HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rslugg@med.unc.edu (Robert Slugg)
Subject: Re: Me and E6
Organization: UNC-CH School of Medicine
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 14:16:57 GMT

Just because it comes in a ggallon doesn't mean you have to mix up a
gallon at a time.  I usually mix chemicals in pint or quart batches, or if
mixing a gallon where they can't be easily separated, I'll fill four quart
jugs instead.  For hypo clear, I mixed, from memory 18 grams of powder in
a 750 ml tmax bottle each 4 rolls.  That way I could buy the powder in the
large 5 gallon pack and use it as I needed it.  E-6 can be made in pints,
which just happens to be the size of my 2 roll patterson tank, and at 4-6
rolls per pint the chemistry stays good (IMHO) for a year as concentrates,
and a month diluted, so its possible to have E-6 on hand for almost a year
out of a single gallon kit.  To do this though, access to good graduated
cylinders is a must, and a digital auto-tare mettler balance helps too ;-)

Bob

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: haydud@vccsouth03.its.rpi.edu (Darren Jon Hayduk)
Subject: Photographic Encyclopedia
Reply-To: haydud@rpi.edu
Organization: Rennselaer Polytechnic Institute.
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 16:56:39 GMT

Interested in purchasing 9(?) volume set titled 'Encyclopedia of Photography'
published about 40-50 years ago.  The only other informarion I can remember is that the book covers were green.

  
Darren Hayduk
(haydud@rpi.edu,  haydukd@cs.rpi.edu)

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: gag65@cas.org ()
Subject: Canon EOS Elan lens recommendations
Organization: Chemical Abstracts Service
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 13:39:32 GMT

Hi, a day or two ago someone asked for recommendations for the best
general-purpose lens for a new Canon EOS Elan.  I have found myself in the same
boat--I have decided on an Elan and am going to purchase it in the next few days
for a trip to Denver next week.  My question is, should I go with the "standard"
28-80 mm f3.5 USM lens or the "New" 35-80mm or 35-105.  I've read some clips
that say the new "Micro USM" lenses are lighter and the autofocus is quicker,
but then others say the 28-80mm is a better lens (it is more expensive, but does
that equate with better?)  Normally I'd do more research on this, but I have to
make a quick decision.  Post here or e-mail and I will summarize if there is
interest.

Thanks everyone.

--Gary Gorka
  gag65@cas.org
From: aavvaa@mixcom.com (Fred Falk)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Camera Show/Swap Kingston NY 9/20/92
Keywords: swap kingston 9/20
Date: 20 Aug 92 03:13:46 GMT
Article-I.D.: mixcom.1992Aug20.031346.13959
Followup-To: poster
Distribution: usa
Organization: Milwaukee Internet Xchange BBS, Milwaukee, WI U.S.A.

We've expanded our Camera Shows to another location:
THE NEW YORK STATE ARMORY, KINGSTON NY 10am-3pm

If you want to be added to the mailing list, please message
a US Postal address to me and specify CAMERA SHOW, RECORD SHOW
or BOTH (see list below).

OTHER SHOWS WE DO:
Wayne, NJ (20 mins from NYC):  Monthly Show the Second Sunday of
			       EVERY month.  Next Show 9/13/92

Hamilton Square, NJ (30-40 mins from Philly):  4-6 times per year.
					       Next Show 9/27

NYC:  14th St. Armory:  3-4 times per year.  Next Show ????.

White Plains, NY:  3-4 times per year.  Next Show November.

PHOTOGRAPHIC IMAGES:  Penta Hotel, NYC:  November 15.


We also run a series of RECORD & CD Shows in NJ and NY:
Wayne, NJ:  Monthly Show, the Second Saturday of EVERY month.  Next
	    Show 9/12/92.

Kingston, NY:  3-4 times per year.  Next Show 9/19/92.

Mahwah, NJ:  3-4 times per year.  Next Show 10/25/92.

Coming Soon:  South Jersey, NYC, and Long Island.

Thanks for your time,

Fred

-- 
Fred Falk
ffalk@mixcom.UUCP
EIES:  ff, 1935
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: tomg@mishima.mn.org (Thomas Greenwalt)
Subject: Chinon CP-7m
Organization: Alternate Realities
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 05:53:20 GMT

I just bought a used Chinon CP-7m Multiprogram today.  Of course there
is no user guide to the camera.  Could someone send me an address of
Chinon I could write to so I can order a manual?

