Re: I enjoy film

In a way this is all to the good. We get so many who are enamored with their new digital cameras on the list that it is easy to get the idea that no one is using film any more. Not so! Many of us still like the old way. But we do need to speak up, or soon we will be forgotten, and then there wil

RE: More 15/3.5 samples - seeking opinions

There is one thing you have to be VERY aware of it that if you take two photos of the same scene with two different focal lengths the wider angle lens always loses on detail because the image magnification is smaller. The only way to compare with a 24mm for example is to shoot a subject at say 15 f

Re: More 15/3.5 samples - seeking opinions

None taken. In fact, I was wondering if Tamron or Sigma 14/2.8 was as bad. I starts to wonder if the lens had been poorly assembled before I bought it. The inner glass retaining rings were easy to remove and not glued at all (usually they were very tight and glued with threadlock). I know it is

RE: More 15/3.5 samples - seeking opinions

I think I will do one last test the next few days, along with FA*24/2 this time and see how they compared. I have always done tests the same way (tripod, self-timer, magnifier etc, just able the way I shoot) so there is nothing else I could do. Scanning is always done with Minolta Scan Elite so

Re: I enjoy film

- Original Message - From: "Caveman" Subject: Re: I enjoy film > The success of digital is largely due to the failure of the industry to > provide adequate film printing services to the consumer. > The failure of the minilab is largely due to the consumer insisting that the bottom line

Re: test

Please give me the date and subject so that I may study. Norm Caveman wrote:

Re: I enjoy film

Just waiting for WfieldW's reply. Norm Caveman wrote:

Re: I enjoy film

The success of digital is largely due to the failure of the industry to provide adequate film printing services to the consumer. Same industry that pushed smaller and crappier film formats (anyone remember disc film, APS, etc). Same industry that was interested in printing each and every frame

Re: More 15/3.5 samples - seeking opinions

The contrast seems to be off compared to other image samples I have seen using this lens. There seems to be a noticable lack of sharpness too. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There was some dirty mark on one of the inner element but I cleaned it. All glasses are clean now even when lited by a torch li

RE: I enjoy film

I feel the same way! Film is fun to shoot, no question, and there are some advantages to it like exposure latitude. The only problem is that when I started shooting with the istD I noticed that my 8x10 prints were superior to the ones I got from film and, being a portrait shooter, I quickly becam

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

Norm Baugher wrote: I don't need to turn the lights off? You can keep a red light.

RE: Thoughts on Sunpak flashes?

Darn... I didn't know there was different AF280T versions, when purchased mine (ebay). Perhaps I should try to get a later version. It's is anoying that I can't hit the cieling, while shooting downwards (to catch my grandaughter in a chair, bed or whatever). I used to use the AF280T on my SONY F717

test

yes just a test

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

i wasn't first, but i was among the earliest on the list to buy a 4G Microdrive for the *istD. during the vacation, i shot about 100 exposures on a busy day. there weren't a lot of opportunities for shooting panoramas or the number would have been about double that. the drawback with a Microdrive i

I enjoy film

You digital guys are bringing me down. I really enjoy shooting film. Changing film after 24 or 36 exp is not a "hassle" for me. I like the results I get from film. I can use an all manual body like my Spotmatic or my MZ-S. Fun. It really is too bad that film is on the wane in the world. My lab's f

Re: Pentax at the Olympics

he stole the term. Herb... - Original Message - From: "Billy Abbott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2004 5:52 PM Subject: Re: Pentax at the Olympics > > p.s. 'clacks'? You've defeated my New Oxford Dictionary. > > You need to read some more Terry

Re: Pentax at the Olympics

semaphore. Herb... - Original Message - From: "Bob W" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2004 5:03 PM Subject: Re: Pentax at the Olympics > p.s. 'clacks'? You've defeated my New Oxford Dictionary.

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

Hi Herb, I agree. My experience is similar. But you say you get 282 exposures shooting RAW. I get 72 on a 1 gig card. Are you using a 4 gig card? If so, I'm jealous / Paul On Aug 24, 2004, at 10:35 PM, Herb Chong wrote: two weekends ago, i went on vacation, taking my last 17 rolls of film with

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

I don't need to turn the lights off? Norm "who hates the term 'digital darkroom'" B. Paul Stenquist wrote: That's good news for those who would want to set up a digital darkroom.

