HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: memsthd@prism.gatech.EDU (MIKE WILEMAN)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Flash & Lens for Nikon FM2
Date: 21 Aug 92 17:58:07 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <4757@daily-planet.concordia.ca> honna@cs.concordia.ca (SEGEL honna) writes:
>I suggest that you also consider the Viv285.  One thing that irks me about the
>283 is that variable power ( 1/2 to the nth of manual output) is only
>available as an add-on. The 285 comes with variable power, manual, and four
>auto modes built into the sensor.  Whichever you decide on, try to buy it
>with the 1m coiled sensor cord; this little addition will make your flash much
>much more versatile, allowing you, for example, to: bounce the flash off of
>nearby surfaces *without* having to worry about camera orientation to that
>surface; cover an angle of view slightly larger than the *widest* setting
>on the flash; rid your photos of silhouette shadows of your subjects so
>typical of on-camera flash; and, with an appropriate lanyard, work quickly
>while taking advantage of the difference that off-camera flash makes.

This sounds like a good flash for my FM, but is there a flash which has all
(or, at least, most) of these feature, particularly the fully variable
manual power setting, which I can also occasionally use as a TTL flash
with my 6006 body.  I would also trade a lower guide number (say around 75)
for a compact design.

Any info appreciated.

Thanks,
Mike



-- 
MIKE WILEMAN
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp:	  ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!memsthd
Internet: memsthd@prism.gatech.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: ptse@bwdls49.bnr.ca (Paul Tse)
Subject: Re: EKTAPRESS..
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Canada
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 01:46:03 GMT

goldberg@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Mark Goldberg) writes:

>I shoot Ektapress all the time.  It is of higher contrast than Vericolor,
>but to my eyes, no more than Kodacolor or Ektar.  A factor in how things

Speaking of relative contrast/saturation/etc., what is the order for
Kodak's color print films?  If anyone knows (perhaps from a Kodak 
reference), please include Ektar, Gold, Ektapress, GPF, VPS, and
whatever else.

Thanks.

From: andyc@hplsla.hp.com (Andy Cassino)
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 16:43:21 GMT
Subject: Re: Medium-fomrat camera with a self-timer?
Organization: HP Lake Stevens, WA
Newsgroups: rec.photo

>My Pentax 645 does NOT have one.  If anyone knows of a company that might make
>a self timer that screws in like a mechanical cable release, i'd be very
>interested in it.  That seems to be the only solution to a camera w/o self
>timer, aside from switching systems. (and i love self timers too.)
>
>James Zuelow
>FSJFZ@acad3.alaska.edu
>----------

There's several of these add-on timers available. They're made by the outfits
that make the accessory hot-shoes, filter wrenches and other little widgets
that the camera manufacturers don't bother with. Can't remember any brand
names. My local dealer charges about $25 for one of these and I keep
"forgetting" to pick one up.

I'm sure you could order one from Calumet (1-800-CALUMET). (Not a plug; I
don't even get the Calumet catalog any longer!)


    %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
    % Andy Cassino                                       %
    % Hewlett-Packard - Lake Stevens Instrument Division %
    %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
From: tonya@hpldsla.sid.hp.com (Tony Arnerich)
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 17:49:26 GMT
Subject: Re: Ground glass for 35mm film planes
Organization: HP Scientific Instruments Division - Palo Alto, CA
Newsgroups: rec.photo

mvolo@ecsvax.uncecs.edu (Michael R. Volow) writes:

> I'm looking on a source for ground glass to use at the film plane
> of non-reflex 35mm's. I would use it for checking the vignetting of
> home-made sun shades, testing for lens flare, etc. I would hold the
> shutter open with a locking cable release and hold the glass in place
> on the film rails with tape.

> Any suggestions as to sources for ground glass for this? Would matte
> acetate from a drafting supply work for this?

Why not use an interchangeable focus screen? I know that the Nikon F and
F2 screen would fit the space - but being thick glass, they are heavy
enough that taping might be a little tough. Another option is a thin
plastic screen like the ones used on the Nikon FE and FM. Nikon makes
a "B" matte screen, and an "E" screen which is the same matte, with
gridlines. The strongest positive of this approach is the guaranteed
flatness. The strongest negative is price, of course.

You could also use drawing vellum (matte acetate) which is dirt cheap
in comparison to screens, but you'd have to tape it securely on both
sides to take out any curl.

