HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Christian Brudevoll <chribrud@ifi.uio.no>
Subject: Viewing large slides (Was: What's your favourite slide viewer?)
        11:26:13 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Informatics, University of Oslo, Norway
        <1992Jul22.112613.25761@alf.uib.no>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 11:55:01 GMT
Originator: chribrud@gyda.ifi.uio.no

In article <1992Jul22.112613.25761@alf.uib.no> edmtl@alf.uib.no (Thor Legvold) writes:

>  - I use Medium format exclusively,
> and the cheapest projector (here anyway) is a kr.6000 Reflekta (about $1000)
>
> Are there any other alternatives other than a lupe & lightboard?
> 

There is a (hard) alternative for viewing large slides.
I have tried to build me an enlarger for 4x4" with an
overhead as lightsource. It didn't work partly because of
lack of quality in the light, so I ended up bying a used one.

But the enlarger will suddenly become a good slide-projector 
if I get 4x5" slides sometime. 
So if you can get an old overhead cheap or free, make an extension,
a slide-holder and a connection for a lens. I have used the viewing
camera for the last one, and it's far from perfect.

Christian Brudevoll
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 08:37:27 EDT
From: <SPW103@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: olympus IS-1, eats batteries or defect...?

In article <zccm-zb@dixie.com>, jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond) says:
>
>yehuda@ilx129 (Yizraeli Yehuda) writes:
>
>
>will run just about forever but after they have your money, reality
>sinks in.  I got a MOST 4 rolls.  Then 2..  Then the display started
>flashing.. Then random motordrive.. Then nothing.  It's been back twice
>now.  Going back the third time tomorrow.  I talked to an Olympus
>rep at a trade show.  Her response was pretty much "We care but the
>problem is between you and your dealer."  My dealer was (unfortunately)
>Wolf Camera.  Total silence despite three letters including one to
>Comendante Wolf himself.  I foolishly purchased the extended warranty
>so unless I want to be out even more money, I'm stuck trying to
>get them to fix it.
>
>A word to the wise.  Olympus and Wolf are a pair to stay away from.
>
>I forgot just how good a store can be until I started using my friendly
>neighborhood pro shop.  (Camera World in Marietta for the locals.)
>
>John

Did you buy this camera with a USA warranty, or did you go for the cheaper
parallel "Grey Market" import from Wolf Camera.  If the camera was not sold
with an Olympus USA warranty, how can you expect Olympus to do anything about
it?  If it _was_ sold with an official Olympus USA warranty, forget about
Wolf Camera, and take it to your local Olympus dealer for repairs.

                     -Stephen Walker
                      spw103@psuvm.psu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: phg+@CS.CMU.EDU (Paul Gleichauf)
Subject: Re: Nikkor 180mm f2.8
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 15:19:17 GMT
Organization: Carnegie Mellon University

	Do not assume the same optical quality.  The current 180 mm Nikors use
ED glass.
	The second reason for the 180 over the 135 is the obvious incease in 
magnification.  I would not use the 180 as a classic portrait lens, and the
telephoto compression is probably not enough to produce the background isolation
that a true long lens can give you.  It is excellent as a fixed focal length
photojournalist lens that is more moderately priced than the 80-200 f2.8 zoom
and perhaps a little sharper, certainly a bit lighter.  I would not be inclined 
to buy the non-ED version of this lens, since it had some color correction
problems that the ED glass really solved.
	The 135 might be better suited for portraiture perspectives where you
want high magnifications.  Most photgraphers prefer a somewhat shorter lens (85 
or 105 mm). Its speed gives it some advantages for available light fashion
(runway) work and small groups at moderate working distance.  There is no AF
version available.

							Paul
From: ark@alice.att.com (Andrew Koenig)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Amateur vs. Pro (was Re: International Photographer)
Date: 23 Jul 92 21:34:13 GMT
Article-I.D.: alice.23300
Reply-To: ark@alice.UUCP ()
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Liberty Corner NJ

In article <1992Jul23.170656.4831@clark.edu> gsnow@clark.edu (Gary Snow) writes:

> Just what is the difference between a Pro Photographer, and an Amateur?

