HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dp@world.std.com (Jeff DelPapa)
Subject: Re: How to make screen shots
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 23:32:06 GMT

In article <1992Dec13.182651.2809@andersen.co.uk> sdpage@andersen.co.uk (Stephen Page) writes:
>robertw@informix.com (Robert Weinberg) writes:
>>> In article <1992Dec3.103109.1352@newsserver.rrzn.uni-hannover.de>  
>>andreas@appel012.hydromech.uni-hannover.de () writes:
>
>>We had a guy over here taking screen shots for a brochure. He made a virtual tent  
>>of black fabric around the computer screen and camera to eliminate screen  
>>reflection.
>
>Good idea, if you can get it sorted out. Reflections are very hard to
>get rid of - I usually take screen shots late at night with all the building
>lights turned off.  Another advantage of killing the light is that the 
>plastic bit around the screen doesn't show up on the film.
>
>I bought a focussing screen with a cross-hatch pattern to help get the
>camera level. This is harder than it might seem when photographing a 
>largely-black screen in a blacked-out room.
>
>See the FAQ for other suggestions.

My favorite trick for squaring the screen is to use a peice of string
to the 4 corners, tho I always use a cheapie level to be sure....  I
guess I have been lucky - every time I wanted to do this, there has
been a conference room in the center of the bldg, and either
windowless, or posseses of a small window by the door that is easily
covered. Conference rooms are usually a little bigger than an office,
so you have a bit more room to work...

Getting the screen's convergence touched up before shooting off of it
is a good idea, and leave the pattern (usually some sort of a grid) on
the screen when you are squaring up the camera.

<dp>
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: michael9@odie.cs.mun.ca (Michael Sullivan)
Subject: Minolta or Canon?
Keywords: Which one?
Organization: CS Dept., Memorial University of Newfoundland
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 15:11:44 GMT


	[ The story thus far - may old Pratica has bit the bucket, so I need a new
	camera, but I don't want to give up my Tamron 70-210 zoom.  Many people
	have recommended a Pentax K1000 as a replacement.]

	I've recently been thinking about purchasing either a Minolta Maxxum 3xi, 
or a Canon EOS Rebel S-11.  They are both within an acceptable price range.
My reasoning for going with a more expensive model then the K1000, is that I
don't feel good about spending all kinds of money on a camera that doesn't have
the features of my old one.  So I may as well just bite the bullet and buy
a camera that is a little more flexible.  (The manual models were not very
useful for "on the run" photos)

   If you've used either a 3xi or a Rebel, could you let me have your comments
on them?

Thanks in advance!

-- 
|uunet!garfield!michael9|'"Proof denies faith and without faith I am nothing,"|
|michael9@odie.cs.mun.ca| says God.  "But you have given us proof," says      |
|POB 756,St.John's,Nfld.| man, "Therefore you do not exist. QED." "Oh, my,"   |
|A1S 1G8                | says God, and disappears in a puff of logic.'       |
From: dbernard@clesun.Central.Sun.COM (Dave Bernard)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Mirror lock-up, Has anybody really tested?
Date: 15 Dec 92 13:00:33 GMT
Reply-To: dbernard@clesun.Central.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems

Michael Covington writes:

>There were some tests of mirror lock in _Shutterbug_ a few months ago.
>T>he author found that it helps, but not as much as people suppose.
>(Bear in mind that most of the vibration that you feel and hear is _after_
>the exposure, not before it.)


That particular article was notoriously unprecise,however.  The author just
took some non-new cameras, without any prior adjustment, calibration, or anything,
and just one model of each camera.  Each camera may be so out of whack that it
is non-representative.  For example, a Leica M3, with its slow moving shutter and
no mirror, did not exactly shine in the vibration department.  I found the article
to be somewhat typical of the kind of "testing" found in SHutterbug- it left me
disappointed, and did nothing to clear up an important issue.

