HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ajayshah@almaak.usc.edu (Ajay Shah)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Sunset Color Lab opinions?
Date: 28 Jan 1993 07:44:22 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: almaak.usc.edu

In Popular Photography, I see an ad for Sunset Color Lab.
Are they any good?

I tried directory assistance and they are not listed, which bothered
me a bit.

When they say "transparency" they mean slide?

Thanks,

        -ans.

-- 
Ajay Shah, (213)749-8133, ajayshah@rcf.usc.edu
From: ajayshah@almaak.usc.edu (Ajay Shah)
Newsgroups: rec.photo,soc.culture.indian,rec.travel
Subject: FYI: slide film and processing while in India
Date: 22 Jan 1993 01:37:37 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: almaak.usc.edu

I was in India recently and thought I'd pass back information.

Slide Film
----------

E-6 film is widely available.  It's considered a upmarket item so the
prices are much higher than print film.  (Kodacolor Gold printfilm is
roughly Rs. 110).

In Bombay, I sampled two shops south of VT station.  I found E6 film
at Rs. 220 or so.  This was Ektachrome HC and Fujichrome RD.
Amazingly RDP was just Rs. 10 more.  The shops don't know what `rdp'
means, they say it is "daylight film" (had me confused for a while).

In Calicut, I sampled 1 shop.  It carried EPP too (apart from the
above).  Here the base price was Rs. 250 and the professional films
were again Rs. 10 extra.

These prices are very high when compared against buying by mailorder
from new york, and a bit bad when compared against stores in LA.  
Rs. 250 is $8.


Processing
----------

Lots of people do E6 processing, though it's not as widespread as
print film.  Kodak (IPC) has a large network for collecting film and
returning processed slides using frontend shops which you interact
with.  Apart from Kodak, many others backends do E6 too.  One of
Bombay's biggest printfilm companies (A1 photo) does a good job of E6.

They are all roughly Rs. 90 ($3) for cardboard mounts and Rs. 150 ($5)
for plastic mounts.  I got three rolls done by IPC (Kodak).  In
retrospect I feel A1 Photo might have been a bit better.  I got one
slide which appears scratched, and it has a bit of paper firmly stuck
to it.  This may well have been an end-frame -- they don't number
slides for you. One bad slide out of 108 does not really trouble me.

All these guys give you 1 day turnaround time for e6, which is nice.


There is absolutely no Kodachrome in the picture.  A pity.
I did not look up the pro shops, like Mitter Bedi's studio.

        -ans.
-- 
Ajay Shah, (213)749-8133, ajayshah@rcf.usc.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: pflaum@world.std.com (Greg M Pflaum)
Subject: Re: cost of a Nikon F90 ?
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 05:04:38 GMT

> Please,
> how much is the Nikon F90 in US ?

I got prices from Adorama, Camera World of Oregon and Genesis a few
days ago.  Adorama and Camera World prices are for US warranty.  Not
sure about Genesis, but they probably aren't US warranty.

                      Adorama   CW   Genesis
Nikon N90               $725   $739   $749
SB-25 flash              295    289    299
AF 28-70 f/3.5-4.5D      315    339    349

Greg

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au
Subject: Re: Plastic Canon
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 11:04:34 GMT

In article <1993Jan22.002517.29853@news.weeg.uiowa.edu>, goldis@news.weeg.uiowa.edu (Al Goldis) writes:
> In <nicholson.11@main.mndly.umn.edu> nicholson@main.mndly.umn.edu (JOHN JAY NICHOLSON) writes:
> 
...
> One other thing.  Pros I know used to really moan and groan about the
> plastic lens hoods that most EOS lenses come with.  Now they realize
> they actually protect better than metal because they absorb the impact
> instead of merely transmitting it to the lens.

And will take impacts etc that will demolish Al.

Question to consider. Have you ever hand torn al-foil? Care to rip a .030"
Carbon-fibre/poly-carbonate sheet with your bare hands?

~Paul
From: moreaux@litsun22.epfl.ch (Michel Moreaux)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: has someone tested Auto-Mask (tm) for Ilfochrome prints
Date: 27 Jan 93 12:24:25 GMT
Reply-To: moreaux@litsun.epfl.ch
Distribution: rec
Organization: Laboratoire d'informatique technique


Recently, I have noticed an add presenting the new product of an
English company called Colour .. (Something, do not remember for now).
This company offers a product called Auto-Mask (tm) consisting in a
piece of plate glass. In order to make a mask, you press the plate on
a slide and make a kind of contact print with an intense light source
that should contain high energy in the blue part of its spectrum. You
do not need to develop the glass since it is said that the glass is
light sensitive. So, maybe after a while of exposure, the glass takes
locally on a neutral tint according to the slide density. I suppose
that once the glass has been exposed, you could make a Ciba print of
the sandwich constituted by the slide and the glass plate (in perfect
matching since it was not necessary to separate them in order to
develop the mask). The plate can be reused by warning it.

