That's true, Bob.
But you are missing out good old techniques to increase contrast by
underexsposure/overdevelopment and decreasing contrast by
overexsposure/underdevelopment.
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Bob W
On 20/5/05, Rob Studdert, discombobulated, unleashed:
There are plenty of times that it's saved my bacon photographically, I
thought
about selling mine after I purchased my 77LTD but I've found them
complementary. It's one of Pentax's all time best lenses (optically it
beat the
pants off my
Yes - those things are important for people who want to go on to become good
printers. But you have to be able to walk before you can run.
--
Cheers,
Bob
That's true, Bob.
But you are missing out good old techniques to increase
contrast by underexsposure/overdevelopment and decreasing
I don't agree. It has nothing to do with printing. We are talking about
exposure here - not about how to resque faulty exposures.
First of all, to be a good printer (I belive, I used to be one - before the
digital revolution) it's prefered to start out with the best possible
negative (or digital
For what it's worth - I just found this nice website about the zone system:
http://www.zone2tone.co.uk/
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Bob W [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 20. maj 2005 08:33
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
On Thu, 19 May 2005 13:32:06 -0400, P. J. Alling wrote:
I understand the issues with CF card longevity. A secure erase say once
a week is unlikely to noticeably effect the life of my cards anyway.
I'm more likely to lose them before they wear out in any case. I'd
rather find a utility
From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/05/20 Fri AM 01:43:50 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: How to photograph animals in the dark?
On 19 May 2005 at 9:29, mike.wilson wrote:
It turns out that there is a commmon specie of bat around here that is
comparitively
Hello everyone,
I am looking for a piece of software for my 82 year old father to use.
He has a 4 megapixel Sony Cybershot and is dropping these photos into
word documents (and sending the occasional email) at a far higher
resolution than is required. I am trying to find a simple program (for
#20 in this years series is now available for viewing:
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/20.htm
Comments and critique always appreciated.
enjoy,
Godfrey
On Fri, 20 May 2005, Rob Studdert wrote:
On 19 May 2005 at 15:31, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
I don't know about Cotty, but I find the 85/1.4 to be rather large and
heavy. On the other hand, the M85/2 is a petite and tidy lens, with
beautiful imaging qualities.
There are plenty of times
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
I certainly agree with the concept of understanding one's tools to use
the tools best. But, by analogy, does a user of a computer trying to
write a novel using Frame Maker need to know all the specifics of the
OpenBoot firmware design necessary to bootstrap the hardware
On May 20, 2005, at 1:36 AM, Doug Brewer wrote:
2. When you are about to release the shutter, ask yourself if you
want to look at this photo later.
I photographed a sunrise about a month ago and I'd made the
horrendous mistake of only having one roll of 120. 10 frames. For
something as
The full legend should read SMC PENTAX 1:2 85mm 1:2.8-4 100mm.
I guess it weared of.
They may have issued some of them without the 85mm mention as this
lens came out a bit afterwards.
I use it on the aforementioned lenses on film, and it makes a dandy
hood for the SMC-P FA 70-210mm on
Hi all,
My brother rang me a few weeks ago saying that he wanted to improve his
photography. He has a 7 MP Sony Cybershot and was finding that he was
running into the limits of the camera.
After much discussion he realised that he would probably need a new
camera and we proceeded to talk about
Hello Bob
It still has NOTHING AT ALL to do with printing. We are only talkning about
exposure here. Exposing and developing FILM. Not printing.
Many pictures will not be printed at all - that goes for slides and for
digtal images for the internet or the computer. They still have to be
Ann Sanfedele wrote:
That was what the guy at Photo tech told me - I'll
have to learn about
what the red channel is.
Simulating the filters in Photoshop is easier than carrying a bunch of
filters around, but you can only accurately simulate a limited range of
filter effects. For example, you
On May 20, 2005, at 10:05 AM, frank theriault wrote:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3378801
Not great art, but I think it's kind of fun.
Frank, it has a cat in it. That means it is art. A cat in BW is
fine art.
