From the Exif data:
Grapes = DA 50-200 @ 200mm
Gate and car = DA 50-200 @ 68mm
Vegetables = DA 16-45 @ 38mm
Girl + oof car = 70mm
Sheep = 21mm
Dario
- Original Message -
From: Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2006 6:44
Same here :-(
Dario
- Original Message -
From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2006 4:09 AM
Subject: Re: K10 samples
My new favorite converter doesn't support DNG anyway, and since Adobe
has bought them out it
Rawshooter Premium.
It will disappear.
Dario
- Original Message -
From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2006 4:54 AM
Subject: Re: K10 samples
What converter doesn't support DNG? If Adpbe bought them out, it will
Well, not really.
The title is more than a little misleading - although there's only
a single 'pixel', the value at that pixel is recorded some 30,000
different times, with a different optical transform of the source
being applied each time. Then they apply a reconstruction algorithm
to find the
Thanks Ken!
On Sat, 7 Oct 2006 00:05:53 -0400, Kenneth Waller wrote:
Well done. A very nice capture.
Came across this one while selecting some stuff for large format
prints today, it is a scan from a 67 slide taken at Yosemite.
http://www.dfsee.com/gallery/index.php?id=182
Regards, JvW
James,
On Sat, 7 Oct 2006 09:22:04 +1000, J and K Messervy wrote:
I agree with you. As far as I'm concerned, the only benefit of using DNG
over PEF is the lossless compression freeing up storage space. if shooting
DNG in the K10D means uncompressed DNGs, I can't see any benefit for me over
Thanks Jan !
2006/10/6, Jan van Wijk [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Fri, 6 Oct 2006 22:26:01 +0200, Thibouille wrote:
Anybody with an idea on this lens ?
It could be a cheap way of getting a 21mm on 35mm.
I have one that I used way back, on an MX and later SFXn.
It was a good WA for film, a
Hi Dario, Peter ...
On Sat, 7 Oct 2006 08:51:44 +0200, Dario Bonazza wrote:
Same here :-(
Dario
- Original Message -
From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED]
My new favorite converter doesn't support DNG anyway, and since Adobe
has bought them out it never will. I'm screwed any way I
Mmm we should wait for it, try it and see.
I've the impression in can do what you want, but really I won't say it
will (was 2 weeks ago).
2006/10/7, Digital Image Studio [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 07/10/06, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There's always the delete button ...
Not the point
Jan van Wijk wrote:
If you had a RawShooter Pro license, the 'upgrade'
to Lightroom is free AFAIK ...
That'd be OK if I didn't positively *hate* Lightroom. The beta anyway.
Sucks dogs' balls for what I need.
--
Thanks,
DougF (KG4LMZ)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
If I was able to read RAW from GX10 without any software support it is
thanks to DNG.
Wanna wait 3-6months for the next ACR version? I do not.
2006/10/7, J and K Messervy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I agree with you. As far as I'm concerned, the only benefit of using DNG
over PEF is the lossless
David Savage wrote:
Doug can you take a picture of the lens/filter combo and post
it somewhere?
I'll give it a shot, but it's about 0400 here right now, and I'm about
to go beddy-bye. :-) I'll see what I can do tomorrow.
--
Thanks,
DougF (KG4LMZ)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
I did it, my nightmare came true, I submitted a Cat photo to the pdml.
Horrors.
These are all from yesterday and the day before, taken with my DS (the
cat one with my kit zoom, the two macros with an M50mm f2 and Vivatar
macro TC and all the rest with my 200mm 2.5). Hope you like em.
On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 09:01:46 +0100, Doug Franklin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jan van Wijk wrote:
If you had a RawShooter Pro license, the 'upgrade'
to Lightroom is free AFAIK ...
That'd be OK if I didn't positively *hate* Lightroom. The beta anyway.
Sucks dogs' balls for what I need.
On Oct 7, 2006, at 9:01 AM, Doug Franklin wrote:
If you had a RawShooter Pro license, the 'upgrade'
to Lightroom is free AFAIK ...
That'd be OK if I didn't positively *hate* Lightroom. The beta
anyway.
Sucks dogs' balls for what I need.
