Cotty wrote:
British summers are generally cooler than summers one would experience
(say) in Australia or the United States, but a car in direct
sunshine with no breeze an temps in the 90s (30s C) is quite
possible here in the UK. If I am working, leaving the vehicle
in the sun (currently
Cotty wrote:
Sure, except I'd need about a dozen little fridges ;-) I
keep three dozen spare tapes and several cases of equipment,
10 inch monitor, etc etc. One of the rear seats had to go to
make room - still not enough in the back. The heat does weird
things to the tapes...
Right!
Shel Belinkoff winds up the PDML with:
Last night, wading through all the off topic and inane
messages and comments posted these past few days made me
hungry, and I went downstairs for a snack. Upon opening the
fridge, I realized that the shelves were not well organized.
I tend to put
I must hate me. Apparently, I have just tried to send myself a virus - which
of course I haven't, my anti-virus is fine and my computer checks out OK.
So how do e-mail addresses get hi-jacked for this sort of nonsense? Can
anyone point me at a suitable website to find out how?
Many thanks,
Antonio Aparicio wrote:
I think what happens is your email address gets picked up
somewhere on the net and inserted into a spam/virus email as
if it were sent by you which it is not. You then get a virus
alert warning in return from the recipients system.
Nice :-(
Alternatively, you
D. Glenn Arthur Jr. wrote:
That's pretty much it. I'm not sure whether there are any
recent worms which don't forge the return address, so these
days you can pretty much figure that anyone _except_ the
listed sender might own the infected machine.
{Highly informative e-mail kept, but
Bob W wrote:
The best conspiracy theories cannot be proved, but this one
is out of
the ballpark
there may be something in it. Think Clark Kent/Superman, snip
I hope there is no suggestion that to take quality photographs, underwear
must be worn as an 'outer' garment.
Malcolm
Jostein wrote:
As I just wrote in another mail, what probably happened is
that someone with your address in their address book was
infected by a virus that propagated your email address to an
address collector.
Noted. Such e-mails are now reviewed by 'Mr Delete-Key'.
Now for my weekly
Jostein wrote:
Hello Jostein,
Comments interspaced:
When a virus infects a person's computer, it tries to
replicate itself by sending copies of itself to others. It's
source of email addresses is naturally the contacts lists in
the infected computer. That's the basic of all mail worms
Graywolf wrote:
Well, we can be kind of glad. You see trojans are pretty
innoctuous, you have to be an internet idiot to get them.
Worms are worse, and true viruses are a real bitch to deal
with as they can latch themselves onto about any bit of data
and get into your system without you
Bob W wrote:
you might to think about installing a spam filter in your mail client.
These use a technique called Bayesian probability to work out
from the contents whether or not a message is spam. You can
set actions to invoke according to the probability of the
message being spam, most
D. Glenn Arthur Jr. wrote:
Another interesting post, comments interspaced:
Malcolm Smith wrote:
There is a mindset for the creation of viruses, that I just don't
understand. I can't understand vandalism either, wanton
destruction of
public and/or private property for no purpose makes
frank theriault wrote:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2376852
Ah! Sweet! She has her Father's ears!
Nice to know that one of your daughters is following (Pentax) photography.
Nice capture Frank.
Malcolm
frank theriault wrote:
She is interested in photography. I should buy a roll of
cheapy pre-paid processing film, and let her fool around with
one of my Spotties for a while. I think at 11 she's old
enough. She's actually not bad with disposable cameras, so I
should let her try a real
Tom wrote:
After dragging most of this crap to my apartment -
http://www.bigdayphoto.com/tom/images/crap.jpg
My mailman has made an executive decision -
http://www.bigdayphoto.com/tom/images/mayer.jpg
Yes, Tanya has sent me so much junk that the mailman believes
she lives here.
Markus Maurer wrote:
To sweeten your weekend, I have two questions for you (and
yes, the results of the opinion poll will be published here)
1 Which 3 photos you made are your most loved ones?
Unlike most of the surveys that have been here before, when you ask which of
the photographs
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
http://home.earthlink.net/~digisnaps/franks_cat.html
Poor little chap. He's tired out after chasing all those mice about on his
bike.