Cheers,
- Dave
http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
If it's plastic, and clip on, it looks like the hood for the SMC-Pentax
M 85mm f2.8 SMCP-M 100mm [Portrait] f2.8 SMC-P M 100mm f4 macro/dental.
Beware the plastic clips are really easy to break. It also seems that
part of the legend on the hood has been erased or obscured. The full
From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/05/20 Fri AM 09:35:28 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: RE: Understanding exposure? Recommendations?
Hello Bob
It still has NOTHING AT ALL to do with printing. We are only talkning about
exposure here. Exposing and developing FILM.
You can subtract shades of grey - when printing - but realy not add them.
If
they are gone (in a too hard neg.), they are really gone.
BTW - one of the reasons I like Pentax *ist D. The images are soft and not
over sharpened. This means I don't loose information before I even get to
see my
Leon,
Coming from a 7 MP / electronic viewfinder camera his choice is
logical. These kind of users are not going to choose a lower MP
camera based on bigger/clearer viewfinder and better build. Canon
knows where to aim with its rebels. Pentax doesn't stand a chance
outside its
From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/05/20 Fri AM 02:27:37 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: PAW: SnowBird 1
On 5/19/05, Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Check out -
http://mypeoplepc.com/members/kwaller/offwallphoto/id2.html
Taken late
I like the grainy oversaturated look and the deep shadows. Kind of
emphasizes the feeling or urban crowding that is suggested by the very
presence of bikes in the hallway. Good stuff.
Paul
On May 19, 2005, at 9:50 PM, frank theriault wrote:
As you can see (if you saw my PESO from earlier this
Jens, Bob ...
I've been reading the discussion between the both of you. You're both
right, one or the other more so depending on just what and how one wants to
learn about exposure, and how much involvement one wants in the process.
I've made my views on other aspects of the debate known, so I
But that one red channel is adjustable, so its infinitely variable.
What's more, one can adjust the tonality of the color original in other
ways -- shadow/highlight, curves, selective color, color replacement
etc. -- so almost any grayscale variation is possible.
Paul
On May 20, 2005, at 5:37
I think Shel's right in his contention that the art of exposure is
disappearing, but it's no less important. Even working in a strictly
digital world, an understanding of exposure its finer points will
separate truly good work from the merely adequate. With studio
situations involving
Paul Stenquist wrote:
But that one red channel is adjustable, so its infinitely variable.
What's more, one can adjust the tonality of the color original in other
ways -- shadow/highlight, curves, selective color, color replacement
etc. -- so almost any grayscale variation is possible.
Indeedy;
That's one of the nice aspects of PS ... the flexibility and variety that's
available. Unfortunately, because the program can be so daunting to those
who are new to it and unfamiliar with many darkroom techniques, it's often
underutilized. Even over on the User-to-User forum, where a lot of
On 5/20/05, David Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Frank, it has a cat in it. That means it is art. A cat in BW is
fine art.
I've always wondered what fine art is (as opposed to just art).
That's especially true WRT fine art photography.
I've also had big problems defining for myself,
LOL
All you guys are starting to sound like a bunch of old farts VBG
You mean to tell me that in your young and foolish days you were all
the safe conscientious drivers/riders that you are today?
BTW I agree completely. The older I get the more reckless stupid I
think young drivers are.
And
Well said, I couldn't agree more.
Dave S
On 5/20/05, Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
What is useful to the majority of users, and particularly to the
beginner and intermediate user, is not to overload them with too much
unneeded detail information and give them the general
On 5/20/05, Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh jeez, here we go again with the Norwegian Blue Monty Python
routine. :-)
What's that? Monty Python's Dead Parrot Sketch?
I don't believe I've ever heard that one. Anyone here know how it goes?
cheers,
frank
--
Sharpness is a
These PS cameras are amazing, aren't they -
I use a Nikon Coolpix 5700 at work the biggest complaint I have with it is
that when it is in the macro mode, while I can focus down to something like 2,
if I need aux light, the onboard flash cannot overcome the lens extension
consequently the
On 5/18/05, UncaMikey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So much for FOFU, I'll have to think of something else, larf!
