HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dykes@gcox.ucdavis.edu (Jim Dykes)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Filters for View Cameras
Date: 8 Apr 92 23:20:16 GMT
Article-I.D.: ucdavis.12069
Organization: University of California, Davis


  I have a question for the view camera users on the net.  What type of
filters do you use and how do you attach them?

  I own a Bender camera with a couple of lenses (210mm & 90mm).  Right
now, I hold a 'P' series Cokin filter in front of the lens
whenever I need a filter, but for long exposures this is often
unpractical.  I'm not sure I want to commit any more money to the Cokin
filters because I can't always find the colors I want (yellow-green, deep
red and CC).  I'll probably go to gel filters, but I want to know if
there are any other options.  Thanks.

Jim Dykes
jedykes@ucdavis.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: tonyb@juliet.ll.mit.edu ( Tony Berke )
Subject: Re: Amateur film processing (NOW tabletop procs).
Organization: M.I.T. Lincoln Lab - Group 43
	<1992Apr7.032054.22001@a.cs.okstate.edu>
	<1992Apr7.210042.5948@unx.sas.com>
	<1992Apr8.053523.1@eagle.wesleyan.edu>
	<1992Apr9.034925.18155@odin.corp.sgi.com>
Date: 9 Apr 92 12:04:24

In article <1992Apr9.034925.18155@odin.corp.sgi.com> donl@glass.esd.sgi.com (donl mathis) writes:

   [ stuff deleted...]

   I can see two problems with metal, though.  One is that they would be
   noisy (the Printo is deliciously quiet as-is).  The other is that
   materials for use around the chemistry we're talking about have to be
   carefully chosen.  The acids and corrosives are might strong in some
   cases, and metals like "ordinary" stainless steel still don't get the
   job done.  It's a lot harder to machine stainless steel, which adds to
   the cost considerably, especially when compared to plastic.

   Besides, if the gears don't give, the torque of stuck rollers is sent
   all the way back to the motor, which would probably burn out, and I'd
   rather replace a $6 gear than find out how much they'd have to charge
   for a new motor.

No offense to the Printo, which by all accounts is a real breakthrough in
"affordable" roller-transport processors, but I'm somewhat disturbed by
a design philosophy that results in broken parts due to a common use
scenario.  If Durst doesn't want to bake the motor when the rollors stick,
they should stick a current limiting device on it (ie a circuit breaker,
if they're too cheap for something sophisticated).  $1700 might be cheap
for what the Printo does, but it is still a lot of money -- I think a $3
circuit breaker isn't too much to ask for.

Tony Berke
From: swayzed@brandonu.ca
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: mechanical cameras
Date: 9 Apr 92 16:06:20 GMT
Organization: Brandon University, Brandon, Manitoba, Canada

In article <6455@shodha.enet.dec.com>, j_feldman@blkice.enet.dec.com ( ) writes:
> 
> a1.  Check shutterbug (available at larger newstands), you should have NO
> trouble finding old OM1's in excellent or better condition.  Del's comes to
> mind as does KEH.  With 50mm lens, shouldn't be more than $160.  Probably some
> old Nikons out there too, but I'm not sure what models have mechanical
> shutters.  Del's is a Nikon dealer and I would expect they could tell you.
> 
> B2.  I'm sure someone will correct me, but I think the only all mechancial
> (except the meter) 35mm SLR camera left in production, is the Pentax K1000.

Actually Jim, NIKON still manufactures the FM2n. It is completely manual with
batteries only operating the meter. It has shutter speeds up to 1/4000 which
operate without batteries. I have the FM, the precursor to the FM2n, which
is virtually identical but with shutter speeds from 1 sec to 1/1000, plus
bulb. Both also offer double exposures with a double exposure button. The
FM also accepts all Nikon lenses, even those without AI. I don't believe the
FM2 accepts non-AI lenses. Both offer aperture preview.

