HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hall@orion.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Philip Hall 283-4031)
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
Subject: Re: IQ and religious belief
Date: 7 Apr 1992 21:01:09 GMT
Organization: nasa-jsc

>Steiner:

>Why does it make sense that there is a "highest" being?  Why not turtles all
>the way up, so to speak?  It has been said that the only logical numbers are
>zero and one; either something is or isn't--once you allow for two, then the
>concepts become zero, one, more than one--with all non-zero or one numbers being
>grouped together.
...
>As suggested above, once you allow for a higher form of existence, you logically
>have no upper limit.

I didn't suggest an upper limit - 
I suggested a "highest" form - At any point in time, there is always
a "highest" point in any hierarchy.

PH
From: davidd@noaapmel.gov (David Doll)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: misc questions
Date: 10 Apr 92 20:28:27 GMT
Organization: NOAA, Sand Point Way, Seattle, WA


Q1) I've noticed in the popular monthly photo magazines, that the
Nikon AI-S 28-85 lens is about $500 and the AF one about $300. I'm a
little confused, I would have thought that the AF would be more
expensive. Is it just that the non-AF is such a "sharper" (?) lens
over the AF version? Is this true for most lens - that non-AF are a
"sharper" lens or is the only diff being a cpu & motor in the lens...?

Q2) I remember a couple of the photo places in the want adds in the
magazines, like 47th photo and Audioarama(sp?) from back in the 70's.
Are these or others still places w/o any real problems when ordering
through the mail.

Thanks much.

David

--
David Doll              |  #include <std.disclaimer> Standard disclaimers 
                        |  apply here...only my opinion,not my employer, etc.
NOAA/PMEL/OCRD          |  
7600 Sand Point Way NE  | --------------------------------------------------
Seattle, WA 98115-0070  |
voice:(206) 526-6862    |  C++: The language where only friends can access
fax:  (206) 526-6744    |  your private members.   
davidd@noaapmel.gov     |
From: kbb0@harvey.gte.com (Kevin Burke)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Any experiences with Tamron 35-105/2.8 out there?
Keywords: Tamron, zoom, reviews, tests, experiences
Date: 10 Apr 92 15:42:46 GMT
Distribution: w

Hello everyone,

Has anyone bought, looked at, tested, seen an article/review on Tamron's
new 35-105/2.8 zoom? It looks like what I need but I'm trying to figure
out if the cost versus performance is worth it. I'll be using it on an
8008 if it matters.

Thanks, Kevin	(kbb0@harvey.gte.com)
From: MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu (Michael Edelman)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: For Sale: Minox Binocular Attachment
Date: 13 Apr 92 16:44:35 GMT
Article-I.D.: cms.167C8B333.MEDELMA
Organization: Wayne State University

I have a Minox Binocular Attachment for sale, complete with original box,
instructions, cable release and all other bits. This fits all the original
subminiature cameras. Postpaid, $50 or best offer.
 
    --mike edelman   medelma@cms.cc.wayne.edu   mje@pookie.pass.wayne.edu
From: donl@glass.esd.sgi.com (donl mathis)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Amateur film processing (NOW tabletop procs).
Date: 9 Apr 92 03:43:14 GMT
Reply-To: donl@glass.esd.sgi.com (donl mathis)
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA


In article <1992Apr7.210042.5948@unx.sas.com>, sch@gargoyle.unx.sas.com
(Steve Holzworth) writes:

|> [...]  The second time I used my unit, I broke two drive gears.

I broke a gear, too.  I got by with swapping it to a less heavily-loaded
position, but since it's only a few bucks to replace it, I guess I will
one of these days.

The Printo is terrific, but you really do have to make sure the rollers
are unstuck before you turn it on.  I use drymount press release paper
sometimes -- *nothing* sticks to that stuff.

|> I have had ONE misfeed, which also resulted in a gear break.

I've never had a misfeed.  I do occasionally put the paper in a little
crooked, and the corner ends up smashing into the side as it gets drawn
in.  It goes through alright, but that corner is crunched.  This happens
much less often as my technique has improved.

|> The manual I got had a sticker affixed warning that the RA4 process
|> requires the transport speed be set to THREE (which gives one minute
|> tank times). Actual RA4 (as quoted by Kodak, Tetenal, and even the
|> Printo manual inside) runs in 45sec step times. I ignored the sticker
|> and ran at 45sec, with good results. Any comments donl?

