Odd copyright question first.
Some many years ago, my late father was mildly into photography.
A friend of his copied a picture of a mutual acquaintance (no idea who he
was) which dated from the '30s on slide film, sometime in the early '60s.
This friend died about ten years later, and his son
John wrote:
For a definitive answer, you really need a lawyer.
But, I'm pretty sure current law is that copyright protection for old
photos is life of the author + 70 years. So whoever took the photo
owns the copyright and/or his heirs own it for 70 years after his
death.
Paul Stenquist wrote:
I just scanned 30 60-year-old BW prints for a magazine article. Used my
Epson 500 then fine tuned them in PhotoShop. Excellent results.
Impressive they came up with enough quality for a magazine. OK, I can see
which way this is going
Malcolm
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss
Paul wrote:
Also - If the prints are small you can place a group of them on a
flatbed scanner and scan the bunch as one image. If you have Photoshop
Elements there is a function to divide the group and save them as
individual images.
That may be the winning point. Having seen a review of
Yolanda Rowe wrote:
This information applies to the United States. Since the image under
discussion was taken in the 1930s, the copyright exists until 50 years
after the photographer’s death. Photographs taken after 1989 are
copyrighted until 70 years after the photographer dies.
Carolyn
Brian Walters wrote:
G'day all
I haven't posted a cat photo for yonks so here's one I came across in
San Francisco in 2013.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1370864/PESO/slides/_IGP0424-Q-
1peso.html
http://tinyurl.com/nqrhle6
I love cat pictures, so I enjoyed this.
What I also
Mark Roberts wrote:
Published works created before 1923 are automatically in the public
domain. For unpublished works created before 1932 and all works created
after 1923, copyright expires 50-70 years (depending on the
country) after the death of the author.
In practical terms, though, no
P.J. Alling wrote:
I'm sure that changes to copyright law have made all of this quite
complicated, however, if you own the original slide, you have defacto
copyright. If there is no commercial value to the image it won't be in
anyone's interest to challenge it.
Thanks. I've tried to take a
Darren Addy wrote:
Regarding your copying of BW photos (some of which are curling...
If you think that scanning would be a long job, I assure you that
copying them with a camera will be just as long, if not longer. For
those that don't lie flat, you will need to position them under glass.
Jack Davis wrote:
I'm comfortable with it for now, but I'm really never finished with these
images.
I loved the mood of the image.
I'm only just beginning with post image taking software. I thought it would
make my photos easier to sort out and correct where required. In one photo I
took, I've
Eric Weir wrote:
What is a “full size Dalek”?
Dr Who - a BBC TV programme.
This company makes replicas of them:
http://www.thisplanetearth.co.uk/page10.html
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please
Eric Weir wrote:
I have only a few lenses already. There is some duplication, and one,
said to be a good one, that I hardly use at all. Within the next couple
months I will have still fewer lenses.
I'll find out how good they are shortly, as I'm going to collect mine next
week. I had hoped
Ken Waller wrote:
For the majority of us, photography is simply a pastime to be enjoyed
with other enjoyable activities in life. For me it's a great reason to
get out in the woods and experience nature and to capture some of those
moments to enjoy later and share with others.
The trip is
Forget my last e-mail, I saw extension tubes in the description and jumped
to the wrong conclusion! Tubes better AFTER the lens! I so wanted an easy
way out.
Malcolm
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML,
Igor wrote:
Some PDMLers might have read about this new lens before, but I just
discovered and thought I'd share this information, as it might be of
interest some people here.
There is a new Venus 60/2.8 Ultra-Macro (up to 2:1) lens. As far as I
understand it has adjustable magnification.
Following discussions here about Lightroom/Photoshop Elements/Photoshop etc
and a suggestion from Bob W that obtaining books on the subject would help,
I acquired the following two a couple of weeks back:
Photoshop Elements 13, the missing manual by Barbara Brundage
The Adobe Photoshop Lightroom
Ken Waller wrote:
Merry Christmas and a Healthy, Happy New Year to all.
May all your images be keepers.