	Dave
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: aj@lew.rosemount.com (Andy Joe)
Subject: Hasselblad Classic
Organization: Rosemount, Inc.
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 00:02:54 GMT


I've just sold off all of my Leica cameras and lenses (except for
my M3) and now I am very seriously considering buying a Hasselblad Classic
outfit and was wondering what other people opinions are.  

Is it worth it?  Is there something else that's better?  

All comments appreciated.

thanxs.

aj.
From: ray@tsw.UUCP (Ray Izumi)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: WD-40 Remover?
Date: 18 Dec 92 02:50:33 GMT
Organization: The System Works, Redmond, WA

In article <1992Dec16.151119.17167@bcrka451.bnr.ca> poole@bnr.ca (Thomas Poole) writes:
>on the shutter. I've got the lenses off and tried
>to clean the shutter but the WD-40 is all over it 
>and keeps running back. I tried using a little
>isopropyl alcohol to dilute the WD-40 and hope
>that it would help the WD-40 evaporate but it didn't
>work that well. Can someone suggest something to 
>dissolve this stuff? The camera isn't worth much
>so going to a pro is out of the question.
>
Hmmmm. Speaking as a former analytical chemist, I would say that no matter
what you use to clean up this mess you run the risk of doing some serious
damage to any plastic elements there might be in the body. If it were me,
I would try some very pure hexane perhaps. Since most people don't have a
bottle of this hanging around, maybe try some Coleman camp stove fuel,
otherwise known as "white gas". This stuff is heavily filtered, so you
won't leave any grit behind, and it is pretty pure with no heavy hydro-
carbons to leave an oily residue. It will take many rinsings to get rid
of all the WD-40, but it will dissolve WD-40.

After cleaning, leave the body open in a warm (not hot!) place for a few
days so it can dry out.

PLEASE REMEMBER that this is a measure of absolute desperation. I would
not try this until you have exhausted all other possibilities. On the
other hand, it just might work. And it sounds like you don't have much
to lose at this point.

Good luck - let us know if you find something that works.


-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ray Izumi, The System Works, Redmond, WA     206-823-4685      uunet!tsw!ray
"Put the pillow over your head, scream and cry - the garbage is coming!"
           - New York City Commissioner of Sanitation
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson)
Subject: Re: Depth of Field preview - any 'cheap` SLRs?
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 04:26:03 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories

In article <1992Dec17.030720.205@crd.ge.com> kassover@rumsey.crd.ge.com (David Kassover) writes:
>I suspect that dof preview levers started disappearing in the mid
>70's because they were holdovers from the days of stop-down
>meters.  When did Pentax introduce the K-mount?

No no no.  I have an ancient Pentax H-3, which I bought in 1962.  It
has depth of field preview, but it doesn't even have a meter!

  -- David Jacobson

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: samm@panix.com (Sam Merrell)
Subject: Re: Want info on Kodak Center for Creative Imaging 
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 19:54:15 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC

In <1992Dec9.220126.19087@newstand.syr.edu> dbarberi@mothra.syr.EDU (London W11) writes:

>Hey net.folks,

>   Is anyone familiar with the Kodak Center for Creative Imaging up
>in Maine?  I'd be interested to hear from people who have attended classes
>or who have interned there. Also, does the center have an email address? 
----------------------------------------

David, CCI, while at the seeming end of the world, does a good job teaching
photographers and other professional creatives  emerging technology. Courses
range from basics to advanced image manipulation techniques to trade issues
and specifific applications.  No one from the Center is online regularly
that I know of except Glen F -- on the WELL... try fleglei@well.sf.ca.us.

Sam Merrell
From: kjm@buc.edu.au (Kevin Moore)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Scratch on Front Element
Date: 16 Dec 1992 01:32:06 GMT
Organization: Physics Department - Ballarat University College
NNTP-Posting-Host: 141.132.16.8

In article <1992Dec14.195510.8233@athena.cs.uga.edu> mcovingt@aisun3.ai.uga.edu (Michael Covington) writes:

>In article <1992Dec14.181759.24827@cs.UAlberta.CA> rodney@cs.UAlberta.CA (Rodney Gitzel) writes:
>>
>>What effect will a small scratch on the front
>> element have on a lens?  The lens in question
>> is a Canon FD 135 f2 with a 72mm filter size,
>> and the scratch is about 1mm, right near the 
>> centre.

