HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cheu@venus.its.uci.edu (Kelvin Cheu)
Subject: Re: Ektar vs. Gold
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Reply-To: cheu@venus.its.uci.edu (Kelvin Cheu)
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 26 Sep 92 22:52:48 GMT

In article <1992Sep26.021234.16137@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, lmitchel@nyx.cs.du.edu (lloyd mitchell) writes:

-----stuff deleted -----


|> So, my question is, is Gold 100 any better or worse than Ektar 25?  Also, what
|> would be the best film for shooting computer screens with a 35mm camera?
|> 
|> Thanks,
|> Kerry Mitchell

About shooting from computer screen.  Say my PC monitor has a pixel
resolution of 680x1024, in a 19" monitor. To cover that in a 35mm negative,
hmmmm....does it matter if you use Ektar 25 or Gold 100 ?
Even the ISO 1600 film has millions of grains. So the limitation in
resolution is in the display capability of your computer screen, not in
the film technology.  What a brighter screen and more color ? Adjust the
monitor.  

Kelvin
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: stb@dasher.uucp (25157-becker)
Subject: RE: Anyone Using the Pentax P30T
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 14:22:49 GMT
Keywords: Some Experiences

I have had some limited experience with the Pentax P30T, which I purchased
mainly to use with an old bellow/slide copier that I have left over after
I traded-in for Nikon equipment.  I used it with a Tamaron 35-135mm manual
zoom lens.

The camera is very light, has a programmed mode and manual mode.  It also
has a self timer and runs off A76 batteries.  It seems to be very similar to 
Pentax Super "type" of camera.  I think that it is a better buy (about $160)
than the Pentax K1000 in that it has programmed exposure.  I decided to get
this camera instead of a "used Pentax ME Super", which surprising enough
was about the same price.  

The positives for the camera are: light, inexpensive, and should be capable of
taking a wide range of excellent photos ( I have taken hundreds of excellant
photos with my previous Pentax camera).

The negatives are: found the leds in the viewfinder hard to see in daylight,
has only one programmed mode, has no way other than going into manual
mode or using the backlight button to adjust the ASA of the film, and also
has not pc strobe body connector.  Also no power advance or TTL mode flash
metering. I think that the lack in being able to 
adjusting the ASA and the no TTL Flash are the biggest disadvantages. 

The following can be considered either and advantage or disadvantage: it has
only simple center weighted metering versus the newer complex matrix pattern
exposure modes.   

In general, I would consider it a "I CAN DO IT" camera but with 
limitations compared to today's latest.  The trade off being price and weight. 
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: mas@mipl8.jpl.nasa.gov (Marc Sarrel)
Subject: Re: More than 37 exposures/roll with 8008s?
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
	<1992Oct1.041141.1@cc.curtin.edu.au>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 20:51:57 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.041141.1@cc.curtin.edu.au> zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi) writes:

   Get a Proofing frame that only prints one edge. You can fit 40 exps
   on an 8x10.  The bad news is the company that made them hase been
   out of bussiness 15 or so years. Anyone interested in the plans?
   BTW, you don't have to cut your negs. 


Yes.

--marc
--
Marc Sarrel			"And they lived ever after, which is about
Jet Propulsion Laboratory	 all you can expect from a story like this."
mas@mipl8.jpl.nasa.gov		            --  Fractured Fairy Tales
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Ektar vs. Gold
Date: 27 Sep 92 17:31:13 GMT
Organization: Curtin University of Technology

In article <1992Sep27.025125.18054@umr.edu>, tonyp@mcs213j.cs.umr.edu (Tony Phillips) writes:
> In article <1992Sep27.023612.1@cc.curtin.edu.au> zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi) writes:
> :.... Never have to shift channels in the printer,
> :easy to print... 
> :He does have a channel for Ektar 25?, and uses it?
> :
> :~Paul
> :
> 
> Interesting.  I'm at a loss, now..  The mini-labs I've seen don't do anything
> different for different brands of film in the printing area.  In the FILM
> processor, yes, but not the printer.  If ya got a negative, you print it.
> 
??? C-41 is C-41 ( well almost ). 

> Has some wacky new technology appeared thats changed printing technology
> based on the negative you're printing?
> 

Nothing wacky. You have always had to reset your colour analysier for different
negative types. The dyes are slightly different, and as you measure only 3
'points' rather than a full spectrum, the mapping to the spectral response of
the paper is not 1:1.
The 'new' bit, is that most films now have a bar-code on the edge for film type.
Many of the better printers can read this automaticaly, and select the calibration
setting needed for that film.