A colorful expression, Doug. I have not yet
On 10/7/06, John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 09:01:46 +0100, Doug Franklin
That'd be OK if I didn't positively *hate* Lightroom. The beta anyway.
Sucks dogs' balls for what I need.
Perhaps you could refine your metaphors a bit.
Yes. Please refine it.
What sort of
That's my first impression too, and it's
slow.
Dario
- Original Message -
From: Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2006 10:01 AM
Subject: Re: JunkEmail: Re: K10 samples
Jan van
I made this pic last year about this time. This morning I revisited the
photo and saw something more, different in it. So, here's the revised
edition.
http://home.earthlink.net/~ebay-pics/fallenleaf2.html
Shel
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
Great job Shel. That's a very striking image.
James
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: PDML PDML@pdml.net
Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2006 8:15 PM
Subject: PESO - Fallen Leaf #2
I made this pic last year about this time. This morning I revisited the
Excellent.
On Oct 7, 2006, at 6:15 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I made this pic last year about this time. This morning I revisited
the
photo and saw something more, different in it. So, here's the revised
edition.
http://home.earthlink.net/~ebay-pics/fallenleaf2.html
Shel
--
PDML
After my previous message, I've been playing with Beta 4, and I find it a
lot better, both for features and speed.
Now I only need to find out how to save converted files and how to do batch
conversion, if allowed.
Dario
- Original Message -
From: Dario Bonazza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
And it's got fill-in, missing in previous releases ;-)
Dario
- Original Message -
From: Dario Bonazza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2006 1:10 PM
Subject: Re: JunkEmail: Re: K10 samples
After my previous message, I've been
Yeah andthe beta 4 on a french system exibits all kind of stupid
translation problems (thought the beta wassupposed to be in english
huh) and thingslike {Tahoma} OK on a button instead ofwriting OK on
the button with the Tahoma Font.
Seems rushed out of the door if you ask me.
Had none of thses
On 10/6/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is only true with transparency film and presupposes that you
understand how the film and processing work. You have no control
other than focus and exposure. The film and processing are a constant.
I of course undersstand all that :-).
On 10/07/06 6:15 AM, Shel Belinkoff, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I made this pic last year about this time. This morning I revisited the
photo and saw something more, different in it. So, here's the revised
edition.
http://home.earthlink.net/~ebay-pics/fallenleaf2.html
Hi Shel,
I like it!
Reminds me of a class in college in 89. The professor made the statement
that computer buss speeds would never exceed 100 mghz because of buss path
lengths. Supposedly electrons would have to travel faster than light to
increase beyond a certain limit. I often wonder what he says today :)
I
Thanks all for lens ID's.
Jack
--- David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Looks like:
- DA 70mmf2.4 for 2 of the shots of the model (I don't know about the
3rd indoor shot), the old guy sitting the cafe exterior
- 200mm (probably the FA 200mm f2.8) for the bunch of grapes
- DA 16-45 f4
Shel,
Refreshing outlook.
Like Ken says, a change of pace for you.
Regards, Bob S.
On 10/7/06, K.Takeshita [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/07/06 6:15 AM, Shel Belinkoff, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I made this pic last year about this time. This morning I revisited the
photo and saw something
Image size off-set is, of course, the savior of MF. Interesting to
consider that the MF segment wholly accepted lower resolution lenses to
dominate as a way of increasing profits.
Jack
--- Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
35mm lenses are typically of higher resolution in terms of lpmm as
I'd disagree with that characterization. The MF lines that ended up
dominating the market (Hassy, Pentax, Mamiya) all are known for being
quite high resolution and sharp for MF glass. It simply never hit the
resolution of the 35mm lenses.
-Adam
Jack Davis wrote:
Image size off-set is, of
Francis,
Nice shots. I think the bee and the fenced lake are my favorites.
The bird series is interesting. What kind of bird is it?
Regards, Bob S.
On 10/7/06, Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I did it, my nightmare came true, I submitted a Cat photo to the pdml.
Horrors.
These are all
Don't count yourself out yet, Walt. I'm about to turn 65 and hoping to
see much more of what's coming down the road. Always said my preferred
method of leaving this world was to be shot in bed at 95 by a jealous
husband. ;)
-P
Walter Hamler wrote:
At 64 yrs old I am almost sorry I
http://www.graywolfphoto.com/pentax/pdml-faq.html
--
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
Idiot Proof == Expert Proof
---
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Why do you suppose..it never hit the resolution of the 35mm lenses?