Both accept the MD-12 motor drive and the FM has a flash sync of 1/125. I 
believe the flash sync on the FM2n is 1/250.


I highly recommend this camera, and it is one often kept as a backup by some
pros.

The FM2n can be had for between $300-$400 from most mail order outlets, and the
FM can be found used for $200-$300.

David Swayze        | swayzed@brandonu.ca    | Reading furnishes the mind only
Brandon University  | Canada (pokey) Post:   | with materials of knowledge; it
Brandon, Manitoba   | 56 Wilnor Bay          | is thinking which makes what we
Canada              | Brandon, MB, R7B 3H1   | read ours.           John Locke
From: rasmuse@jacobs.CS.ORST.EDU (Erik Rasmussen)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Help!!!... P3200 didn't work...
Date: 17 Apr 92 16:55:40 GMT
Followup-To: rasmuse@jacobs.cs.orst.edu (Erik Rasmussen)
Organization: CS Dept. Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon.


Hello fellow photographers,

I wrote in about two weeks ago about which B+W film would be best to use in a
very low light situation... I thank you who replied... For those of you who 
dont remember, I am riding along with Oregon State Police for a photo-essay
in OSU's Daily Barometer.  

I went out last night and shot a rool of P3200, and a roll of P3200 pushed to 
6400... Neither rool turned out that well.  I set the appiture <sp> to f/4 (the
maximum that my lens will go)... and most of the shutter speeds were around 60-
125.  What did I do wrong.  I do get some real faint images, but nothing really
worth printing.

Any ideas about what to do, would be greatly appreciated (new film to use, etc).

Please e-mail me with your answer, at...rasmuse@jacobs.cs.orst.edu...

Thanks,
Erik
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: admiral.uucp!fsaleem@uunet.uu.net (Farzan Saleem)
Subject: Minolta 5200i flash problem
Reply-To: admiral.uucp!fsaleem@uunet.uu.net (Farzan Saleem)
Organization: The Grid/Waffle BBS, 203-661-2873, -1279, -0450, -2967
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 09:45:27 GMT

I have a Minolta Maxxum 7000i and a 5200i flash. Well, this weekend I was
taking pictures when suddenly the flash went off, then "locked up." By
locked up I mean that the display panel was still active, but it would
not respond if any of the buttons were pressed. The ready light also 
didn't come on.
 
Anybody experience this problem or a similar problem before? 
 
Farzan.

--
admiral!fsaleem@uunet.uu.net (Farzan Saleem) <uunet!admiral!fsaleem>
The Admiral's Public UNIX - Greenwich, CT - System Administrator: Doug Fields
(HST/V32) (203)661-2873 -- (PEP/V32) -1279 -- (V32) -0450 -- (V29/MNP6) -2967
>FREE!< Unix shell accounts, Usenet access, and Internet-style mail available
From: ntran@danang.East.Sun.COM (Nhon Van Tran - Sun ECOPS IR)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: How much should I pay
Date: 8 Apr 92 22:59:09 GMT
Reply-To: ntran@danang.East.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems
NNTP-Posting-Host: danang.east.sun.com


  I am gonna to buy used SB24 flash for my 8008S from somebody Flash
  is 3 years old and in excellent condition. How much should I pay 
  him for a  fair price ? I want a good deal but also do not want to
  to pay him too low . Please help.
  Thanks in advance.

  Nhon Tran
From: liang@saul.cis.upenn.edu (Chuck Liang)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: B&H: Please help!
Date: 14 Apr 92 22:48:11 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Apr13.231251.25547@a.cs.okstate.edu> ong@a.cs.okstate.edu (ONG ENG TENG) writes:
>Usually I would wait (till up to a month), but since I am leaving for
>Grand Canyon in a few days, I can't. 
>
>The order was put in exactly two weeks ago with a guy named John at B&H.
>A Sigma 180/5.6 APO micro, at the advertised price.  I asked would it be
>here in a week, and he said yes.  Now it is two weeks, it is still not here,
>and they charged the amount to my credit card the day I ordered.