DO NOT use a tape with a gummy adhesive like duct tape - you will be
very sorry if you do! Even "Gaffer's Tape" I've purchased at pro-oriented
camera shops has been gummy, despite the fact that it's supposed to come
off clean by design. Run experiments with any tape before using it in the
film channel.

tonya@hpldsla.sid.hp.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: dhong@wam.umd.edu (Sze Yuen Hong)
Subject: Film questions?(Kodak Safety film 5063)
Originator: dhong@rac1.wam.umd.edu
Organization: University of Maryland at College Park
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 15:48:21 GMT


  I've got a used Bulk film loader in a couples of weeks ago. It has some film 
loaded already. After I shoot and process the film, it's appear to be KODAK
SAFETY FILM 5063. Did anyone have the data of this film? Thanks in advance!

David
From: geoff@pmafire.inel.gov (Geoff Allen)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Nuclear Powered ANTI STATIC BRUSHES (was Re: View finder cleaning)
Date: 19 Aug 92 14:56:38 GMT
Article-I.D.: pmafire.1992Aug19.145638.27228
Distribution: usa
Organization: Computer Nerd (is that redundant?), WINCO, INEL, Idaho

kjm@cnmss.tredydev.unisys.com (Ken J. McFadden) writes:
>A while ago, I ordered one of those "Static Master" (I think that's the name)
>brushes from Adorama.  I was suprised to see all the radiation warnings, etc.
>You can't throw it out.  You have to return the radioactive piece of the
>brush to the company for recycling.  Don't remove the protective grill,
>because touching the radioactive material isn't good for you. ...

Just like the smoke detector in your house.  (You do have a smoke
detector, don't you?)

>I had seen the ad for these near the back of Darkroom & Creative Camera
>Techniques magazine for years, and don't remember ever seeing anything in the
>ads to indicate that the brush uses radiation to cancel out static charges.

Without having any data, I'd imagine that the radiation dose you'll get
from using a Static Master is absolutely insignificant.  (Especially if
you're fond of photographing in the mountains, where the background
radiation is considerably higher than it is at sea level.)

I've never used (or even seen) a Static Master, but I'm just trying to
dispel some fears about Evil Radiation (tm).  Remember, you get a
radiation dose from watching TV, climbing a mountain, smoking a
cigarette, eating a banana, taking a trip to Denver, flying across the
country, and lots of other things you probably don't think twice about
(well, ok, you might think twice about the cigarette ;^) ). 

It would be interesting to see some numbers, but I doubt that you'll get
any significant radiation dose from a Static Master.

Geoff

-- 
Geoff Allen          \  Many people come, looking, looking, taking picture....
uunet!pmafire!geoff   \  No good.... Some people come, see. Good!
geoff@pmafire.inel.gov \   -- Nepalese Sherpa, quoted by Galen Rowell
From: kjm@cnmss.tredydev.unisys.com (Ken J. McFadden)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Nuclear Powered ANTI STATIC BRUSHES (was Re: View finder cleaning)
Date: 18 Aug 92 15:10:25 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Unisys Corporation, Tredyffrin

In article <1992Aug16.185021.14262@ucunix.san.uc.edu> mandayrv@ucunix.san.uc.edu (The Karate Kid) writes:
>Your friendly photo dealer may be able to supply you ( for $$$ ) an
>ANTI STATIC BRUSH. This thing is extremely effective. All you do is just
>brush the dust off. The main reason why dust remains on the ground is
>because of static and the brush generates a negative charge vis a vis the
>dust. This helps to neutralize the charge and thus dislodge the dust
>particles very easily.
>
>  mandayrv@ucunix.san.uc.edu

A while ago, I ordered one of those "Static Master" (I think that's the name)
brushes from Adorama.  I was suprised to see all the radiation warnings, etc.
You can't throw it out.  You have to return the radioactive piece of the
brush to the company for recycling.  Don't remove the protective grill,
because touching the radioactive material isn't good for you. ...

I had seen the ad for these near the back of Darkroom & Creative Camera
Techniques magazine for years, and don't remember ever seeing anything in the
ads to indicate that the brush uses radiation to cancel out static charges.