I don't remember for sure, but I think I went with the longer time.  As
best I understand RA-4, it more or less runs to completion, which means
longer times won't hurt anything.  I wonder if the problem is not so much
development, but the bleach-fix stage, and that's why they threw in the
extra 15 seconds.  I reasoned that I could stand an extra few seconds
if it would add an extra few years to the life of the print.

|> I have had good luck with Calumet over the years; they are worth a slightly
|> higher price. They will be glad to send you literature on Durst Printos.

Agreed.  I believe I bought mine from Helix, who are not quite up to
Calumet standards, but are at least in the same category (i.e. a
genuine professional photo dealership, not a nasty New York importer).
Helix is often a bit cheaper than Calumet.

- donl mathis at Silicon Graphics Computer Systems, Mountain View, CA
donl@sgi.com
From: johnc@endor.harvard.edu (John Chervinsky)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Twin Lens Reflex Repair
Date: 14 Apr 92 13:35:39 GMT
Article-I.D.: das.1992Apr14.133539.11687
Organization: Aiken Computation Lab, Harvard University



Does anyone know where I may obtain a repair manual or assembly drawing for
the Minolta Autocord TLR?  I have such a camera in need of minor repair
and wish to be able to do it myself and as the occasion arises. A repair
manual for a similar camera such as a Rollie or a Yashica would even be a
great help.

Does anyone have experience doing this sort of work? Other than the
shutter,these cameras seem to be pretty simple mechanically.

I have access and experience with a complete machine shop so I could make
the required spanner wrenches ect.

Thank you in advanve for your advice.

John Chervinsky
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jmb5b@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (John M. Bozeman)
Subject:  Minolta/quiet camera info wanted
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 05:43:51 GMT

How does the XD-5 compare with the XD-ll in the noise dept?  Are there any
other especially quiet cameras?  (Sometimes I feel that my Canon AE-1 and 
my Contax 139 would wake the dead...as when taking pictures during weddings.)

              John
From: lee@equinox.unr.edu (Lee T Grasseschi)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: view camera-pyro
Date: 14 Apr 92 16:36:50 GMT
Organization: University of Nevada, Reno

In response to queries about The Book of Pyro and View Camera magazine, (916)
441-2557 is the number for subscription info for the magazine. It is published
6 times a year @ $4.50   per copy by Steve Simmons at 2774 Harkness St. Gordon
Hutchings is the author of The Book of Pyro and a contributing editor to the
magazine. His book is available for $25 plus $4 s+h from Gordon Hutchings
PO BOX 2324, Granite Bay, CA, 95746. Both are highly recommended (the magazine
and the book, that is).
From: merrill@scivax.stsci.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: B&H: Please help!
Date: 15 Apr 92 16:55:46 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute

I have ordered from B+H three times in the past year.  I live in Baltimore 
and have always gotten my stuff within a week.  They have also told me what
is in stock and what must be back ordered.  I never put anything on back 
order!  I am a satified customer!  I guess we should all avoid this John 
person!  I also called them 2 days after my Canon lens went up $50 in 
price.:-(

I guess I would still recomend them to somebody!

Clark B. Merrill
Space Telescope Science Institute
Baltimore, Maryland
merrill@stsci.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: gsm@mendelson.com (Geoffrey S. Mendelson)
Subject: Re: Enlarger, heat absorbing glass.
Organization: Mendelson Computer Consulting
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 92 19:08:24 GMT

mandayrv@ucunix.san.uc.edu (Ramanand V. Mandayam) asks:

>I recently purchased a used b&w enlarger (the Omega B22 XL). Among the many
>accessories that I got along with it, there is a heat absorbing glass. I did
>read somewhere -- I am not sure when and how long ago -- that these pieces
>of glass are recommended for long exposures so that the film does not buckle
>under prolonged heating.

You should use it all the time. It prevents heat waves (infra read) from
reaching the film (or filters) and heating them.

>My question is: Is heating really such a serious problem and is this the
>most recommended way of suppressing the heating. 

Yes, use the glass.

>If yes, can somebody enlighten me where to place this piece  of glass. Alas,
>the glass is not an original equipment supplied by the manufacturer (OMEGA) 
>but was purchased separately. Hence, the users manual for the enlarger does
>not have any descriptions on how to use those glasses.

Funny, mine came with one. It sits on top of the condensers in the lamphouse.
If you have the extra condenser for 35mm put it on top of the heat absorbing
glass.