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=16677433
Taken with K20D, 28-80mm F, 100 ISO
Beautiful capture. Reminds me strongly of Christmas scenes I saw as a child
in the 60s. Some of
-Original Message-
From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
knarftheria...@gmail.com
Sent: 23 December 2012 1:31 AM
To: PDML@pdml.net
Subject: OT - Augie Wren's Christmas Story
A PDML tradition started many years ago by Shel (some of you remember
Shel, right?).
David J Brooks wrote:
thank. I think this justifies the cost of a 55-300 for stealth baby
shots, right??
Of course! Congratulations.
Malcolm
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link
Brian wrote:
It's possible that someone at Ricoh has decided that dual branding
might not be a good idea after all. 'Ricoh' doesn't appear on the
rear of the latest models (K-S1, Q-S1 and 645Z) - Just 'Pentax' on
the front.
Bill wrote:
Over on Pentax forums, there were people
Backdrop: Over the last four years, I've reduced the number of lenses I've
owned by about 90%. The acquisition of this lens, if recommended, would
allow me to sell on three more lenses which cover portions of this range. I
would rather have a very small handful of lenses I use frequently, than
Bulent Celasun wrote:
I have the earlier (not WR) version.
I have found it very versatile while I was using it.
It was definitely better than my earlier lens of simiar range (Sigma
70 - 300mm).
I do not think I may sell it even though I have too many lenses
already.
Thanks. Most of
Brian Walters wrote:
Ralf has just posted a few PESOs taken with it. He seems happy.
I have the earlier version. I don't use it all that often but I have
some quite acceptable shots with it.
Thanks Brian. It's a lens I'll get a fair bit of use out of.
Malcolm
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss
Zos Xavius wrote:
Mind is currently the only lens that goes on my K-3 other than my 20-
40. Its pretty good. Watch out for sample variation. Its not unusual to
go through 2-3 copies before you find a good one and a good one is
worth finding.
Thanks. I intend to buy new and locally, so if I
Attila Boros wrote:
I have the earlier non-WR version, happy with it. I bought it to
replace the DA 50-200mm, it's much better. Here is a sample at 135mm:
https://500px.com/photo/80471415/doubletree-by-attila-boros
Thanks, a great shot too. This looks like the lens to get.
Malcolm
--
Bill wrote:
That's the Fuji X-T1. It's a lovely little camera, abut the same size
as a Pentax MX (It is actually smaller than the LX), and the Fuji
lenses are superb. I still think Pentax has a slight edge in lens
coatings, but it's close, and the Fuji optics overall are nicer.
Not seen this
Ralf R Radermacher wrote:
I most certainly am, so far.
Haven't been able to do any serious shoot-out with my other lenses
because of the darned wind that's still strong enough to rattle even my
sturdy Berlebach wooden tripod. I'm seriously fed up with this weather.
Then again, that's my
Ann Sanfedele wrote:
that's lovely, Zos -
Peso's don't HAVE to be Pentax, and since it is Ricoh almost the same
now
ann
On 12/21/2014 11:28, Bulent Celasun wrote:
A monochrome.
https://celasun.wordpress.com/2014/12/21/droplets/
It is done with a Ricoh.
Not mean to be
Brian Walters wrote:
Well, Pentax isn't a manufacturer any more - it's just a brand owned by
Ricoh.
It's much the same as Panasonic putting Lumix on its cameras.
OK, but I understood that Pentax were keeping the brand name on the DSLRs.
Not having a K5 of any model, I'm fairly sure even the
Paul Stenquist wrote:
I was googling images, looking for some pics of someone I’m writing
about. I googled a name and a photo of mine came up. Obviously, I
already have that one. But what was disturbing was that it was for sale
on Photobucket. I took a look and found that a man named William
Bob W wrote:
My house looks like a work of modern art since yesterday morning when
the kitchen ceiling fell down. Perhaps Nick Serota would like to buy
it.
Doesn't that make your kitchen an 'installation'?
Best of luck with the ceiling; I had a bedroom ceiling come down in 2009 and
that
Mark C wrote:
Malcolm -
1- If you are not invested in one piece of software or another, or one
workflow vs another, then the question is simply Which is better for
me
- LR or PS? If you are invested in a particular workflow then the
question becomes Do the advantages of LR over PS (or
Boris Liberman wrote:
Personally, I don't like the idea of cloud based personal software. I
don't mind if it has to do with communications, but this is different.