Malcolm
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Kevin Waterson
If you have any reasons why
children should be learning in a darkroom, I would love
to hear them and pass them on.
It teaches them that there is life beyond the computer screen, which
many kids don't seem to
Cotty posted and ran:
In this day and age, I can't think of one good reason, except
for historical interest.
zips Nomex suit on
Look at your answer to another posting - get the jewellers screwdrivers out
and get stuck in: if we don't have children 'doing' things, such as
dismantling
John Francis wrote:
We live in a society fuelled by instant gratification and
disposable
everything. We need children today who will want to know
how things work.
There, in brief, is the nub of it.
You can't teach anybody who doesn't want to learn.
Trying to teach photography to
Hi Adelheid,
I am afraid this is Jostein's part.
The autopug is his baby.
If you are in doubt please send the submission as mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with a sensible Subject.
Otherwise it gets caught in my Spamfilter.
Then I'll check whether it made it or not and submit it myself.
It
Bob W wrote:
there is nobody who specialises in Pentax, although they all
tend to have a few pieces. Your best bet is to visit them all
in the West End one day to see if they've got anything in.
I regret to say that I've done it so often that I have a route:
Jessops, Tottenham Ct. Rd.
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Marnie Shel,
Digital photography can provide instant gratification. One
of the most often heard comments here and in other places is
that people like the idea of seeing their photos immediately.
Sure. Taking pictures of books or whatever for eBay or pictures which
Paul Stenquist wrote:
Her eyes drew me in. But I did enhance them a bit in PS. (See
above.) However, the color was there, and the wall was a good match.
Paul
The skill is there to make an excellent picture.
Will you do the same for a certain 50 year old next year? That will
certainly
Paul Stenquist made me feel inadequate by, posting these links:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2399802
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2399804
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2399807
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2399808
I'd just like to wish those attending a fantastic time.
Enjoy yourselves. Tell us all about it later.
Malcolm
William Robb wrote:
Would I be better off getting an assortment of primes
as opposed to 1 or 2 zooms? And which primes would be
best?
Buying prime lenses is dangerous. You soon realize that you never
actually have as many as you want/ need.
This mailing list is a very bad place to be
Bob W wrote:
You can all sing Happy Birthday to me (June 2nd)! I can't
make it to Washington, but I will be driving round the safari
park at Woburn, taking photographs of the lions.
Happy Birthday! Best not to celebrate by being munched by a damn great lion.
Malcolm
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
I shoot equally badly with either eye.
Hey! I resemble that remark!
I know I favour my right eye, but this demands a test. What if I take better
photographs with my left eye(?)another sleepless night ahead :-)
Malcolm
Cotty wrote:
I'll have to wait until next time as it was after sunset
here. I think
the next transit (8 years away) will be better for NZ provided the
weather is good.
It's my understanding that the next transit will be in 2247
Wow! And we moan about Pentax introducing new models,
Marnie wrote:
Oops, sorry, I was mucking around last night and changed the url.
http://members.aol.com/eactivist/GFMPeople/
http://members.aol.com/eactivsit/GFMNature/Pages/
Not consistent, I know. I am trying to revamp my site. Right
now the index to eactivist pulls up only PAWs and I
Marnie:
http://members.aol.com/eactivist/GFMPeople/
http://members.aol.com/eactivist/GFMNature/Pages/
Mark Roberts:
http://www.robertstech.com/temp/gfm2004.htm
Jostein:
http://www.oksne.net
Cotty:
http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps
Graywolf:
Paul Stenquist wrote:
I may have shown a pic of it here, but it's coral and white.