In the meantime, here's a portrait. I am not objective about this one,
so I'd like to hear what others might have to say.
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3375603
Considering that most people don't have, or no longer
have, (such as myself) facilities to develop black
and white film, how do those of you that do feel about
trying out these techniques with C-41 BW film?
Of course you have no control over development times
but do you think it would be a
I took this about 3-4 months ago when I was checking out the Mitchell Canyon
area of Mt. Diablo for the upcoming NorCal PDML meet (we went elsewhere). The
CA hills are yellowish brown now, then they were verdant green.
I wasnt sure I would share this but this is a quintessential Marnie
shot.
On 5/20/05, Alin Flaider [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Leon,
Coming from a 7 MP / electronic viewfinder camera his choice is
logical. These kind of users are not going to choose a lower MP
camera based on bigger/clearer viewfinder and better build. Canon
knows where to aim with its
On Fri, 20 May 2005 19:23:34 +0800, David Savage wrote:
You mean to tell me that in your young and foolish days you were
all the safe conscientious drivers/riders that you are today?
For the most part, I was. Sure, I had my moments of vehicular
stupidity, but they were moments, they weren't
What you are in fact saying is that exposure doesn't matter! Because the
printing/editing can allways make up for bad negs or files.
Sounds alot like the way some people approach Photoshop.
Kenneth Waller
-Original Message-
From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: May 20, 2005 5:35 AM
Nice pic. A quick turn of the knobs in the shadow/highlight tool would
bring that sky under control. But I like it as shot.
Paul
On May 20, 2005, at 8:24 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I took this about 3-4 months ago when I was checking out the Mitchell
Canyon
area of Mt. Diablo for the upcoming
Came in to find this guy hanging around...
members.aol.com/rfsindg/Hanging.jpg
And they claim it is a squirrel proof feeder!
From a slide with the A400/5.6 MZ-S, handheld
Regards, Bob S.
On 5/20/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I took this about 3-4
months ago when I was checking out the Mitchell Canyon area of Mt. Diablo for
the upcoming NorCal PDML meet (we went elsewhere). The CA hills are yellowish
brown now, then they were verdant green. I wasn't sure I
On 5/19/05, David Zaninovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would not go back to film if it was free. :)
Excellent!
You can ship all your free film to me then g.
cheers,
frank
--
Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Speaking as a PDML Honorary Crusty Old Fart I have to
admit I drove like a complete maniac when younger.
Even dirt raced motorcycles (easy to prove with a quick
x-ray showing multiple fractures in multiple ribs).
My goal in life was to prove the needle on the speedometer
could really go that high.
On 5/19/05, Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm going to sorta agree. Since we received our new 750Z a few days
ago, I've been playing with it quite a bit. I've decided that color
film is no longer necessary. I mostly use color film for snapshots -
family gatherings, chasing my
On 5/20/05, Bob Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Came in to find this guy hanging around...
members.aol.com/rfsindg/Hanging.jpg
And they claim it is a squirrel proof feeder!
From a slide with the A400/5.6 MZ-S, handheld
Regards, Bob S.
Great grab, Bob!
Love the way the little
That's one of my favorite type of shots too Marnie.
I like it the way it is, it shows the contrast between the
bright sunny day and my favorite, the cool shade of the trail. ;-)
Very nicely done.
Don
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday,
I forgot to add that the title is great too.
One look at the pic and I find myself wanting to know
just what's around that next bend.
Don
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2005 7:24 AM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject:
In a message dated 5/20/2005 5:32:38 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Nice pic. A quick turn of the knobs in the shadow/highlight tool would
bring that sky under control. But I like it as shot.
Paul
Thanks!
Yes, but that would affect the whole photo. I
In a message dated 5/20/2005 5:38:08 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://members.aol.com/eactivist/PAWS/pages/trail1.htm Comments welcome.
