HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih)
Subject: Re: Canon 10s Vs Nikon N90, Which one?
Date: 26 Dec 92 01:45:03 GMT

In <1992Dec25.204540.6437@colorado.edu> panos@burton.cs.colorado.edu (Panos Tsirigotis) writes:

>Producing red-eye if not just a function of the flash head distance
>from the lens axis; it also depends on the lens focal length.
>I have managed to produce red-eye with my 100-300mm lens at 100mm
>(or maybe 135) using a 430EZ so red-eye reduction on the flash
>may come useful sometimes.

I can see it being useful here, but I still think there might be
techinical problems.

The SB-25 fires 3 "visible but dim" preflashes.  If the flashes are too
dim, they might not be effective at convincing the pupil to close
down.  If they're too bright, they eat into the power that is supposed
to go into the main flash.  (One hopes the SB-25 takes this into
account.)

In any case, from what I've heard, all you get is smaller red eyes.
Again, if someone has an F-90/SB-25 combo to do some testing, I'm
willing to be convinced.


Actually, I have another comment on the brochure regarding the SB-25
(don't I always :-).  On the last page, they tell you the settings used
to take some of the pictures in the brochure.  It is particularly
telling that they don't say *anything* about the settings on the
SB-25.  For such an advanced piece of equipment, one would think
the settings to be important.

For the picture illustrating FP sync, they don't mention any settings
at all!  (And with the boasting about the recording capabilities of the
Sharp Electronic Organizer, I can't see how they have any excuse.)
I'd really like to know how they got "balanced fill flash" with FP sync!
Indeed, the shot didn't even require it.  Normal X-sync at 1/250th
would have done the job.

The picture on p.16 where we see the image of a woman (in a dumb pose
IMHO) in three mirrors, I was prepared to be impressed with the
multi-segment OTF metering.  The blurb at the back says:

    p.16: 3D Multi-Sensor Balanced Fill-Flash
    Matrix Metering, Manual exposure (1/250 sec, f/11), AF 28-70mm
    f/3.5-4.5F, with SB-25 off camera.

Again, I don't see how the distance information could possibly play any
role in a picture where the flash is not only not facing the subject,
it's off camera!

The exposure was set *manually*.  Who knows?  Maybe the flash was
set manually too!

A fine testimony to the powerful computerized flash capabilities of the
F-90/SB-25... Not!

>Panos

ACS

-- 
 ___ ___ ___ ______________________________________________________________
|   |   | __|      Democracy is not a way of getting better solutions.     |
| - | --|__ |           It's just a way to spread the blame.               |
|_|_|___|___|______________________________________________________________|
Alvin_C._Shih____________________acs@csri.utoronto.ca______________________|
From: pd@sics.se (Per Danielsson)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Canon Technical Back E for EOS. (was Re: Canon Elan - leave leader out?)
Date: 30 Dec 92 01:11:22 GMT
	<92364.114510MPOISSON@ESOC.BITNET>
	<1992Dec29.090517.12765@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>
	<20614@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu>
	<1992Dec29.145030.26917@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>
Organization: Swedish Institute of Computer Science, Kista

In article <1992Dec29.145030.26917@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih) writes:

>Actually, since you have a 630, you could do some of this with the
>"Technical Back E", but it was really designed for the 620 and 650
>which didn't have flash exposure compensation.  (Sigh.)

Does anyone out there know why the Techical Back E cannot be used with
the EOS RT? (I can't think of a reason, since the RT is very similar
to the 600/630).
--
Per Danielsson				pd@sics.se
Swedish Institute of Computer Science, PO Box 1263, S-164 28 KISTA, SWEDEN
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: samm@panix.com (Sam Merrell)
Subject: Re: IBM programs for manipulating photgraphs
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 06:42:57 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC

In <1992Dec24.152719.20617@ultb.isc.rit.edu> fjcppr@ritvax.isc.rit.edu writes:

>The most versatile program for IBM/Windows photo manipulation is
>Aldus PhotoStyler. It costs about $500. Adobe is planning to introduce
>Photoshop sometime in early 1993. 

I strongly suggest you run (don't walk) to the nearest phone and call
Ron Scott and get a hold of HiRes QFX version 3.0. Runs like a scared
cat on DOS with Memory extenders (expanders?), will address LOTS of RAM.
Really right software!