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

two weekends ago, i went on vacation, taking my last 17 rolls of film with me and a film body along with the *istD. try as i might, there were very few occasions where it was worth using the film body. whenever the lighting was tricky, i would use the *istD and take the shot to verify exposure. if

Re: Sandisc CF cards are pretty tough.

Pics you want in your portfolio, yet not really.. Fascinating story. Thanks for that B! Cheers, Ryan - Original Message - From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax Discuss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2004 8:36 AM Subject: Sandisc CF cards are pretty tough

Re: More 15/3.5 samples - seeking opinions

Hmmm, that last post of mine comes across as rude. I didn't intend that. But the internet pics look good to me. The only way I can tell for sure if a lens is delivering is by making a high race 12 x18 print or something close to that. from a scan of 72 meg or so at 24 bit. As an alternativ

Re: Ilford in trouble?

all my friends who are not into photography and are just snap shooters are abandoning film because they can't stand it. number one reason for going digital is that they can look at the LCD on the back and tell if they "got" the picture they wanted and not be disappointed when they take their film i

Re: Epson 1270 - was Re: Any Epson 2200 users out there?

1270 setup under OSX should be the same as 2200 setup. Make sure your ColorSynch profiles for printer and monitor are installed. The Epson software and monitor software should have handled that but go to the ColorSynch utility and check. Then in PhotoShop go to color settings and change your se

Re: More 15/3.5 samples - seeking opinions

They all suck. How much do you want for the lens. I'll do you a favor and take it off your hands. Seriously, it's impossible to say for sure based on 72 dpi internet images, but they look quite sharp and contrasty. But as I said, I'll be happy to take that turkey off your hands. Perhaps you

RE: More 15/3.5 samples - seeking opinions

In my honest opinion, unless you shoot with a similar lens like a 17mm fish or 20mm under exact same conditions using a tripod there is no way to tell. Don't rush to send it back if you don't have to. Compare to some other fine lenses and post BOTH for us it see and compare. It could be your techni

Re: Pentax at the Olympics

they have no choice. the standard for being acceptable has gotten very high and there is only one way to achieve it reliably enough to make a living at sports photography. Pentax has nothing to offer for the professional sports photographer. Herb... - Original Message - From: "Peter J. Al

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

Chris asked: Wonder why he doesn't shoot digi though? I wouldn't be surprised if he does by now. Remember, those images were shot at least two years ago.

RE: More 15/3.5 samples - seeking opinions

There was some dirty mark on one of the inner element but I cleaned it. All glasses are clean now even when lited by a torch light so it is unlikely the cause. So my pics are definitely less sharp than normal? Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan Have you held the lens up to a very bright ligh

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

Hi Cotty, That's good news for those who would want to set up a digital darkroom. Fast drives are a big key to making PhotoShop work well. The computer investment for a digital darkroom isn't that huge, and most people can get by with whatever box they're currently using. Paul On Aug 24, 2004, a

RE: More 15/3.5 samples - seeking opinions

Have you held the lens up to a very bright light and looked thru it ( just the lens, not mounted on camera)?? Maybe there is hazing or seperation or extreme dust or something affecting the sharpness and contrast? I have the SM version and it is very sharp and constrasty especailly the center shar

Epson 1270 - was Re: Any Epson 2200 users out there?

Mark - Tonight I plugged in the 1270, cleaned the nozzles and printed a few pages to verify that all is ok. All is in fact ok. Sometime later (another day) I will read the manual and think about how to use a real printer (as opposed to the barely adequate Lexmark I have been using.) If anyone h

Re: Ilford in trouble? (fwd)

they should have. Agfa has been trying to sell its film division for years with no buyers. Herb - Original Message - From: "Chris Stoddart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2004 6:39 AM Subject: Re: Ilford in trouble? (fwd) > According to the Man

More 15/3.5 samples - seeking opinions

Just before I return the lens, I would like too hear more opinions on these pictures. The first 5 were taken with Centuria Super 100, the rest were with Velvia 100F. My impression is that all 15mm pictures lack the "punch". Am I expecting too much for such 30yrs old design? http://www.pbase.com

Re: black and white

Oh, I quite agree. But basically their success was all down to Reggie - Ronnie was a liability, just kept in the business because Reggie had made a promise to their mum to look after Ronnie. I grew up on the outskirts of London during those times, and had a couple of accquaintances who knew far