A Pro knows how to blow without spitting.
-- 
				--Andrew Koenig
				  ark@europa.att.com
From: rbhank@wsl.dec.com (Ron Bhanukitsiri)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: PZ-1 over the EOS 10s, N8008s
Date: 24 Jul 92 20:47:03 GMT
Reply-To: rbhank@wsl.dec.com (Ron Bhanukitsiri)
Organization: DEC Western Software Lab


In article <5118@transfer.stratus.com>, savoia@sw.stratus.com (Rick Savoia) writes:

|> In article <1992Jul24.071517.2132@sactoh0.sac.ca.us>, mfolivo@sactoh0.sac.ca.us (Mark Newton-John) writes:
|> > Subject: Re: advice wanted on the Pentax PZ1 vs the Canon EOS 10s
|> > Keywords: Get the PZ-1
|> > References: <1992Jul21.073517@wrl.dec.com>
|> > 
|> > The PZ-1 has a programmable image tracking and "zoom clip", you can
|> > preset two focal lengths that the lens will go to when you press
|> > the button on the lens. That is if you are at 28mm for a tennis
|> > match, and all of a sudden you see a good shot, press the button
|> > and presto, 105mm without thinking! (with 105mm preset).
|> 
|> 
|> No offense intended but is that much better than turning the 
|> zoom ring?   I like to have control over my focal length.  What
|> I want might not be at 105mm, but rather at 90 or 150.  Personally,
|> I can't see much use for 'power zoom'.  Kind of ranks right up there
|> with bar code readers in my book.
|> 
|> 
|> Rick
|> 

Pentax gives you a choice.  If you don't like the power zoom, just pull the
zoom ring toward you and you have *manual* zoom.  What a neat design!

While still on the subject, the previous note said something about Canon
lens mount.  The pentax cameras has 5 screws holding the lens mount in place.
I've dropped my cameras a few time and never had any problem.  However,
autofocus lens mechanism in the lens is delicate.  I dropped one several
times without any problem except once really hard on a cement slab and had
to send it in to Pentax to repair.

Ron B[ee]
From: andyc@hplsla.hp.com (Andy Cassino)
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 16:53:55 GMT
Subject: Re: print protection?
Organization: HP Lake Stevens, WA
Newsgroups: rec.photo

changj@nova.cs.rpi.edu (John Chang) writes:

| Does anyone know of anything that would protect prints (primarily from 
| scratches), preferrably in something easily applicable like a spray?
| As many people know, Cibachrome is very easily scratched (and dirtied),
| and I'm tired of having it scratched up just from carrying it with
| other prints.

You should store your Ciba prints individually in polyethylene bags or mylar
sleeves made for the purpose. Alternatively, use acid-free slip sheets. Light
Impressions sells all these materials. I prefer the poly bags since they are
cheap and protect against thumbprints as well!

| 
| Also, when I make prints with Cibachrome, it seems to always come out
| with magenta cast.  This is with magenta filter reduced 10-15 from
| what's suggested on the paper package.  I can keep reducing the filter,
| but was wondering if this is a sign of my doing something wrong.  

Not at all. The numbers on the package are merely a starting point. Your
final filter settings depend on a (large) number of variables completely 
outside of Ilford's control. Use filter settings that give you a properly
balanced print and don't worry!


    %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
    % Andy Cassino                                       %
    % Hewlett-Packard - Lake Stevens Instrument Division %
    %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi)
Subject: Re: E-6 temp control, and Hobby-Pac
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 10:51:41 GMT

In article <211@metran.UUCP>, jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts) writes:

> Now, I have a question for all you E-6 experts.  I have used the Hobby Pac
> a few times, and want to improve on quality and cost-effectiveness.  This
> means going for Kodak's gallon size E-6.  But I don't have a Jobo processor;
> I just use a water bath and a stainless steel tank and try to keep the
> bath around 105 deg. F.
> 
...
> How carefully do I *really* have to control the solution (especially
> 1st developer) temperatures?  I keep reading .1 or .5 degree.  What
> happens if the temperature slowly (and monotonically) varies from
> say, 106 to 104 degrees during the 5 minutes of 1st developer?  I
> just tried that with the Hobby Pac, and can't see any problem (no
> color shift or crossover apparent, anyway).
> 
The 'hobby'-anything will be more tollerant of process variations than lab
formulations. The closer the temp control, the better. 2 deg in 5 min would be
a bit much for E-6 I feel. Use a water bath. A foam cooler is just the shot,
and not too big. there have been a few posts regarding cutting E-6 chem to
smaller sizes. general opinion seems to be that "Hobby-Pac" is pretty cruddy.

