverfast and polacolor software. Since it's last firmware update, or so it
seems, the unit's focus seems to have gone
So, what does that have to do with the price of fish?
- Original Message -
From: Julie Cooke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, August 03, 2002 3:09 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Disabling right-click, etc. (was: Web home page
writing software)
I was advised to
David writes:
But it's not quite that easy nor as cut-and=
dried as the above.
There aren't any other options. Anything you put on the site is likely to
be stolen. Anything you do not want stolen should not be put on the site.
For example, you've just thumbed-your-nose at
the
Right on!
- Original Message -
From: Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, August 03, 2002 5:52 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Disabling right-click, etc. (was: Web home page
writing software)
Shunith writes:
Disabling right click will not stop any
I have a full digital darkroom, and chemical as well. The market is strong
in both. Digital prints are selling very well, if priced right ($10-12
wholesale, $20-30 retail, for 11x14). Many young people who are trying to
get art photography shows in this region are finding that even coffee shops
But it's not quite that easy nor as cut-and-dried as the above. For
example, you've just thumbed-your-nose at the state-of-the-art in
professional event photography. On-line proofing is currently all the rage
in that area...especially for out-of-town customers.
Well actually it is. I have to
Preben writes:
I would be interested in knowing which photos
ARE worth protecting.?
The ones that are worth money.
As far as I know, in the finest museums of the
world (for what it is worth), you may stumble across
(quote) sunsets, breaking waves, distant mountains,
nudes (unquote) .
Sounds like the art market has learned that inkjet prints fade just as
archival inkjet printers are becoming mainstream.
--
Ciao, Paul D. DeRocco
Paulmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: HPA
Many young people who are trying to
get art photography shows in this
Hi Tom,
Can you explain a bit more on what is being asked for? What do you mean by
fiber? What do you mean by digital fiber? Are ink jet prints
acceptable if they are done on the right paper? If not, what type of
printer is acceptable?
Thanks,
Stephen
- Original Message -
From:
Thumbnailer does what you want for 25 USD.
http://www.smalleranimals.com/thumb.htm
Mike Simmons
At 02:46 AM 8/3/2002, you wrote:
My files are ordered in a geographical folder hierarchy:
i.e: europe/southern europe/italy/rome/cityscapes
Does anyone know how to batch process (image size, tiff
On 8/3/02 10:44 AM, HPA [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a full digital darkroom, and chemical as well. The market is strong
in both. Digital prints are selling very well, if priced right ($10-12
wholesale, $20-30 retail, for 11x14). Many young people who are trying to
get art photography
Is it egotistical to try to prevent someone stealing images that a
photographer has spent time and money creating? For photographers making a
living solely from photography stealing images can be and is a problem.
I've only just implemented the disabling of the right click. It's been
interesting
I wonder the same thing, having just purchased this wiz-bang Epson 2200
printer, supposedly with reported longevity rivaling Lightjet prints. I
have a hard time with the idea that ink-jets are being condemned in
general. I suppose they just want us to call them giclee's.
Mark
Most commercial photographic papers are RC (Resin Coated - i.e., plastic
coated) papers and not Fiber papers which do not have a resin coating.
Similarly, most papers designated as being for inkjet printing (as opposed
to various watercolor and fine art papers, linen and canvas type media) tend
Hi! I just bought a Nikon Coolscan 4000 off the net. I was assured
they were an authorized dealer and it had a US warranty. The scanner
arrived without the warranty and missing some things like the full
version of Genuine Fractals that comes packaged with the scanner. There
also was no
Well,
Having just bought one on ebay, now I ask about it...
Anyone using/used the Umax Powerlook III for filmscanning? 4x5 and 8x10. How
do you find it does
tim
Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED],
I have used the earlier PowerLook II to scan 4x5 negs and transparencies at
600 dpi and found that to be satisfactory for my purposes, which typically
involved retouching of copy negatives or portfolio prints of commericial 4x5
transparencies from jobs I shot. I too just got a PowerLook III with
Laurie,
Fair enough, but archival fiber-only papers were not designed to be used
with inkjet inks, were they? Rarely can you have everything in life!
Bob Frost.
- Original Message -
From: Laurie Solomon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Most commercial photographic papers are RC (Resin Coated - i.e.,
Hi Mike,
Thank you for a very useful tip. It will do what I want - and more!
Greetings Preben
- Original Message -
From: Mike Simmons [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, August 03, 2002 7:45 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Batch processing, but keeping same
What you have not told us clearly is if the scanner is turned on prior
to your booting up Win ME or if you turn it on after the boot up. If
the latter is the case, you will need to manually go to the Control
Panel's Device Manager and refresh the scan of the SCSI card with the
Linotype-Hell
Julie writes:
Is it egotistical to try to prevent someone
stealing images that a photographer has spent
time and money creating?
Not at all, but it is often egotistical to actually believe that anyone
wants to steal them. I've seen photos on many photo sites that the
photographer couldn't
I recall the preliminary ads said that this printer had the ability to print
on CDs, yet the spec sheet I downloaded don't mention this. Was this
misinformation?
--
Ciao, Paul D. DeRocco
Paulmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I wonder the same
Are you saying that the Epson Matte Heavyweight paper, which is what they
claim has the greatest longevity, isn't coated?