I rather like it. Well composed, I like the use of light/shadows.
I actually quite like the bright sky in the background; far
From: David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/05/20 Fri AM 11:23:34 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Re: Dunces on Wheels (Was Re: OT Raw upgrades for Photoshop CS?)
LOL
All you guys are starting to sound like a bunch of old farts VBG
You mean to tell me that in your
From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/05/20 Fri PM 12:14:44 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: SnowBird 1
On 5/20/05, Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh jeez, here we go again with the Norwegian Blue Monty Python
routine. :-)
What's that? Monty
This is a nice composition subject with good exposure focus and aptly fits
your title.
As posted it does a fine job of relaying the lay of the land so to speak. As
something more than that, i think it fails.
IMHO, I wouldn't have taken the shot as is, due to the blown out sky. Don't
know if
From: Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/05/20 Fri PM 12:41:29 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: RE: Re: Dunces on Wheels (Was Re: OT Raw upgrades for Photoshop CS?)
Speaking as a PDML Honorary Crusty Old Fart I have to
admit I drove like a complete maniac when younger.
From: mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/05/20 Fri PM 12:46:05 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Re: SnowBird 1
From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/05/20 Fri PM 12:14:44 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: SnowBird 1
On 5/20/05,
Quoting mike.wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I did wonder about beam-breaking apparatus for triggering the shutter
but I think the large opening will be a problem again.
For both, it will be dark(ish) and probably some form of light
enhancement (i.e. night vision scope - flash is not
Hi UncaMikey
Me and I think others too do enjoy personal stories surrounding Pentax
photography themes.
greetings
Markus
Sorry for the boring personal history, but a man has to realize his own
limitations, y'know? :-)
*UncaMikey the Dilettante
Be my guest.
If it wasn't for Photoshop I would be running a real operating system myself.
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
Idiot Proof == Expert Proof
---
Doug Franklin wrote:
On Thu, 19 May 2005 18:00:29 -0400, Graywolf wrote:
Anyway that is what the Frame Shops who charge $150 to frame a $20 photo say.
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
Idiot Proof == Expert Proof
---
Bob Blakely wrote:
If it has a frame, it's art.
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG
The difference between then and now is that modern machinery is generally much
better than the pilot.
Amen to that.
In my experience I'd say that the even machinery from the fifties had higher
ultimate limits than most of the drivers of those machines. Same holds true
today, even more so.
I
The Microsoft Powertoy Image Resizer found at the link below fits your
requirements quite well (right click menu addition) and is free.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/downloads/powertoys/xppowertoys.mspx
Peace,
will
Leon Altoff wrote:
Hello everyone,
I am looking for a piece of software for
Paul wrote:
Even working in a strictly
digital world, an understanding of exposure its finer points will
separate truly good work from the merely adequate.
I second that. No camera or meter can yet figure out what you are in fact
photgraphing.
Cameras and meters still don't know if you are
From: Jostein [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/05/20 Fri PM 01:03:27 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: How to photograph animals in the dark?
Quoting mike.wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I did wonder about beam-breaking apparatus for triggering the shutter
but I think the
- Original Message -
From: Jens Bladt
Subject: RE: Understanding exposure? Recommendations?
That's true, Bob.
But you are missing out good old techniques to increase contrast by
underexsposure/overdevelopment and decreasing contrast by
overexsposure/underdevelopment.
If you are learning
- Original Message -
From: Kenneth Waller
Subject: RE: Understanding exposure? Recommendations?
What you are in fact saying is that exposure doesn't matter! Because the
printing/editing can allways make up for bad negs or files.
Sounds alot like the way some people approach Photoshop.
I
- Original Message -
From: Jens Bladt
Subject: RE: Understanding exposure? Recommendations?
I don't agree. It has nothing to do with printing. We are talking about
exposure here - not about how to resque faulty exposures.
Jens, get a grip.
If you don't learn how to make good exposures,
- Original Message -
From: Don Sanderson
Subject: RE: Understanding exposure? Recommendations?