>It may have slightly _less_ effect if you fill it with black stuff
>of some sort, so it can only obstruct light and not scatter it.

EEEK! Just leave it alone, and it will not cause any great problem. The 
scratches which are a problem are caused by attempts to clean lenses with 
tissues which are unsuitable for the job, (or filling scratches with black 
stuff) scouring the surface with microfine scratches. To see them, look 
through the lens at something black, while shining a light obliquely into 
the lens. They appear as patches of pearlescence. They will be obvious if 
they are there, and it's the paranoiacally clean photographers who get them. 
The pearlescence is the scattered light, which causes a loss of contrast. 

>Apart from reducing the resale value of your lens, it will have very
>little effect.

Agreed.
******************************************************************************
The reason is that the program was written in  	*	Kevin Moore
BASIC, a sort of computer baby-talk.            *     kjm@buc.edu.au
                              Richard Dawkins	*
******************************************************************************
From: marc@milan.East.Sun.COM (Marc Thompson-Sun-Vienna VA-Systems Engineer)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Dye Transfers
Date: 11 Dec 92 19:39:03 GMT
Reply-To: marc@milan.East.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: milan.east.sun.com

I have heard seveal people talk dye transfers. Could someone elaborate on
this subject?  Also, is there a  good book that discusses this subject?

Is it the same or different than color seperations in magazines?

Thanks,

Marc &&
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (JOHN P. GLORIA)
Subject: Re:  Cibachrome-care & feeding of...
Organization: Pacific * Bell
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 18:21:09 GMT

In article <1992Dec13.092438.13478@sfu.ca> forman@fraser.sfu.ca (Pamela Catherine Forman) writes:
>I took several cibachrome prints in to be framed the other day
>and noticed that there were light scratches all over the prints
>as well as a finger print on one (probablly myself!).  I was told
>that there is no way to get rid of the finger print.  Is this true?
>The prints were returned to me from the shop with layers of tissue
>in between the prints.  Could this have caused the scratches?  
>What is the best way to take care of this type of print untill it
>gets framed??  Someone told me that it is ok to dry-mount them and
>then I was told NEVER!  Who's right (or is this just dependent on
>skill of handler)?
>  
>How different is doing cibachrome from B & W developement and
>processing (I guess what I want to know is it within the realm
>of beginners to do)?
>
>Thanks for the help!!  It's too expensive for me to accidentally
>muck up good prints!! 
>
I am not an expert framer, nor have I ever framed any
type of print. I have however had about a dozen ciba's
framed and ALL WITHOUT any prints or scratches on them.
I think you should seek another framing shop, i.e.,
a professional one.
-- 
 ---------  John Gloria - jpglori@pacbell.com	--------	
	"You cannot depend on your eyes when your imagination
  is out of focus."   -     Mark Twain
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: fourie@odie.ee.wits.ac.za (Andre Fourie)
Subject: Does Minolta X-700 allow shutter priority auto mode
Keywords: Minolta, camera
Organization: Wits Electrical Engineering (Novell Users).
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 11:11:25 GMT

I have purchased a 2nd hand Minolta X-700 camera. The camera seems to 
support only aperture priority "A" and program "P" modes as well as a manual 
mode. Somebody told me that the camera can be used in shutter priority mode 
as well. Since the aperture is controlled by the camera in the program mode 
this appears to be feasible. Does anybody have more information on this. I 
shall also appreciate any other useful information on this model of camera.

