On 8 Dec 2004 at 8:47, Jon Glass wrote:
Question, though. Is the bokeh digitally enhanced?
Hi Jon,
Absolutely as found, sharpened if anything, the shooting distance was probably
10-15m, so at a shooting distance of 12.5m @ f7.1 DOF is only around 50cm.
Perspective appears compressed too of
On 8 Dec 2004 at 8:47, Jon Glass wrote:
Question, though. Is the bokeh digitally enhanced?
so at a shooting distance of 12.5m @ f7.1 DOF is only around 50cm.
Make that f5.0
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Not sure what this is good for, but just felt like playing a bit in
Photoshop. Here's a comparison between the original (well, BW)
image from the istD and a version with grain added:
http://www.jbuhler.com/blog/archives/0142.html
j
--
Juan Buhler
http://www.jbuhler.com
blog at
C Not to enable infinity focus, rather to enable the lenses to be attached
C - there is physically no room for the lever inside the throat of the EOS
C body. The lenses are used in stop-down mode in both manual and AP.
Bwah! Instead of modifying lenses, you should have drilled enough
space in
On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 16:40:49 -0800 (PST), Alan Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You may visit Rob's site to see what it looks like. I
don't have the MX anymore so I cannot how you.
Can someone remind us of the URL? Thanks!
Hi Rob,
That's an awesome shot you've got there. I love the bokeh and the way
the girl just stands out of the picture. Well done!
Patrick
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well I might as well join the pack, an attempt at a mono image from a really
severely rear lit *ist D image using a hue
I've been using NiMH batteries in my MZ-S since I got the BG-10 in
February 2002, with no ill effects. I leave the battery selector on
Alkaline.
I also use them in the AF-360 flash, again without troubles. I don't
know about older flashes.
The only problem with these batteries is that their
At 02:52 2004.12.08 -0500, you wrote:
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 08:34:50 +0100
From: Thibs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Scanner: which one?
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I'm looking for a
it's not brilliant if it doesn't run synched with the slides and that is
what he wants. that is much harder to do.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 1:21 AM
Subject: RE: Need software suggestion for
I concur. Well done, Rob!
Don Sanderson wrote:
You could have spent two hours posing people and not
got a shot that interesting.
Amazing, hard to take your eyes off of it.
Great shot.
Don
-Original Message-
From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 7:35
frank theriault wrote:
On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 18:54:26 -0800, Juan Buhler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What do the purists in the list think about these idea of fake grain?
1) That's a loaded question (that I'll have to consider before I answer), and,
2) Who, on this list, is a purist - come to think
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 7 Dec 2004 at 21:52, frank theriault wrote:
Well, it sure doesn't look like real film. Those two OOF folks in
the foreground have an odd look to them - not natural to my eye, but
likely what I mean by not natural is it doesn't look like what I'm
used to.
LOL, I'm
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 8 Dec 2004 at 8:47, Jon Glass wrote:
Question, though. Is the bokeh digitally enhanced?
Hi Jon,
Absolutely as found, sharpened if anything, the shooting distance was probably
10-15m, so at a shooting distance of 12.5m @ f7.1 DOF is only around 50cm.
Now, that's
Thibs wrote on 08.12.04 8:34:
I'm looking for a scanner.
I'm very budget limited so it'll probably be flatbed one.
I know Canon do affordable (almost) flatbeds with film back.
Of course it is nowhere near a film scanner but I do not expect it to.
I absolutely need a normal scanner. Film
Thibs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm looking for a scanner.
I'm very budget limited so it'll probably be flatbed one.
I know Canon do affordable (almost) flatbeds with film back.
Of course it is nowhere near a film scanner but I do not expect it to.
I absolutely need a normal scanner. Film one may
Hi Juan ...
I'm not sure if I'm a purist but I don't care for anything fake. For
years we've worked with grain in film, trying to reduce or eliminate it as
much as possible, or, at times, trying to enhance it, all for creative
reasons. Now we have digital, which has it's own type of grain, and
Frank said:
I like the composition, but as someone's already noted, it's a bit
oversaturated for my taste. Nature should look, er, natural. vbg
Now, I know I said that #1 looked a bit flat, but this is way way too
far in the other direction vbg.