Thanks.
-- 
Thomas S. Greenwalt (Tom-Too)                                  (612)866-1344
7300 Nicollet Ave. S, Mpls, MN 55423                     tomg@mishima.mn.org 
-------------- Death: SEE! I HAVE TIME! AT LAST I HAVE TIME! ---------------
--- Alfred: And now that you have it, what are you going to do with it? ----
From: fred-mckenzie@ksc.nasa.gov (Fred McKenzie)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Flourencent light question
Date: 13 Aug 92 15:24:07 GMT
Followup-To: rec.photo
Distribution: world
Organization: NASA/Kennedy Space Center, Florida

In article <robinson.20@odie.ee.wits.ac.za>, robinson@odie.ee.wits.ac.za
(Michael Robinson) wrote:
> If I am shooting on daylight balanced film is there any filter available for 
> use under flourescent light?  What other alternatives are there to avoiding 
> green photos?

Michael-

Yes, there is a filter that claims to correct for flourescent lighting. 
I've never used one, but have heard it doesn't always help.

Flourescent light is generated when ultraviolet light, emitted from ionized
mercury vapor, strikes a phosphor coating on the inside of the cylinder. 
The phosphor is "excited" by the UV light, causing it to jump directly to a
higher energy state.  It then returns to its original state, but by jumping
to intermediate states first.  These "jumps" cause emission of light with
an energy equal to the difference in states for each jump.  In this case,
the light is visible.

Phosphors are chosen so that the resulting light appears to be white.  It
actually consists of light of several discrete colors, rather than a broad
"smear" of color like sunlight.  Various film emulsions each react
differently to flourescent light, and differently still to various types of
flourescent tubes such as cool white, warm white, soft white, et cetera.

If you follow this, it should be clear that a single filter can only help
some combinations of lighting and film emulsion.  I suggest you try
different films in an area where you expect to take pictures in the future,
and standardize on the combination that works the best.  In the process of
trying different films, you may find a filter to be worthwhile.

fred-mckenzie@ksc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: troby@diana.cair.du.edu (Thorn Roby)
Subject: Re: color saturation (was EKTAPRESS..)
Organization: University of Denver, Denver, Colorado
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 22:29:10 GMT

In article <ptse.714102363@bwdls49> ptse@bwdls49.bnr.ca (Paul Tse) writes:
>Kodak's color print films?  If anyone knows (perhaps from a Kodak 
>reference), please include Ektar, Gold, Ektapress, GPF, VPS, and
>whatever else.
>
>Thanks.
>
Unfortunately, I've never been able to translate either Kodak's
data sheets or their marketing descriptions into indications of
color saturation, but my personal opinion is that Ektar 100 is the
most saturated, followed by Gold 100 Plus, followed by Ektar 25
(which I avoid for this reason). In terms of contrast I'd rate
Ektar 25 > Ektar 100 > gold (I believe this is borne out by the
data sheets). 
You can get data sheets for Kodak films by calling 800/242-2424.

-- 

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
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: ehr@ecsvax.uncecs.edu (Ernest H. Robl)
Subject: Re: Multiple SB-24 setups, your experiences
Summary: Novatron kit alternative
Organization: UNC Educational Computing Service
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 01:59:17 GMT

In article <1992Aug20.221613.2023@indetech.com>, alix@indetech.com (Alexandria North) writes:
> 
   [ ... SB-24 comments delted ...]
> 
> I know right now that I simply can't afford two studio lights of the 
> quality I prefer, and it would be a long time before I could afford 
> a second if I bought only one. I'm trying to gauge whether or not it 
> would be worthwhile for me to spend a year or so (time flies) using 
> the SB-24 alternative, and investing in reflectors and such in the 
> meantime.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Alexandria


What about low power studio lights like the Novatron 240WS kit?
This kit is advertised by mail order places in the $425-$525 range,
with the higher prices even including the dedicated case.  %This is
about what you would pay for two SB-24 units.

This kit consists of a very small power pack with three outlets,
two light stands and two flash heads WITH MODEL LIGHTS, and two
small umbrellas.  (The basic power pack will accept a third head,
which you may even bew able to find used locally.)

I have no dispute with the fact that the SB-24 is an excellent
unit for field work.  However, if you really want to do portraits
(and/or a variety of other photographic work) you will need 
model lights that show you exactly the lighting effect that you 
are getting.

Yes, I own one of these kits and think it is a good value.  A friend
who is a full-time portrait photographer and does good business 
doing portraits of children in people's homes also uses one of these
kits as the basis of his location kit.  (He also has heavier and
more powerful lights -- but got tired of lugging these around.)

No, this power pack doesn't put out a huge amount of lighting power,
but for most portrait situations, you don't need that.  (I also have
some other lights, including a Bowens Voyager, which can put out
500 WS.)