I do not know very much about this product because the small article
in which it was presented said nothing more except that the produced
mask is fuzzy enough. This product is only available for large format
and has been developped for professionnal labs.

I have this article in the december issue ot the famous french
magazine "Chasseur d'Images". They said they will soon test this
product.

Has anyone on the net already heard about this product ? Has anyone
already tested it ?

_Michel Moreaux
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michel Moreaux,                           | "Ceux qui ne savent rien en savent
Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne  |  toujours tout autant que ceux qui
Departement d'Informatique                |  n'en savent pas plus qu'eux"
Laboratoire d'Informatique Technique      |                  P. Dac.
EL-Ecublens                               |___________________________________
CH-1015 Lausanne                           
Phone # : (21) 693-46-72,   e-mail : moreaux@litsun.epfl.ch
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: f92mlu@efd.lth.se (Marcus Lundahl)
Subject: Hasselblad TCC equipment???
Organization: Lund Institute of Technology, Sweden
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 11:18:54 GMT

Here in the country of Hasselblad, Sweden, all kinds of equipment to
Hasselblad is rather expensive. But I wonder, what is the price in the
states on both new and used Hasselblad equipment (especially for the
205TCC)? Is there alot of TCC used equipment available?

Marcus Lundahl

Lund Institute of Technology in Sweden

-- 
Marcus Lundahl (Technical Physician at Lund Institute of Technology)
E-mail adress: f92mlu@efd.lth.se
Home adress:   Marcus Lundahl   
               Tranbogatan 5
From: dbernard@clesun.Central.Sun.COM (Dave Bernard)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Actual vs. advertised lens focal lengths
Date: 21 Jan 1993 13:11:47 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems
Distribution: world
Reply-To: dbernard@clesun.Central.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: clesun.central.sun.com

In article 8852@cbnewsm.cb.att.com, ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins) writes:
>> In article <1993Jan19.152408.37954@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu> vl01@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (VINCENZO LIOTTA) writes:
>> >After comparing an EOS 28-105 USM lens to a 35-105 USM lens, I noticed that
>> >there was a *very* noticeable difference in the magnifiaction at 105 mm. The
>> >35-105 USM got closer. My local camera shop sales person said that actual focal
>> >lengths may vary up to 10 mm from the advertised number.
>> >
>> >Is this a common practice ? Does anyone have the REAL foacal lengths for these
>
>This has come up before (in fact I think I brought it up!) and the conclusion
>from looking at the Popular Photography tests was that ALL the lenses they
>tested (longer than 100mm) actually had focal lengths shorter than they
>were advertised to be (on average maybe 5% short?). A number of lenses were
>also slower than they were supposed to be. I think it's a rip-off, while
>manufacturers claim it's manufacturing tolerance. If that is so then why
>are the lenses shorter and slower than they should be and why are there not
>some examples of lenses which are longer and faster than advertised?
>
>===============================================================
>Bob Atkins  AT&T Bell Labs  email (direct)  att!clockwise!rma
>===============================================================


Sounds suspiciously close to manufacturer's claims that their medium format
cameras are 6x6 or 6x7 cm, when in actuality the frame size is noticeably
less.  Brochures for 645 cameras compare 645 area with the 24x36mm area of
35mm frames... but their frames are not quite 645, even on a good day.

	Dave
From: byrde@imhfhp16.epfl.ch (Olivier Byrde)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Rolleiflex 2.8 GX
Date: 23 Jan 93 21:04:00 GMT
Organization: Swiss Federal Institute of Technology

Hi,

I have a chance to buy an old Rolleiflex 2.8 GX, but I do not know if it
is a good bargain. Does anyone have any information about this camera ?
Its lens is a Planar 80 'made by Rollei', but is it better or poorer than
the one made by Zeiss for Hasselblad ? In any case, what is the difference ?
(The dealer said it was sharper :-) Is it true ??) And what is the current
price of this camera (new or used) in the USA or in Germany ?