8400F is about US$140 at BHPHOTO.. in NYC. Anyone using the
more expensive 9950F?
Otis Wright
Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote:
Thibs wrote on 08.12.04 8:34:
I'm looking for a scanner.
I'm very budget limited so it'll probably be flatbed one.
I know Canon do affordable (almost) flatbeds
Check this out -
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/digitalphotography/photostory/default.mspx
I think it will do what you want, will also do pans and zooms and I think
it's free if you are using Win XP - if not, it's still in the neighborhood
of 30USD.
-P
- Original Message
My SO is Jewish - best of both worlds - we get to celebrate both Hanukkah
and Christmas.
-P
- Original Message -
From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: PDML [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 6:08 PM
Subject: Happy Hannukah
Okay, it's after sundown here, so I
Shel
To add another perspective, one could argue that to add fake film grain in
PS is the same as doing anything in a darkroom. You are merely trying to add
to the artistry of the picture.
I'll agree with you about the grittiness of film photography but I would
have to add that a big part of
I haven't used this but it's been highly recommended.
http://www.wnsoft.com/
Regards
Gareth Callaway
Gateway
905-773-1186
www.recruiter4u.net
-Original Message-
From: Paul Sorenson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 8:14 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re:
Thanks to all who offered suggestions.
Shel
So, a guy has a Takumar lens for sale on eekBay.
I ask him whether it's Auto, Super or SMC.
He responds SMC, great.
But now ALL the buyers can see this on the auction page.
The price'll go way up.
Don doesn't get his super, devious, informed, clever, good deal.
Poor, poor me. :-(
Has anyone
Hi Frank,
Thanks for the nice comments.
Patrick
frank theriault wrote:
On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 00:27:46 +0100, Patrick Genovese
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Taken near Hasan's Cave on Malta's Southern coast one very very cold
Sunday (late) afteroon. Equipment MZ-S + FA50 1.4 + Tripod - Media Fuji
An exhibition of rarely seen photos of US presidents has opened in
Washington, revealing unguarded moments from their spells at the peak of
power.
The National Archives says it has uncovered photographs that capture
not just the events of public life, but also the human qualities of our
leaders.
On Wed, 8 Dec 2004, Don Sanderson wrote:
Has anyone discovered a super, devious, informed, clever way
around this?
Ebay wants the price to go up. You don't have a prayer. I am just
getting out of the ebay habit after I sell a gazillion of small items
left (filters, an Olympus AD2 and other
Really nice shot, Rob.
It could be included in a fashion magazine without
problems.
Regards
Albano
--- Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8 Dec 2004 at 7:28, Jens Bladt wrote:
Very nice shot - and editing. Perhaps just a bit
overdone... but still
brilliant, IMO.
Hi Jens,
Just be thankful that the answer to your question isn't reflected in
the search results for 'smc takumar'
Or is it?
On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 14:11:29 + (GMT), Kostas Kavoussanakis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 8 Dec 2004, Don Sanderson wrote:
Has anyone discovered a super, devious,
Yes, the downside is that other bidders may get key information
that only you had in the past. BUT, there is also a great upside
to this. If the seller gives you false answers, they are in the
listing and gives you much better grounds to get a refund if
you end up getting something less than what
On top of that, it won't burn a dvd and play on a regular dvd player, only on a
computer.
Bruce
Wednesday, December 8, 2004, 3:19:22 AM, you wrote:
HC it's not brilliant if it doesn't run synched with the slides and that is
HC what he wants. that is much harder to do.
HC Herb
HC -
I tried a shot with lens cap on at 1/15 and I could easily find 10 hot pixels.
There are more but only when I go play with the
levels in Photoshop. I am returning the camera to the store. BTW. I think
that every camera has hot pixels but they are somehow
mapped out, it would be cool to see
Can we just call it what it is - stealing. If I make something I am entitled
to charge whatever I want. You, on the other hand, are entitled not to buy
it. It is not a function of what time and money went into the creation of
the object. It is a function of what I want to charge for it.