I put a shot up on Photo Net. This was shot with the 6x7 and
the 300/4 (just to keep this OT :-) Paul
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2438913size=lg
As you know Paul, a friend of mine a few
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PS for those who wondered about my father, he's mending
rapidly and he even felt well enough to go out and take some
pictures with us yesterday. And that's my second ON-topic
comment, since he uses a K1000. :-)
Great news :-))
Malcolm
**Only one extra addition today**
Marnie:
http://members.aol.com/eactivist/GFMPeople/
http://members.aol.com/eactivist/GFMNature/Pages/
Mark Roberts:
http://www.robertstech.com/temp/gfm2004.htm
Jostein:
http://www.oksne.net
Cotty:
http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps
Graywolf:
**Many thanks for all the corrections and additions. Keep them coming!**
Marnie:
http://members.aol.com/eactivist/GFMPeople/
http://members.aol.com/eactivist/GFMNature/Pages/
Mark Roberts:
http://www.robertstech.com/g_father.htm
http://www.robertstech.com/temp/gfm2004.htm
**The list grows, thank you everyone**
Marnie:
http://members.aol.com/eactivist/GFMPeople/
http://members.aol.com/eactivist/GFMNature/Pages/
Mark Roberts:
http://www.robertstech.com/g_father.htm
http://www.robertstech.com/temp/gfm2004.htm
Jostein:
http://www.oksne.net
frank theriault wrote:
Thanks, Malcolm, for compiling them.
I hope you're able to keep doing it, and by the time
everything's posted, it will make a tremendous souvenir for
those of us who were there, and those of you who weren't (and
hopefully, an incentive for you to come next year).
Cotty wrote:
What about 'stone the crows' ??
Why crows?
http://www.quinion.com/words/qa/qa-sto1.htm
Malcolm
Mark Roberts wrote:
Some more tidbits:
104 people (out of about 160 present) completed the survey for us.
46% were first-timers at GFM.
12.5% have never used a digital camera.
40% own a DSLR.
32.7% very much want a digital contest next year.
19.2% very much *don't* want a digital contest
Mark Roberts wrote:
It was a survey regarding shooting preferences, digital use,
digital experience, printing habits, software use, etc.
Neither Manual Focus nor Medium Format entered into any of
the questions.
Thanks Mark.
Malcolm
5706*** Nov 2003
Malcolm
Graywolf wrote:
I guess I should mention that The letters DL placed upon
lenses by the advertising department seldom, if ever, means
the lens is diffraction limited.
If they were taken to court about it they would probably say
it means DeLuxe.
Gosh - I've got 'DL' on the back of our
Rob Studdert wrote:
And choice within other brands has dictated that many new
DSLR adopters are purchasing 300Ds, I know of at least 3 in
my group of friends, 2 of which owned older Canon ystems and
the other a film PS owner. No one I know outside this list
has yet purchased a *ist D.
Bob W wrote:
Helps to have some good products. Available. Before I went
looking for a little ps digital camera on Saturday I checked
some specs. I would very much like to have looked at the
Pentax Optio 33LF. I could have bought one from Amazon, but I
wanted to be able to play with
Cotty wrote:
How about this?:
http://www.douglasdc3.com/
Nice photos too.
For God's sake Malcolm, don't give the aviators an inch!
There'll be hairy-knuckled talk of trim levers and leather
flying goggles in no time, those seat-of-your pants flights
and scraping Finagle-knows-what
Anders Hultman wrote:
Maybe I'm missing something here, not having English as my
first language. Is the world terminal sinister in any way?
Yes, I know it means the end of something and that that
something could be a persons life, as well as a ferry line or
a communications circuit, but
Bob W wrote:
I'm a big fan of Leonard Cohen.
Many people ask How can you listen to that stuff? It's music
to kill yourself by.
I say Hey - it cheers me up. At least there's one person out
there who's more miserable than I am.
Perhaps he could get sponsored by Pentax to write a few
Jens Bladt wrote:
It seems that some of you are still buying film gear. Are you
camera collectors or do you actually still use film (like me)?
I have been very close to selling all my 35mm film gear
(Pentax bodies). I wonder if I should keep it or sell. Is ait
already to late to sell at
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Forget what I said earlier. Just let the photo stand by
itself. I said too much in my initial post, proving, or at
least giving credence to, the idea that the viewer can be
influenced by too much information.