Thanks all,

Olivier
From: mikec@spider.co.uk (Mike Coren)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Actual vs. advertised lens focal lengths
Date: 23 Jan 93 15:54:44 GMT
Organization: Spider Systems Limited, Edinburgh, UK.

>>> My local camera shop sales person said that actual focal
>>> lengths may vary up to 10 mm from the advertised number.
>>> 
>> 
>> There is a tollerence on focal lengths of lenses, but it is no where near +-10mm
>> Consider, the 28-105 could be a 18-115 or a 38-95 if this was so!!
>> Don't confuse focal length with the closest distance a lens will focus to.
>> 
>> ~Paul
>>
>Depending if you want to consider end of range error or total range error
> (which I beleive is what the sales person ment) Then the range could be 23 to
>110 or 32 to 100 (or any possibility not excluding 28-115 or 18-95(although
>these would be extreems)) also the salesperson may have ment 10 mm off that
>particualr lens focal lenth (because it is a zoom). If you ever read popular
>photography's Lens tests they show mm of error in reported focal lenths
>especially on zooms over a large focal lenth range.
>

I think it's just a matter of time before the some slimey camera store (or
mail order place) advertises:

	"28-105mm Zoom Lens, 25% off!"

...then when you buy one, they'll give you a 28-80.  That's about 25% off. ;-)

Mike

-- 
Michael D. Coren, Electrical Engineer             mikec@spider.co.uk
Telecommunications Techniques Corporation, Germantown, Maryland, USA.
Temporarily at Spider Systems Limited, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: bongers@redgto.asd.sgi.com (Hans L. Bongers)
Subject: Re: Ansel Adams Prints
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 20:50:20 GMT

In article <1993Jan27.193002.1873@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>, swatko@airbag.enet.dec.com (Mike Swatko) writes:
|> --
|> In article <1993Jan27.181827.6056@odin.corp.sgi.com>, bongers@redgto.asd.sgi.com (Hans L. Bongers) writes:
|> >In article <1k53fsINNaqd@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu>, sylve_ge@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Gerald E Sylvester) writes:
|> >|> A few months ago, someone posted a message containing the phone
|> >|> number and address of the company (?) that sells "authentic"
|> >|> Ansel Adams prints.  Can someone re-post this address and phone 
|> >|> number and approximate price of 8x10's and 11x14's (or whatever
|> >|> the standard sizes are).  Thanks in advance.....
|> >
|> >There are TONs of places that sell Ansel's prints.
|> >
|> >The cheapest start at about $3000 (5x7).
|> 
|> 
|> Hmmm.  I've seen several 16x20 AA signed prints starting at $1200 at a
|> studio in New Orleans.  The same place had a monsterous (probably 32x40)
|> "Moonrise" print for $85K.  Guess it pays to shop around...
|> 
|> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|> Mike Swatko                             !  swatko@airbag.dec.com
|> Digital Equipment Corporation           !  swatko@airbag.enet.dec.com
|> Corporate User Publications Engineering !  swatko%airbag@decwrl.dec.com
|> Nashua, New Hampshire                   !  ...!decwrl!airbag.enet!swatko
|> ===========================================================================


What were the images???  A 16x20 for $1200 seems a little low for an Ansel
"Fine Art" print.  Maybe some commercial work he did could be that low
but if the price is right, point me to the gallery & I'll fly down there and
buy all I can get my hands on and sell them in CA for about 10X.

--- hans
From: luong@naxos.inria.fr (Quang-Tuan Luong)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Fuji GS 645 W
Date: 24 Jan 93 18:47:32 GMT
Reply-To: luong@sophia.inria.fr
Organization: Inria Sofia Antipolis

Hi, 

Does anyone know what happened to the Fujica GS 645 W ?
It was a camera similar to the Fujica GS 645, except that the (fixed)
lens was a wide angle, and that the rangefinding system was simplified,
opposite to the Fujica GS 645, which has a standard lens. 
I understand that the GS 645 is still available, but what about the GS 645 W ?
I am sure GS 645 W has existed, I have seen a picture of it in a book.

Thanks.

Tuan.
From: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Funky Leica Winder?
Date: 26 Jan 93 13:09:09 GMT
Reply-To: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin)
Organization: COMANDOS Project, Glesga Yoonie

chorley@vms.ocom.okstate.edu wrote:
> The motor for the Leica screw mount was the MOOLY. Such poetry!