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

I saw the exhibit twice,once in London and once in Oslo. Truely stunning photographs! -- Original Message -- From: Chris Stoddart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 23:23:55 +0100 (BST) > >On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Bob W wro

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

On 24/8/04, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed: > So, what's he - or anyone in a similar situation - >to do if they want to make a few $$ practicing the art and craft of >photography? That's easy. You shoot the subject that you are intimate with / know everything about / have great acces

Re: black and white

Frank, After reading the first few lines of your post, I knew almost EXACTLY what the last line would be! :-) The "almost" means I reckoned without Delgado. John On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 16:51:03 -0400 (EDT), frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 23/8/04, Paul McEvoy, discombobulated, unle

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

On 24/8/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed: >In terms of a computer, I use a fairly high power setup most of the time, >but I can also work with a very slow i-book G3 when I have to. That's the >machine I take on locations. I'm not dialed into PCs, but I would guess >that any 1 giga

Re: black and white

On 24/8/04, Frank Theriault, discombobulated, unleashed: >> If we call negative film what we do, why can't we call >> the opposite type "positives"? That would make sense >> to me... In moviemaking, you shoot on negative stockand you work with...wait for ita print! Rush print, answer

Re: New Pentax Cameras

The S5 is the 5 MP version of the S4. And, since the S4 will fit the can, I assume the S5 will as well... keith graywolf wrote: The S50 is a standard P&S digital. The S5 is the minature (Altoid tin size) pocket camera. Or is it the other way around?

RE: Re-assemling SMC-A 2.8/28mm

Use a piece of rubber to rotate the filter retaining ring in anti-clockwide direction. Then you should see 3 screws which hold the filter mount. Remove them too and you can access to the focus holding screws (loose them a bit only, don't remove them). Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan Than

Re: Ilford in trouble?

This one time, at band camp, Caveman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Aren't we all using Windows, Word and Photoshop already. Not me Kevin -- __ (_ \ _) ) | / / _ ) / _ | / ___) / _ ) |

Re: Pentax at the Olympics

Hi, >> > Do you think they're shooting b&w? Will they do their >> > own developing? >> >> Don't be so ridiculous! >> >> They have boys who run with the glass negatives to the office, where >> there is a team of trained chemists waiting to do the processing, then >> an armada of balloons and pig

Re: AF problems with *ISTD!

Odd, I use two of them for weddings all the time. I pretty much find AF in general not useful/needed during a wedding shoot. Didn't matter if I was shooting my old PZ-1p's, MZ-S's, P67II's or the *istD's. Seems like a strong reliance on AF when not necessary. I only use AF when I am not capable

RE: Ilford in trouble?

Delta 3200 is the film of my choice for low light. I also like tonal range of Fuji Neopan 1600. However, the grain Delta 3200 produces is just great. I love it. Besides, HP5+ 400 is one of my cameras all the time. I dotry Kodak stuff as well as Agfa 100 and 400 ISO emulsions from time to time,

Re: black and white

> > Consider it collaboration if you like. Rodgers & Hammerstein, Lennon & > McCartney, Bill & Ben, Marks & Spencer, Ronnie & Reggie, ... Just wanted to let you know that there was at least one reader out here who recognised every one of those pairings. Mind you, the last pair were probably abou

Re: Pentax at the Olympics

> > Hi, > > >> Well, we now know why it takes 25,000 shots to cover > >> a football game. Set up 200 > >> cameras and hit the remote control when something is > >> somewhere in front of them. > >> The crap ratio must be enormous. About like 200 > >> monkeys with 200 cameras. > > > > Do you th

Re: AF problems with *ISTD!

On Aug 24, 2004, at 6:38 PM, Brendan wrote: I'm not so sure that the *istD is that bad vs the competion, it's sure slower than the Pz-20 but it does focus accurately, so long as nothing moves! So it makes it useless for low light action reportage (like wedding) photography. -- Best regards Sylwe

Buyin used enlargers:was ilford in trouble

http://www.khbphotografix.com/ This is the link to a store in Toronto that sells new and used darkroom equipment and supplies. I have 3 in mind and just would like some comments on those that may have or had this stuff. My main interest

RE: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

J. C. O'Connell wrote: > ALL I WANT with photography is a A HOBBY! > > I shoot totally for my own personal satisfaction. > > If you have shoot for money you become a slave doing stuff > you don't want to do and do it in ways you don't want to do > them just for a profit. I am not into that. Id

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

This is, of course, quite true. And while I'm a strong advocate of film, I gotta ask, how many "big name" photojournalists are there these days. Not many compared to wedding photogs, sports photogs, advertising photogs, and so on. I'd venture to say that becoming a well-known, well-respected, an

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

Hi, > That's all film will get ya these days. > Without digital, all ya got is a hobby. A wonderful, > fulfilling hobby to be sure, but nothing more than > that. an awful lot of big name photojournalists, even young ones, are still using film. -- Cheers, Bob

RE: Ilford in trouble?