  My bet is that they didn't have the item you ordered in stock.
Sometime they lie to you about that so you'll still place the order
(yes - I know for a fact that B&H does this).   I've ordered several
times from them, and the goods always arived within a week.  But I had
a friend who was less fortunate once when he ordered a bunch of
filters.  They did not have the items in stock as they claimed and he
didn't get them even after a month.  It seems that if you order major
camera bodies or popular lenses there would be no problem, but when
you order something out of the ordinary the chances of something going
wrong increases.  I don't think the sigma lens is that popular.  If
you ordered something like a 70-210mm zoom, you'd have no problem at
all. 

>
>I have dealt with NYC shops before and most of them were disastors.  But after
>seeing support for both B&H and Andorama in this group, I thought maybe
>there are some that are all right.  So, if you have dealt with them
>before, what works?  I mean how do you make them send you the goods?
>My previous experience with Cambridge said that phoning them don't work
>(I waited for about 3 months for the goods, they charged the card the day
>it was ordered).  
>
>Well?  Do I have to resort to calling my credit card company?

yes
>Thanks in advance. 
>
>p.s. Is Camera World of Oregon different?  Do they ship immediately? 


  Ok, this is the real reason I made this post.  A lot of people here
seem to think that CWO is soooo much better than those slimy NYC places.
I've visited B&H, Adorama, and CWO (my parents live near Portland),
and I find no reason to believe CWO is any better.  The salesmen at
CWO are all a bit uptight.  They become very defensive when you bring
up the fact that their mail order prices are so much lower than their
in-store prices.  (At B&H and Adorama, the in-store prices are the
same, except you'll have to pay NY sales tax.)  They may seem nicer
and talk more slowly but it doesn't make them any less greedy than the
New Yorkers.  I think one reason CWO may have a better reputation is
that they only advertize major items (bodies and lenses) for
mailorder, so the chances of something going wrong is less. 

So please don't give us any more whining about how rude NYC salesmen
are, and how west coast people are all a bunch of little angels.








Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: mcginnis@graphis.essc.psu.edu (David McGinnis)
Subject: 4 x 5 followup question
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Wed, 08 Apr 92 16:27:16 GMT

I have received many helpful replys to my question regarding 4 x 5 equipment
earlier in the week.  However, none have mentioned some of the cheaper brands
of large-format gear that I see advertised in Shutterbug.  Does anyone have
opinions on such cameras as the Burke and James, Ikeda(?), Tachahara, Kodak,
etc.  Thanks for the help.  Dave McGinnis
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: nigel@isgtec.com (Nigel Burnett)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: portrait lenses / soft focus?
Date: 16 Apr 92 19:12:40 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: ISG Technologies Inc., Mississauga Ontario

The Nikon lenses on my F801 on T-Max film give (to me) incredibly sharp
images.  Unfortunately, on full-frame shots of people's faces, every
little skin imperfection shows up in embarrasingly fine detail.

How does a portrait lens 'solve' this problem?  I presume it's more than
a matter of just de-focusing slightly.  Will I achieve acceptable results
by defocusing my 37-70 f2.8 lens slightly?  

As usual, any advice (esp. from someone with some experience) will be
most appreciated.

Thanks
N.


--
"It is an infantile superstition of the human spirit that virginity would be
thought a virtue and not the barrier that separates ignorance from knowledge"                                                                       Voltaire
Nigel Burnett:  business: 3030 Orlando Dr., Mississauga, Ont.,  416-672-2100
Send e-mail to nigel@isgtec.com, uunet.ca!isgtec!nigel, or nigel@isgtec.UUCP
From: shun@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (shun.cheung)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Some arcane questions
Date: 9 Apr 92 14:43:04 GMT
Organization: AT&T

As far as I know, the "great" 105mm/f2.5 Nikkor doesn't have
an AF version. There is a 105mm/2.8 AF macro which I have
and like a lot for macro work.