I have often wondered whether it was really a German monoglot's effort that
got their *close-up* attachment for the 50mm screw-mount coded as NOOKY...

-- 
--  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: ah505@yfn.ysu.edu (Brian Quinby)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Nikon Equivalent of Pentax K1000?
Date: 26 Jan 93 22:42:49 GMT
Organization: Youngstown State/Youngstown Free-Net


The only "current" Nikon equivalent to the K-1000 is the
FM-2 which is a wonderful camera but considerable more
expensive. If you are just learning, the K-1000 is
fine. You might consider looking for a used FM-2 or
FM which would save you some $$ an older Nikormat -
I have had several and they just don't seem to die.

	Brian
From: keithh@bnr.ca (Keith Hanlan)
Subject: Re: Minolta Maxxum 5400i flash
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 20:02:42 GMT

In article <1993Jan20.191420.29629@convex.com> finger@convex.com (Jay Finger) writes:
>
>I've got a new 7xi, and I need a flash for it.  Has anybody out there had
>any experiences with Minolta's 5400i flash?  Good, bad, etc?  In short, 
>is it worth a hoot?

I'm in the same position but, for financial reasons and marital
harmony, have elected to go with the 3500xi. Both flashes are reputed
to be excellent, especially with the wireless remote capabilities. The
major differences between the 5400xi and the 3500xi are:
 o the 3500xi supports A and M modes while the 5400xi supports all of
   P, A, S, and M modes.
 o the GN of 177' vs 115' at 105mm, ISO 100
 o Multi-burst flash (2x - 10x, 1-100Hz) on the 5400xi
 o the 5400xi flash head swivels as well as tilts. The 3500xi only tilts.
 o the 5400xi zooms out to 24mm vs the 3500xi's widest 28mm setting.
 
 o The 5400xi is *much* bulkier than the 3500xi. The latter is
   virtually compact in comparison.

Apart from these differences, they both:
 o support 2:1 lighting when used off-camera with the on-body flash
 o have the same slow-shutter sync
 
I can always add a 5400xi later and relegate the 3500xi to secondary
flash and travel. (I travel on a motorcycle and compactness is a concern.)

Let me know what you choose and why. I'm interested.
Regards,
Keith Hanlan  KeithH@bnr.ca  Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Canada 613-765-4645
From: uli@i13d5.ira.uka.de (Uli Bodenhausen)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: abandon 35mm completely for medium format
Date: 27 Jan 1993 13:24:26 GMT
Organization: University of Karlsruhe, FRG
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: i13d5.ira.uka.de

Hi,
I can't find the original article, but here's my comment
on medium format without 35mm:

I was on a short vacation recently and I took a Pentax 67,
two lenses and a spotmeter with me instead of the usual
35mm camera with two lenses. Surprisingly, everything fit
into a smaller bag than I had expected, but it was heavy. Additionally,
I had to keep the film somewhere else. 

Disadvantages compared to 35mm equipment:

	-more weight
	-more space needed for films (considerably)
	-more time needed for changing the films (considerably)
	-big cameras draw much attention - bad for candid pictures
	-more thinking about the right exposure required
	-more concern about loss of the equipment

Thinking about it, I will only take medium format for a vacation again
if the vacation is short and I really give a high priority to
photography. 

	Uli
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: rspeirs@javelin.sim.es.com (Ron Speirs)
Subject: Re: Ilford XP1 - Home develop??
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Corp.
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 17:49:47 GMT

In article <1jkoh4INN1bd@gaia.ucs.orst.edu> lantis@math.orst.edu (David Lantis) writes:
>As strange as it may sound to some people, I prefer to develope XP1 in
>D-76.  I give it about the same time as Delta in the developer, leave it
>a little longer in the fixer, and wash well.  When it is wet, it will
>have a "milky" look to it, but this clears as it dries.  Warning: the
>film is VERY soft until dry, so treat is gently.  Gives fairly nice
>grain with softened contrast with greatest constrast range in the middle
>tones, so it works well for pictures of fair skinned persons.  There is
>some detail loss, but for people it is not a problem.  You can also push
>this film with D-76 developing, and I did not have luck doing the same
>with C-41 developing.
>
>"Rules are meant to be broken...after you understand why they are
>there."

I would like to suggest an experiment:
Expose 3 pieces of XP-1 film to identical subject matter.
Process the first piece in C-41.
Process the second and third pieces in D-76 as you describe.
After the third piece has been processed, put it in C-41 bleach for
  the recommended time.  Rinse. Open up the tank and expose it to strong 
  light for a minute or so.  Then process it in standard C-41 for the
  normal times.