Only a curiosity, not my characterization. =))
Jack
--- Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd disagree with that characterization. The MF lines that ended up
dominating the market (Hassy, Pentax, Mamiya) all are known for
As a lark, I'm putting up a contrived image that kind of suits this
Halloween month.
In my hauntings of a nearby State Wildlife Area, I happened to
stumble upon this Vulture gaping scene. Probably a year or so later I
decided to try a sandwich print with a moon slide.
I projected the moon slide
- Original Message -
From: Adam Maas
Subject: Re: OT: Who needs mega pixels?
I'd disagree with that characterization. The MF lines that ended up
dominating the market (Hassy, Pentax, Mamiya) all are known for being
quite high resolution and sharp for MF glass. It simply never hit
- Original Message -
From: Bob Sullivan
Subject: Re: Quick question
No, no, no! We never agreed to take the Frenchies.
You gotta keep them, or spin them off.
We've already got two official languages - English and Spanish.
There is no room for a third official language.
Maybe we
35mm lenses are higher resolution (at least the better ones) than MF
glass. That's not to say that MF glass wasn't designed for high resolution.
-Adam
Jack Davis wrote:
Why do you suppose..it never hit the resolution of the 35mm lenses?
Only a curiosity, not my characterization. =))
Jack
- Original Message -
From: Adam Maas
Subject: Re: OT: Who needs mega pixels?
35mm lenses are higher resolution (at least the better ones) than MF
glass. That's not to say that MF glass wasn't designed for high
resolution.
Check out the numbers for the modern Rodenstocks
Some
- Original Message -
From: David Savage
Subject: Re: JunkEmail: Re: K10 samples
On 10/7/06, John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 09:01:46 +0100, Doug Franklin
That'd be OK if I didn't positively *hate* Lightroom. The beta
anyway.
Sucks dogs' balls for
I like all three. Grebe with youngs is my favourite, because it tells a
simple little story.
The angle of the bird's heads tells me that they are connected. That's one
of the most fascinating things about studying birds, their social life.
Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
Why are they called privates when they're out there for all to see?
Shel
[Original Message]
From: William Robb
My dog was licking his privates one time
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
OK, but no ourageous export duties on Potatoes...
On 10/7/06, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Bob Sullivan
Subject: Re: Quick question
No, no, no! We never agreed to take the Frenchies.
You gotta keep them, or spin them off.
We've already got
While these super LF lenses really help with 4x5
Or when using a MF film back on a 4x5, at 8x10 or
Larger you can use a coke bottle at F32 and get
Stunning resultsYou just don't even need good specifiedd lenses
To get absolutely incredible results..
jco
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
Nicely done. :-)
Godfrey
On Oct 7, 2006, at 11:15 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I made this pic last year about this time. This morning I
revisited the
photo and saw something more, different in it. So, here's the revised
edition.
http://home.earthlink.net/~ebay-pics/fallenleaf2.html
--
Zarri's Delicatessen has been an institution in the little community of
Albany for 35 years. A family operation (the patriarch, Joe Zarri, usually
called Mr. by his customers, still works in the store and recently turned
85 years old), they serve good food at reasonable prices (you can still get
a
You'll have to find a lab that still processes using the old C-22
chemistry for the Kodacolor X. I think you should be able to process it
BW chemistry, but I have no idea how to process it that way. I'm not
sure how good your results will be even if you can find the correct
chemistry for
Some of you who have GOOD memories and little else to think about may
remember a couple years back I received a box of old cameras from my
grandmothers estate.
I was going through them again yesterday and noticed there was a roll of
film in the old Kodak TLR camera.
I have an un processed roll
There's a similar Italian deli not far from me. Your shot brings to
mind it's unique aroma. Coffee beans, fresh roasted chicken, cold
meats, cheeses, olives, sun dried tomato's all blended together. I
love just walking past that place. And when you go inside you have the
local Italians speaking
If you don't mind shipping a long wait:
http://www.rockymountainfilm.com/c22.htm
Dave
On 10/7/06, cbwaters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Some of you who have GOOD memories and little else to think about may
remember a couple years back I received a box of old cameras from my
grandmothers estate.