It really varies from case to case whether Nikon changes the
optical design when they introduce the AF version of a lens.
The 105 macro mentioned above is very different from the
non-AF version, for example, but the 35mm/f2 AF is optically
identical to the non-AF lens.
-- 
-- Shun Cheung,    electronic: shun.cheung@att.com    voice: (908) 615-5135
     HR 1A-304, AT&T Bell Labs, 480 Red Hill Road, Middletown, NJ, 07748 USA
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: ong@a.cs.okstate.edu (ONG ENG TENG)
Subject: Re: Sigma 21-35 vs 24-50 
Organization: Oklahoma State University
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 92 00:42:14 GMT

From article <1992Apr16.162901.27424@a.cs.okstate.edu>, by ong@a.cs.okstate.edu (ONG ENG TENG):
> circular-polarizer, price, reported quality, lens angle, etc, I finally
> pulled out the old card called CWoO for a non-candidate (drum-roll...)
> the Leica Mini.
> 
> I asked for Bruce and Dave upon calling CWoO as advised, but the guy said
> both were off today, and that his name is TJ.  Well, he was not Rick, so I
> proceeded.  The price was $239, plus $19 for 2-day FedEx. 

Well, after about 7 or 8 hours, the folks from CWoO called me back and 
"checked" if I ordered the lens, and I said yes.  The lady then said she
will ship out the camera right away.  I thought they were just being careful.  
No problem.  After another 2 hours, they called back again.  This time 
she said they were out of stock, and gave me the option whether to cancel,
buy another camera, or wait.  

When I first ordered it this morning, I asked if they were in stock and TJ
said yes.  I guess it is just more efficient for them, not having to check
the stock right at the moment, but do it later all at once.  But then
again they could be looking around (other sources) for the camera.  Finally
they couldn't and called back to allow me to cancel the order.

Well, I guess this is the price we have to pay to go mail-order.  I bet
this is also why we have to pay higher price for "walk-in".  Because it
cost to keep inventory in the store.  On mail-order they can call another
place for the actual item (no inventory cost).
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: B & H and Camera World of Oregon
From: ctobias@violet.ccit.arizona.edu
Date: 15 Apr 92 13:10:02 MST
Distribution: world,local
Nntp-Posting-User: ctobias

When I ordered from Camera World of Oregon, I asked if all the items were in
stock.  The guy wasn't sure and said he would check.  They called me back that
afternoon to tell me that everything was in stock and that it was shipping that
day.  I was very pleased with that service.
From: subrat@itsictp.bitnet (Kar Subrat)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: What does a x2 lens do ?
Date: 13 Apr 92 10:03:09 GMT
Reply-To: subrat@itsICTP.bitnet
X-Unparsable-Date: Sun, 12 Apr 92 18:29:43 MET DST

I have Canon EOS-1000/S (Rebel/S) with 35-80 zoom. I want to shoot in
the following scenarios: (a) in a zoo, typical distance from subject
about 50 meters (b) in the wild, typ. distance about 10 meters. I would
like to use one lens, fast film (still can't afford a 430ez) for both
situations. Being an utter amateur, I have no idea what I should buy.
A 80-300 USM (silent operation ?), or a x2 , or a 500 fixed zoom ? I
tried a x2 with my 35-80 and I couldn't notice any significant
difference at either 35 or 80. What is a tele-photo lens ? Is it that I
am looking for a tele-photo lens ?

Also I seem to have no way to remotely trigger the shutter, either
manually or thru a terminal. However, there are a few gold plated
contacts you see when you unmount the lens - you can't do anything with
these, could you now (a pair of them must be for the shutter) ?

Advise me, everybody. I am wide open to all suggestions. 
PLEASE Bcc: me in your replies.