If
On Wed, 8 Dec 2004, David Zaninovic wrote:
I tried a shot with lens cap on at 1/15 and I could easily find 10
hot pixels. There are more but only when I go play with the levels
in Photoshop. I am returning the camera to the store.
If you search in the archive you may find prior discussions
Saw a National Geographic lying around my folks' place this morning, and
seeing France on the cover I thought it might give me some useful tips for
my little trip there end of the month. I picked it up, and the first thing I
noticed on the page it flipped open to, a great big PENTAX blares out at
Not bad at all.
AWB seemed to get this one ok,and the noise is not very noticable.
Neat Image you say, eh.:-)
Dave
I the other night I was casually showing my
friend Dave, a 300D owner, the *ist
D output at ISO3200. Dave liked the pic so here it is, the
Nice shot Paul.
Shadows do not hide a lot of detail,and the composition is great. I love how
the old and
new blend
together.Vertical lines are very pleasing.
Dave
Here's another shot from my Chicago
walkaround of a couple of weeks
ago. After the Wrigley
Nice light and textures on the face; this photo has some humanity in it ;)
On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 10:54:38 US/Eastern, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not bad at all.
AWB seemed to get this one ok,and the noise is not very noticable.
Neat Image you say, eh.:-)
Dave
The argument can be made that if you work for a crook, you are a crook. It is a
legal priciple called accessory to the act. Many of us manage to justify our
conflicting views with such rationalizations as yours.
The above is not intended as an attack, but to illustrate out how we can argue
one
John Francis wrote:
mike wilson mused:
Not sure I agree with you (I don't think the photographer analogy stands
up at all) and I still don't understand why music CDs are so much
cheaper, given the development costs are similar.
You're confusing unit manufacturing cost with product development
No, no, a purist drinks his coffee black, or maybe with a we dram o' wiskey in
it. Milk, cream, sugar, those are for infants. GRIN
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
Idiot Proof == Expert Proof
---
Jon Glass wrote:
On Dec 8, 2004, at 4:04 AM, frank theriault
But Cotty, we didn't ask for a character assessment, (I'm sorry I just
couldn't resist, Bad!, Bad!).
Cotty wrote:
On 7/12/04, Steve Pearson, discombobulated, unleashed:
Sorry, for a PC.
Hey Steve, *I'm* sorry ;-)
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|
Nice shot, I recognized the bottom, (of the camera not the photographer
damnit), I wish you'd made it a trivia question, it was one I could have
gotten...
Rob Studdert wrote:
Well I might as well join the pack, an attempt at a mono image from a really
severely rear lit *ist D image using a
Thanks Dave. My wife and daughter were growing impatient with me. It took a
while to find a camera position where the verticals aligned.
Nice shot Paul.
Shadows do not hide a lot of detail,and the composition is great. I love how
the
old and
new blend
together.Vertical lines are very
Oh, don't do that, Dave. By posting pics that may have problems you'll
have a chance to learn from the comments and experiences of others. Your
digi work is OK
Shel
[Original Message]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I really have a problem working with scanned images.
Probably just going
I will do a test using Dead Pixel Test software and compare the results with
PDML members. It will probably find even more than 10
hot pixels. :)
If you search in the archive you may find prior discussions about hot
pixels. I seem to recall 10 is not bad, but as I don't have a -D I may
not
I like the Pilleated, the other isn't quite as good with that out of
focus area in the forground.
Francis wrote:
Hi all,
I just got back this month's film and thought I might post a few that
I've scanned.
Pilleated wood pecker
http://www.photosynth.ca/photo/f/pilleated.jpg
I had been chasing
Pleasing.
Sure doesn't look like light is a fluorescent
reflection. Having a flare for the obvious, IMO, the
warm desk top bounce makes it a success.
Jack
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not bad at all.
AWB seemed to get this one ok,and the noise is not
very noticable.
Neat Image you say,
Absolutely great shot and composition Rob. You MUST print this (and
send me a copy)! Add the A200 2.8 to my list of must have lenses too.
I love the way she is the only person/object in the focus plane (except
for the shoulder of someone on the left, which could use a cropping). I
think you
Mark Roberts wrote:
Yeah but it was worth waiting for that fine church-brewed ale!