I originally though the brush would be better than "Canned Air" for getting
dust off of slides before making enlargements.  But I've found that the
"Canned Air" is more convenient and less radioactive, so I've pretty much only
used the brush a couple of times.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ken McFadden        kjm@cnmss.tredydev.unisys.com
Unisys Corporation  kjm@cnmsa.tredydev.unisys.com
P.O. Box 203        work: (215) 648-3742
Paoli, PA 19301     home: (215) 675-0382
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: hegarty@iis.ethz.ch (Christopher Hegarty)
Subject: Heat-resistant long-life film
Organization: Integrated Systems Lab, ETH Zurich, Switzerland
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 08:45:09 GMT

I want to leave a camera in my car so that if I am involved in a car
accident I can take some photos of the accident scene, which may be
helpful if any legal problems arise.

One problem is that inside my car tends to get very hot in
summer; I'm concerned about film lifetime.  Can anyone tell me 
how often I might need to replace the film, or recommend film with a
relatively long lifetime under these conditions?

I guess colour print film is probably the best for this application,
but I'm open to other suggestions.

Thanks

Chris Hegarty (hegarty@iis.ethz.ch)
From: jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: media permanence (was Re: photo-developing, specifically nudes)
Date: 13 Aug 92 21:59:35 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories

In article <1992Aug13.194244.23506@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk> jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin) writes:
>eclipse@netcom.com (Brian McCullough) wrote:
>> Here we are, all of us with computers, with an utter revolution in digital
>> imaging ahead of us, and we hear from a fellow who still suffers from
>> monochrome bias!  Isn't that _quaint_? 
>
>"Bias" is a peculiar word to use for an objective interest in image
>permanence.  Digital technology is irrelevant to this since the results of
>the high-end technologies are output onto ordinary photographic materials
>anyway, and tape or CD as end media rather than temporary storage for an
>image processor are even less durable than RA-4 (two years MTF for a
>cartridge tape, maybe 5 for a write-once CD?) and aimed at the same market.
>(The current issue of a British magazine reproduces a computer-processed
>image printed in platinum: though that particular picture is a yawn, the
>approach starts to get interesting...)
>
>One group of people who *ought* to be worrying about image permanence was
>the one I was talking about in my original article: those who want to
>preserve the lost youth of their lovers.  ...
>And another, which is where I fit in, is people who see their activity as
>historical documentation: I want someone to dig out my pictures a hundred
>years from now and see something about late 20th-century life in them, and
>in particular I'd like them to see more than "that dye technology was
>crap".  ...

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?

In some ways I think the PhotoCD is a great idea.  Problems with
fading dyes gone for ever.  Error correcting codes to zap bit rot.
But I can imagine my greatgreatgrandkids going into a photoshop (or
whatever) in 2092 saying, "After my grandmother died we found this old
PhotoCD in her stuff and in pen on the outside it says, 'Grandpa and
Grandma Jacobson and Family, 1992'.  That must be my great great
grandparents.  I'd love to get a print of it.  Do you think there's
any way..."

  -- David Jacobson
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: sbonds@jarthur.claremont.edu (007)
Subject: Re: About infrared photography ...
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 21:54:43 GMT

Look for a Kodak book called "applied infrared photography".  It'll tell you
everything you need to know, and a lot of other stuff.

When you shoot, be sure to shoot a couple of pictures of people. Eyes 
look especially interesting!

  -- 007

-- 
 000   000  7777 | sbonds@jarthur.claremont.edu
0   0 0   0   7  |----------------------------------------------------------- 
0   0 0   0  7   |        Childhood is short...
 000   000   7   |                    ...but immaturity is forever.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: troby@diana.cair.du.edu (Thorn Roby)
Subject: Anyone used a Rodenstock Geronar lens?
Organization: University of Denver, Denver, Colorado
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 92 20:10:31 GMT

I'm thinking about a new lens for shooting (primarily landscapes)
6x9 format on a Speed Graphic. I noticed a Rodenstock Geronar 150/5.6
for about $240 new from B&H. This is way below any of the other
similar lenses. Is this a real dog? Coated? Anyone know the mounting
dimensions (hole size, front & rear extension)? I don't use much in
the way of movements, so since I'm only shooting 6x9 the edge performance
and coverage don't matter too much. Don't need good macro performance
because I use my EL-Nikkor 80 for that.
-- 

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
From: peishuh@author.ecn.purdue.edu (Pei-Shuh F Wang)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Want: Lens <= 28mm, Universal mount
Date: 18 Aug 92 05:17:24 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network


 I use a MAMIYA/Sekor DTL1000 camera,  and I am in need
of a wide angle lens <= 28mm, or fish-eye, and
I can only use Universal SCREW mount.
Please email, any brand. Thanks.