What difference does it make where the garden is in
www.mynetcologne.de/~nc-kellersv2/19.JPG
Wow!!
Malcolm
Pål Jensen wrote:
Although this fits well in with Pentax lack of marketing
strategies (perhaps it is a strategy!), I was actually told
that Pentax had no plan to meet demand of the *ist D ever.
They would never make any volume with this camera. This was
at the introduction and plans may
mike wilson wrote:
I think that would be more and more likely to be Canon, Nokia
and Sony.
Not necessarily in that order.
Quite likely. Shame Pentax isn't in the top three.
Malcolm
Here's the background to this minor matter; from time to time I visit local
car boot sales and on rare occasions I've seen boxes of 35mm colour slides
for sale. Nearly all of these I have looked at, put down and walked on, but
I suppose twice in 5 years I have made an offer on them (silly money,
John Coyle wrote:
Yes Malcolm, I have. I intend to donate a collection of
slides, negatives and memorabilia taken or collected in the
1960's onwards to an institute set up to maintain an
historical archive of the location, and I have given them
free and clear copyright in my will. As
frank theriault wrote:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2492691
Another interesting capture.
I'm beginning to think dogs aren't allowed to walk in Canada.
Malcolm
Surely the comparison of the 'Pro' digital camera against the film mega
enlargement should have been against an MF camera - which such a studio shot
would have been taken on if it was a real film shoot?
The film enlargement was better anyway ;-)
Malcolm
William Robb wrote:
PS - I grudgingly accept that digital image storing takes up much
less
space, but I like my slides.
It's just as easy to lose an image though.
Thanks! I'm sure I'll find that myself very soon :-)
Malcolm
Leon Altoff wrote:
Hi Leon,
Don't believe it when people tell you that digital storage
takes up less space. I fit 54 raw files to a cd. I have two
copies of each CD in different brands of cd with different
coatings (one silver one gold). The difference is not that
great. Maybe I
Antonio Aparicio wrote:
Personally I prefer transparent slide sheets, in
chronological order, as I can easlily flick throught he pages
to find the slide I want.
These do have their advantages, especially to see a page at a time, but they
take up so much room.
Boxes I find anoying as I
Graywolf wrote:
Negafile used to make such a thing. I considted of stackable
wooden drawers and a stand to put the stack of drawers on.
The made them for slides as well as about anysize negative
you could think of. I do not know if they are made any longer.
Just checked google, yes they
Bob W wrote:
http://store.preservationequipment.co.uk/store/show-product.cfm?p=656
http://store.preservationequipment.co.uk/store/show-product.cfm?p=654
http://www.adorama.com/LG1500G.html?sid=10892234383850608
http://www.conservation-by-design.co.uk/acidfree/acidfree29.html
Thanks Bob!
Brian Walters wrote:
Hi Brian,
I agree with Leon in that it doesn't matter much how you
store slides, provided they are stored safely and provided
there is a way to easily retrieve the ones you want.
When you have a packing boxes full of slides, it becomes a major problem.
Mine are in
Shel wrote:
Time for me to move on. Have a long vacation coming up in
a few days
and I probably won't return to the list for quite some
time. Frankly,
I don't feel much a part of things here ... so, thanks to
all who've
been helpful.
I hope I've been able to help or
Leon Altoff wrote:
If your wife is good with Access and is willing to make
something that is tailor made to your needs I'm happy to
share my Access photo database as a starting point. It's
written in Access 97 but will convert to any later versions.
Thanks Leon,
I'll raise this subject
Herb Chong wrote:
none of my friends are willing to be subject to a slide show.
the only reason i shot slides when i did was because
magazines insisted.
I rarely hear of slide shows. My own have been going since I was at school
and it's mainly the same folk who came to the first few who
Tom C wrote:
Many of us, and let me presume all of us, filter out all
kinds of things we don't want to see or hear. My satellite
TV controller has plenty of filters set up.
This constant filtering from all sources becomes exhausting
and tiresome. I personally would prefer that the
Rob Studdert wrote:
So who here has shed their excess film bodies in view of the
pending fate of film?