Is that the Church Brew Works in Pittsburgh? Good beer. But I did like
the one that used to be in the Strip district better, what was the name?
The Strip Brewery? Love that Love Stout #9 never been a finer
I've been thinking about some questions related to the digital grain thread
to which Shel and Juan have been contributing. In particular, I've been
working with some Photoshop techniques that yield results similar to Lith
printing. The techniques give shadow and dark areas a gritty, rich look
If I want grain I shoot Tri-X.
Juan Buhler wrote:
On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 18:38:26 -0800, Shel Belinkoff
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fine work, Rob. Good to see what can be done with BW conversions and the
RAW format. Between you and Juan, I may be moving closer to a DSLR all the
faster. I do miss
frank theriault wrote:
On Tue, 07 Dec 2004 12:52:48 -0500, Graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
L
Despite his one-liners here, Cotty is quite a decent person though those who
have not actually met him may not believe that (g).
...and some of us who have met him may not believe it, either...
frank theriault wrote:
On Mon, 6 Dec 2004 23:03:39 -0800, Juan Buhler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A few days ago I inquired about a 39mm to 42mm adapter because I
wanted to try an old Industar Zenit lens in the ist D. Well, Shel
loaned me his, so behold this anachronism, the black tape special
Hi everybody on the PDML,
I have been silent for a while. Wich does not mean that I am out of
Pentax. On the contrary: After considering the decision for a whole
year, in August I bought an *ist D - which I enjoy!
Now, however, I am back with a question concerning the Pentax K8.4/f2.8
Fish-Eye
Sure would like to see results of your digital lith efforts.
Rgds
Patrick
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been thinking about some questions related to the digital grain
thread to which Shel and Juan have been contributing. In particular,
I've been working with some Photoshop techniques that
I like it a lot but the yellow light in the eyes bothered me a bit.
Here is a version with the whites de saturated about 50%.
http://members.shaw.ca/hargravep/2558222-md2.jpg
A subtle change but the eyes are so important in a portrait.
Powell
I the other night I was casually showing my
friend
Jon Glass wrote:
On Dec 8, 2004, at 4:04 AM, frank theriault wrote:
2) Who, on this list, is a purist - come to think of it, what's a
purist? vbg
A purist is a person who drinks their coffee with only cream and
sugar. ;-D
I thought a purist drank his coffee black. (A purist also uses the
Quoting Peter J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
If I want grain I shoot Tri-X.
Hypothetically, if I were to *want* grain, I'd probably shoot TMZ.
I can't, personally, think of a case in which I'd want grain. I see its
presence in certain images as a necessary tradeoff for getting the images at
all
Here's a response I got from a fella named Jim:
quote
i) Level a complaint to eBay directly and send one to their suggestion box,
as
others have.
ii) Your questions cannot be edited by the seller so I go with something
like
If it's alright, I'd prefer my questions not be posted. Thanks.
Make
Quoting Arnold Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi everybody on the PDML,
I have been silent for a while. Wich does not mean that I am out of
Pentax. On the contrary: After considering the decision for a whole
year, in August I bought an *ist D - which I enjoy!
dada-dum-dum-dum, another one buys
Quoting Peter J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Jon Glass wrote:
A purist is a person who drinks their coffee with only cream and
sugar. ;-D
I thought a purist drank his coffee black. (A purist also uses the
proper non-gender specific pronoun in English as well).
LOL!!!
ERNR
(language
mike wilson mused:
John Francis wrote:
mike wilson mused:
Not sure I agree with you (I don't think the photographer analogy stands
up at all) and I still don't understand why music CDs are so much
cheaper, given the development costs are similar.
You're confusing unit
Thanks for that Larry.
I'm staying out of this because I'm a reseller of software.
People other than the big corps. stand to lose to pirates.
I think folks forget about us little guys trying to make
a living whe they make moral judgments about piracy.