You will now have 3 differently processed pieces of XP-1:
  1.  C-41 processed, contains dye image made initially from color developer.
  2.  D-76 processed, contains silver image, dye couplers are still in the
      film but not used.
  3.  D-76 - bleach - C-41 processed, silver image made first, converted
      to silver halide, rendered developable by light, dye image formed when
      the silver is redeveloped, and then the silver removed leaving only
      dye image.

Make prints from the 3 pieces of film, and examine grain, sharpness,
contrast, etc.

This is indirectly related to a technique described in Darkroom & Creative
Camera Techniques, "Color Print Contrast Control - Boost Contrast and
Color Saturation Easily", Jan/Feb 1990, page 34.

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

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: chiang@cs.uiuc.edu (Sam. H.K. Chiang)
Subject: Re: Avoid FOTO CELL! Avoid FOTO CELL! Avoid FOTO CELL!
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 04:39:09 GMT


I don't like FOTO CELL either.  I ordered some Fuji Reala films 
from them, and the salesman told me the expiration date on these
films has about 1 year.  When I got these films I found out the expiration
date on these films has about 8 months intead of 1 year.  I talked to my 
CityBank customer representative who said he will take care of it if I
couldn't work out this prob. with FOTO CELL.  I always like CityBank's
service even though I need to pay ~$25 annunal fee.

Since I can finish these Reala films in 8 months, I didn't bother to call
FOTO CELL to complain about this since I don't think I can get anything from 
them based on my experiences with this kind of mail-order company.  I simply
WON'T order ANYTHING from them anymore.

Sam.

-- 


+--------------------------------------------------------+
+ Sam. H.K. Chiang					 +
+ Department of Computer Science, University of Illinois +
+ e-mal : chiang@cs.uiuc.edu				 +
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins)
Subject: Re: reloading film on an EOS 10s
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 18:09:24 GMT

In article <1993Jan28.101416.27108@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>, acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih) writes:
> In <1k8q2tINN8no@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu> ravenone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Robert Marsa) writes:
> 
> >If I have the film processed by Kodalux will my slides be cut wrong?
> 
> Never dealt with Kodalux.  Most of the time, I make an effort to note
> that the film was rewound and reloaded.  I guess you scribble a note on
> your Kodalux mailer in big black letters.  (I don't recommend colours
> for emphasis, since there is the odd story of a colourblind machine
> operator!) That way I can rag on them if they slice and dice my
> frames.  (Arg.  Forgot to do that on the last roll I turned in.  Hmph.)
> 

I deal with Kodalux all the time. If you send in a reloaded film, just
tell them that (I usually include the approx. frame number where the
film was reloaded too) in the box on the mailer marked "special instructions".
They will handmount the slides instead of sending them through the
automatic machine. My experience is that they really do this since the 
slides take several days longer to get back to me. They have never
cut through a frame in my experience.
Just a note that despite many complaints about Kodalux, they are still
giving me good service (this is on slide film only) and typically get
slides back to me in 4 working days (the Fair Lawn plant is less than
50 miles from me).

===============================================================
Bob Atkins  AT&T Bell Labs  email (direct)  att!clockwise!rma
===============================================================
From: hpb@hpb.cis.pitt.edu (Harry Bloomberg)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Apartment Darkrooms
Date: 27 Jan 93 14:22:17 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <EXJTMM.93Jan27095219@ida28.tts.lth.se> exjtmm@tts.lth.se (Thommy M. Malmstr|m) writes:
>I have my equipment in the bathroom with the enlarger on a low
>cupboard and the trays at a board placed on the bathtub. It's
>becoming quite annoying to bend down to the trays so I'm about to
>switch to the kitchen. My problem is that my kitchen has a large
>window. What is the easiest way to cover the window? There is also a
>small "window" above the door to the livingroom. Is it possible to
>cover that window with some kind of red filter-plastic so that I will
>have a overall red darkroom light?
>
   This darkroom cloth material from Calumet could be easily taped
around the offending window.  This would result in a truely dark
darkroom.

   The darkroom cloth is 40 inches wide and is sold by the yard.  One
yard costs *10.49, a price I consider reasonable.

   Calumet's 800 number is (800) 225-8638.  The darkroom cloth is
catalog number BN6000.

Harry Bloomberg
hpb@vms.cis.pitt.edu