-- Ernest

-- 

"My other computer is a Nikon N8008." -- Ernest H. Robl
Ernest H. Robl (ehr@ecsvax)  Durham, NC, USA   +1  919   286-3845
                                         FAX:  +1  919   286-1696
From: hlam@umiami.ir.miami.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: EKTAPRESS..
Date: 17 Aug 92 08:58:29 EDT
Organization: Univ of Miami IR


Thanks to all for feedback on EKTAPRESS GOLD...

I shot a few rolls of EXTAPRESS GOLD (iso 100) and the prints seems to be
highly saturated with deep contrast.  If I ever come to a situation where I
need high contrast, I would definetely recommmend this film.  Otherwise, I 
would stick to other film...



Xref: sparky rec.photo:14265 misc.wanted:7739
From: liang@saul.cis.upenn.edu (Chuck Liang)
Newsgroups: rec.photo,misc.wanted
Subject: Re: Wanted: Leicaflex SL2 Mot
Date: 15 Aug 92 01:59:28 GMT
Followup-To: rec.photo
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <976mfrg.hchong@netcom.com> hchong@netcom.com (Hoi Chong) writes:
>From article <1992Aug12.160739.22012@investor.pgh.pa.us>, by bwm@investor.pgh.pa.us (Bruce Miller #307):
>> 
>> I am interesting in obtaining a Leicaflex SL2 Mot (this is an
>> SL2 body with the ability to take the Motor-Drive.  I currently
>> have an SL2 and a few lenses, but would like to add the MD ability.
>
>Long before I knew what the name "Leica" mean (photographically), I saw
>a Leicaflex SL-1 at a shop back home outside US (thought then Nikon was
>the best).  They wanted only what is less than $100US.  The camera was
>in very good condition and now I can kick myself for not picking it up. 


  But there's no such thing as the SL-1.  There's the Leicaflex or
Leicaflex standard, the SL and the SL-2.  Only the SL-2 is realy
sought after.  I've seen an SL with a 50mm summicron lens for sale for
~$350.

  According to McKeown's 1990-91 price guide to antique and classic
cameras, an SL-2 mot with motor in "exc" condition should cost
$1500-$1800.  But I've never managed to buy anything at Mckeown's
suggested prices so I'd say you can expect to pay $2000-$2500.

  If I absolutely had to have a motor drive, I'd get an used R-3 with
a motor drive and send my lenses to Lietz to add a third cam (If I
needed full-aperture metering).  It certainly would cost much less
than an SL-2 mot with motor. 

  The SL-mot is also considerably less expensive.



Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: alix@indetech.com (Alexandria North)
Subject: Re: Multiple SB-24 setups, your experiences
Organization: Independence Technologies, Inc. Fremont, CA
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 16:03:27 GMT

In article <1992Aug21.015917.16444@ecsvax.uncecs.edu> ehr@ecsvax.uncecs.edu (Ernest H. Robl) writes:
>In article <1992Aug20.221613.2023@indetech.com>, alix@indetech.com (Alexandria North) writes:
>> 
>   [ ... SB-24 comments delted ...]
>> 
>> I know right now that I simply can't afford two studio lights of the 
>> quality I prefer, and it would be a long time before I could afford 
>> a second if I bought only one. I'm trying to gauge whether or not it 
>> would be worthwhile for me to spend a year or so (time flies) using 
>> the SB-24 alternative, and investing in reflectors and such in the 
>> meantime.
>> 
>> Alexandria
>
>What about low power studio lights like the Novatron 240WS kit?
>This kit is advertised by mail order places in the $425-$525 range,
>with the higher prices even including the dedicated case.  %This is
>about what you would pay for two SB-24 units.

I had thought about that, too, and I meant to add a note asking if 
anyone had experiences with these kinds of kits. I was wondering about 
the quality of the materials (not that I doubt it, per se). What I'm 
thinking is that if I bought one of these kits, would it be worthwhile 
for me to use the same equipment (umbrellas, barn doors, etc.) when I 
later purchased an individual, more powerful studio flash, or would 
I for some reason need to get larger or sturdier versions of the 
paraphenelia?

Also, do you know anything about the Novatron competitors -- i.e., did 
you have a reason you chose Novatron over the other manufacturers that 
offer similar kits?

I think that, yes, a kit like this is definitely an alternative I'd 
like to explore. Anyone elses comments on these kits are appreciated 
(by me if no one else :-) ).