Not me.
I have, I'm down to the smallest number of film bodies I've
had for many years and I don't expect the number to ever
increase either.
I caught myself looking at another LX
Don Sanderson wrote:
Now that I'm a member of the PDML I'm sure I can count on
y'all to buy all my stuff promptly at the BIN price, right?
I don't like to alarm you, but joining the PDML *and* looking at eBay, will
normally result in you becoming a power buyer.
Malcolm
Ann Sanfedele wrote:
LOL!
So did any of you wags actually tell him how to do it?
David, send an email here (if you are still on
list)
put unsubscribe in the subject line and you are outta here
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Funny people can subscribe and not unsubscribe. I had a quick look at the
Cotty wrote:
LOL. Actually another PDMLer wrote to me off list mentioning
this. The cat is called Duki and I was surprised she paid
attention. Then I figured it out. On the front of the D60
there is a focus-assist lamp (for AF) which I have set
through custom function so it never comes
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Who on this list has never developed their own film and made
prints in a darkroom?
Me too sadly, until I joined PDML I had never thought of it either. I've
retained many of the posts which have discussed the subject and I have
bought a couple of books as well. When the
William Robb wrote:
Anyway, if you want a laugh, check out:
http://www.komkon.org/~wrobb/
Most interesting, thanks.
Malcolm
frank theriault wrote:
Shoot Lots!
Film is cheap. With digital, shooting lots is even cheaper
(after the initial investment of equipment and peripherals).
Well, I've done just that! 5 rolls sent off for development last night.
Development isn't as cheap though g.
Malcolm
Francis Alviar wrote:
I can't wait to get an *ist D. However I would like to ask
everyone's opinion whether it's a good time to jump in now or
wait for the next Pentax dSLR. Where do you see this going
in the near future? Will Pentax release a higher resolution
camera (8 or 9 MP) or
Herb Chong wrote:
like i said, Malcolm, are you sure it wasn't her camera you opened?
You may well be right :-)
Malcolm
Cotty wrote:
My Pentax wish for 2004 is that the company starts to embark
on the very beginnings of a concerted effort to try and
initiate a few first tantalising steps on the road to setting
out along the path that leads to a determined effort to build
up the brand and turn it into the
Nick wrote:
Thought you might like to see some of my pictures:
http://www.edmontoncameraclub.co.uk/nickclark/page.html
Click on a image to get a bigger one and some information.
I'd welcome some comments.
Very much like the shot of the new Lloyds Building - well it is to me, but
I used to
Hi Nick,
Lloyds Building - yes it's looking a bit old these days,
especially being so close to the new guerkin building.
I really must refresh my memory and take a few rolls of film of it and what
was the Nat West building in St. Mary Axe off Leadenhall Street. Actually,
most of the immediate
frank theriault wrote:
Ooo! Oooo!
Battle of Epping Forest. Genesis, on Selling England by
the Pound.
Brilliant album, which I bought new - sigh - vinyl ;-)
So, Malcolm, you live in Epping Forest, eh? g
Not *actually* in it Frank, but so close to it, you can hear the birdsong,
Tanya Mayer wrote:
*eek*, it's a wonder that people aren't sick all the time
with colds and flu with temperature fluctuations such as those...
Tan,
I don't know how you cope with the heat ;-)
Some of my best holidays (visiting family) have involved wandering around
Perthshire (Scotland) in
Peter Jordan wrote:
One thing never to do when talking with your customers is to
relating what you charge with what it costs you. They won't
recognise your cost structure and vastly underestimate your
costs.Say you go into a restaurant and query the £5 that they
are charging for French
So, which Pentax body do you feel is the toughest ... the one you'd
take through the rain and the mud and the Atacama desert, and toss
into the back of your rattling old pickup and not worry about it
getting the crap knocked out of it?
1. 6x7 - pickup truck will expire first.
2. K1000
J. C. O'Connell wrote:
Something just occurred to me. With today's extremely high
divorce rate, does most of the photographer's work end up in
a dumpster sooner or later? Kind of a shame huh?