> -Original Message- > From: Bob W [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > I mostly agree with you, but I expect Agfa and Ilford to > merge, then get eaten by Kodak and in the medium term there > will only be Tri-X and D-76. No paper, or any of the > printing-related stuff. I think a few bra

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

I would like to add just one thing.if I only shot color, I would have a Starkist DSLR right now and have sold my film gear. Norm Shel Belinkoff wrote: So, Frank, if you wanna be a "photographer," maybe you should dump the film cams and buy a DSLR.

Re: Ilford in trouble?

Hi, > For those of you who know your history, it feels to me like the 'tragedy > of the commons' yet again. Pretty soon we'll all be driving the same car, > all eating the same McBurgers and all shooting the same (digital) camera. > Oh yes, it'll be a Canon guys, don't kid yourself otherwise. the

Re: Ilford in trouble?

Hi, Tuesday, August 24, 2004, 3:22:23 PM, Steve wrote: > Chris Stoddart wrote: >> Now the BBC gets in on the act: >> >> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/3591360.stm >> >> Chris > My crystal ball says that Ilford sells the business as a going concern, > the new owners make big layo

RE: Re-assemling SMC-A 2.8/28mm

Thanks Alan and Rob. How do I remove the front filter retaining ring? Jens Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Alan Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 24. august 2004 10:02 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: RE: Re-assemling SMC-A 2.

Re: Whack is BAD! (Was RE-Lens damage question)

No, Don, you need a 6 pound sledge. WHACK! New camera! It's a one to one ratio. GRIN! -- Don Sanderson wrote: PLEASE, see my original reply. I said "TAP", not "WHACK"! The brass hammer I use has a head that weighs a whopping 1 ounce! tap not whack tap not whack Don ;-) -Original Message- F

Re: New Pentax Cameras

The S50 is a standard P&S digital. The S5 is the minature (Altoid tin size) pocket camera. Or is it the other way around? -- Keith Whaley wrote: BTW, the other new release by Pentax is the Optio S50. Now, in _simple_ terms, what is the difference between the S5 and the S50? Or, for that matter, t

Re: Pentax at the Olympics

Hi, >> Well, we now know why it takes 25,000 shots to cover >> a football game. Set up 200 >> cameras and hit the remote control when something is >> somewhere in front of them. >> The crap ratio must be enormous. About like 200 >> monkeys with 200 cameras. > Do you think they're shooting b&w?

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

Unless you are doing some kind of consummer photography (weddings, portraits, events) you problably do not even have to worry about prints. But there is no doubt that getting into digital professionally is still every bit as expensive as it was doing so with film. -- Shel Belinkoff wrote: Of c

Re: Pentax at the Olympics

Hi, Tuesday, August 24, 2004, 11:43:19 AM, Keith wrote: > That's incredible! I guess I've never spent any tiime around the > "photographer's corner" at an event like this, but I'm almost speechless! > I've never seen so much long gla$$ in one place, ever! > That "keeper" in the yellow hat must h

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

Aah..? Now I understand the bitterness. Even in fine art photography B&W is nearly dead, has been for two decades. Much of that work is still done with film, but not in 135 or even 120, you need 4x5 or larger. The little papers went digital before the big ones did. To them not having to pay a d

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

Sure, but - and speaking specifically wrt Frank (and maybe he should speak for himself) - it's a lot of expense and work that may not be possible at this time. Frank's not been scanning (AFAIK), seems to eschew getting too deep into the technical aspects of film photography, and, I suppose, would

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

I like the idea of a camera that will take an optional digital back, as is the case with some med format bodies. I'll soon be looking at a Hasselblad, which seems to offer the best of film and digital. BTW, for those who care, Hasselblad and Imacon have merged. Imacon makes scanners and digital

