HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: system@nmsb.larc.nasa.gov (system)
Subject: Bying a Slide Projector 
Reply-To: M.C.Wu@larc.nasa.gov
Organization: NASA, Langley, Hampton, Virginia 
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 13:29:08 GMT

Hi,
I am new to this newsgroup. It's really a warm feeling that I realize I can 
leran a lot and get help from the people out there. Really appreciate.

A few months ago, I saw someone (sorry, forget his name) posting an article 
about Leica slide projectors. He suggested get a Leica P155 (ColorPlan) but 
not P150. I called 4 mail order companies (including, CWO and B&H), and found 
they carry only P150. I would like to get a relatively good projector for my 
family for years to come. (Not plan to upgrade frequently.) I am willing to 
spend a little bit more than the cost of P150 (abot $250).  So, the questions:

Can you suggest a good place (mail order) to get a Leica P155 or equivalent 
new models?
Or, P150 is good enough for famaly entertainment (or showing my wife's 
painting for small group gathering)?
Or, even other suggestions?

Thanks.

Meng-Chou Wu

NASA, Langley Research Center       M.C.Wu@larc.nasa.gov
MS 231                              Phone: (804)864-4951
Hampton, VA 23681                   FAX: (804)864-4914
From: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Masking glass negative carrier
Date: 8 Sep 92 13:44:20 GMT
Reply-To: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin)
Organization: COMANDOS Project, Glesga Yoonie

madler@vssad.enet.dec.com (Michael C. Adler) wrote:
> Does anyone have any clever ideas for masking a 6x9 cm (AN) glass
> negative carrier down to smaller sizes?  Beseler, in its infinite
> wisdom, chooses not to ship their carriers with anything so useful.
> Black photographic masking tape seems an obvious solution but that
> would, most likely, permanently degrade the masked glass so I would
> never be able to use a larger format.  I've considered cutting a
> piece of mat board and taping it to the underside.

I don't know the geometry of the Beseler carrier, but how about a piece of
blackened roll or sheet film (scrounge off a pro if you don't use it, they
always have stuff to throw away unprocessed) with a rectangular hole cut in
the centre?  Or a cut-down piece from one of the black polythene bags they
ship paper in? - this isn't as heat-resistant, though.  Or an old filter
gel?

-- 
--  Jack Campin    room G092, Computing Science Department, Glasgow University,
17 Lilybank Gardens, Glasgow G12 8RZ, Scotland   TEL: 041 339 8855 x6854 (work)
INTERNET: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk or via nsfnet-relay.ac.uk    FAX: 041 330 4913
BANG!net: via mcsun and uknet     BITNET: via UKACRL    UUCP: jack@glasgow.uucp
From: philg@zurich.ai.mit.edu (Philip Greenspun)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: fixed lens medium format / slide mount questions
Date: 6 Sep 92 21:46:53 GMT
Reply-To: philg@martigny.ai.mit.edu
Organization: M.I.T. Artificial Intelligence Lab.
In-reply-to: rsl@gasco.com's message of 4 Sep 92 19:50:26 GMT

In article <1992Sep4.195026.22515@gasco.com> rsl@gasco.com (Robert Lucas x4363) writes:

   I am wondering if anyone out there has had any experience with the Fuji line
   of medium format cameras (6x7 and 6x9) that utilize a fixed lens and 
   rangefinder focusing.  They seem to be affordable, but I am unsure of the 
   quality; also, most of my photographic work involves shooting fine art
   for exhibitions, gallery cards, etc., and I am concerned about possible 
   parallax errors at the 5' to 15' camera to object range I typically use.

I use the Fuji 645 rangefinder with a 60mm lens and am delighted with
the image quality and overall handling.  The rangefinder is incredibly
dim and hard to use, however.  I picked up an old Canon 35mm RF camera
for $50 that has a much better rangefinder.

My 645 compensates for parallax with the framelines in the viewfinder.
I don't think you'll have a problem with the bigger ones.

Philip Greenspun
MIT Department of EE
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: mittal@eos.ncsu.edu (RAVI O MITTAL)
Subject: Slide Viewer - Recommendations wanted 
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 17:18:27 GMT

 Please recommend a good viewer for standard color 
slides. I don't want to spend the $200 on a slide
projector!
Thanks.