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: liang@saul.cis.upenn.edu (Chuck Liang)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Tunsten-Daylight filter adjustments question (enlarging)
Date: 7 Apr 92 08:30:33 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania


  I've just started making color enlargements with a filter drawer
type enlarger.  I was wondering if there's someone out there with
color printing experience who can tell me what filter adjustments I
should make to convert tunsten (household) to daylight?  I used
50Y-20M-5C for normal exposures satisfactorily.  I tried using
50Y-10M-0C to compensate for tunsten lighting but that had little
effect.  I also tried 90Y-40M-5C and that was too much: everything
looked too blue/green.  I could make many more exposure tests until I
get it right, but it would be really helpful if someone could post
this information.

  I was printing Kodacolor Gold 200 speed film.  Will Fuji 200 film be
significantly different?

Thank you.
From: davidd@noaapmel.gov (David Doll)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: shutter lockup - FM2
Date: 10 Apr 92 20:58:53 GMT
Article-I.D.: wimpie.DAVIDD.92Apr10125853
Organization: NOAA, Sand Point Way, Seattle, WA


I was reading an older Nikon systems book and in the section dealing
with the FM2, they mentioned that the FM2 doesn't have a mirro lockup
button, but you can get by, by using the self timer and pushing the
sutter...something like this; I don't have the book in front of me.
Anyway it didn't make any sense to me. Could anyone offer if you
can/can't do a mirror lockup in a FM2. Thanks.

David



--
David Doll              |  #include <std.disclaimer> Standard disclaimers 
                        |  apply here...only my opinion,not my employer, etc.
NOAA/PMEL/OCRD          |  
7600 Sand Point Way NE  | --------------------------------------------------
Seattle, WA 98115-0070  |
voice:(206) 526-6862    |  C++: The language where only friends can access
fax:  (206) 526-6744    |  your private members.   
davidd@noaapmel.gov     |
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: garyf@puente.jpl.nasa.gov (Gary Friedman)
Subject: Re: About Russian Cameras
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Advanced Engineering Group
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 23:24:52 GMT

Speaking about the Zyenit cameras...

I own what must be a 10-year-old model, which was still being sold for
about 325 rubles when I was a photojournalist in Latvia "way back" in '88...

As has been stated before, the camera is all-mechanical with a top speed
of 1/500th of a second, and a 1/30 sec. flash sync.  The meter uses a
selinium (sp?) cell in the front where the manufacturer's name is usually 
found, and the needle + matching lollipop are found ON THE TOP DECK
rather than in the viewfinder.  (I understand later models have the
meter in the finder.)

There is no mechanical coupling between the shutter box and the lens;
the user must focus, expose, and then manually stop down the lens
before the picture can be taken.  As far as I can tell the lenses
(which don't appear to be coated) use the once-standard Pentax screw
mount, and produce decent results.

Just remember that these cameras will work in Siberia in the
wintertime, whereas my whiz-bang battery-powered vertical-traversing
"professional" SLR will fail in at least three different ways
(batteries, electronics, and frozen moisture between the shutter blades)
before the film actually becomes too brittle to use.


						-Gary Friedman


Oddly, it *does* have a hot shoe on top of the pentaprism!

rang
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Friedman                   Jet Propulsion Laboratory - NASA
4800 Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena, CA.  91109        (818) 306-6193
garyf@puente.JPL.NASA.GOV || {cit-vax,elroy,psivax}!devvax!garyf
From: byron@archone.tamu.edu (Byron Rakitzis)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: FA really better than FE2?
Date: 14 Apr 92 07:30:28 GMT
Organization: College of Architecture, Texas A&M University

In article <5360753@hplsla.hp.com> andyc@hplsla.hp.com (Andy Cassino) writes:

>No, the F3 was available before the FE2. If I'm not mistaken, the F3
>preceeded the FE... even the FE was able to out-sync the F3 at 1/125 of 
>a second! My recollection was the F3 was available in 1976 and the FE in
>1978. I remember the big concern with the F3 was how long the new-fangled LCD
>readout would last! (Nikon said 10 years, BTW).