FS: PZ-1p, FA 28-70, AF500 FTZ

OK, I've made a fairly significant purchase (not an *ist D, though -- it's a mini DV camcorder) and I need to sell a few items. PZ-1p, EX+ condition, includes grip strap, extra battery, everready case, instruction manual, neckstrap, body cap, etc. Beautiful condition and works beautifully. $325

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, frank theriault wrote: > Can't afford it. For what I'd get for my film stuff, > I'd not be able to afford the DSLR and peripheral > equipment, plus the computer and peripheral upgrades > I'd need. I think someone here said to expect to > spend at least what you spent on your

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

That's true. It does all depend on what you want from photography. Shooting film is still a great hobby, and it always will be. But Frank seemed to be saying that he had hoped to turn photography into a money-making proposition. For that to happen, he'd have to make the leap to digital. In terms

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

I like the idea of a camera that will take an optional digital back, as is the case with some med format bodies. I'll soon be looking at a Hasselblad, which seems to offer the best of film and digital. BTW, for those who care, Hasselblad and Imacon have merged. Imacon makes scanners and digital

Re: black and white

On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, frank theriault wrote: > I've always liked the French term for "reversal" > films: Diapositif. In Swedish we usually call it "dia" but "diapositiv" is understood too. anders - http://anders.hultman.nu/ med dagens bild och allt!

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

Of course, that would require learning a bunch of technical stuff ... might be daunting at first. And then there's the computer upgrade, learning PS, getting the results printed For some making the transition to digital may be quite an expensive and time consuming undertaking. That would re

Re: black and white

Well, maybe some more tech knowledge is needed here. Reversal is a very accurate description of what goes on. However, I think I will let the neo-Luddites look it up for themselves this time. -- frank theriault wrote: --- John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Not to mention 'reversal' film

Re: New Pentax Cameras

--- Keith Whaley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Now, in _simple_ terms, what is the difference > between the S5 and the S50? > Or, for that matter, the S4 and the S40? > I don't want the specifications, I can go to > dpreview for that, but a few > sentence description of how they differ. Appare

It's over (was Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers)

Some history keeps coming back to mind. I've been in computers for a long time now. Since the 70s. In the 80s we were selling daisy wheel printers. Qume Sprint 5, iirc. Then along came 24-pin dot matrix. "Near letter quality" they called it. Our response was derisive -- "That's an apology," w

Re: Ilford in trouble?

Gonna throw my screw into this by saying i hope it sticks around for a while. I;m activly going out and searching for (used mined you) an enlarger that can handle 6x7 and 35mm(i have a few in mind,i'll post a what do you think thread later).Hope to look at them whilst on vacation next week. I s

Re: New Pentax Cameras

BTW, the other new release by Pentax is the Optio S50. Now, in _simple_ terms, what is the difference between the S5 and the S50? Or, for that matter, the S4 and the S40? I don't want the specifications, I can go to dpreview for that, but a few sentence description of how they differ. Pentax sure

Re: Ilford in trouble?

> >> It's not the digi-snappers who will kill film, it is >> the companies >> pushing it down our throats. In order to receive, >> someone has to give... > >Is it that simple? [excellent rant snipped] No - actually for the P+S brigade, digital is *cool* and 'what, you're still using *film* ??'

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

--- Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So, Frank, if you wanna be a "photographer," maybe > you should dump the film > cams and buy a DSLR. Can't afford it. For what I'd get for my film stuff, I'd not be able to afford the DSLR and peripheral equipment, plus the computer and peripheral

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

--- Caveman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Frank wrote: > > >>That's all film will get ya these days. > > To be more precise: That's all 35mm format film will > get ya these days. > I did qualify in my earlier post on that thread (the one Paul replied to) that there are still some professiona

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

Dumping the film cameras and buying a DSLR is probably not such a bad idea. I sold almost all my screw mount Pentaxes and a couple of K lenses to finance the *istD, battery grip, flash cards, and one ultra-wide lens. I was just starting to get heavily involved in stock, and I could see it was i

Whack is BAD! (Was RE-Lens damage question)

PLEASE, see my original reply. I said "TAP", not "WHACK"! The brass hammer I use has a head that weighs a whopping 1 ounce! tap not whack tap not whack Don ;-) > -Original Message- > From: Mick Maguire [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2004 9:08 AM > To: [EMAIL PR

Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers

Frank wrote: That's all film will get ya these days. To be more precise: That's all 35mm format film will get ya these days.

Re: AF problems with *ISTD!