Ravi Mittal
Department of Industrial Engineering
N.C. State University
Raleigh, North Carolina

mittal@cadcam.ie.ncsu.edu


Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi)
Subject: Re: Info on Better wide angle
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Distribution: world,local
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 08:15:52 GMT

In article <11SEP92092817@tiamat.hacks.arizona.edu>, paulf@tiamat.hacks.arizona.edu (Paul Frankenstein, Bs.D.) writes:
> In article <vemuri.716151305@godzilla>, vemuri@informix.com (Sudhakar Vemuri) writes...
>>Dear friends,
>> 
>>I am very new to photography. I love to take nature photos which I understand
>>need wider angle lenses.
>> 
>>I want to buy a SLR camera with Autofocus option. I would like to try Canon 
>>EOS rebel or its minolta counterpart.
> 
> The general consensus on the net seems to be that the bottom-end AF SLRs
> (Canon Rebel, Nikon 4004/f401, Minolta 3xi, etc) arn't much more than 
> point-and-shoot cameras with interchangeable lenses. If you really want
> AF, go with the next higher level (Nikon 6006/f601, Canon Elan, Minolta 5xi).
> 

What do you mean by 'nature'? Two things come to mind; close-up/macro, or,
the clasic 'bird photo' type stuff. The key to getting good results in a single
life-time is the lens. Given a limited budget, pick a lens that will do what
you are intersted in and buy a body with whats left over.

>>Here are some of my basic questions :
>> 
>>1. Since I need to take more nature photos, Should I buy a 28mm-50mm camera 
>>with additional lenses to add for higher zooms.

If you are serious about it, you are realy limited to Canon or Nikon.
Get a lens listing and see which ones you want. You will then hae some idea of
how far your buget will go, and how to start.

~Paul
From: hlam@umiami.ir.miami.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Film processing
Date: 8 Sep 92 10:38:52 EDT
Organization: Univ of Miami IR

Could anyone give me information on the following:

	. Fujimoto image processor (CP-31 or CP-51)
	. Daylab 600
	. Patterson Auto Colortherm

I got these from magazines advertisement.  As far as I could make out,
the Fujimoto claim to process 8X10 black and white prints in less then 90
seconds.  And the unit looks like its self contained, kinda like a XEROX. 
The Daylab makes color enlargements from either slides or negatives.
And the Patterson Auto Colortherm is all you need to process 8X10 color prints.

I'm new to this arena, could anyone give me more information regarding
processing either slides or prints.  

Thanks for any info,

Huntson L.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: pdg@cup.hp.com (Paul Gootherts)
Subject: New Canon mentioned on CBS This Morning
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 00:06:24 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1.3 PL5

On CBS This Morning (Sep 9) I heard an annoyingly incomplete description
of a new Canon body about to be announced.

They said it's able to focus on "what the photographer is looking at".
They didn't say what that means.  They also said it is expected to sell
for about $800 and that it would be introduced in Japan first (with no
plans announced at this time for U.S. release).

Now for my question.  Does anyone know anything *substantive* about this
camera?

--

Paul Gootherts, pdg@cup.hp.com
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: B&W Slide filmREAD/NEW/FOLLOWUP
Date: 14 Sep 92 14:37:41 GMT
Organization: Curtin University of Technology

In article <1992Sep14.030852.1906@ultb.isc.rit.edu>, andpph@ritvax.isc.rit.edu writes:
...
> BTW, there is also a Kodak Direct Positive Copy film that has a speed of about
> .1 or so.... not too practical for action photography but maybe useable for
> still, very still, lives. On the other hand, T-Max, Tech Pan, and Ilford Pan f
> and Agfapan can all be developed to a positive which is what B&W slide film is
> after all.
> 
Kodak Rapid Process Copy or Professional B&W Duplicating 4168 is on ORTHO film.
Is there a Panchro equivalent?

~Paul
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: ptse@bcars65b.bnr.ca (Paul Tse)
Subject: Re: SB-24 Vs SB-22 ???
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Canada
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 00:54:01 GMT

When considering the fabulous SB-24, consider that it will be
discontinued with the introduction of the SB-25.  If you still
want it, you may be able to find it discounted...
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: chuck@drutx.ATT.COM (LucianoC)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: New Canon mentioned on CBS This Morning
Date: 10 Sep 92 18:53:34 GMT
Reply-To: chuck@drutx.ATT.COM (LucianoC)
Organization: AT&T, Denver, CO

In article <1992Sep10.152915.28058@wri.com> markm@wri.com writes:
>In article <1992Sep9.192416.1@acad3.alaska.edu> fsjfz@acad3.alaska.edu writes:
>
>I saw the story too.  They said that the camera uses two small laser-beams to  
>determine what the photographer is looking at. 