~Paul
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: dsp@halcyon.com (Don Smith)
Subject: 2 mystery addresses
Keywords: ASMP Copyright Guide
Organization: Northwest Nexus Inc. (206) 455-3505
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 01:17:46 GMT

 I've trouble sending the ASMP Copyright Guide to the 2 following
addresses:    mpc@apldbio.com
              mattias@crc.chalmers.se

 If you have an alternate address which will work from an Internet site
please forward it to me, I'd really like to fulfill your requests.

   Thanks in advance,

      Don

 

 Don Smith Photography
 dsp@halcyon.com
From: usenet@adobe.com (USENET NEWS)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: AGFA, Fuji, Kodak or ?
Date: 5 Oct 92 20:10:19 GMT
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Originator: asanders@sparta

This is hearsay, since I don't use Agfa film; but I've
heard it said that Agfa's quality control isn't that good.

Both Kodak and Fuji make excellent products, in my opinion.

					   -Alan
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: geoff@pmafire.inel.gov (Geoff Allen)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 92 15:06:44 GMT
Organization: Roller Coaster fanatic with no hope for a cure
Subject: Re: How to make a good ghost illusion?
Summary: 
Followup-To: 
Distribution: world
Organization: Roller Coaster fanatic with no hope for a cure
Keywords: Ghost, multiple exposure

739chan1@gw.wmich.edu writes:
>   So you might want to try this in normal lighting:
>1) Find a suitable background.
>2) Set up your camera with a tripod.
>3) Take an exposure reading.
>4) Take the picture, one stop underexposed.
>5) Ask you subject to step in.
>6) Activate your multiple-exposure facility.
>7) Take the picture again, two stops underexposed.

I just wanted to point out that this will give you a total of 3/4 of a
normal exposure.  Probably not a *major* deal, especially with a
negative film, but still might need to be considered.

Specifically, for those who might wonder how you get 3/4 of a ``normal''
exposure, remember that every stop is twice as much exposure as the one
before it, and half as much as the one after.  So the initial ``one stop
underexposed'' gives 1/2 of the normal exposure.  Then we add ``two
stops underexposed,'' which gives us 1/4 of an exposure, or a total of
3/4.

>  Of course this is a very rough guide on how to do it. You should experiment
>with different amounts of underexposure as well as backgrounds. But the general
>rule is, the more underexposed your shot, the fainter the "ghost" will be.

Right.

Geoff

-- 
Geoff Allen          \  Usenet is distributed network anarchy at its best---
uunet!pmafire!geoff   \   or worst, depending on what is posted on any
geoff@pmafire.inel.gov \   particular day.   --David Fiedler in _Byte_
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: troby@diana.cair.du.edu (Thorn Roby)
Subject: Re: Press Camera Questions...........................
Organization: University of Denver, Denver, Colorado
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 92 23:40:39 GMT

In article <1992Oct6.221738.1021@nntpd2.cxo.dec.com> feldman@hal9k.cxo.dec.com (james feldman) writes:
>Look on your speed, two small knobs at either side of the base of the front
>standard.  You may have to press down on sheet metal springs right under them
>in order to get they to go.  If it has a drop bed than it has to have some
>tilt to compensate and bring the lensboard parallel to the film plane.  You
>should also get some swing and shift by loosening the locking lever on the
>front standard and then depressing another wide sheet metal spring underneath.
The Anniversary (and earlier?) Speeds have a drop bed for use with wide angle
lenses but no provision for tilting the front. That is , the front section
of the bed drops out of the way but the lens remains on the inside rail.
Woe (or, perhaps, whoa!) to him who would attempt to drop the bed with
the lens pulled out - it can be very difficult to get it put back again
without bending the tracks (I speak from sad experience). The front
standard does have rise and shift. The Pacemaker models have the front
tilt, but only tilt up, as described above. Crowns likewise, but I'm not
sure how the models names match up between the two lines.
-- 

Thorn Roby                              troby@diana.cair.du.edu
CARL Systems, Inc.                               troby@carl.org   
3801 E. Florida Ave.,Suite D300,Denver, CO 80210 (303) 758-3030
From: robertw@informix.com (Robert Weinberg)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Cheap slide sorter - PLANS
Date: 29 Sep 92 22:56:24 GMT
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.

In article <1992Sep23.134800.5201@fnbc.com> chris@fnbc.com (Chris Toczycki) writes:
> 
> I recently had to sort nearly 1000 slides from a vacation trip.  Instead of  
> building a sorter from some frosted glass and wood, I instead used the coffee  
> table in our family room.