Alexandria

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Babies, babies, babies. Why did God make so many babies?
 But no, God didn't make them. Stupid people made them."
      -- Margaret Mitchell, Gone With The Wind
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jlysagh@hubcap.clemson.edu (james joseph lysaght)
Subject: improving nude photogrphs
Organization: Clemson University
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 15:38:05 GMT

Considering the repsonse I got to my question on getting nude photo's
developed I have a new question.  Presently, I am taking my pictures
with a 15 year old kodak 110 mm point and shoot camera.  I am planning
to purchase a new kodak 35 mm point and shoot.  I found one that fits my
needs for $60.  The kodak 835 (I think, might be 735).  It decides when
to flash, it has autofocus (as opposed to focus free) and is small
enought to carry around in my pocket on trips to the mountains and the
like.  I am no quality photographer but my pictures are pretty fair.  At
least I do not cut the heads off or have my thumb in the way or
anything like dear old Dad used to do.  I have been having a lighting
problem with nude photographs though.  I tend to get them either
underexposed or overexposed.  This is even more so the case if I
photograph my wife in white langerie.  My wife is pale skinned, not
stark pale but we don't lay out in the sun so we are not tanned.  I have
found that pictures of her in black lengerie come out perfectly but
light colors tend to overexpose some.  When I seem to get the lighting
right to avoid the overexposure I get huge shadows cast around her that
make the picture look realy weird.  How should I work my lighting, and
my backgound colors in order to get a better picture?  I want reasonably
good color response in the picture.  Incidentally, one of the best
pictures I got of her was witha flash in front of a mirror.  The flash
reflected of the mirror casting these rays of light from behind her.  It
was a close up of her face and it gave excellent color response.  Her
blue eyes came out as blue as could be.  Could any of you give me
details on use mirrors or reflectors in this manner?

Jim



Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jayg@emilio.WPI.EDU (Jay Giurleo)
Subject: Need tripod/photo lab recommendations
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 12:20:09 GMT

Hello... I'm just starting out in photography, and I need some advice. First,
I would like to get a tripod.  I'd like someting reasonable sturdy, but not
terribly expensive, either. (College-student budget!) Any recommendations?
Would mail-order be a good bet? 

Secondly, could someone recommend a good photo-finishing lab for color/bw 
prints?  A friend of mine suggested Mystic.  Any thoughts on that? Price
is a factor.

Also, is there a decent place to buy film at low-cost? I'm going to go 
broke just buying film.  Bulk is fine, I'll just use the fridge.

Thanks very much.

    -Jay 
-- 
                                  
     Jay Giurleo - jayg@wpi.wpi.edu - WPI Box 2080 - Worcester, MA 01609
From: gsnow@clark.edu (Gary Snow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: media permanence (was Re: photo-developing, specifically nudes)
Date: 14 Aug 92 15:41:36 GMT
Article-I.D.: clark.1992Aug14.154136.29761
Organization: Clark College, Vancouver, Wa.  USA

In article <1992Aug13.215935.28028@cello.hpl.hp.com> jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson) writes:
>
>Jack Champin addresses digital media problems as though the problem
>were only a materials problem.  (How long will tapes last?)  A much
>more serious problem is obsolesence.  Ever tried to find someplace
>that will read an 800 bpi tape, or a Hollerith (IBM) card?  How about
>an 8 inch floppy disk?  How about punched paper tape?  Don't even
>think about those little casettes that used to go in Hewlett-Packard
>2645 terminals.  Going beyond digital, What about music on one of
>those 3M cartiridges?  Or even an 8-track cartridge.  78 RPM records?

Actually, thats one thing great about digital media. If a new format comes
out, all you have to do is copy your old stuff to the new format (with NO
loss in quality, every digital image is just as good as the original, no
matter how many copies are made from it), and you are all set.

Gary

-- 
-----
Gary Snow
uunet!clark!gsnow  or  gsnow@clark.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: rspeirs@javelin.sim.es.com (Ron Speirs)
Subject: Re: Me and E6
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corporation
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 16:56:38 GMT

In article <224@metran.UUCP> jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts) writes:
>rslugg@med.unc.edu (Robert Slugg) writes:
>: E-6 can be made in pints,
>: which just happens to be the size of my 2 roll patterson tank, and at 4-6
>: rolls per pint the chemistry stays good (IMHO) for a year as concentrates,
>
>I just want to check on something.  I was considering an E-6 gallon kit,
>but without a Jobo, and no re-use of solutions, I would only be able to
>process 16 rolls, which is really not very economical.
>
Who said you couldn't reuse solutions?  The instructions in the E-6 gallon
kit cover this quite wel.