Fighter planes have been doing something like this for aiming weapons.








Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: CCGM <CCGM@MUSICM.MCGILL.CA>
Subject: RE: Cokin Filters:  Any good?
Organization: McGill University Systems Inc (MUSIC/SP)
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 03:22:32 GMT

In article <16862B928.M18709@mwvm.mitre.org> M18709@mwvm.mitre.org writes:
>I have been thinking about the Cokin filters.  How are they optically.
>Is there a great loss of resolution?  Do they scratch easily?  How is
>the polarizer?  Do they make a circular polarizer?  Should I get the
>hood?
  Optically, there is not a NOTICABLE degradation with and without
the filters. I have several graduated neutral density filters, some
B+W contrast filters, the scratched star (4 point) one, and a circular
polarizer (made of glass). They do not scratch easily, but do accumulate
dust - they build up a static charge. I haven't found a need yet for the
hood - I've had mine for a couple of years. However, do consider getting
the filter box for ten filters - good for the camera case. Also, unless
you've got big big lenses, get the amateur line - there exists an
adapter if you ever need a pro size filter. Also, no box for the
pro sized filters.
>
> ... [stuff deleted]
>
>Should I buy the Cokins or is this a mistake after buying only Nikon
>glass?  How do plastic gel filters compare with glass ones? (I assume
>glass would be better)  Is the differences worth it for photographers
>on a budget?
   One might say that if you've bought Nikon equipment, how could
you be on a budget? (:-) On the other hand, if you've bought Nikon
equipment, how could you not be? (;-)
   I think that for the cost, you can't beat Cokin filters. Unless
you are doing really critical work, and require large enlargements,
I doubt that you'll notice whatever difference in optical quality might
exist between Cokin and Tiffin filters. One approach might be to try
things out with Cokin, and if you find that they really enhance your
work, to put them aside and go then for the optical quality. Odds are
that you'll be satisfied enough with them.

   I'm very satisfied with the Cokin line - most of their filters don't
appeal to me, but the basic ones are fine for me.

Glen Matthews
MUSIC Product Group, McGill University
550 Sherbrooke St. West, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3A 3C5
Phone: (514) 398-4477 Fax: (514) 398-4488 BitNet: CCGM@MCGILLM
Internet: ccgm@musicm.mcgill.ca   Anonymous FTP: vm.mpg.mcgill.ca
From: jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Morris Slaves and NiCads?
Keywords: Morris optical slave flash nicad batteries
Date: 14 Sep 92 02:56:37 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories

In article <1992Sep13.002114.25203@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih) writes:
>I recently bought a Morris "Mini Wide" slave flash and some NiCd AAA's
>to power it.  However, when I tried NiCads (after charging them, of
>course), the flash wouldn't charge.  Indeed, one of the cells became
                                              ^^^
>too hot to handle and is probably damaged.  The flash seems to work
>fine with Alkaline batteries.

This is most strange.  I assume they are all in series.  Why would one
get hotter than the others?

There are two common problems with using NiCd cells on flashes
designed for alkalines.

1.  The cell voltage is a little lower.  On some equpiment there is
not enough voltage to fully charge it up.  This happens on my Nikon
One-touch (P&S).  It just keeps charging but the ready light never
comes on.

2.  The internal resistance of NiCds is smaller than that of
alkalines.  Some flashes actually depend of this internal resistance
to limit the current to a safe level.  It is rumored that some Vivitar
flashes will burn out on NiCd batteries.

However, your description doesn't match this either.

>When I hooked the Morris up to the small power supply I have in my
>basement, the power supply gave a "short circuit" indication at the
>beginning of each flash recharge cycle, but otherwise worked fine.

Try setting it to the exact voltage that the cells put out and see
what happens.
...
>Alvin_C._Shih____________________acs@csri.utoronto.ca______________________|

  -- David Jacobson
From: dbernard@thewho.Central.Sun.COM (Dave Bernard)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Nikon FE2: Isn't it good? Why discontinued?
Date: 11 Sep 92 20:16:22 GMT
Reply-To: dbernard@thewho.Central.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems


Deleted, statements that the FE2 is available yet, new, in Japan and Europe.