Andre Fourie
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: glp@fig.citib.com (Greg Parkinson)
Subject: Re: Prints from Slides - NYC
Originator: glp@merlin
Organization: Citibank IBISM
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 16:45:00 GMT


In article <3b=S02DR2fU801@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com>, bjs@RUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Barry Sherman) writes:

|> The options (of which I'm aware):
|> 
|> 1.  Inexpensive inter-negative:
|>     This is what your local lab did.  Basically, they shoot a 35mm negative
|>     of your slide and then print it.  Usually you lose a lot of sharpness
|>     and often the contrast suffers - the look is either very "flat" or
|>     very "harsh".  Also, the color balance may be off - there can be a definite
|>     "tint" to the print.  I've been most unhappy with prints made this way.
|>     Never again.

I found a place in the Wall St. area that did
*very* good work for me.  I had shot a lot of
slides on vacation and I had wanted to make prints
from some of them to give to friends.  

I took them to a one-hour photo place down in Hanover
Square, next to the Reuben's (I was clued in because
they process 120 film) and prints they made were of
a uniformly high quality.  There was a noticeable difference
based on which slide film, with the best - almost exact
match - coming from EPP.

He charges $2/slide, and will give discounts for larger
quantities.

So it *is* possible, you just have to look and get
lucky.

-- 
Greg Parkinson                  Phone: 212-657-7814  Fax: 212-825-8607
Citibank,111 Wall Street        E-Mail: glp@fig.citib.com
New York, New York  10043
The opinions expressed are my own and not those of the big 'ol bank.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: nigel@kathunk.phaedrav.on.ca (Nigel M Burnett)
Subject: Re: Dumb Photographers
Organization: as little as possible
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 20:23:53 GMT

Craig Richmond - division (craig@ec.uwa.oz.au) wrote:
: When a big burst of fireworks goes off up in the sky, the view that can be
: seen of all the camera flashes going off on the shore (show is held over a
: big river in front of Perth) is probably more impressive than the fireworks
: themselves.

I hope you have a photo of that - the same 2-5 seconds that one uses
for fireworks shots should be a good centre point to bracket around.

They don't do that at the Victoria Day (May 24-closest Monday) holiday
at the fireworks show I go to.  (Ashbridge's Bay for the locals).  The
path lights are a pain - about 10 or 12 feet high, they're quite hard 
to keep out of your f.o.v. without a moderate telephoto - and I like
using my 20mm on some shots!  Wish they'd turn them off.  Bitch, bitch.

Anyway, I like your story.  Here's another that I remember being posted
here a couple of years ago.  Sorry I can't ascribe attribution.  About
500m (?) south of the core of Toronto are a group of popular sandbars
that one reaches by an elderly pituresque ferry boat.  Returning in
the summer evening, someone picked up the 'instamatic' and shot the
Toronto skyline.  The afore-mentioned poster turned to his friend, and
asked, "Wow - did you see the WHOLE skyline light up there?" (Or words
to that effect)

Cheers (off to the darkroom to make a couple of Christmas presents)
Nigel
-- 
The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of
a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.  His own
good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant.   John Stuart Mill

Nigel Burnett: 78 Normandy Blvd, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M4L 3K3, 416-690-1834
Send e-mail to nigel@kathunk.phaedrav.on.ca or try uunet.ca!kink!kathunk!nigel
From: feldman@hal9k.cxo.dec.com (james feldman)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: WD-40 Remover?
Date: 16 Dec 92 18:32:01 GMT
Reply-To: feldman@hal9k.cxo.dec.com (james feldman)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation

In article <1992Dec16.151119.17167@bcrka451.bnr.ca>, poole@bnr.ca (Thomas Poole) writes:
|>not turn the lens to focus so I sprayed it with a
|>little WD-40 and let it sit. An hour later everything
|>was working fine. The next day the WD-40 had seeped
|>in behind the lens, behind the next lens and onto the
|>shutter. (between the lens shutter). This stuff really
|>works! A little too good in fact. Now the shutter
|>doesn't work. 

|> Can someone suggest something to 
|>dissolve this stuff? The camera isn't worth much
|>so going to a pro is out of the question.
You might try one of the teflon based solvents (trichloro**flouro ethane) or
maybe perc (perchloro ethylene, dry cleaning fluid).  The first is often used
in the computer industry as a tape drive cleaner.  The second might be
available at a supermarket or at a car parts place, as disk brake cleaner. 
Both should be used sparingly with lots of ventilation.