Considering that most people don't have, or no longer
have, (such as myself) facilities to develop black
and white film, how do those of you that do feel about
trying out these techniques with
- Original Message -
From: Jens Bladt
Subject: RE: Understanding exposure? Recommendations?
Hello Bob
It still has NOTHING AT ALL to do with printing. We are only talkning
about
exposure here. Exposing and developing FILM. Not printing.
IF IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PRINTING, THEN USE A
From: mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/05/20 Fri PM 01:39:43 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Re: How to photograph animals in the dark?
From: Jostein [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/05/20 Fri PM 01:03:27 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: How to
My thoughts here were to have the lab develop only
and either scan them myself or view the actual negs
on a light box.
If I got real serious I could buy some chemistry
and setup the enlarger again fairly easily.
What think you?
Don
-Original Message-
From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL
What do you mean, William? Isn't this what I've been saying all along?
Or are you saying that if you wepose badly, you'll very likely become a
great printer :-)
But being a skilled printer, doesn't mean you shouln't expose properly, does
it? Prints still can't produce deatails lost due to inproper
From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/05/20 Fri PM 02:04:29 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: RE: Understanding exposure? Recommendations?
What do you mean, William? Isn't this what I've been saying all along?
Or are you saying that if you wepose badly, you'll very
Don,
Your idea is a pretty good one. Once scanned you have a lot of flexibility
with regard to making a print. As an example, you can use the scan to
fiddle with cropping and balance but still have the print made from the
neg. Or you can have the print made from the results of your scanning.
I think there is a lot of misunderstanding of where that 18% comes from.
If you stood in the middle of a park tilting your meter down so it is not
reading skylight you would get a perfect exposure. Why is that? Because the
natural world around us just happens to reflect 18% of the light that
Sorry, I already sold it on eBay. :)
- Original Message -
From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2005 8:40 AM
Subject: Re: A digital photographer's maxim
On 5/19/05, David Zaninovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would not go back to
Well, good exposure does not require printing, it requires a camera, a meter
and a photographer.
I, for one, scan all my BW negs (and acolour for that matter). I don't
often make or order prints.
I just need good exposures/film developing.
Regards
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mhm bats...
Some years ago when doing more ornithology and similar we were
catching bats for ringing them and I remember the little blighters
were very smart. Most were able to sonar-detect quite fine nets if
there was even the slightest wind and simply evade them in a
right-angle maneuver that
Apologies in advance if this sounds like an advertisement, but I
thought some of you may be interested.
After leaving St. Louis, where I had several choices of good labs,
I've found myself surrounded by incompetent mini-labs, no local BW
processing, and endless frustration sending BW to Qualex.
Unless you can recognize a properly exposed C-41 negative, but that is asking a
lot from a beginner.
Anyone else remember good old Kodachrome (ASA 10)? If your exposure was off by
two stops you did not even get an image. Exposure by guess got 2-5 images to a
roll (out of 36), autoexposure
I likes it, Franky. Especially the graininess. Now that I've
recently sworn off color film, I'll have to go get a roll or four of
Gold Max 800.
Just out of curiousity, all of the gold/max Kodak film I've seen
lately is made in China. Is that the case with your film, or is there
some
Hi all--
I unsubbed and went back to lurk mode -- too much email, LOL! I
think I learn more by reading via Mail Archive anyway, and it's easy
enough to pop up occasionally with a post like this.
About Understanding Exposure -- I'm glad my innocent question
sparked a lively discussion! I
Yes, you want to mask the bright area. It's quite simple. Not knowing all
the commands and features in elements, I may be using the wrong terms and
definitions, but I know you're clever enuf to figure it out.
1: Create a duplicate background layer;
2: Use the magic wand (which seems
I agree that a print isn't a good gauge of exposure accuracy, but a digital
file is a quite accurate measure. A RAW file is, in fact, untouched exposure
data.
Paul
From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/05/20 Fri PM 02:04:29 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: RE:
That's a good point, I guess I'm so used to doing it
I never thought about it.