If this is so, and with the price of used FE2s so high, why doesn't some
enterprising New York dealer import them for US sale?
	Dave
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: rspeirs@javelin.sim.es.com (Ron Speirs)
Subject: Re: Film for making prints from slides
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corporation
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 16:19:57 GMT

In article <1992Sep9.115250.22498@cs.rit.edu> kar@cs.rit.edu (Kenneth A Reek) writes:
>
>	I have some slides that I want to make ordinary prints from.
>Last time I tried this using my macro lens to get 1:1 reproduction,
>the results were very contrasty.  Does anyone know of a print film
>specifically intended for reproducing slides, or any print film
>with low enough contrast to be useful to me?
>
Use Kodak Vericolor Internegative Film 6011 (VIN).  It is specifically
designed for this purpose.  Call Kodak's information line and request
the publications which describe how to expose the film to your slides
(you must get the right color balance).  

The catch:  It is available only in 100-ft rolls; B&H lists it for $68.95.
But if you have a lot of slides to do, it could be worth it.  Share it 
with some friends.  Keep the remainder in the freezer.

Ron Speirs, Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp., Salt Lake City, Utah


Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: pd@sics.se (Per Danielsson)
Subject: Re: Digital Photography
Organization: Swedish Institute of Computer Science
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 01:07:25 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.172937.10142@kodak.kodak.com> axman@acadia.Kodak.COM (Mike Axman) writes:

>I suspect the traffic around digital photography to increase in rec.photo, 
>as we are now seeing "affordable" scanners, writers, etc... (and PhotoCD).
>Over the last year or so I've monitored rec.photo, however, the number of
>discussions on this topic have been fairly small.

Digital photography (as in digital cameras) is still very expensive.
My guess is that it will take many years until it will become
affordable by amateur photographers. Digital storage is another
matter. I look forward very much to get my hands on a PhotoCD to play
with. The cost of putting images onto a CD seems to be reasonable even
for an amateur. (Not surprisingly, since it was meant to be, right Mike?)
--
Per Danielsson				pd@sics.se
Swedish Institute of Computer Science, PO Box 1263, S-164 28 KISTA, SWEDEN
From: sdm@pyramid.Corp.Sun.COM (Scott Mann)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Cokin Filters:  Any good?
Date: 15 Sep 1992 17:12:08 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: pyramid.corp.sun.com

In article <16862B928.M18709@mwvm.mitre.org> M18709@mwvm.mitre.org writes:
>I have been thinking about getting some graduated filters (Neutral
>Density, and perhaps some color ones).  I plan on getting the square
>kind (4"x4").
> 
>I have been thinking about the Cokin filters.  How are they optically.
>Is there a great loss of resolution?  Do they scratch easily?  How is
>the polarizer?  Do they make a circular polarizer?  Should I get the
>hood?

My experience with the Cokin plastic 4X4's is that they scratch
quite easily.  This is not a recommendation against them, since
I still use them regularly, but it is to say that you need to
be *real* careful with them. I've had a lot of fun with the colored
ones, and given their relative low cost, I've been able to get
more than one or two.  Don't know about the polarizer.

--


..Scott
From: jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: High speed useful ? (was Re: Nikon N90 technobabble)
Date: 9 Sep 92 02:35:40 GMT
Organization: Pacific * Bell

In article <274@metran.UUCP> jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts) writes:
>hchong@netcom.com (Hoi Chong) writes:
>: From article <272@metran.UUCP>, by jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts):
>: > luong@naxos.inria.fr (Quang-Tuan Luong) writes:
>: > : In article <PHR.92Sep4102515@soda.berkeley.edu>, phr@soda.berkeley.edu (Paul Rubin) writes:
>: > : 
>: > : I don't understand the utility of high speed shutters. On my 8008, I think
>: > : I have never shot beyond 1/1000s, and I cannot imagine any real situation 
>: > : where 1/8000s would be useful.
>: > 
>: > There also might be some really fast action you would like to catch.
>: > Hummingbirds, or something...
>: 
>: [..] might be a bit
>: "not that true".  I believe at 1/8000th, the camera does not actually
>: capture the whole frame within 1/8000th of a second.  Instead, it might
>: say take 1/2000th of a second to take the frame, while taking portions
>           ^^^^^^^^
>It would take as long as the X sync speed.  So if that is fast because
>the shutter is fast, at least there is a win over a camera with a slower
>shutter...
>
>: of the frame at a time. 
>
>Yes, so the hypothetical hummingbird's wings might be distorted in shape,
>because they are in different positions while the shutter traverses the
>film plane.
>
If I am not mistaken, a camera has not been invented that can freeze
a hummingbirds wings when hovering.  I saw a nature program on TV
recently and this was mentioned during the narration.
-- 
        ---------  John Gloria - jpglori@pacbell.com	--------	
 		"You cannot depend on your eyes when your imagination
	       is out of focus."   -     Mark Twain
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: fjcppr@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Subject: Can someone derive this term?
Reply-To: fjcppr@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 03:50:07 GMT