Subrat@itsictp.bitnet
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: rspeirs@javelin.sim.es.com (Ron Speirs)
Subject: Re: OM-PC Problem
Keywords: Check battery current 
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corporation
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 16:42:17 GMT

In article <sprinkle.702590587@convex.convex.com> sprinkle@convex.com (Robert Sprinkle) writes:
>I have owned an Olympus OM-PC for several years now and have been very
>pleased.  However I am now having a very frustrating problem.  I can put
>in a fresh set of batteries and attempt to take a shot and the shutter
>locks up and the "fresh" batteries are drained.  I have taken it to a
>local (Dallas) camera store for repairs.  They kept it for 4 weeks.  Upon
>the return of the camera at the store I put in new batteries and it seemed
>to work fine.  The repair people said they coould find no problem with the 
>camera.  As usual soon as I left the store and tried to use the camera the
>same thing happened.  I tried another set of batteries to no avail.  Using
>this trial and error method gets expensive 'cause batteries aint cheap.
>I would like to stay with Olympus because of the accesories I have
>accumulated over the years.  I refuse to buy ANY of this autofocus crap
>on the market today.

I haven't had camera battery problems, but I had a similar problem on a
Franklin Spelling Ace.  I installed the 4 AAA batteries and it worked fine.
But in three days the new alkaline batteries were dead.  The unit didn't 
have an on-off switch; just an "off" button, so I knew that it had to draw
some quiescent current.  Using some clip leads, insulating tape and copper
tape, I connected my digital volt-ohm-milliammeter in SERIES with the
battery to measure current.  The OFF current was about 10 milliamperes,
enough to drain the batteries in a few days.  

Armed with this information, I called the factory, and was informed that
the OFF current should have been 10 microamperes.  When I described the
problem, they gave me a return authorization number, I returned the unit
and they replaced it.

So the key to your problem is to find out what the battery drain current is.
You will need a good meter, preferably an auto-ranging DVM capable of 
measuring into the microamperes.  Some small wires, insulating tape and
ingenuity will be needed.  Find out from the manufacturer what the current
drain should be in various modes of operation.  When you find this information,
you will probably be able to solve your problem.

Ron Speirs, Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp., Salt Lake City, Utah
From: gsm@mendelson.com (Geoffrey S. Mendelson)
Subject: Re: B&W Contact Prints
Organization: Mendelson Computer Consulting
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 92 01:23:46 GMT

gle@l42bb.jsc.nasa.gov (glenn ellis) asks:

>Anyone have a cleaver suggestions on how to make bw contact prints without 
>an enlarger.  I've heard of some methods using picture frame glass and a 
>flash, does this work.  any suggestions?

Buy (or make) a thing called a "contact printer" or contact printing frame.

They come in size from 4x5 and up. There are special ones made to hold 
strips of negatives in plastic sleeves.

They are basicly a large deep frame with a piece of heavy glass on one face.

Place the frame glass side down on a table. Your negatives go in
emulsion side up against the glass. Place the paper on top and close
the frame. A homemade frame would work well with a thin piece of
massonite or 1/4" plywood cut just smaller than the inside of the
frame. Fasten it closed.  some frames use springy metal cilps (I have
an old Kodak like that), but carefully placed rubber bands will work.

Invert. Expose the paper from a diffused light source. A light bulb in
or with a builtin reflector from about 3 feet will work nicely. Opal
finished enlarging lamps work the best. Adjust the distance and bulb
wattage to get a good print with 10-20 seconds exposure.

Hints: 

Using low contrast (#0 or 1) paper will produce better results for 
"contact sheets". These are large sheets of paper (e.g 8x10") with more
than one negative on them.

While you can squeeze 6 rows of 6 35mm double-frame negatives (1x1.5") on
an 8x10 paper, I get better results doing 7 rows of 5. (yes, that's  only 35).