Introduction of FM: 1977 (same year as the other first AI cameras: F2A, F2AS
				EL2, Nikkormat FT3)
     "	     "  FE: 1978

     "	     "  F3: 1980

     "	     "  FM2: 1982

     "	     "  FE2: 1983

The reason the FM, FE out-sync the F3 is that they use vertically-
travelling multi-blade curtains, while the F3 has a horizontally-
travelling single-curtain design. (Is this the same as the F2's
shutter? The sync and top speed are the same, aren't they).

I think the reason for this is that Nikon advances their F series very
conservatively; e.g., many of the gizmos in the F4 were available about
half a year (or thereabouts) earlier in the 8008, and AF was available
MUCH earlier than that in the F3AF and N2020, matrix metering in the
FA, fast shutter in the FE2, etc. Similarly, aperture priority cameras
were available from Nikon before the F3, but not built to pro
standards.

So, my guess is that Nikon did not feel that the shutter in the FE/FM
was up to pro "F-series" standards. e.g., in the F4 they did two things
to make the vertically travelling shutter acceptable to them: they
doubled it, so that there would be no light leak in the event of a
mirror lockup (obviously there is no light leak when you have a single-
piece shutter as in the F, F2, F3!!) and they also put in a balancer to
reduce bounce (because presumably vertical shutters are more prone to
bounce than horizontal?)

One more reason may be that if you poke your finger into the middle of
the FM2's honeycombed, aluminum alloy shutter, it may not survive the
experience, while the F3's single sheet of titanium foil will probably
do better. I don't know how Nikon addresses this problem in the F4.

Byron.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: tonyb@juliet.ll.mit.edu ( Tony Berke )
Subject: Re: Recommendations?  (Was fungal growth on lenses)
Organization: M.I.T. Lincoln Lab - Group 43
Date: 9 Apr 92 11:59:17

In article <4100052@hpcc01.corp.hp.com> johnson@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Cole Johnson) writes:

>My grandfather gave me a camera that he had shoved in the back of a
>closet for years.... Unfortunately this closet was in Okinawa and the
>fungi destroyed a couple of the lenses and the inside of the range
>finder.  I sent it to Canon and they said they could replace the
>shutter that was bad but they couldn't do anything about the fungus.

There are places that can take care of this sort of damage.  I've dealt
with a guy named John Van Stelton, who runs an optical repair shop by
the name of The Focal Point in Boulder Co.  He'll de-cement lens groups,
polish them up, and recement them.  Polished elements will lose their
coatings, but he can re-coat them as well.  Prices vary according to
element size, whether you want them recoated, and whether you or he
does the dissasembly of the lens/camera.  I think he quoted me about
$45 to fix a fouled finder on an Olympus OM1.  Kinda steep if you can
find a junked body for parts instead, but worth it for a rare collector's
item (which the OM1 isn't -- so I live with the problem).

I think polishing a typical lens element will run about $30 -- I don't
know what kind of discount, if any, you get for polishing multiple
pieces in a single order.


Tony Berke
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: griffenj@SSD.intel.com (Jeff Griffen)
Subject: Silica Gel Reuse
Reply-To: griffenj@SSD.intel.com (Jeff Griffen)
Organization: Supercomputer Systems Divison, Intel Corp.
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 00:10:46 GMT

The latest box of stuff I got had a bag silica gel that had a notice that
"reactivation time" was 16 hours @ 250 degrees (F).  

- jeff
From: "ronald hands" <ronald.hands@canrem.com>
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: lab screw-up!
Date: 11 Apr 92 19:03:21 EST
Reply-To: "ronald hands" <ronald.hands@canrem.com>
Distribution: rec
Organization: Canada Remote Systems


  Just to put this lab screw-up in perspective:
  Wasn't it Robert Capa who risked his life to land with the first wave
on D-Day in 1944, took a series of once-in-a-lifetime pictures, and
then had them all ruined by a lab in London (I think one bleary image
was salvaged)?
  Now *that* would -- justifiably -- tend to make one a trifle
indignant!    

-- Ron
ronald.hands@canrem.com

 * DeLuxe2 1.21 #10218 * 
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario/Detroit, MI
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: tomh@wes.on.ca (Tom Haapanen)
Subject: Re: Joshua Tree NM. Need info on photo experiences
Organization: Waterloo Engineering Software
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 18:47:18 GMT

> elau@berlioz.nsc.com (Eugene Lau) writes:
> : Don't just go there for the bighorn.  The Cholla (spelling ???) cactus is
> : beautiful and is about as tall as we are.  It's not a one-piece cactus but
> : a "tree" with cacti "branches".

jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts) writes:
> I have been away from the desert for a while, but I seem to remember that a
> common name for these is "Jumping Cholla" (I don't know the correct spelling
> either!).