One of my school friends had a marriage that only lasted a year; came back
to find half the house
J. C. O'Connell wrote:
Another question:
If you shoot for fun, what gives you the most fun, the shoot
or the results or both?
Landscape photography during the winter months, in foul weather. Nothing
else, photographically, comes close to the enjoyment I have doing that.
Malcolm
The interesting posting by Frank 'one R' Theriault on people and their
bikes has reminded me of something I saw late last year.
I saw someone photographing a house that was having work done to it, with
builders filling a skip with the properties old bathroom and assumed he was
an agent, taking a
Bob W wrote:
back in the good old days Steptoe Son would do the rounds
every week and take the stuff away for recycling. I can still
remember rag bone men in Leeds and Bradford from the 60s and 70s.
I can remember a few in the early 70s, but the horse had been replaced by a
flat bed mark
mike wilson wrote:
About 15years ago I found two whole Triumph Bonnevilles in a
skip. As far as I know, they are still running.
That is both amazing and very sad. Who on earth would throw away a Triumph
Bonneville, let alone two of them?
New next door neighbour has just completely
John Coyle wrote:
Gentrification and 'urban renewal' are something that I have
been working with other local people to try and control in my
suburb. Many fine old 'Queenslander' houses have been
knocked down and either modern rubbish or 'Tuscan'
monstrosities have taken their place.
William Robb wrote:
That is both amazing and very sad. Who on earth would throw
away a Triumph
Bonneville, let alone two of them?
A better question is, who in their right mind would buy one
in the first
place?
I like British motorbikes, my late father used to have a Vincent Black
Bob W wrote:
has anybody used these people for E6 or C41 processing? If
so, what are they like, please?
I started using Dlab7 a couple of years ago and they now do all my E6
processing. Great prices from them as they are based in Guernsey, so small
exports attract no dreaded VAT.
For C41, I
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I started about 3 years ago in my area.I'm mostly rural with
the ever present urban sprawl only a few concessions away to
my rear(southg) I started taking pictures,mostly winter BW
of farm properties,old houses and barns,old farm impliments etc.
Now that i have
Nick Clark wrote:
The MX with the 40mm f2.8 pancake lens makes a great rugged
carry anywhere kit
There are a few here that carry this combination; mine lives in a coat
pocket.
Malcolm
Nick Clark wrote:
Cameraworld have it at £1079.99, or £1199.99 with 18-35 FAJ lens.
It's a good bit cheaper than when I acquired one, but it's also the first
time that hasn't concerned me. It's already earned it's keep in terms of
images it's captured.
Malcolm
Bob W wrote:
Hi Bob,
thanks. Do they have an option for cut sleeve on the 35mm
E6, or is it just mounted?
As Steve Jolly has already replied, that option is available.
Why do you use someone different for your c41?
Late 2001/early 2002 I was going through many rolls of film and decided
Cotty wrote:
In a word, no. Stanstead is a 2 hour drive for me and way
over in a different TV region. The whole Stanstead thing will
be VERY contentious over the coming years. It's a nest of vipers.
Yep. This one is set to run and run...
Problem is, air travel is increasing and there
Amita Guha wrote:
Government won't pay. People will argue about the funding and never
agree on a suitable re-location.
What about an organization like the National Trust stepping in?
The National Trust is a charitable organisation who rely on property being
'given' to them, generally of
Bill Owens wrote:
Here in the USA, airport parking lots are an airport's
largest source of income.
Here in the UK, particularly airports like Gatwick, Heathrow and Stanstead
have astonishingly good bus, coach and rail links (and Underground to
central London in the case of Heathrow) and
William Robb wrote:
We have a lot of excess land here that can be used as parking
lots that you
in the UK just don't have.
True.
Not that we should be turning excess land into parking lots, mind you.
Well said.
Malcolm
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hmm. That brings up another point -- not all buildings that
ought to have been preserved are lost to progress.
Especially in the US, an awful lot of historical buildings
were made of wood, less durable than stone. It's still
tragic to lose history, even when
601 - 700 of 1859 matches
Mail list logo