Don
-Original Message-
From:
Hi Gang,
I've been working to eliminate spots, scratches, and imperfections on an
old BW negative that has not been treated well. Here's a sample section:
http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/sample.jpg (50K file size)
Thus far I've been fiddling with this using the clone tool, healing brush,
On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 12:41:05 -0500, Peter J. Alling
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You can get almost the same effect with a chrome 43ltd on it. (Sorry no
pictures since I don't have an *ist-D)
Ah, but the effect in your bank account is very different in that case!
:-)
--
Juan Buhler
Larry Levy wrote:
Just because you want something, doesn't mean you're entitled to have it.
That includes outrageous retail prices.
mike
On top of that, it won't burn a dvd and play on a regular dvd player, only
on a
computer.
Bruce
Most DVD players will not play JPEG picture CD's Burned on DVD, only on
CD. Don't ask me why.
Butch
Going on 9 weeks and 3 phone calls.
Still no 200 bucks!
Did anyone else get theirs yet?
Don
And that's why I left and consulted to the law firm that was representing
the company from whom they lifted code. It was a really thin line to walk
while still honoring my original non-disclosure agreement with my former
employer. This helped to stop the activity as they went Chapter 7 leaving
The instructions that came with it said to position it about half-way
on. No explanation, or course.
What is the difference if I push it on all the way?
Thanks,
Joe
I didn't get mine. I was going to ask here as well. I was very careful to
complete all the forms and include all the bar codes. I hope we don't get
stiffed.
Paul
Going on 9 weeks and 3 phone calls.
Still no 200 bucks!
Did anyone else get theirs yet?
Don
Wow indeed. Shel, I've had bad scans come out looking like this (in part
-- not the whole image). I don't know of shortcuts for this kind of
situation. It can take hours of retouching.
I would say try a scanner with Digital ICE, but I'm not sure that works
with BW film. I could be wrong.
On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 04:51:19 -0800, Shel Belinkoff
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Juan ...
I'm not sure if I'm a purist but I don't care for anything fake.
I make my living by making fake images. I suppose my skin is thicker
in this regard because of that. I wouldn't do things like deleting
File this one under missed it by ~that~ much (as Agent 86 used to say):
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2941715
I think (with the greatest of humility) that were it not for the
couple (yes, there are two of them - count the feet) almost dead
centre, this would have been a real
I doubt the little flash is not power controlled. I have the PZ-1 and the same
flash and SCA adapter as you have. The filters for the small flash are for
controlling the ratio of light between the main flash and the little one, it
makes contrast control not necessary, as it is done by the Metz
On 7/12/04, frank theriault, discombobulated, unleashed:
2) Who, on this list, is a purist - come to think of it, what's a
purist? vbg
I'm a digital purist.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
On 8/12/04, Peter J. Alling, discombobulated, unleashed:
But Cotty, we didn't ask for a character assessment, (I'm sorry I just
couldn't resist, Bad!, Bad!).
You don;t know *how* bad.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
On 8 Dec 2004 at 10:54, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not bad at all.
AWB seemed to get this one ok,and the noise is not very noticable.
Neat Image you say, eh.:-)
Hi Dave,
Thanks for the comment. That post was from the 27th July, you are behind on
your PAW comments, and I thought I was bad :-)
On 7/12/04, Juan Buhler, discombobulated, unleashed:
Uh, I'm dating a jewish girl, so... thanks.
You Shaygetz !!
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
Yes I did get mine for a purchase made in late May. Seems like it only took
6-8 weeks.
- Original Message -
From: Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: PDML [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 12:24 PM
Subject: ist D/DA 16-45 rebate, did anyone get theirs?
Going on 9
Hi Joe ...
It's not the scan that's bad, the neg has suffered from poor processing and
drying in a dusty environment (one of my first rolls), crummy, scratchy
negative sleeves, poor storage, and the ravages of time.
ICE doesn't work on conventional BW. My scanner has ICE, BTW ...
Shel
On 8/12/04, Rob Studdert, discombobulated, unleashed:
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~audiob/temp/IMGP8928.jpg
NICE grab Studdsy.
That a macro lens she's using? ;-)
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
Only your children will be Jewish, Juan ... get to work if you want to join
the brotherhood. LOL
Shel
On 7/12/04, Juan Buhler, discombobulated, unleashed:
Uh, I'm dating a jewish girl, so... thanks.