     Ron Scott Inc.
     1000 Jackson Blvd
     Houston TX 77066
     713-529-5868

Not to detract from PhotoStyler, but if you don't want to deal with Windows,
This is the one to check out.  --Sam
From: ken@racerx.bridge.COM (Ken Hardy)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Query: Aerial photography with kites
Date: 4 Jan 93 05:15:51 GMT
Organization: Planet Earth

In article <1992Dec31.221237.862@ultb.isc.rit.edu> andpph@ritvax.isc.rit.edu writes:
>
>One of the truly GREAT kite photographers was George "flashlight" Lawrence if
>my memory serves me right. He lifted swing-lens panoramic cameras of his own
>manufacture and photographed in Chicago, San Francisco fire aftermath, and even
>strung his kites of the poopdeck of a steamer near the coast of Africa.
>
>I believe his kites were box kites and he would stack maybe up to a dozen or so
>before lifting his camera. I am not sure what method he used to trip the

For Christmas I received the book _Looking At Earth_ (ISBN
1-878685-16-3, Turner Publishing, 1992) which is mostly a fascinating
collection of annotated photographs from space.  The intro has a
panoramic shot of San Fransisco taken by Lawrence some six weeks after
the 1906 earthquake.  The caption says it was taken from around 2,000
feet (600 m) with a camera lifted by 17 kites.  I'm not too familiar
with S.F., but I'd guess it's taken from Fishermen's Wharf area (the
foreground is definitely a wharf), and you can see the _whole_ city.
Unfortunately for the originator of this thread, no discussion of
technique is presented.

BTW, the book does give some info on the hand-held Hasselblads used by
shuttle astronauts.  If anyone would like to know about the lenses,
backs, and films, and the resolutions obtained, I'll post a summary
here.  If there's no interest, I'll skip it.

-- 

Ken Hardy
ken@bridge.com  (racerx!ken)
From: bjs@RUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Barry Sherman)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: WD-40 Remover?
Date: 22 Dec 92 19:32:40 GMT
Reply-To: bjs@RUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Barry Sherman)
Followup-To: rec.photo
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

Marty Hewew writes:

>Ya gotta ask
>yourself, do you feel lucky?

Without forgetting that a man's *got* to know his limiatations. :-)

Barry

--


|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Barry Sherman, Amdahl Corp. | "It's much easier to go to exotic places and | 
| bjs@uts.ccc.amdahl.com      |  capture spectacular scenes than to take a   |
|                             |  spectacular picture of a really boring      |
|                             |  green pepper". - Anthony Tse                |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Amdahl, being a corporation, is a legal fiction.  Therefore it is incapable|
| of holding, let alone expressing, opinions.  Unfortunately, this has been  |
| said of me as well. (I.e.  My statments are mine, not Amdahl's.)           |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih)
Subject: Re: Disc Cameras
Date: 1 Jan 93 00:59:44 GMT

In <PHR.92Dec31131029@napa.telebit.com> phr@telebit.com (Paul Rubin) writes:

>In article <1992Dec31.054721.27130@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih) writes:

>   Indeed, there are plans underway to standardize a smaller 35mm film
>   cassette with thin-base film so that smaller P&S cameras can be made.
>   So, the pocket-sized P&S wonders of today will get even smaller!  (And
>   the possibility for 72 exposures in the current cassette looms...
>   Gads.  Bulk backs might even become extinct!)

>This is interesting--who is going to offer 72 exp. loads in normal
>cassettes?  Ilford tried this with a thin-base HP5 a few years ago
>but it was very unsuccessful, perhaps partly because of the special
>processing equipt. needed.

I don't know if 72 exposure film is destined to be that popular myself
(but a nifty specialty option nonetheless).  Certainly, the average
shooter has trouble going through a roll of 36 in a single day (and
still have time to *talk* to the people s/he's shooting :-).

For people who do their own developing, it may be difficult to handle
such a long strip of film.  Most of the people I know who do their own
B&W developing keep their film down to 20 or 24 exposures.  Come to
think of it, something would have to change with respect to the
developing reels...