Your next problem will be what to use after you've flushed out all the lube.  I
would advise you to call some camera repair place and ask what they use (and
would they give or sell you a little).

I apologize for the solvent spellings, it's been many years since O chem.
--
Jim Feldman                         || This space for lease, contact your
Digital Equipment Corp              || Digital Sales Rep.
CSC/Colorado Springs                || 

My opinions are my own and in no way reflect Digital's POV (unless they're
charging somebody for me to give them).
From: Andy.Taylor@brunel.ac.uk (Andy J Taylor)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Depth of Field preview - any 'cheap` SLRs?
Date: 15 Dec 92 13:30:41 GMT
Organization: Henley Management College, UK

In article <1992Dec8.011847.22208@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>
acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih) writes:

>In <BywE7M.Gy9@fulcrum.co.uk> rct@fulcrum.co.uk (Richard Taylor) writes:
>
>>Are there any low-end cameras that depth of field preview? It seems like a
>>very simple thing to add...
>
>It *is* a simple thing to add, which is why so many rec.photophiles get
>upset at camera manufacturers!
>
>>Low-end means near the price of a Rebel IIs (1000FN to me!).
>

Can't you get Praktica cameras in the US/Canada ?  The BX20(s) comes
with everything you need for just 150 quid over here.  ***** rating
from Amateur Photographer, too.



-- 
********************************************************************
* Andy.Taylor@brunel.ac.uk       * Henley Management College, UK   * 
********************************************************************
* "...And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space *
* Cos there's bugger all down here on Earth." - Monty Python       *
********************************************************************
From: duli@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Li Du)
Subject: Re: Scratch on Front Element
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 19:30:06 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.Alberta.CA> rodney@cs.UAlberta.CA (Rodney Gitzel) writes:
>What effect will a small scratch on the front
> element have on a lens?  The lens in question
> is a Canon FD 135 f2 with a 72mm filter size,
> and the scratch is about 1mm, right near the 
> centre.
>So far results have been fine with it, though
> admittedly I am not at all sure where to look
> in the photos for problems.  Also, I've heard
> that rear-element scratches are far more problematic
> than those on front elements.  Is it going to
> pose problems?
	I don't think anyone could see a trace of problem in the results.
The area of the scratch is probably less than 1/10000 of the area of the
front element. I have seen some pros use much uglier and dirtier lenses
than yours with the slightest concern.

---------------------------------
 Li Du | duli@prony.colorado.edu
---------------------------------
From: bu890@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brian Segal)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: 127 film
Date: 16 Dec 1992 05:17:15 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu



I have a friend with an old Rolliflex TLR with a schneider 60 f 4.6
taking ens.  It takes 127 film and he can't find any.  Does anyone
out there know of a source for this film??

thanks

brian
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: mcovingt@aisun3.ai.uga.edu (Michael Covington)
Subject: Re: color change w/exposure change: Why?
Organization: AI Programs, University of Georgia, Athens
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 16:36:00 GMT

Reciprocity failure.

In very long exposures, film becomes less efficient.  That is, it "forgets"
some of the photons that have fallen on it.  With Tri-X Pan, for example, 
a 3-minute exposure picks up only twice as much light as a 1-minute exposure
(not 3 times as much, as you would expect).

With color film, the extent of this phenomenon is not the same in the three
different color layers.

-- 
:-  Michael A. Covington     internet mcovingt@uga.cc.uga.edu :   Verbum caro
:-  Artificial Intelligence Programs       phone 706 542-0358 :    factum est
:-  The University of Georgia                fax 706 542-0349 :  et habitavit
:-  Athens, Georgia 30602-7415 U.S.A.     amateur radio N4TMI :   in nobis...
Newsgroups: rec.photo