I forgot the C-41 BW has a color mask.
Don
-Original Message-
From: Graywolf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2005 9:44 AM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Understanding exposure?
Doug Brewer wrote:
Ann Sanfedele wrote:
Erudite snobby nature photog FYI (that, o course
Doug knows very well)
Pronghorn ain't antelope
Oh, but they are: http://www.nps.gov/wica/Pronghorn.htm
annsan replies:
Oh but the are not. True antelopes are of the
family BOVIDAE.
NOte this
Nice Shel.
This'll work better tho:
http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/marnie.jpg ;-)
Don
-Original Message-
From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2005 9:56 AM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: PESO: Invitation to Hike
Yes, you want to
Thanks for the lesson but I don't need it, that was one of the first things I
learned. After that lesson I was running around with
grey card for months in hope I would get better exposures. Now I know better.
:)
I am now concentrated on reducing the contrast of the scene I am photographing
clickable link: http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/marnie.jpg
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Shel Belinkoff
Here's the pic with the adjustment:
http:home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/marnie.jpg
Nice pic, BTW ;-))
On 19/5/05, frank theriault, discombobulated, unleashed:
Poor Mark! If he saved every quote that we encouraged him to, his
annual compendium of quotes would end up being a rather large tome!
Mark!
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|
The Ilford version (XP2) doesn't have a mask and looks very much like a
standard BW negative.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Don Sanderson
That's a good point, I guess I'm so used to doing it
I never thought about it.
I forgot the C-41 BW has a color mask.
Now you are getting into something I can
understand :0
Late reading Collin's thing I was about to say
something similar...
Did you ever make paper negs in the darkroom,
Godfrey? WHen I was
first doing darkroom stuff I think the first year
was devoted to playing
have some pretty silly looking
Well, you captured all the info that the door has to offer, maybe even more
than if you compensated as you could blown highlights on
white door or make the black door too dark. When you shoot raw it would not
matter.
- Original Message -
From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
On 20/5/05, mike wilson, discombobulated, unleashed:
It's got nothing to do with art 8-) Bats will be put off by the flash
and will either not visit the place again or, if it is a roost, stay
indoors. Even shining a torch into a roost entrance will make them stay
at home. So one might get a
I didn't know that, thanks!
Don
-Original Message-
From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2005 10:04 AM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: RE: Understanding exposure? Recommendations?
The Ilford version (XP2) doesn't have a mask and looks very
On 19/5/05, Godfrey DiGiorgi, discombobulated, unleashed:
I picked up a pretty nice condition black MX body last week for $30.
okay okay fella just rub it in a little more why don't you!!
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|
On 19/5/05, frank theriault, discombobulated, unleashed:
Nice to see you back, all rested up, Marnie. And, glad you got some
satisfaction WRT that Image Tank (whatever that is...).
Not heard if it Frank? It's a new Canon digital that is so big and heavy
it comes with a set of caterpillar tracks
- Original Message -
From: Don Sanderson
Subject: RE: Understanding exposure? Recommendations?
My thoughts here were to have the lab develop only
and either scan them myself or view the actual negs
on a light box.
If I got real serious I could buy some chemistry
and setup the enlarger
- Original Message -
From: Jens Bladt
Subject: RE: Understanding exposure? Recommendations?
What do you mean, William? Isn't this what I've been saying all along?
I was answering specifically to:
That's true, Bob.
But you are missing out good old techniques to increase contrast by
- Original Message -
From: Jens Bladt
Subject: RE: Understanding exposure? Recommendations?
Well, good exposure does not require printing, it requires a camera, a
meter
and a photographer.
I, for one, scan all my BW negs (and acolour for that matter). I don't
often make or order
Herb Chong wrote:
don't have OS/2 to install it on, but i do have the Windows NT 3.1 install
disks. i could run it there if i could only get the install to succeed. no
supported hardware anymore. the main reason for going to the Windows version
was better large memory support and also long
1 - 100 of 274 matches
Mail list logo