Adobe got hacked some time ago. Depending on what kind of personal
information Adobe is storing about their Creative Cloud
Bob W wrote:
I think you'd do well to buy one or two of the books about LR and spend
a weekend working your way through them. There are really 3 major
topics to consider and they feedback into each other to some extent:
1. What is your storage (and back-up) strategy. In my experience it's
Photoshop or Lightroom? Lightroom or Photoshop? Or both? Or neither?
For the last couple of years, photography has been a dormant hobby, the
camera really only coming out to record events, usually in jpeg, so I can
swiftly take them off the card and e-mail on if required. I now finally have
some
Brian Walters wrote:
Well, it's not quite like that.
I signed up for Adobe's Creative Cloud for Photographers plan.
$9.99 per month gives me the latest versions of Photoshop and Lightroom
(although I rarely use Lightroom). I was certainly never going to be
able to justify the cost of
George Sinos wrote:
I took the $10/mo deal and never looked back. That's a very fair price
for LR and PS. 99.9% of work is done in LR.
One thing I will say. You MUST buy off on the concept that LR is where
you keep and organize your photos. This isn't a problem, it works very
well.
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Indeed... I have both (PS CS v5.1 and current LR) and didn't bother
upgrading to latest PS because I hardly use it. Once in a while it's
necessary, usually for type manipulation on layouts, and the older
version I have works fine for that and the occasional panorama
Mark Roberts wrote:
Each one will do things the other won't, but Lightroom is by far the
better tool for photographers these days; Photoshop has become more of
a graphic designer's tool. That's not to say you can't have a good
workflow with Photoshop and Bridge, but if you find yourself
A quick round up from the many helpful and thought provoking replies:
John mentions Lightroom freeing up. I have a copy of PSE v9. So why, you may
ask, am I asking questions about software. I can only use it to crop or
resize photos. Any more than this and the computer freezes or causes some
Paul Stenquist wrote:
I use photoshop exclusively. I frequently do a lot of post work and ps
is the best tool in many cases. But more importantly it's familiar and
feels right. I have my own filing system that I access with Bridge.
It's all working fine. Tried Lightroom 2 years ago, didn't
Cotty wrote:
I know some here like infrared... this video might be interesting. I
mean, it's interesting to me and I'm not into it at all :-)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAuUR5aIJJE
Something I've had a passing interest in for years, but never tried, and I
might have missed the boat to
Many thanks for the replies. The fact there are no rumours of the impending
release of a new model, make me happy that I might actually have the current
model for a few months. It will be two or three models on until I get
another, so I want the current top model now. As the K3 has been out a
A quick de-lurk about two questions before buying my next DSLR.
I was late to change to digital with the *ist D (still a barmy name for a
camera), and bought a K7 somewhat closer to its launch. Since then I've sold
all my other cameras and would like to get another digital body, and the K3
Steve Cottrell wrote:
Throwing this open to the list as there are plenty of cycle-holics on
here. Anyone know of any decent clamp-on specially-shaped mounts for
GoPro (or similar) cameras for attaching to expensive and sensitive
aerodynamically contoured carbon fibre cycle frames?
GoPro
Very atmospheric Frank, particularly as I've just watched Lucas Brunelle's
film 'Line Of Sight'!
Malcolm
Here's Dale just before the start of last month's charity alleycat:
http://mondociclismo.blogspot.ca/2013/01/ready-to-race.html
Not the sharpest portrait, but I think his cocky
Now if feels like Christmas. Thanks Frank.
Malcolm
-Original Message-
From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
knarftheria...@gmail.com
Sent: 23 December 2012 1:31 AM
To: PDML@pdml.net
Subject: OT - Augie Wren's Christmas Story
A PDML tradition started many years
Larry Colen wrote:
There's also the possibility that whoever took them, would like them
back, and would have no idea that they even exist without you posting
them someplace that someone could see.
There are whole websites of found photographs with, so far as I know,
no complaints.
Hello folks,
Greetings of the season. Not been posting but reading of late only; only
have a K-7 and taking photos of interest really only to locals. I hope to
add a K-5 next year, it has been very odd with just the one camera body.