No, you're a puerile digitalist
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm a digital purist.
On 7/12/04, Peter J. Alling, discombobulated, unleashed:
Cotty takes a hacksaw to the K mount and forceably grafts the alien eos
mount to them...
Peter would make an excellent headline-writer for a UK tabloid newspaper
or The National Enquirer.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) |
Hi,
Wednesday, December 8, 2004, 6:30:33 PM, Larry wrote:
And that's why I left and consulted to the law firm that was representing
the company from whom they lifted code. It was a really thin line to walk
while still honoring my original non-disclosure agreement with my former
employer.
On 7/12/04, frank theriault, discombobulated, unleashed:
Despite his one-liners here, Cotty is quite a decent person though
those who
have not actually met him may not believe that (g).
...and some of us who have met him may not believe it, either...
LOL. Hey, you talkin about me, you lookin
On Tue, 07 Dec 2004 12:42:47 -0500, Graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Amateur camera = low priced, cheap junk.
Pro camera = high priced, cheap junk in black finish.
GRIN!
No one's made a black tape joke yet...
g
-frank
--
Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
On 8/12/04, Frantisek, discombobulated, unleashed:
Bwah! Instead of modifying lenses, you should have drilled enough
space in your 1DmkII body!
the thought did cross my mind.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
On 8/12/04, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed:
No, you're a puerile digitalist
yeah, I'll go along with that.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
15 hot pixels at 1/6 seconds ! I hate this digital technology, should of
stayed with film, there was no bad pixels there, and I
bet it was sharper and with more detail. :)
1/6 seconds:
[DeadPixelText]
NumBadPixels=15
0=Hot,2743,212,93
1=Hot,2742,213,95
2=Hot,2743,213,156
3=Hot,2744,213,66
On 8 Dec 2004 at 9:43, Powell Hargrave wrote:
I like it a lot but the yellow light in the eyes bothered me a bit.
Here is a version with the whites de saturated about 50%.
http://members.shaw.ca/hargravep/2558222-md2.jpg
A subtle change but the eyes are so important in a portrait.
Thanks
I'm looking for a decent and hopefully not ridiculously expensive flash
bracket to mount may af-500FTZ off camera to end up with a handle mount
type setup like the 400t. I'm interested in doing contrast control
flash with the 500ftz and the built in flash on the MZ-S.
I'v already got the
On 8 Dec 2004 at 14:36, David Zaninovic wrote:
15 hot pixels at 1/6 seconds ! I hate this digital technology, should of
stayed with film, there was no bad pixels there, and I bet it was sharper and
with more detail. :)
1/6 seconds:
[DeadPixelText]
NumBadPixels=15
Har, don't get
Monday a 20in x 30in print of this
http://www.skofteland.net/displayimage.php?album=2pos=0
arrived on my doorstep from Mpix (www.mpix.com)
The detail is simply amazing. You can see the stars and stripes in the
flags that are flying on top of the bridge.
I bought the D to replace my 35mm gear.
On 8 Dec 2004 at 12:02, David Zaninovic wrote:
I will do a test using Dead Pixel Test software and compare the results with
PDML members. It will probably find even more than 10 hot pixels. :)
Extracts from my post of 10th Feb 2004 titled *ist D sensor noise survey
follow:
I'm interested in
I will just blow it out with canned air. :)
How many hot pixels did you have when the camera was new ?
Har, don't get frantic, it's much better than mine and I've made over 9000
shots where it hasn't become a problem, just wait until you get dust on the
sensor :-(
Well, anyway mixing the contrast control with the both 40MZ lamps seems
bad idea right?
Will disable one of those. Dunno whoch one for now. The built-in does
only 35mm (Z1) but does not lower the power of the big lamp of the
40MZ... will see.
-
Thibouille
Frits Wüthrich a
On 8 Dec 2004 at 12:04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
dada-dum-dum-dum, another one buys the D*ist
dada-dum-dum-dum, another one buys the D*ist ...
and another one down, and another one down
Another one buys the D*ist
Hey, gonna get you too,
Another one buys the D*ist ...
LOL, I've got a
1 - 100 of 227 matches
Mail list logo