		Percy
peishuh@ecn.purdue.edu
(317) 743-1734
From: andyc@hplsla.hp.com (Andy Cassino)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: More 4x5 questions
Date: 18 Aug 92 17:30:43 GMT
Organization: HP Lake Stevens, WA

franz@cs.washington.edu (Franz G. Amador) writes:
> 
> Lastly (uh oh) a lens question.  I currently have only a Symmar-S
> 210/5.6, and I'd like a 90/8.  The Nikkor 90/8 is about $200 cheaper
> than the Super Angulon 90/8.  Do you get what you pay for, or are they
> pretty much equivalent?  I ask because I've heard or read several
> authoritative-sounding claims that all decent large-format lenses are
> good enough for all but highly specialized applications.
> 

I have all Nikkor large format lenses, including the 90mm f/8.0.

I'd buy them all again, EXCEPT for the 90mm f/8.0!

First, f/8.0 is too damn dim for a wide-angle lens and has too much depth 
of field to focus critically. That's for me with my eyes. I've tried Fresnel 
screens and brightscreens and nothing helps enough. It is worth getting 
an f/5.6 lens.

Second, Nikon does not make available filters to compensate for light
fall-off. This is not because their wide angle lenses don't need them! The
90mm f/8.0 certainly is in DIRE need of one.

Consequently, I would buy the Schneider 90mm f/5.6 Super-Angulon w/center
filter. Scratch that, I'd actually go for their 75mm. I don't think 90mm is
wide enough for many (most) of my applications.

    %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
    % Andy Cassino                                       %
    % Hewlett-Packard - Lake Stevens Instrument Division %
    %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: vibard@utopia.resntl.bhp.com.au (David Barnes)
Subject: Durst Printo Processor
Keywords: Print Processor 
Organization: BHP Research - Newcastle Laboratories
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 06:17:27 GMT

Does anybody have any experience using the Durst Printo processor. We are
considering purchasing one for RA prints.

We are not looking for a long term option. Just something to tide us over until
we move across to electronic imaging.

But for the next year or so we still need a processor that is reliable and can
take the wear and tear from constant use.

Your opinions are appreciated.

                              David Barnes

                              Photographer BHP Research.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: vibard@venus.resntl.bhp.com.au
Subject: Re: Flourencent light question
Organization: BHP Research, Newcastle Laboratories
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 01:47:41 GMT

In article <robinson.20@odie.ee.wits.ac.za>, robinson@odie.ee.wits.ac.za (Michael Robinson) writes:
> 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?
> 
> Thank you
> Michael Robinson
> robinson@odie.ee.wits.ac.za
The Hoya FL-Day filter will correct the green cast that occurs when using
daylight film with flourescent lighting. If Hoya filters are not available in
your part of the world I'm sure other filter makers would have a similar filter
in their range. It is also possible to purchase daylight balanced flourescent
tubes althought these.tubes cost more. They are more pleasent and healthier to
work under.

All the best-  David.
From: rslugg@med.unc.edu (Robert Slugg)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Qualex complaints (was Fuji E-6 labs)
Date: 21 Aug 92 20:42:26 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: UNC-CH School of Medicine

In the September Shutterbug Bob Shell in the article about Gold+ films has
a several paragraph bitch session about kodalux service.  I'm still
getting 5 day turnaround and no scratches or dirt on my slides, and they
are still mounting my remaining rolls of "processing/unmounted" B&H
kodachrome.  

Bob
From: leskinen@hplvec.LVLD.HP.COM (Erick Leskinen)
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 22:32:50 GMT
Subject: Re: View Camera Questions
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Co., Loveland, CO
Newsgroups: rec.photo

 > Finally, can someone provide me the address of Zone VI please?