OK, let's see if anyone can out-cheap MY solution (500-slide vacation):

Take 2 2-by-4 boards or long broom handles or whatever.

Tape an old thin linen bedsheet between these sticks.

Attach the sticks to two table-tops or chair-tops, causing the sheet to stretch out  
fairly flat.

Place 2 or 3 table lamps on the floor underneath the sheet, making sure the light  
bulbs are far enough under the sheet to allow cooling air to circulate. (Check for  
heat and don't don't leave town while the lamps are on :>)

So sort your slides on the sheet! At least, you can easily distinguish all shapes  
and basic colors. When you need to inspect a slide closely, pull it up to your  
loupe. And when you're done, just put everything away.

Cost: $0.
--
+================================+================================+
|         Rob Weinberg           |  Workstation publications tech |
|   Email : robertw@informix.com |        Graphic designer        |
|   Voice : 415-926-6754         |     <imagine your ad here>     |
+================================+================================+
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: chrisd@mahler.redwood.com (Christoph Ditzen)
Subject: safety of chemicals ?
Organization: Redwood Design Automation
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 92 22:50:21 GMT

Hi there,

I am just about to start using our bathroom as a darkroom. I would like to 
have the developer, stop and fixing trays over the bathtub. I am worried
about what will happen to the tub if I spill any of the liquids. The tub
is one of these fiberglas jobs. (The floor is tiled, so I am not worried
about that). Also, the sinks are glazed metal (cast iron?). Is there any
problem with that?
The bathroom is fairly large and has a build-in exhaust fan, so I am not
worried very much about the fumes. Also, it doesn't have any windows, so
the light-problem is limited to the door. Is there anything else I 
should worry about ? 

Thank's ....chris
From: dbernard@thewho.Central.Sun.COM (Dave Bernard)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: about N90.
Date: 28 Sep 92 18:33:47 GMT
Reply-To: dbernard@thewho.Central.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems

>probably find a solid market niche. It cannot replace the F3 in professional
>terms, as someone else has posted, but it may be substituted in the product line
>because of slumping F3 sales. 

This makes sense, in light of a previous release from Nikon, stating that
the F series specifically targets a high use market in terms of things such
as being able to tolerate, what, 100,000 shutter firings, while the "advanced
amateur (N8008? FE2?) offerings feature tolerances at half the professional
levels.

My only surprise is that Nikon has tolerated keeping the F3 line this long.  Am
I wrong, or is the F3 the longest running model Nikon has had (if we consider
FM/FM2/FM2n each as separate models)?

	Dave
Xref: sparky rec.photo:17224 comp.graphics:10170
From: gary_crum@next.com (Gary Crum)
Newsgroups: rec.photo,comp.graphics
Subject: PhotoCD services
Keywords: Kodak, Kodalux, PhotoCD
Date: 1 Oct 92 20:50:06 GMT
Followup-To: rec.photo

I just got my first PhotoCD today.  It was more expensive that I was told  
it would be when I dropped of my negatives -- $45 and not just $20 for  
transfer to disk of 27 images from various negative strips.  Kodalux is a  
processing services company in Manteca California, with a retail service  
store in Palo Alto California, and is apparently not owned by Kodak.

Is anyone out there using PhotoCD very much?

Kodalux (their "will call window" in Palo Alto) charges $20 to develop a  
24-exposure roll of film, returning negatives and a PhotoCD.  That's $2.25  
for developing and $0.74 per image for transfer to disk (including a new  
disk).  It is not clear to me if that $0.74 per image price applies to  
transferring an already developed roll of film.  The cost is more than  
double that, $1.79 per image or $42.96 per 24 images, for the case of  
transfering a customer-specified set of images from various negatives to  
PhotoCD.  (That prices goes slightly down when more than 24 images are  
transferred  -- $1.69 per image for 25-49 images, $1.59 per image for  
50-74 images, and $1.49 per image for 75 or more images.)

I don't see an entry on the Kodalux price list for the service of copying  
a specific set of images from various PhotoCDs to a new PhotoCD.  Does  
anyone know of a processing services company that does offer this service?   
Kodalux lists a "disc duplication" service for copying of a complete disk  
that is strangely high-priced -- $29 for copying a single disk with up to  
24 images on it.  That's 50% more than the $20 price for developing a  
24-exposure roll of film including transfer and a new PhotoCD.