In Popular Photography, they use the term "tyro" a lot. It appears to
mean someone who is very inexperienced with photography, or someone 
who is gadget-oriented in a bad sort of way. Can someone explain
the derivation and real meaning of this strange term? 
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: troby@diana.cair.du.edu (Thorn Roby)
Subject: Re: Tilt and Shift.  How useful are they?
Organization: University of Denver, Denver, Colorado
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 15:21:42 GMT


Concerning the use of tilt in landscapes: I've been trying to adapt
a 113 mm Protar (should cover 5x7") to my Speed Graphic to handle 
situations where I want to optimize the plane of focus for an image
along the ground, receding to the horizon. I set the lens into a
hemispherical surface (ok, ok... a tennis ball) mounted on a lens
board. I set the lens below the center of the mount, figuring that
the image circle would then be more nearly centered on the film 
plane (sorry, we're beyond the realm of ascii graphics now). Oops -
forgot to mention - shooting 6x7. 
However, I find that, although the depth of field along this plane
is increased, the overall resolution is worse, despite the apparent
absence of vignetting. The tilt is about 30 degrees. Should I expect
this to cause a significant loss in sharpness? Would I be better off
leaving the lens centered on the film plane? It would be nice if I
could analyze the situation by what I see on the ground glass, but at
f/18 that's not a lot.
-- 

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,rec.backcountry
From: smmyers@pbhyg.PacBell.COM (Sean M. Myers)
Subject: Re: What tripod do you use when backpacking?
Reply-To: smmyers@PacBell.COM (Sean M. Myers)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 18:36:37 GMT

> The title says it all. What is a good tradeoff between weight and stability?

     I came into this thread late, so I don't know if this has been mentioned.
You might want to check out using a monopod (sp?)  Basically it's just a
single leg, usually collapsable.  I have a wooden hiking staff that I use when
hiking, and I just drilled the proper size hole in the top, and went down to
the hardware store and bought a screw (bolt ?) that matches the threads on the 
camera.

     Presto !!!  I have a steady support for my camera, and a hiking staff to
boot.



  -+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+-
  + Sean M. Myers (smmyers@pbhyg.PacBell.COM)| Sweater, n.:                 +
  = Systems Analyst                          |      A garment worn by       =
  + Operator Services                        |      a child when its        +
  = Software Engineering and Maintenance     |      mother feels            =
  + Pacific Bell SRV, CA. USA                |      chilly.                 +
  -+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+-
  +   Sex without love is an empty experience,    |                         +
  =   but, as empty experiences go,               |                         =
  +   it's one of the best.     -- Woody Allen    |                         +
  -+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+--+=+-
From: barnick@mesa.Kodak.COM (William M Barnick x73638)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Photo-CD and HDTV 'standards'
Date: 14 Sep 92 17:25:57 GMT
Organization: Eastman Kodak Co., Rochester, NY

In article <1992Sep12.175325.1@cc.curtin.edu.au> zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi) writes:
>In article <1992Sep11.125437.4167@kodak.kodak.com>, axman@acadia.Kodak.COM (Mike Axman) writes:
>...
>> Although the current player is engineered for current television standards,
>> the data recorded on the Photo CD is "HDTV ready" when those devices 
>                                        ^^^^^^^^^^
>> become generally available.  Additionally, you can read the data into 
>> a computer using a CD-ROMxa drive, and/or get digital prints of 
>> manipulated images.
>> 
>
>could you explain this a bit more Mike? Given the state of HDTV 'standards'
>and NTSC vs PAL ect...
>
>~Paul

This months Popular Photography (Oct'92) is running a featured article
on PhotoCD.  It should answer all the basic question.  Although I personally
do no agree with every comment, the article is informative and covers all
the basics.

Anyway,  it would be interesting to see the comments based on this article.

See Ya ..
WMB
DISCLAIMER:  Comments are my own, as usual.




--
***  William M Barnick ** Eastman Kodak ** barnick@Kodak.COM ******************
***  Electronic Imaging Platform Center * Color Scanning Systems Lab          *
***  B/65-2 D/733 mc01804   Rochester NY   14650-1804                         *
**************************** (716) 477-3638 ***********************************
Newsgroups: rec.photo