ACS
-- 
 ___ ___ ___ ______________________________________________________________
|   |   | __|"The Nikon lens owners are more gratingly smug, while the     |
| - | --|__ | Canon lens owners are more verbally abusive." - Tony Arnerich|
|_|_|___|___|______________________________________________________________|
Alvin_C._Shih____________________acs@csri.utoronto.ca______________________|

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: briang@atlastele.com (Brian Godfrey)
Subject: Re: How do they know?
Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc.
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 21:06:28 GMT

In article <1992Dec22.054431.23588@ultb.isc.rit.edu> fjcppr@ritvax.isc.rit.edu writes:
>In the most recent Del's ad in Shutterbug, Tony "who knows Leica" says
>that you can stand on a Leica without damaging it. Should I believe
>that Tony or someone he knows has actually done that? Has anyone
>out there in Rec.photo every stood on any camera? If so, please 
>include your weight in your reply. Also, did you stand on the camera
>with its bottom or its back to the ground? 

Dear Mr(s) fjcppr,

   One must always be careful of statements such as "Tony, who knows Leica,
says you can stand on a Leica." They can be very misleading.  I, for example,
once knew a hooker named Leica and you could...Oh!  Never mind.

   Anyway, every experienced photographer has not only stood on his camera,
at one time or another, but has also fallen on it with full force, and we
experienced photographers are typically laden with many pounds of extra
gear, so even a leitweight person can come down pretty hard.  We all
know that Galileo's experiments with gravity were conducted before the
invention of cameras.  Cameras, it seems, tend to fall much faster than the
human body and so always end up beneath us when we fall.  

   As to the overall reliability of Leica *cameras*, ask any Leicophile.  It
is a well-known fact that real photojournalists treat their camera as just
another tool to get the job done.  And remember: when all you've got is a
hammer, everything looks like a nail.  So photojournalists tend to use their
Leicas for tire chocks, step ladders to see over a crowd, to break off
padlocks so they can do some covert investigations, as an extra little bit
of armor over their kevlar-lined photo vests, to take photos of violent
beasts such as Hollywood movie stars, etc.  When they are finished with
them, or when they need a new tax write-off, they are sold to Leicophiles,
who place them in velvet and preserve them - battle scars and all - for
posterity.  Or posteriors, since we also all tend to sit on our cameras
from time-to-time, too.

   You're welcome.


-- 
--Brian M. Godfrey
  atlastele.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih)
Subject: Re: Canon Elan - leave leader out?
Date: 29 Dec 92 04:34:38 GMT

In <1992Dec29.034449.28130@ultb.isc.rit.edu> andpph@ritvax.isc.rit.edu writes:

>In article <1992Dec28.213102.18522@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>, acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih) writes:
>>In <1992Dec28.175058.1@cudnvr.denver.colorado.edu> dwing@cudnvr.denver.colorado.edu (Dan Wing) writes:
>>
>>>I've heard of some Nikon 8008s owners sending their cameras back to Nikon to
>>>get them reprogrammed to have the film leader left out when the film is
>>>rewound.
>>
>>>Is this possible with the Canon Elan?

>For this particular camera might it be possible to simply trim off a few
>sprocket holes off the leader on the "longer" side of the tongue to fool the
>sensor into stopping the rewinding process while a bit of film still is poking
>out of the casette?  I do not have one of these cameras to test out how much of
>the edge would have to be trimmed off or even if the scheme would work.

Intriguing idea, but I think the camera keeps winding for a while after
the last sprocket hole as passed.  I doubt it's worth trimming 3 inches
of film to keep the leader out.

>andy

ACS
-- 
 ___ ___ ___ ______________________________________________________________
|   |   | __|      Democracy is not a way of getting better solutions.     |
| - | --|__ |           It's just a way to spread the blame.               |
|_|_|___|___|______________________________________________________________|
Alvin_C._Shih____________________acs@csri.utoronto.ca______________________|
Xref: sparky rec.photo:22811 ba.general:5443
From: pchan@snowy.csd.sgi.com (Pamela Chan)
Newsgroups: rec.photo,ba.general,sgi.general
Subject: Re: Where to process my color negative film
Date: 31 Dec 92 15:19:07 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.


I don't know of any good shops nearby, but I do know of a place to
avoid: "Film to Frame" located at San Antonio and El Camino Real.