Gary
From: eugene@briar.lle.rochester.edu (Eugene Kowaluk)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Freezing Film
Date: 6 Oct 92 13:29:05 GMT
Article-I.D.: galileo.1992Oct6.132905.21537
Organization: UofR Laboratory for Laser Energetics


Chris Toczycki writes:

	Freezing is OK and supposedly preserves the film indefinitely.
	However, the film must be in its original (air-tight) container.
	Film is packaged with very-low moisture content air in its
	air-tight canister.  Keep it closed until you actually use it.

Very good advice, but I don't think this "indefinitely" applies to a 
film such as Kodak's HSIR.  My five-year-old 8x10 sheet film has had its
base+fog increased by 0.1 in density.

	At Nikon School they told us to keep film in its original box
	and put it into a ziplock bag before freezing.  Frozen film
	should be allowed to thaw 6 hours before opening its air-tight
	canister, and should not be re-frozen or re-refrigerated.

Six hours is good for 36exp, 35mm film, but I usually leave 100ft+ rolls
and 50-sheet boxes overnight.  But as to no refrigeration, I disagree.
Again, in the extreme case of HSIR, or for that matter, any spectroscopic
film or glass plates, leaving it in an unfrozen but air-conditioned
darkroom for over one year makes it worthless.  While the same film
resealed and refrozen and then properly unfrozen keeps its integrity.
Granted one couldn't keep the humidity down on the encapsulated air,
but you're still keeping the temperature down.


eugene kowaluk
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: graham@convex.com (Marv Graham)
Subject: Re: Next Nikon camera: An AF interchangeable lens rangefinder?
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 20:08:01 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

There would certainly be no problem about: "Does it have mirror lockup?"
With no mirror, this concern ceases to be a problem.

Marv Graham; Convex Computer Corp.  {uunet,sun,uiucdcs,allegra}!convex!graham
					graham@bach.convex.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: watters@mendel.genetics.washington.edu (Mike Watters)
Subject: How to calculate flash exp with extension tubes
Organization: University of Washington   
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 17:49:11 GMT

Just a quick question (with hopefully some quick answers :)

I'm going to be photographing some small artifacts and wanted to use
both flash (to get them well lit) and extension tubes (to get up close and
personal).

I know how to figure things out normally (just set the lens to the f-stop
appropriate for the distance between flash and subject), but I suspect
the extension tube changes things a bit.

I'll be using 2 manual flashes (GN's 56 and 80), 45, 85, 135mm lenses
and an extension tube.  (all sitting on either a Minolta XD-5 or XG-M).

No TTL-OTF flash cutoff to rely on so I have to do this all by hand.

Any and all help will be greatly appreciated.

mike

--
Mike
watters@genetics.washington.edu
Dept of Genetics, Univ of Washington  Seattle
(d) 206-543-1934   (e) 206-361-1156
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Zonies, (I) need help
Date: 5 Oct 92 18:26:26 GMT
Article-I.D.: cc.1992Oct6.032626.1
Organization: Curtin University of Technology

In article <46520042@hpscit.sc.hp.com>, feltman@hpscit.sc.hp.com (Robert Feltman) writes:
> I have two questions which some experienced "zonies" should be able
> to answer:
> 
> 1. Do larger negs give better tone separation than smaller negs? Why?
> 

Yes. The larger size reduces the Kostinshy effect. Hence the B-W transitions
are more accurate in the intermediate grey areas.

> 2. Does fiber based paper produce better prints than RC, from the
>    perspective of the viewer, and ignoring the archival question?
> 
*PASS*

~Paul
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: nuscss1@vms1.iscs.nus.sg (Vax BULLET-IN-Board SysOps)
Subject: Re: USMs and post focal ...
Summary:  USM35-80 on EOS 630 - problem with CF7 & manual focusing 
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Keywords: EOS 630, USM, CF7  
Organization: National University of Singapore Dept. of Computer Sc.
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 15:15:00 GMT

In article <1992Sep27.041909.1@cc.curtin.edu.au>, zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi) writes...
>By 'USM' in the CF list, they mean the original L USM type. In the EF lens list
>I refered to them as 'USA' lrenses. The 35-135, 70-210, 100-300 USM brought in
>a new type of mech linkage that is permanantly engaged. The nifty trick/trap
>is the AF mode you hae the camera in. If 'one-shot', you can do as you like with
>the focus. If it is in 'servo' mode, you can tweak the focus just a *tiny*
>amount, then the AF system wakes up to the 'error' and fixxes it. 

	CF7 does not put the 630 into single or servo mode. It is
	*supposed* to allow manual focusing without having to flip
	the AF/M switch on the lens. Its one of the Custom Functions
	definable by the user. I don't know anyone else with another USM
	lens that I can try it out with.