Amongst my other hobbies, I tend to acquire the odd addition
P. J. Alling wrote:
As far as I know if you own the original it's yours to do with as you
will. The original owner owner can no longer claim copyright, as a
practical matter.
Paul Ewins wrote:
Unfortunately no. You own the slides, but the copyright still belongs to
whoever shot it (or
Bob W wrote:
This is the offending photograph:
http://www.web-options.com/Recent/content/S0120024_large.html
Nothing in itself, but I'm damned if I'll let some meathead tell me
what I
can and can't photograph.
I've noticed with the small amount of photography that I've done that people
Not my camera but my only such story. Back in late 1979, I went to central
London with a friend one weekend to take some photos. He had two expensive
Nikon cameras, bag, lenses, rolls of film - I took my entire camera
collection which consisted of an MX, 50mm lens and one roll of film in the
interesting story! Back at about that same time I went into Central
London
with a friend. He too had a whole bunch of Nikons and lenses stuuf,
and I
too had just an MX and 1 lens and a flash. We were setting up to take
some
pictures in Parliament Sq and I was putting my MX onto a tripod
P. J. Alling wrote:
I wish I could come up with a good Kodachrome slide image; but every
thing is in storage, or the K25 plugin I found didn't produce crap.
I thought I'd have no end of choice for this a few weeks back, but it was
dependent on winning a bid (yet another attempt) on a Nikon
Steven Desjardins wrote:
I did the same thing a while back. Earlier on, I had a hard time with
digital. I think the take as many as you want devalued the pictures
in my mind. The most difficult part, however, was adjusting to the
lack of prints. It makes no sense since you can have them
For a whole variety of reasons I've been reduced to reading posts, rather
than actively posting but as I know I'm going to be on limited computer time
again over the next week, I wanted to pass my best to you all for Christmas
and the New Year.
Over the last few months I have really thought about
mike wilson wrote:
I believe there's a setting at pdml.net on your personal (logged on)
page that allows you to choose whether to see your own posts or not.
Log in via the bottommost box on the page.
Thanks Mike, as long as I know they are getting through, I'll live without
receiving my own
Checking a new e-mail account.
If it does work, I have to say that Frank's reindeer looked far happier to
be back at school than my three yesterday. Great capture.
Malcolm
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the
Yours, yes, but not my own post. Thanks Ecke.
Malcolm
I can say you can send but can you receive?
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
Oddly enough Darren, I used to receive my own messages. Makes no odds, it
works and that's good enough for me.
Malcolm
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 8:57 AM, Malcolm Smith rrve...@virginmedia.com
wrote:
Yours, yes, but not my own post. Thanks Ecke.
That's normal behavior. You don't see your own
On 8/22/2010 9:51 PM, paul stenquist wrote:
I'm trying to ID this car for an article. Does anyone know what it
might be? It might be a one off, so identification could be
impossible.
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=11479231size=lg
Best guess is a TVR Griffith
For Free: Pentax AF100P flash, in case, no manual or booklet. I've put
batteries in it, appears to work OK. As I've never had a Pentax 110, I'm at
a loss as to how I acquired it - presumably in a bundle of camera stuff.
Found during a clear out of a cupboard this week.
If anyone is using A Pentax
John Sessoms wrote:
Right click the program icon on the desktop and select the
Compatibility tab - check the box for Run this program in
compatibility mode for: ... select the last version of Windows where
the program ran smoothly - Probably XP
I had Photoshop5 LE as a bundle with the
Brian Walters wrote:
For what it's worth, I've run PS 6 successfully on both Vista and
Windows 7 and currently run CS3.
If you can find a second hand copy of anything from PS 6 up, I'm fairly
sure it would run.
Noted. Thanks Brian.
Malcolm
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
I'm currently running Photoshop 5.0 LE which was fine several operating
systems ago, but is causing difficulty now.
Can anyone recommend a later - and cheap (that I can acquire second-hand) -
version that runs OK with Vista and Windows 7, should I update operating
systems again.
Thanks,
Malcolm
Hi Paul,
Wasn't Photoshop LE the precursor to Photoshop Elements? The latest
version of PSE is currently on sale for 70USD. Lightroom is, of
course,
a better choice for photo work and management but it's three times the
price of PSE. And...a combination of PSE and LR will let you do most
Hi Bob,
I don't think the later version of the operating system would be
causing the
problem. It may be that your current machine is not powerful enough
(not
enough memory, not fast enough, generally just too damn weak) to run
the OS
and PS together satisfactorily.