I took my slides there once. They don't have a price list posted
anywhere. You have to ask the person how much they would charge you.
When they informed me about their price, I was also told this, "Go
anywhere else and you can't find a place that beats our price."

Then I walked across the street and found out their were charging me
about 150% more than Photo Drive Up. I fooled myself that this shop
could probably produce good quality pictures since they charged so
much. However, I was totally disappointed with the result. The
coloring isn't right; the lighting isn't right; and some negatives
were missing.

Now you know...


--
-------------------------------------------------------------
Pamela Chan				Silicon Graphics Inc.
pchan@csd.sgi.com			415-390-1224
From: jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson)
Subject: Re: 8008s remote shutter contacts
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 18:53:08 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories

In article <1992Dec21.152049.9642@tijc02.uucp> kjf388@tijc02.uucp (Ken Fisher          ) writes:
>I can't find any specific information regarding the remote shutter
>contacts in the operators manual for a new 8008s.  
>
>I had assumed it was just a simple contact closure, but a reference in a
>magazine to having to use a different resistor value when switching from an
>8008 to an 8008s and using custom electronics to drive the remote shutter
>contacts, leads me to believe otherwise.  
>
>At this point I am guessing, but perhaps you use a certain value of
>resistance across the contacts to simulate lightly pressing the shutter
>release button to turn on the metering circuitry, and then a dead short
>across the contacts to fire the shutter.  
>
>Anybody familiar with this or where technical specifications beyond
>those found in the simple owners manual can be had? 

I have an 8008 (non-s), and I called 1-800-NIKONUS and the guy told me
to use 2 (I think it was 2, maybe 3) forward biased silicon diodes to
get the meter and AF to activate without releasing the shutter.  I
tried it and it and it worked.

You have to be a bit careful, as the camera seems to be quite
suseptible to capacitively coupled noise.  I had to use a shielded
cable to get things to work.  Just twisted pair wasn't reliable.

  -- David Jacobson

Neither I nor HP will be responsible for any damage you do to your
camera.  Try these suggestions at your own risk.
From: Harald.Brandt@eua.ericsson.se (Harald Brandt)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Tilt Shift (Was: Canon 10s Vs Nikon N90, Which one?)
Date: 30 Dec 92 12:31:08 GMT
Organization: Ellemtel Utvecklings AB, Sweden

In article <C01926.JyJ@ra.nrl.navy.mil> tse@ra.nrl.navy.mil (Anthony Tse) 
writes:
>    I was looking at those TS lens, but at the price of the lens
> alone, I can buy a used 4x5 camera.  Since you have to use tripod
> and spend 15 minute ajusting the T&S anyway, might as well go
> all out and do it in 4x5 for less.

I don't see why you would need a tripod (with a 35mm camera).  Let's say I 
want some good depth-of-field, then it is not necessary to stop down to 
f22, instead I could use f5.6 or 8 and a reasonably short shutter speed so 
I can hold the camera by hand!  Or let's say I stand in front of a 
mountain. Then it would be nice to ovoid tilting the whole camera upwards 
(and using an even wider angle such as 20mm might be unsuitable for other 
reasons). My own idea to solve this latter situation without a TS-lens is 
to use 20 mm holding the camera straight, and masking the resulting 
picture, but that is not very optimum when shooting slides, since the 
resulting picture will be smaller. (Concerning the price of the TS, 
however, I fully agree it is outrageous).

Lastly: I mentioned in a reply that the 20-35 is 82 mm long. It is 89 mm 
long. (I didn't have access to the correct figure when I wrote the reply).

/Harald
From: bu890@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brian Segal)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Vivitar 2x for Hasselblad
Date: 21 Dec 1992 23:31:49 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


Well, I guess I got mine on the right day :-)..it is both mechanically
and optically fine.