Last weekend, I pulled the air conditioner out of my living room
window. Within 2 hours of doing so, this little guy had spun a web in
its place.
http://www.matoe.org/gallery2/v/tomatoe/testscans/IMGP0281-cropped.jpg.html
No idea what kind of spider it is. Not having a real macro lens, I
shot
On 10/7/06, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://home.earthlink.net/~ebay-pics/lineformstoright.html
I'm strangely hungry now, for some reason... :-)
-Mat
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Aren't all web spinners female?
Good shot, even if I'm not a bug shooter. ;-)
Godfrey
On Oct 7, 2006, at 5:25 PM, Mat Maessen wrote:
Last weekend, I pulled the air conditioner out of my living room
window. Within 2 hours of doing so, this little guy had spun a web in
its place.
Please allow between six and twelve months for return to you.
Amazing! especially at more than $25.00 per roll ...
Shel
[Original Message]
From: David Savage
If you don't mind shipping a long wait:
http://www.rockymountainfilm.com/c22.htm
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Its been a rough year...
I've finally given up on Mini Disc and bought an iPod.
I've gone ahead and actually gotten a driver's lisence, and a car.
I'm no longer able to colaim that I've got exclusively Mac, I had to buy a
Windows laptop for car diag software.
I realized by the end of the
- Original Message -
From: cbwaters
Subject: Processing OLD film
Some of you who have GOOD memories and little else to think about may
remember a couple years back I received a box of old cameras from my
grandmothers estate.
I was going through them again yesterday and noticed
- Original Message -
From: Bob Sullivan
Subject: Re: Quick question
OK, but no ourageous export duties on Potatoes...
How about we put potatoes under the CWB umbrella?
William Robb
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
- Original Message -
From: J. C. O'Connell
Subject: RE: OT: Who needs mega pixels?
While these super LF lenses really help with 4x5
Or when using a MF film back on a 4x5, at 8x10 or
Larger you can use a coke bottle at F32 and get
Stunning resultsYou just don't even need good
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff
Subject: Re: JunkEmail: Re: K10 samples
Why are they called privates when they're out there for all to see?
Probably for the same reason people think they have a right to privacy
from photographers when they are in public.
William Robb
On 10/8/06, gfen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I feel so...dirty.
(Re: DSLR purchase)
Mark!
Dave
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
David Savage wrote:
Doug can you take a picture of the lens/filter combo and post it somewhere?
My curiosity is piqued.
http://nutdriver.org/sigma.shtml
--
Thanks,
DougF (KG4LMZ)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On Sun, 8 Oct 2006, David Savage wrote:
On 10/8/06, gfen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I feel so...dirty.
(Re: DSLR purchase)
Mark!
Que?
--
http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio.
--
PDML
My thoughts exactly. C22 was dead and buried 16 years ago when I
tried to find processing for some old film I'd found. I did the same
thing: ran it in HC110, scanned bw negs from it.
Godfrey
On Oct 7, 2006, at 5:48 PM, William Robb wrote:
C22 process is defunct. Others have mentioned Rocky
Not really, Bob ... I've posted several leaf pics, numerous graphic images,
building facades, abstracts, still lifes, even a flower or two ...
I'm pleased that you found it refreshing ... the pic is a result of one of
those Aha! experiences @ 3:00am in which something just presented itself
Me too ... I may head over to the deli and grab a few items. A nicely
stuffed sopresata and turkey sandwich sounds like it might make for a
satisfying lunch ;-))
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Mat Maessen
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
http://home.earthlink.net/~ebay-pics/lineformstoright.html
Gracias, amigo ;-))
How's the vacation going?
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi
Nicely done. :-)
http://home.earthlink.net/~ebay-pics/fallenleaf2.html
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
- Original Message -
From: Doug Franklin
Subject: Re: Stuck Filter
David Savage wrote:
Doug can you take a picture of the lens/filter combo and post it
somewhere?
My curiosity is piqued.
http://nutdriver.org/sigma.shtml
Oh yea.