~Paul
From: lakhindr@ESD.3Com.COM (Lakhinder Walia)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: 8008S and SB24: TTL Matrix-computed Flash photography..
Keywords: 8008s, sb24, ttl
Date: 21 Jul 92 19:10:02 GMT
Distribution: rec

brianwi@microsoft.com (Brian Williamson) writes:

>In article <lakhindr.711406527@denali.NSD.3Com.COM> lakhindr@ESD.3Com.COM (Lakhinder Walia) writes:
>>Hi Net Gurus....,
>>  I recently bought this system, 8008s and SB24. Liking it very much..
>>I have not understood the manuals yet, particularly the fill-in flash
>>mechanism vis-a-vis exposure calculation. Which part is considered 
>>background and which is Foreground..? How does the system distinguish 
>>between foreground and background..? Since an object could be on the 
>>boundaries of two or more Matrix segments.., how is the optimal illumination
>>of foreground decided..? 

>The absolute and relative exposure values for each of the five segments are
>used as an index into a table of proper exposure compensations.  This is
>documented in the Hove manual for the SB-24.
>In other words, the whole purpose of the "Matrix balanced, etc." is to calculate
>an exposure compensation relative to what the TTL flash would normally do.
>What the folks at Nikon did was examine thousands of real (presumably "good")
>photographs for which the exp. comp. was known, then look at how their five
>segment meter would read that scene.  When you use this flash mode, your
>camera does this in reverse - matches your five seg. reading up with one in
>the table, then uses the exp. comp. it finds there.
-----------------------------------

I am getting confused here. How will the Nikon camera know about 
what compensation to ask for, particularly when I could swing my SB24 sideways,
And therefore making useless the predicted compensation. Also, there could be
more than one flash (in TTL Mode) connected together.
I guess my question is : Does the Camera know that an SB24 is connected to it.
Or is there some thing else also there, etc etc- like SB24 is tilted.

-----------------------------------
>I nearly drove myself nuts trying to figure out how this all works until I
>realized that the description in the user manual is prescriptive, not
>descriptive (it tells you what to do, not how it works).
>>
>>Is there any book which illustrates these concepts of TTL flash photography..?
-----------------------------------
What is this Hove manual please ..?
-----------------------------------
>>
>>I miss one thing in this 8008s: its LCD display does not illuminate like    
>>that of SB24-- I love that greenish hue.
>>Would also love to see the focal length in the Display..
>>
>>Also, should not those AutoExposure and Auto-Focus lock knobs be toggle 
>>mode  switches..? I dont feel like holding them all the time, till I press 
>>the Shutter.. Ofcourse the toggle should be reset once shutter is pressed.
>>
>>Thanks.
>>
>>-Lakhinder Walia
-----------------------------------
Thanks 
-----------------------------------
From: VAAIRP@UKCC.UKY.EDU
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: ENLARGING 35mm/Med.format/other
Date: 28 Jul 92 21:02:37 GMT
Organization: University of Kentucky

I am not a professional photographer.  I wouldn't even call myself an
amateur.  So consider this when reading this article.
 
I want to make really big blowups of pictures.  I believe it is my calling
in life.  After reading some people's opinions about 35mm, I would assume
that 35mm is not the way to go if I want nice looking pictures larger than
8" by 10".  So then I got to thinking of investing in a medium format
camera.  The prices are mostly out of my "just-for-fun" range.  Yet, how
large can you enlarge the various medium formats before your pictures look
really bad?  Specifically, I was thinking of the rangefinder 6 cm by 9 cm
that Fuji makes.  It would probably work for taking landscapes and city
skylines, don't you think?  Or do I need yet a larger negative to make the
nice looking poster size shots?  The Fuji would be in the right price
range for me, yet will it be enough?  Would I wish that I had gotten an
interchangeable sytem (with lenses that cost over $1000 a piece)?
 
Simply put, I want to take landscapes and city skylines and make poster
size prints of them.  Does anyone have experience with this type of
photography?
 
I know this question wasn't well stated but any help/comments/suggestions
would be appreciated.
 
Rick Marquardt
From: ark@alice.att.com (Andrew Koenig)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: 8008s = F801s
Date: 28 Jul 92 04:35:32 GMT
Article-I.D.: alice.23332
Reply-To: ark@alice.UUCP ()
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Liberty Corner NJ

In article <1992Jul27.094851.19262@sys.sweden.dg.com> robert@sys.sweden.dg.com (Robert Claeson) writes:


> > Why is that disturbing?