>I believe the
>35-80USM is a USB type, as above. The ring is quite firm to turn, but not as
>hard as you seem to imply. However, I hae only given the lens a quick look over,
>not a detailed check. Canon may mave changed the design yet again. Well infact
>they have, see Rob Grooms posting on EOS documentation.

	hmmm... well, i've tried turning the focusing ring with about 
	as much pressure as it's possible without breaking something.
	it's still stuck as firmly as a clam. I fear using more strength to
	force the focusing ring may cause damage to the lens mechanism.
> 
>I'll check one ASAP, and let you know...

	thanx. really appreciate it.
> 
>~Paul
>
From: jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Canon EF 24mm f/2.8 vs. Sigma AF 24mm f/2.8
Date: 4 Oct 92 03:17:36 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories

In article <TJWU.92Oct2195528@e40-008-5.mit.edu> tjwu@athena.mit.edu (Thomas J Wu) writes:
>I'm looking for a good wide-angle lens that is also suitable for
>indoor photography, and I'm trying to decide between these two lenses
>right now.  The Canon lens is $220 and the Sigma lens is $140.
>Is the Canon worth the extra cost?  The Sigma lens seems to have
>outstanding close-focusing capabilities.  If anyone has experience
>with either or both of these (or has a better idea for a lens),
>please e-mail or post.  Thanks.
>
>Thomas Wu
>Internet:  tjwu@athena.mit.edu


I have the Sigma.  The Sigma lens has outstanded freedom from
distortion (barrel or pincushion) but terrible curvature of field.  If
I adjust the focus so that an object at infinity in the corner is
sharp, the center is focused about 6 feet away.  However, this is not
as bad as it might seem.  The hyperfocal distance of a 24mm lens at
f/11 is 5.8 feet, so in bright light situations this is acceptable.
And indoors, I usually use the lens in what I call "National
Geographic" style: some person very close up and lots of background.
In that situation, the corners are background, and the curvature even
helps.  Mechanically, mine is no Nikon lens, but ok.  The AF works
fine with my 8008.  I can't say how well the Canon would work, since
the EOS system has the AF motor in the lens.  Now, for my final
opinion, for just $80, I'd go for the genuine Canon product.

  -- David Jacobson
From: a139146@cc.tut.fi (Ahokas Jarno)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Minolta comp. lenses
Date: 3 Oct 92 23:22:04 GMT
Distribution: rec.photo
Organization: Tampere University of Technology, Finland



Does anyone know any high-guality non-Minolta fixed length lenses with
manual focus and Minolta's new AF bayonet mount ?
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Magzine: Darkroom & Creative Camera Techniques
Date: 30 Sep 92 19:29:34 GMT
Organization: Curtin University of Technology

In article <5360808@hplsla.hp.com>, andyc@hplsla.hp.com (Andy Cassino) writes:
> rune@cimsand.UUCP (Rune Riisnaes) writes:
> | IO92112@MAINE.MAINE.EDU writes:
> | : I just received a mail from Darkroom& Creative Camera Techniques Magzine.
> | : I have never seen or heard this magzine. Just wondering anybody has any
> | : experience and comments with the magzine.

It's one of the few I get, even though its nearly 10 bucks over here. Camera
and Darkroom is better for portfolio type stuff, but DCCTM is the best I have
seen, short of 'real journals' for tech stuff. Millers arts come to mind in
this respect.

~Paul
From: epperly@osnome.che.wisc.edu (Tom Epperly)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Nikon Magazine
Date: 29 Sep 92 16:49:31 GMT
	<1992Sep26.035901.11698@cello.hpl.hp.com>
	<1992Sep28.230718.29537@indetech.com>
	<lcfc2sINNlju@appserv.Eng.Sun.COM>
	<1992Sep29.132839.12178@progress.com>
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Wisconsin-Madison, Chemical Engineering
In-reply-to: erf@progress.COM's message of Tue, 29 Sep 1992 13:28:39 GMT

I filled out the warranty card for my N5005 in January of this year,
and I have yet to receive my free copy of Nikon magazine.  I checked
the little box that says not to send me stuff that I haven't
requested, so maybe that means that I don't get a free copy of the
magazine.  However, it cannot really be considered free if you must
give them the authority to use your address for advertising purposes.

				Tom
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Epperly	University of Wisconsin-Madison		Chemical Engineering
(608) 262-8264	epperly@osnome.che.wisc.edu		Graduate Student
Member of the League for Programming Freedom(fighting software monopolies)
	For more info contact me or league@prep.ai.mit.edu
If you feel you must flame, please send email rather than posting.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------