While I believe that Kodak has discontinued AZO (r.i.p) a contact printing
paper the did not need developing, there are other contact printing papers
still available. They are made with silver chloride instead of silver bromide 
emulsions and therefore are much less sensitive.

Geoff.
-- 
Copyright (C) 1992, Geoffrey S. Mendelson.              All Rights Reserved.
Except for usenet followups, may not be reproduced without permsission. 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                   |  Computer Software Consulting    |                   |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geoffrey S. Mendelson                    Israel
geoffrey@mendelson.com                          or
mwcbbs!mailgsm!geoffrey                            Bust!
(215) 242-8712                          Looks like August now :-(
From: phr@soda.berkeley.edu (Paul H. Rubin)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Some arcane questions
Date: 9 Apr 92 21:33:28
Organization: CSUA/UCB
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: duli@boulder.Colorado.EDU's message of Thu, 9 Apr 1992 09:36:38 GMT

I am pretty sure the 28/2.8E is different than the AF.  The AF
is quite a bit bigger and heavier, more like the 28/2.8AI
(I've owned all three at different times).  The 28/2.8E is
an under-respected lens, by the way.  I wish I hadn't sold the
one I used to have.  It was pretty good optically and very
light and compact, excellent for travelling.
From: antonsen@hpcndaw.CND.HP.COM (Tim Antonsen)
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 20:13:01 GMT
Subject: Re: 4 x 5 followup question
Organization: HP Colorado Networks Division
Newsgroups: rec.photo

I've had a Tachi for 15 years. It has served me very well, and has
collected many Honorable Scars, one during a tripod-tip into my car's
bumper.  I can highly recommend it. 

There are many other fine field cameras. A few, like the Ikeda, are 
very very light, and have sorta funky wiggle-controls. I would 
suggest that you examine a specimen of whatever brands you're interested
in before you purchase one. Look for sturdy craftmanship, easy-to-use 
controls, and overall flexibility.

--Tim
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: 9999am06@uhdvx3.dt.uh.edu (Phil Marcus)
Subject: Re: x-rays at airport affecting films
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41A   
Organization: University of Houston-Downtown
X-Lunar-Date: 4 days, 6 hours, 41 minutes since the first quarter of the moon
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 00:05:00 GMT

In article <19920408082714GERTHD@mvs.sas.com>, GERTHD@mvs.sas.com (Thomas Dachsel) writes...
>Hi everybody,
>this *may* be a FAQ, but I'm going to ask it anyway :)
>Are unexposed/exposed films affected by the X-rays they
>use at airports to scan luggage etc.?
>I know of "film safety bags" that are used in order to
>protect films from the effect of some sort of rays.
>What I don't know is whether they contain some kind
>of lead in order to provide a shielding against those rays.
>I also heard that only films of > 400 ASA are sensible
>against those rays.
>Any comments? Please answer by e-mail, I'll summarize.
>---
>Thomas Dachsel
>SAS Institute Inc., Neuenheimer Landstr. 28-30, D-W-6900 Heidelberg,
>Germany
>Email: GERTHD@MVS.SAS.COM,DACHSEL@RHRK.UNI-KL.DE
>Phone: +49 6221 4150, +49 6203 12274

The film sheild bags do indeed contain lead foil that prevents X-rays from
striking your film.  Your film can and will be fogged by repeated exposure to
airport X-ray machines.  Although one dose from a properly adjusted machine
usually is below the film's exposure threshold, repeated doses or just one
good one will fog your film.  Reports are that non-Western X-ray machines are 
more likely to overdose your film.

As a commercial photographer, I can't afford to fog my film.  And I don't want
to count millirems.  So, the only sane thing left to do is always have my 
bags hand inspected, which is what I advise everyone to do.  By the way, the
faster a film, the more sensitive it will be to *all* wavelengths.  So, the
ISO 400 films are very sensitive indeed to x-ray enchroachment.
Newsgroups: rec.photo