I think about all you can do is to take the lens
Hi Ken,
Thanks for your complimentary comments. I don't understand your comment
below... could you expand upon it or explain what you mean. Thanks!
Shel
[Original Message]
From: K.Takeshita
http://home.earthlink.net/~ebay-pics/fallenleaf2.html
Some of your recent pics posted
Probably a lot of neighborhoods have similar places, but they are
disappearing to quickly, replaced by corporate-owned chains or more
upscale places. The simplicity of Zarri's has always been a selling
point for me, along with their quality, friendly pricing, and friendly
service.
Shel
Hi Tim,
On Sat, 7 Oct 2006 16:58:51 +0200, Tim sleby wrote:
I like all three. Grebe with youngs is my favourite, because it tells a
simple little story.
The angle of the bird's heads tells me that they are connected. That's one
of the most fascinating things about studying birds, their social
Glad y'like it Paul
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Paul Stenquist
Excellent.
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I made this pic last year about this time.
This morning I revisited the photo and
saw something more
http://home.earthlink.net/~ebay-pics/fallenleaf2.html
--
PDML
The C22 processing tidbit and a google trip lead me here:
http://www.rapidphoto.net/c22.html
Anybody heard of them?
CW
- Original Message -
From: cbwaters [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pdml@pdml.net pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2006 11:51 AM
Subject: Processing OLD film
Some of
On 10/8/06, Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David Savage wrote:
Doug can you take a picture of the lens/filter combo and post it somewhere?
My curiosity is piqued.
http://nutdriver.org/sigma.shtml
Thanks Doug.
Good to see you got it off.
Dave
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
On 10/8/06, gfen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 8 Oct 2006, David Savage wrote:
On 10/8/06, gfen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I feel so...dirty.
(Re: DSLR purchase)
Mark!
I thought that line deserved to be included in the 2006 PDML quotable
quotes list.
I was just bringing it to Mark The
On 10/07/06 1:43 PM, Shel Belinkoff, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Ken,
Thanks for your complimentary comments. I don't understand your comment
below... could you expand upon it or explain what you mean. Thanks!
Shel
[Original Message]
From: K.Takeshita
Hi Dario,
On Sat, 7 Oct 2006 13:10:52 +0200, Dario Bonazza wrote:
After my previous message, I've been playing with Beta 4, and I find it a
lot better, both for features and speed.
That is what I said, lots if stuffed added from RSE
since the previous beta, and faster ...
Regards, jvW
PS:
On Oct 7, 2006, at 6:43 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
http://home.earthlink.net/~ebay-pics/fallenleaf2.html
Gracias, amigo ;-))
How's the vacation going?
Excellent, thanks for asking.
I was over in the west/south of the Island today, in Niarbyl. Very
beautiful coastline with some restored,
Hi Jan,
I was at Pentax booth to meet you the day and time planned (sep. 28 at
14:00), for about 45 minutes, but couldn't find you.
Dario
- Original Message -
From: Jan van Wijk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2006 8:43 PM
gfen wrote:
Some c'mon Pentax, where are the DA* or DA-Limited lenses? ;) And, since
you're omitting aperature rings, make 'em cheap for us thrifty types, I
can't afford the 31 Limited.
gfen, who'd like it known his DSLR order did come with a box of 4x5 film.
;)
The DA*'s are
Adam Maas wrote:
K.Takeshita wrote:
May be this was discussed recently, but I was skimming thru the k10D manual
and noticed that the Self-Timer lamp/Remote control receiver are located on
both front and rear of the camera.
I assume this will enable the normal remote trip behind the tripod,
Perry Pellechia wrote:
I agree with you Paul. We tend to limit our expectations based on
what we have seen before. It is usually better to just sit back and
watch where the technology leads us to.
I don't think there was ever much progress made by letting the
technology do the leading,
You rarely post images, but when you do it's a pleasure. I love the high
contrast turtle, despite the disturbing background.
Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Francis
Sent: 7. oktober 2006
Here's my favorite deli:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1855265size=lg
Unfortunately, I can't stop in very often. It's in Madrid.
Paul
On Oct 7, 2006, at 1:43 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Probably a lot of neighborhoods have similar places, but they are
disappearing to quickly,
I remember the first take on this. I didn't like it then, and this take does
not make me change my mind.