--
Ciao, Paul D. DeRocco
Paulmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Laurie Solomon
Most commercial photographic papers are RC (Resin Coated - i.e.,
Dorothy--
I just got the LS8000, and came across the same issue. You can
buy from rock solid places like BH, and pay a bit more, or look
around. I ended up getting mine from mycamera.com, a colorado
based operation. Take a look at the feedback at www.photo.net to
get a sense as to who is
Preben wrote:
Should we perhaps leave it to the *eyes of the beholder*, instead of
stooping to sweeping generalisations.
All copyrighted material deserves protection against commercial pirating if
the originator so wishes...
RIGHT ON! RIGHT ON!! RIGHT ON!!!
I'm pleased you're getting a good laugh from it, then, since it probably
wasn't very effective otherwise
Enjoy!
;-)
Art
Jean-Pierre Verbeke wrote:
Still, hahahahahaha.:-))
Jean-Pierre Verbeke
http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=161965
- Original Message
Yeah, folks in the US and Canada got screwed on this one. Only the 2100
sold in Europe/Austrailia comes with the CD printing capability and the Grey
Balancer software. Lots of people miffed about it.
Mark
- Original Message -
From: Paul D. DeRocco [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL
Preben writes: I would be interested in knowing which photos
ARE worth protecting.?
Anthony Atkielski writes: The ones that are worth money.
Preben writes: As far as I know, in the finest museums of the
world (for what it is worth), you may stumble across
(quote) sunsets, breaking
Great news. I hope so too. The sad part about these scanners is they
are hardly worth repairing. The CCD is probably one of the more
expensive parts in the whole thing.
HP does send rebuilt units or warranty sometimes, so check the unit
out fully when it arrives, since you probably only have
David Soderman writes: But it's not quite that easy nor as cut-and-
dried as the above.
Anthony Atkielski writes: There aren't any other options. Anything you put
on the site is likely to be stolen. Anything you do not want stolen should
not be put on the site.
David
Anthony,
I have many images and I can't decide which ones are worthy to be shown to
the public. Could you please take a look at them and with all your wisdom
let me know which ones are good enough to be stolen. Finally someone can
answer the question what is art?.
thanks,
Gregg
From: Anthony
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Of course. But originators with an exaggerated opinion of their work and
draconian methods of protecting it won't have too many people viewing their
masterpieces.
Oh the irony of it all, Anthony. Please allow me to describe a certain
rascal that I've stumbled onto.
Fair enough, but archival fiber-only papers were not designed to be used
with inkjet inks, were they?
(Smile) No they were not; but some are using archival fiber-only papers on
inkjets and to a greater or lesser extent have found that some not only work
and look good but also have some
Not sure what you mean by the 'full' version of Genuine Fractals.
Neither am I sure what Dorothy Cutter means.
the version of Genuine Fractals that was included in my package was also
not the 'full' version. It was a version that worked in RGB mode but not
CMYK mode.
But I am also not sure
I have both this scanner and the other device on the chain fully
booted up before I start the computer. I have tried three different
SCSI ID numbers so far and two different slots for the host card.
Ok, that eliminates those things as potential sources.
To my knowledge, these things are all
No. It is coated. It also is not really an archival paper in terms of the
traditional standards of achivalness (i.e., the museum standards of 100
years and acid free and the like). As compared to some other inkjet papers
and even some RC photographic papers, it may be more archival or as
Ouch, this concerns me... just before my back went out I upgraded the
firmware, but I didn't do any extensive scanning...
It would not be the first time that Polaroid got a bug in the focusing
system via firmware or software. Have you reported the results you
found to Polaroid yet? Or are you
We have several local digital labs here providing everything from color
laser prints to digitally produced silver based prints to prints
produced with archival inks and papers (giclee). All of these produce
fairly permanent results, and in fact some and even better than normal
silver photography
In wet darkroom, Fibre or fiber refers to papers which do not use
polymers or resin coatings, such as the RC papers. Fiber papers are
made of paper/rag pulp and then coated with silver halide laden
emulsions, and that's it. Thiosulfates can ruin the permanence of a
fibre paper image too, so
Whether the creator of a work of art is an egomaniac or not in regard to
the value of their work is not really relevant. No one knows
categorically if an artist's output will ultimately become valuable to
others of not. The formula for artistic success is a mix or timing,
serendipity, hype,
It depends where you live.
The European version comes with CD printing ability (both via some
hardware device and software) and a gray balancer designed for making
monochrome prints. For some odd reason Epson has decided that North
Americans have no use for these things.
Art
Paul D. DeRocco
Thanks Arthur...
As for the correlation to firmware update, I can't be 100% sure of it, just
seems that way.
I'm using firmware version 1.58.
I had contacted polaroid via email posts, as well as a posting on the
silverfast forum: both quiet and no response as of yet.
N.B. There was another
unsubscribe filmscanners
Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
I have to disagree with Laurie on this one and also to remark that I think
Anthony Atkielski *continuously* thumbs-his-nose at everything and
everyone.
As for Laurie's alleged agreeing with Anthony on this one, I'm still
listening.
You can agree or disagree with me and we can discuss it;
That's potentially very unfortunate, too. Sounds like I am going to
have to provide some type of written warranty if I distribute inkjet
prints as collectibles. Up to now, I use an archival process for
reproducing anything I sell (graphic art more than photos) or I have
sold chemical (wet
53 matches
Mail list logo