ZONE VI STUDIOS Inc.
Newfane, Vermont 05345-0219

I own a Zone VI 4X5 view camera and I do like it.  The long bellows help
with long lens.  But for studio work, I like my Horseman 4X5 monorail view
camera.
From: gsnow@clark.edu (Gary Snow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: polycarbonate camera bodies
Date: 12 Aug 92 21:31:18 GMT
Organization: Clark College, Vancouver, Wa.  USA

In article <l8imjrINN8dc@appserv.Eng.Sun.COM> fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (steve hix) writes:
>
>>Of interest may also be the warnings issued with longer
>>(heavier) lenses against their use on certain polycarbonate camera bodies
>>(Cannon in particular does not recommend use of certain of its lenses on
>>anything less than the EOS1- which likewise is no construction heavyweight).
>
>The parts of the EOS-1 that count, such as the mount and shutter/mirror box
>structure, are metal, not plastic.
>
>I suspect that the warnings are to avoid liability concerns when someone
>grabs their camera attached to their (huge, expensive) 400/2.8 by the
>camera body, and are suprised when the weight of the lens rips the lens
>mount out of the body.
>
>It doesn't matter *what* the body is made of, that sort of abuse will
>trash most cameras.

In such cases, its more natural to grab the lens, and not the camera (I know
thats what you said Steve, I just thought I would throw my .027457254 cents
worth in).

Gary
-- 
-----
Gary Snow
uunet!clark!gsnow  or  gsnow@clark.edu
From: leonglaw@hpsgm2.sgp.hp.com (Lawrence Leong)
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 12:51:12 GMT
Subject: Re: Nuclear Powered ANTI STATIC BRUSHES (was Re: View finder cleaning)
Organization: HP Singapore
Newsgroups: rec.photo

In rec.photo, kjm@cnmss.tredydev.unisys.com (Ken J. McFadden) writes:

|In article <1992Aug16.185021.14262@ucunix.san.uc.edu> mandayrv@ucunix.san.uc.edu (The Karate Kid) writes:
|>Your friendly photo dealer may be able to supply you ( for $$$ ) an
|>ANTI STATIC BRUSH. This thing is extremely effective. All you do is just
|>brush the dust off. The main reason why dust remains on the ground is
|>because of static and the brush generates a negative charge vis a vis the
|>dust. This helps to neutralize the charge and thus dislodge the dust
|>particles very easily.
|>
|>  mandayrv@ucunix.san.uc.edu
|
|A while ago, I ordered one of those "Static Master" (I think that's the name)
|brushes from Adorama.  I was suprised to see all the radiation warnings, etc.
|You can't throw it out.  You have to return the radioactive piece of the
|brush to the company for recycling.  Don't remove the protective grill,
|because touching the radioactive material isn't good for you. ...
|
|I had seen the ad for these near the back of Darkroom & Creative Camera
|Techniques magazine for years, and don't remember ever seeing anything in the
|ads to indicate that the brush uses radiation to cancel out static charges.

I haven't seen these brushes, but this is (was) a common method of removing 
static charges in the electronics industry.  Some years ago, 3M had a recall
(something about someone illegally collecting the nuclear stuff in order to 
make a home brew bomb, or at least that's what I was told).  Better heed the
warnings, you don't want to glow in the dark and fog your paper/film :-).

The usual application is to install the radioactive stuff behind a fan, then
blow the ionised air across any static sensitive materials.

|
|I originally though the brush would be better than "Canned Air" for getting
|dust off of slides before making enlargements.  But I've found that the
|"Canned Air" is more convenient and less radioactive, so I've pretty much only
|used the brush a couple of times.

Static charges are commonly caused by triboelectric effect (fancy word for
friction).  Since the air is moving across the slides (an insulator), it
builds up charges.  Eventually they'll dissipate, but not until some more dust
has collected to replace what was blown off.  

lawrence

|
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Ken McFadden        kjm@cnmss.tredydev.unisys.com
|Unisys Corporation  kjm@cnmsa.tredydev.unisys.com
|P.O. Box 203        work: (215) 648-3742
|Paoli, PA 19301     home: (215) 675-0382
Xref: sparky rec.photo:14528 rec.travel:12084
From: zhoud@ece.orst.edu (Dongsheng Zhou)
Newsgroups: rec.photo,rec.travel
Subject: Depth of View formula?
Date: 20 Aug 92 17:48:37 GMT
Organization: Oregon State University, Corvallis
Originator: zhoud@lingcod.ECE.ORST.EDU


    Is there some kinds of depth of view formula with which we can calculate
the depth of view when aperture, focus length and the distance are known? I 
also heard that one third of this depth is before the object and the rest 
behind the object. Is this true? Can anybody send me any information about 
this? Thanks. e-mail to

zhoud@ece.orst.edu


Dongsheng Zhou
Aug. 20
Newsgroups: rec.photo