What are thinking of
A link to these turned up elsewhere, seemed worth passing on:
http://blogs.denverpost.com/captured/2010/07/26/captured-america-in-color-f
rom-1939-1943/
Fascinating. Some very much of their time but some difficult to place in the
right decade; I thought that without the caption, number 43
Joseph McAllister wrote:
Ditto. I know I don't have all the receipts, but I started keeping a
spreadsheet to track what I have starting a few years ago, that was
actually incomplete when my last gear was stolen. But I still had the
handwritten inventories stretching back over 30 years, plus
William Robb wrote:
Is one allowed to say: Is this the best you can do?
Is one allowed to pass on his disappointment in the photographer?
The Shel fiasco was more or less that.
It may have gotten jacked past that, but my recollection is that it
started
out pretty much that way.
Yes
Matthew Hunt wrote:
It can be hard to keep up with the PDML. How is one supposed to
check each of umpteen
photo blogs every day to see if they've been updated?
With an RSS reader. I currently have 679 subscribed feeds in Google
Reader.
I wondered the same thing as Rick.
Your reply
Hi Ecke,
This is something currently on my mind. I wrote this reply about ten
times and deleted it again. In a nutshell I would love for the
etiquette of this list to make room for more critical comments, I
rarely see anyone saying an image doesn't work but I do see an
enormous difference in
The great benefit of sticking with Pentax for me has been the continued use
of M42 screw thread lenses. I use them with a small Pentax K ring to M42
thread in both my film and digital SLRs. I've recently acquired for a very
small sum a 200mm M42 lens that has a T mount attached to it. As it still
Thanks Toine,
M42 thread isn't the same as Tmount M42 is 42x1.0 and Tmount 42x0.75.
If you apply some force a Tmount adapter fill fit on a M42 lens. You
won't get infinity focus with this combination.
Tmount are made for special lenses and other things like microscope
and telescope adapters.
P. J. Alling wrote:
Yes. You won't get any more automation, (T mounts are basically just
machined metal), but if you're using K mount lenses it's more
convenient. If it's your only K mount lens it will be less so.
I'm fine on the lack of automation, just trying to save swapping mounts
J.C. O'Connell wrote:
T-mounts have a male thread of 42mm by 0.75mm thead pitch,
M42 lenses have a 42mm by 1.0mm pitch. Don't attempt to
fit a T-mount lens onto a M42 body or M42 adapter directly.
You need to use the correct Tmount adapter with T mount
lenses
Duly noted.
Malcolm
--
P. J. Alling wrote:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1604247/PESO/PESO%20--%20%20pleasefindher.html
Sad subject material, wonderfully captured.
Malcolm
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link
I like just about everything on the K-7 as much of the LX, except the lack
of interchangeable viewfinders. I note that Nikon produces a DR-6 waist
level interchangeable viewfinder, so how much of a demand is this for
manufacturers today? A quick look on Google provided a waist level
viewfinder
Thanks Bob,
I should think a live-view lcd screen would take the place of a waist-
level
finder these days, and be more versatile. I used to have a waist-level
finder for my LX, but rarely used it - I was in blinkered collector
mode
when I had the LXs, and wanted to own the whole system,
Bob W wrote:
Some quite nice photos here, with sound, from this year's Horse Fair:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8728149.stm
This is one of the things I've been wanting to photograph for years and
never get round to (bit like GFM). It's one of the stock events for UK
Done and very happily so.
Just go here and press the Donate button:
http://www.pdml.net/
Malcolm
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
Bob W wrote:
Two interviews next week - fingers crossed!
Best of luck Bob, I hope one of them is what you want and offered to you.
Malcolm
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link
Bob W wrote:
http://m.gizmodo.com/5553765/are-cameras-the-new-guns
the answer to that is No. If you carry a camera you get arrested
immediately. If you carry a gun you can drive around the countryside
shooting people at random.
Cotty wrote:
I have one of these in a box somewhere upstairs. Goodness knows where
I
could use it now in this day and age.
Aircraft photography?