Brian
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jromao@bragg.bio.purdue.edu
Subject: Re: Nikkor 180 AF lens: close focusing ability?
Reply-To: jromao@bragg.bio.purdue.edu
Organization: Purdue University, Dept. of Biological Sciences
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 05:21:29 GMT


	In Modern Photography, the 80-200/2.8 Tamron or Tokina, performed bet-
ter than the Nikon 180/2.8 ED (IF? AF? don't recall).

				jromao@bilbo.bio.purdue.edu
From: hussain@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Kashif Hussain )
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: EKTAR-100 FILMS:  This Is A Repost
Date: 27 Dec 92 01:47:03 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania


I am an amateur photographer and have approximately 80 rolls of Kodak's
Ektar 100 film.  Each roll contains 36 shots and will expire by 3/93.
	Since I won't have time to take any pictures before March,  I am
willing to sell the rolls at $3 a piece. 
	If you are interested in purchasing a few rolls (or all of them for
that matter) send me email.  You can also leave a message on my answering
maching at (215) 382-3452.

-Kashif
From: swanger@ducvax.auburn.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: TMAX versus PLUS-X
Date: 1 Jan 93 17:31:54 GMT
Organization: Auburn University, AL

I don't have much experience with black and white photography.  I went into
the local photo shop yesterday and I saw they had two different types of
Kodak b&w film, PLUS-X 125 and TMAX 100.  Aside from the slight speed
difference, does anyone know what is different about these two films?  I
didn't get a lot of help from the salesman.  Is one "better" than the other,
or are they just different?

Thanks for any help you can send!

-- 
David Swanger,   Auburn University, Alabama,   swanger@accs.duc.auburn.edu 
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: andpph@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Subject: Re: pinhole camera
Reply-To: andpph@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 03:20:27 GMT

In article <BzwME7.8LF@fc.hp.com>, pdn@fc.hp.com (Paul Nuber) writes:
>
>When building a pinhole camera, what is the optimum size for the pinhole?
>I thought I read once that it was about 1/200th of the focal length.

From what I have seen published there are about as many "correct" sizes as
there are authors willing to share their advice on this subject! Some
suggestions are based on empirical work, others on theoretical work and others
still on what needles happen to be handy!

There does seems to be a difference between what theory would suggest as "best"
and what "practice" suggests is best. I am not close to any of my reference
materials but if you are really interested let me know or drop me some mail and
I will reply with at least 4 different answers!

In the meantime something like f:200 to f:300 is about what you are shooting
for I believe. It does depend on whether you are shooting a full color image or
can tolerate shooting only in one color of light. If this is the case then
preferably blue light. For the purist it is also very important to make the
hole as round as possible and the edges as thin as possible. BTW, there is a
nice practical book on the subject called the Hole thing, I believe. There is
also a Pinhole Journal. Again, if there is interest I will look it up. Just let
me know. 

It is somewhat amazing that in these days of ultra-sophisticted cameras and
technology there seems to be a great many pinhole enthusiasts around! Actually
pinhole cameras are very useful and way undervalued. For one they allow almost
all imaging radiation to pass, something that can not be said for lenses! well,
  
l8tr,
andy

        *  *  * * *  *
         \/\/\/\/\/\/   Andrew Davidhazy, RIT, High Speed Photography Lab.
          |        |    IN%"andpph@ritvax.isc.rit.edu"    fax 716-475-5804 
_________/          \_____________________________________________________
From: wtyler@adobe.com (William Tyler)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Nikon EM - what's that button do?
Date: 21 Dec 92 05:42:44 GMT
Followup-To: rec.photo
Distribution: na
Organization: Adobe Systems Inc., Mountain View, CA

In article <24456@alice.att.com> ark@alice.UUCP () writes:
>In article <75768@apple.apple.COM> erc@Apple.COM (Ed Carp) writes:
[about the Nikon EM]
>> First, I assume there isn't a way to put this camera in manual mode - it's
>> apeture-priority, camera selects the shutter speed, right?
>
>Correct.

Actually, there is a limited manual capability. If you notice, the
shutter control has three settings, Automatic, Manual 90, and Bulb.
(As I recall, the actual labels are A, M90, and B.) M90 is a
mechanical 1/90 second shutter speed, and thus you can use manual
control at that one speed. Also, of course, Bulb gives you manual
contro for long exposures. If you really really need to override the
automatic exposure settings, and M90 doesn't cut it, you can always
trick the camera by adjusting the film speed dial. That is, if you
think you need 2 1/2 extra stops of exposure, just adjust the film
speed 2 1/2 stops slower. If you do this, don't forget to change it
back !-}

-- 
Bill Tyler      wtyler@adobe.com