>Now, people are posting that the E-6 chemistry can be re-used (without
>loss of quality, I hope).  If I were to re-use the solutions twice, as
>suggested above, would the development times need to be extended, as with
>the Hobby Pac?
>
Yes, you have to increase the First Developer time for subsequent batches.
Again, the instructions cover this.  I can't remember if the Color 
Developer has to be increased.

A note about the utilization of solutions in the E-6 Kit (From the last
time I bought one, which was several years ago):  The developers in the
kit can do half as many rolls as the other solutions.  So to completely
utilize the other solutions, you need to buy another 1-gallon concentrate
of the First and Color Developers half way thru the kit.  (All of this is
based on mixing small pint or quart batches, never the whole gallon).
With a gallon kit and extra developers, you can very conservatively do
64 rolls.  Years ago I experimented extending the solutions 50%, and got
96 rolls routinely from the 1-gallon kits.  (Now just because I did it
doesn't mean that I'm telling you to do it; I just said it worked for
me.)  Nowadays, I buy 5-gallon First and Color developers, and home-brew
everything else.  My E-6 chemistry costs are so far down in the mud that
I don't worry about them (< $.50/roll).  I still process in pint or quart
batches, and just store the 5-gallon concentrates in old 1-gallon
concentrate bottles saved from the Kodak 1-gallon kit days.  Never had 
any problems with concentrates going bad; some stored up to a year.

Ron Speirs, Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp., Salt Lake City, Utah
From: watters@mendel.genetics.washington.edu (Mike Watters)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Fuji's E-6 Labs
Date: 17 Aug 92 19:43:14 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Aug17.194314.15859
Organization: University of Washington

Problems with mailers:
	I can't speak for Fuji, but I sent in a Kodak slide mailer 3 weeks
ago and have yet to get my film back.

BTW:
	What is the price of Fuji processing?  Now that Qualex bumped their
prices about 3 fold (at the outlet I normally use) I've been hunting around
for an alternative.

mike

--
Mike
watters@genetics.washington.edu
Dept of Genetics, Univ of Washington  Seattle
(d) 206-543-1934   (e) 206-361-1156 
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: chris@fnbc.com (Chris Toczycki)
Subject: Re: Grainy B&W film?
Organization: First National Bank Of Chicago, Chicago IL, USA
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 13:28:09 GMT

In article <229@metran.UUCP> jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts) writes:
> sog@craycos.com (Steve Gombosi) writes:
> : In article <1992Aug14.164047.21429@newshost.unh.edu> K_LEPA@unhh.unh.edu  
(Kristen   Lepa) writes:
> : >Is there a B&W film out there that is inherently grainy?  I know it
> : >would help if I got a very fast film, but I like to work with slower
> : >speeds.  
> : 
> : Hmmm...why not use really fast film and a neutral density filter?
> 
> The obvious (?) choice would be Kodak T-max P3200 pushed a bit.  Another
> possibility is Tri-X fully developed in Dektol.  I tried that once.  It
> is quite harsh.

Its funny that the chemistry I used in the late 70's as a high school newspaper  
photographer is now used to enahnce grain.  I hated the grain I got with Tri-X  
and Dektol, especially since I became so good at printing after trying  
different techniques to minimize it.  Unfortunately, I also learned to hate  
darkrooms and the smell of developers.


Chris
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: tomrice@netcom.com (Tom R. Rice)
Subject: Re: Rates for freelance photographer
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 00:55:16 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

hamm@weejordy.physics.mun.ca (Craig Hamm) writes:


>	Now, I would TOTALLY agree that I personally would never do a 
>	wedding shoot, or similar, but selling landscapes, and doing
>	portraiture, I should be allowed to compete with the pros.  If
>	I happen to suck, I will stop getting money, and I'd drop out

	No, you seem to understand the idea.  What I feel demeans the
	profession (any prof, not just photo) is the guy who contracts
	for a job and can't deliver, leaving the customer bitter and
	disillusioned.  Obviously, this doesn't apply to the more
	subjective fields of artistic/personal taste, where your
	work might very well be more pleasing to the buyer, if
	only because your taste is better than the shop down the
	street; you then are entitled to a fair and, hopefully,
	profitable return.

	It sounds like you are getting off on the right foot...
	Good Luck!	

	trr
-- 
"Start off every day with a smile and get it over with."  --W.C.Fields
Tom R. Rice   WB6BYH                   Holler Observatory - 
tomrice@netcom.com                     Longitude:  121 d  30 m  20 s W 
CIS: 71160,1122                        Latitude:    37 d  25 m  10 s N