Surrounded by other photographers you might get away with that, but given
recent events, anything that looks slightly different from a normal
A couple of months ago, I finally got a K-7. Unlike most new owners, I've
only really got to open the box and use it in the last week, after actually
reading the manual first (I know, very odd). I bought the ist D when it
first came out and I've never seen up close any of the other Pentax DSLRs,
Having asked the question and read the replies carefully, I've come to the
conclusion that the DFA100mm f2.8 WR macro is the one I want. It is also one
that far exceeds my current budget, so I have started to save for it. In the
meantime, I've acquired some close up lenses, which have solved the
Hi Jack,
Color..
http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=501
BW..
http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=502
K20, da55~...@55mm, f/11, 1/30, ISO 100, bean bag/SUV hood rest
When I've looked at my own photos of older buildings, it's normally an easy
choice as to
Hi Jack,
I get that, Malcolm! Elements separator themselves by their color and,
perhaps as a result, give the image more 'depth.'(?)
The other thing I forgot to add is about the nature of a BW photograph.
Here we are with all the modern technology of colour, multi-frame shots and
video - and
Hi Bill,
As the subject line says, there are pictures. Fifty three of them, in
fact.
http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/pictures/gesos/chicago/index.html
Great pictures one and all.
The picture of the fire truck with a pristine stuffed toy mounted on the
radiator grill was a surprise. Over
Hi John,
Right click on a location on the map and select What's Here and
google
will give you Longitude Latitude. You can use the numbers Google Maps
gives you as a link.
If you're talking about what I think you're talking about try plugging
51.669177,0.003191 into Google Maps as your
Here's a little offering from the HOUR of webcam video I recorded last
night. Included the exhibition photographs and some music to pad it out
to 7 and a half minutes.
Two places to see -
Flash video on my website:
http://www.seeingeye.tv/pages/chicago.html
Really enjoy watching that,
Hi Doug,
About five years ago, a development of six of these were put up
twenty mins
walk from me in a gated development off a main road.
Is there a chance that knowing the location more precisely, I could
find
out more about them? If they're private homes, probably not, unless
the
Bob W wrote:
Well done - I'm very impressed by anyone who can run further than I
can.
Which is to say, I'm very impressed by most people who can run. The
furthest
I've ever run without stopping is 5 miles, and that took me nearly an
hour.
As am I. I used to walk a six mile circuit every
Hi Doug,
Well, if I can realistically expect to afford a completely custom home,
it means the Lottery Fairy visited and price is, practically, not
really
an object. So, if I'm gonna dream, I'm gonna dream big. :-)
Anyway, I'm more about the land than the house. If price is no object,
Hi Bob,
I started jogging about 5 years ago, having not run outdoors since
school,
and only on the treadmill when I had gym membership. I followed a plan
I
found on a squash training site (I'd started playing squash again, and
needed to fitten up) which basically tells you to build up
Walking 6 miles and running 6 miles will burn more or less the same
number
of calories - it's the amount of energy needed to move a certain weight
a
certain distance - but running does it more quickly. I think it will
give
your cardio system a lot more exercise though, which is more
frank theriault wrote:
http://z.about.com/d/architecture/1/0/B/l/glasshouse.jpg
At one time I had one of these in my garden. Granted it had more panes of
glass, was smaller and I called it a greenhouse but in essence there were
few differences (other than price - I bet this costs).
More
Hi Doug,
On PBS (US federal government funded TV) a few days ago, I saw an
episode about Huf Haus. It's apparently an English company founded
by
Germans that does semi custom prefab houses in a way not many
USicans will find familiar. I discovered on their web site that my
taste in houses
Hi Dan,
http://dinerdan.posterous.com/inside-the-summit-diner
As always, Comments, Criticisms, Suggestions, and Abuse are all
welcomed
Once more late into this, catching up at last with PDML mail. I wondered
initially how much variety can be found in the subject, well, everyone is
very
I'd like to acquire a decent AF macro lens, but as usual, there is a limit
on funds.
The SMC F 35-80mm f4 seems to be reasonable in cost, but from reviews read
on the net, is a poor performer. The DFA 100mm f2.8 is about six times more
expensive but has very good reviews.
I'd sooner save up and
701 - 800 of 1859 matches
Mail list logo