There were two, as I recall: Jumping Choilla and Teddy Bear Choilla (I think
that's the right spelling...).  For one of them, the Joshua Tree NM is the
only location in the US.

> They have a "habit" of "jumping" onto things that walk underneath
> them.  One of these followed me home from one desert trip.  Fortunately for
> me, it jumped onto my shoe! ;-)

They are VERY sticky!  We found some abandoned shoes in a choilla patch...

Anyway, on to photographic items: when we were at Joshua Tree NM (in late April,
1989) there weren't a lot of cacti or other plants flowering (although the
candlewoods were still in bloom), but I still thought that the best photos I
got were of either cacti or of rock formations.  While we saw some smaller
animals, there were no bighorn to be seen.  Still, this was definitely the
highlight of our trip to California.

[ \tom haapanen    "i don't even know what street canada is on" -- al capone ]
[ tomh@wes.on.ca                   "trust the programmer" -- ansi c standard ]
[ waterloo engineering software      "to thine own self be true" -- polonius ]
From: peterd@hpgrla.gr.hp.com (Peter Davidoff)
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 15:59:54 GMT
Subject: Re: hand-coloring B&W prints
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Greeley, CO
Newsgroups: rec.photo

Dyer:

The first two pictures I tinted ended up hanging in a small
show here at HP!  One was of a pile of green beans that I
moved to kodalith (pos) and solarized, then made another 
kodalith neg and finally printed.  I colored one bean green,
left the others as they were.  It was this print that everyone
seemed to like!

I also tinted a 5x7 contact of my daughter.  I think I tinted
too much, as most people wondered why I had a color picture
hanging in a B&W show!  So I've backed way off the amount of
color I put on.  I make the color much more subtle, adding just
enought now to make the brain think twice - is this black and
white, or did I just see some color in there.

I've used the oils, but prefer the pencils.  I find the oils
much too strong.  I've been diluting the oils and building 
up color very slowly.  This is working better.  I also intend
to try some color retouching dyes (water based).  I understand
the water colors are more translucient.

One last thing you might try... I've taken to bleaching and then
sepia toning the prints before coloring.  I think the effect
is better than the cold black as a base.

Keep on tinting!

   Peter Davidoff
From: martins@amanda.Eng.Sun.COM (Martin Sodos)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: No more Minolta Professional Cameras?!
Date: 6 Apr 92 21:49:14 GMT
Reply-To: martins@amanda.Eng.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems
NNTP-Posting-Host: amanda


I took a look at the Minolta 7xi recently. I've owned the 7000 and
7000i and thought it might be time to upgrade. I was surprised to find
that all electrical contacts were missing from the underside, and no
previous accessories (such as the CG-1000 control grip) were
compatible.

I was in San Jose Camera today and asked about the possibility of a
9xi. These guys have their faults, (they are usually biased heavily pro
Minolta), but that only meant they would give the rosier picture of
whatever Minolta's upcoming product plans were. To my surprise, they
answered that Minolta has decided to discontinue all professional level
cameras (no successors to the 9000) and much worse, no more support for
previously issued accessories, as I had found on the 7xi.


I personally don't care that much if there is to be a 9xi, but I mind
very much their not supporting current accessories on the 7xi and
beyond. I understand their decision to change the lens mount when they
went to AF, but this seems unecessary and with arrogant disregard for
their current customers.

Does anyone know the real story on this? Comments?

MS
From: jeffs@.SanDiego.NCR.COM
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Good cameras for Astrophotography?
Date: 9 Apr 92 15:43:57 GMT
Reply-To: jeffs@spike.SanDiego.NCR.COM (Jeff Schwartz)
Organization: San Diego Porting Center

I'm not really into astrophotography, but I happened to be at Oceanside 
Telescope and Camera recently and I got into a discussion with the owner 
concerning the Olympus OM-1.  Apparently, that is the camera of choice for many
serious astro's around here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeffrey A. Schwartz                      San Diego Porting Center 
NCR - E&M San Diego                      Jeff.Schwartz@SanDiego.NCR.COM
16550 W. Bernardo Dr ms7990		 (619) 485-2052
San Diego, CA  92127			 NCR Voice Plus 440-2052
============================================================================