But it is well done; I got to give you that :-)
Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shel
Great picture, Shel.
Maybe the leaf is a bit too saturated, though. It doesn't look too
realistic to me. Or it's just me, or my screen :-)
Patrice
Shel Belinkoff a écrit :
I made this pic last year about this time. This morning I revisited the
photo and saw something more, different in it.
It's not this particular technology that is promising. It's the
obvious truth that digital is a relatively new technology, and
significant refinement will certainly come soon.
Paul
On Oct 7, 2006, at 4:35 PM, mike wilson wrote:
Perry Pellechia wrote:
I agree with you Paul. We tend to
You are crazy Jack ;-)
I kind of like it, but I have no idea why.
In fact, I don't want to like it, but still do ;-)
Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jack
Davis
Sent: 7. oktober 2006 16:13
I see this as graphic art. I think the question of realism is
irrelevant here.
Paul
On Oct 7, 2006, at 5:03 PM, Patrice LACOUTURE (GMail) wrote:
Great picture, Shel.
Maybe the leaf is a bit too saturated, though. It doesn't look too
realistic to me. Or it's just me, or my screen :-)
My point is that a decades ago people were saying digital cameras
would never replace film. I do not think most people feel this way
today. Read this story about the first digital image recorded by
Kodak RD labs 30 years ago:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9261340/
Quoting from the article:
The
Thanks for the mental diagnosis. ;-))
Please, why are you fighting like?
Jack
--- Tim Øsleby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You are crazy Jack ;-)
I kind of like it, but I have no idea why.
In fact, I don't want to like it, but still do ;-)
Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
Easy question: 3872 pixel (wide) at 300 ppi = 12.9 inch wide (32 cm) prints.
A little larger than A4 (24x30 cm). That's it, folks.
But then you can up-rez, naturally, which doesn't realy improve the quality,
even though you get more pixels.
For large prints 100 or 150 ppi is enough, if the image
Easy question: 3822 pixel (wide) at 300 ppi = 12.9 inch wide (32 cm) prints.
A little larger than A4 (24x30 cm). That's it, folks.
But then you can up-rez, naturally, which doesn't realy improve the quality,
even though you get more pixels.
For large prints 100 or 150 ppi is enough, if the image
This isn't really even digital. It's looks more related to Mechanical
Television from the 1920's.
Paul Stenquist wrote:
It's not this particular technology that is promising. It's the
obvious truth that digital is a relatively new technology, and
significant refinement will certainly come
Good work. Very strange, but well done.
Paul
On Oct 7, 2006, at 5:18 PM, Jack Davis wrote:
Thanks for the mental diagnosis. ;-))
Please, why are you fighting like?
Jack
--- Tim Øsleby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You are crazy Jack ;-)
I kind of like it, but I have no idea why.
In fact, I
I can't explain better. Sorry. All I can say is that it made me chuckle.
Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jack
Davis
Sent: 7. oktober 2006 23:18
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: RE:
Strange is a good choice. =)
Thanks.
Jack
--- Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good work. Very strange, but well done.
Paul
On Oct 7, 2006, at 5:18 PM, Jack Davis wrote:
Thanks for the mental diagnosis. ;-))
Please, why are you fighting like?
Jack
--- Tim Øsleby [EMAIL
That's a good out turn!
Thanks.
Jack
--- Tim Øsleby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can't explain better. Sorry. All I can say is that it made me
chuckle.
Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
As I said, Paul, thanks. Let me add that this strange (I agree) image
was used by The California State Department of Fish and Game, both for
the month of October and for the cover of their '05 calendar.
Jack
--- Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good work. Very strange, but well done.
Perry Pellechia wrote:
My point is that a decades ago people were saying digital cameras
would never replace film. I do not think most people feel this way
today. Read this story about the first digital image recorded by
Kodak RD labs 30 years ago:
Most people think whatever the
The bird is a Sand Hill Crane, the first one of these rather impressive
birds I've ever seen. It was amazingly tame and I spent most of the day
following it around on my hands and knees taking photos and watching it
go about its business.
Thanks for your thoughts.
Cheers,
Francis
Bob
1 - 100 of 120 matches
Mail list logo