I'm not so sure that the *istD is that bad vs the competion, it's sure slower than the Pz-20 but it does focus accurately, so long as nothing moves! --- Sylwester Pietrzyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 24.08.04 17:31: > > > What's the EV number relating to the light

Re: Ilford in trouble?

On 24/8/04, Mick Maguire, discombobulated, unleashed: >>the digi-snappers are going to kill real photography. It's not the digi-snappers who will kill film, it is the companies pushing it down our throats. In order to receive, someone has to give... Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) |

Re: Ilford in trouble?

On 24/8/04, Caveman, discombobulated, unleashed: >Aren't we all using Windows Er, no. D'OH! Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _

Re: Any Epson 2200 users out there?

see if this is any help http://www.torphoto.net/proofing.htm http://www.torphoto.net/printflow.htm also for more indepth infor www.drycreekphoto.com Ethan is the 2200 guru! --- Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I just got my Epson 2200 set up. What an ordeal! I > ordered a refurb from

Re: two more!

graywolf wrote: Still scheduled to be shown at Photokina and available in November as far as I have heard. Said to be smaller than the current camera. Uses SD cards instead of CF. Does it have a built-in RIAA approved video/Mp3 player or what ?

Re: Slow list, or is it me?

Ah, thanks Jostein - was starting to worry for a moment. A. On 24/8/04 12:54 pm, "Jostein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Nor has there been any response to the below, despite four copies to the list. > > Strange indeed. > > LOL! > > Jostein > > Antonio resent this message for the th

Re: Any Epson 2200 users out there?

"Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >A custom profile from these guys might save you a lot of time, effort, expense >and heartache in the long run: > >http://www.drycreekphoto.com/Learn/profiles.htm Thanks, I've been looking through that web site already. I'm pretty close to optimum for my

RE: Pro Lab recommendations?

I would recommend doing the C-41 negs yourself and scanning and printing digitally at home. Much faster, cheaper, and most of all better quality control. C-41 negs are easy to develop and you don't need a darkroom. JCO -Original Message- From: Mick Maguire [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent:

Re: POW: Woodward Dream Cruise

On Mon, 23 Aug 2004, Paul Stenquist wrote: > http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2633547 I really like this (pity I cannot see more or preferably less of the car in front). Well seen. Kostas

New Pentax Cameras

Optio X: Optio S5i: Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _

Re: two more!

Still scheduled to be shown at Photokina and available in November as far as I have heard. Said to be smaller than the current camera. Uses SD cards instead of CF. It will still have a real pentaprism, high magnification viewfinder, and the stainless steel erector set chassis. I have a feeling t

RE: AF problems with *ISTD!

I can't answer the question exactly, but in "the old days" light was measured in "candela", which is the light from one candle: Definition: The candela is the luminous intensity, in a given direction, of a source that emits monochromatic radiation of frequency 540 × 1012 hertz and that has a radia

Re: Ilford in trouble?

Well, I for one, do not think that Ilford is long term viable. First and formost everyone here seems to think they are a small niche market company. Not so! They produce 60% of the B&W matterials sold worldwide. Think about that. Kodak probably produces 20%, Agfa 10%, and everyone else together

Re: AF problems with *ISTD!

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 24.08.04 17:31: > What's the EV number relating to the light of a single candle? > I ask because that was the light source on this image autofocused and taken by > my Optio 550 (I remember it was autofocus 'cause there's No Way I could have > manually focused it; too dar

Re: AF problems with *ISTD!

Mr Robb posted: > Pentax sez the istD AF sensitivity goes to EV 0, while the MZ-S goes > to -1. > Thats a full stop less sensitivity on the istD, which will certainly > be noticable. > OTOH, digital cameras are next to useless below EV 1 (my situation, > YMMV). What's the EV number relating to the

Re: Any Epson 2200 users out there?

On 24 Aug 2004 at 10:54, Mark Roberts wrote: > Now I'm trying to get it set up so I can make good prints. I've > installed the latest drivers and paper profiles but I'm still closing in > on the ideal setup. I'll probably go through a lot of ink and paper > before I get there. I know I did with th

Re: two more!

Christian wrote on 24.08.04 17:15: > http://www.dpreview.com > > ok no new SLRs but at least they are producing something! More and more news from Pentax! Something is telling me we will see "Baby D" sooner than we thought :-) -- Best Regards Sylwek

  1   2   >