> Whenever I open a U.S. photo magazine and read a reference to, say, a
> Canon Elan, I have to keep remembering myself of "oh yes, that's the EOS 100"

> Just imagine entering a McDonalds restaurant (or so they pretend) in
> a different country, ordering a "Coke" and get the question "what's that???".

But why is that disturbing?

For a number of years, Volkswagen was selling essentially identical cars
under the name of "Rabbit" in the USA and "Golf" in Europe.  That's quite
common for Japanese cars as well.

There's another motivation for cameras: it makes it easier for US distributors
to detect whether a camera was imported by them or by someone else.  That,
in turn, makes it easier for them to refuse warranty service for cameras
they did not import.  This practice became much more common after a US
Supreme Court ruling that prohibited US subsidiaries of overseas companies
from using trademark law to prevent anyone else from importing their products.
It is essentially an economic defense against the grey market.
-- 
				--Andrew Koenig
				  ark@europa.att.com
From: gsnow@clark.edu (Gary Snow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Amateur vs. Pro (was Re: Intenational Photog
Date: 27 Jul 92 22:17:54 GMT
Organization: Clark College, Vancouver, Wa.  USA

In article <1992Jul27.163049.929@msus1.msus.edu> Stafford@Vax2.Winona.MSUS.EDU (John) writes:
>
>News (Field Enterprises) and have encountered 'citizen' photographers (I don't
>like the classification of 'amateur' for any purpose.)  When they _seemed_
>to intefere with 'spot news', I'd consider them just part of the event.
>For example, during the riots many people were trying to document the
>event from the high-placed pros to the person on the street.  Pictures of
>photographers being beaten by cops _were part of the story_. Same thing in
>more benign circumstances.  We did overviews as well as tight shots which
>tend to focus to exclude the event.
>
>Those who seemed to complain the most were those 'pros' who were rather lazy and
>/or easily challenged, who thought that they required the exclusivity
>of a badge or pass in order to compensate for their lack of talent or energy.

After reading that, I wish there were some way to reach out over the net and
shake your hand....that last paragraph is VERY well said!!

Gary

-- 
-----
Gary Snow
uunet!clark!gsnow  or  gsnow@clark.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: sgccpgs@citec.oz.au (Paul Salanitri)
Subject: Re: Minolta 7000 Qs + Need help in improving my photographs
Organization: CITEC
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 01:39:47 GMT

With regards to your question on being able to have both background and
foreground objects in focus:

What you are refering to is called : "Depth of Field"

This is an important question to ask, and every person who takes pictures
with an SLR should try to understand it.

To focus on two objects, one being close (foreground) and one being far
(background, scenery) you must set your apeture to a higher number like
f/11 or f/16, not to a lower number (f/4) as you have tried to do.
You were correct in setting "aperture priority".

Some lenses have an easy guide on them which surrounds the focus mark thus:

  16 11 8 5.6 4 ! 4 5.6 8 11 16

This guide means everything between the distance adjacent to your aperture
and it's complement on the other side of the mark should be in focus.

As it can be seen, f/16 has a very large depth of field, whereas less than
f/4 is relatively narrow.

When trying for a larger depth of field, it will of course be necessary to
use a slower speed e.g.  f/4 1/125th =>  f/16 1/8th

Trying to explain this to my flatmate I told her to hold a finger in from of
her and look at the scenery in the distance.  It is not possible to focus on
them simultaneuosly.  However, when one makes a fist and looks through the
pin hole it forms, one notices that it is possible to focus on both, albeit
a much dimmer image.  This is the equivalent of an aperture like f/16.


--

==========================================================================
 Paul Salanitri                 sgccpgs@citecuc.citec.oz.au
==========================================================================
From: cmcdowel@en.ecn.purdue.edu (Charles E. McDowell)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Hassy / Medium Format Digest.
Date: 27 Jul 92 22:07:35 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

If you would be interested in participating in a semi-moderated digest 
dedicated to Hassleblad and Medium Format photography, send you're mail
address (don't rely on the header) to :   cmcdowel@ecn.purdue.edu

[ Charles McDowell                   Purdue University - Lafayette, Indiana ]
[ cmcdowel@ecn.purdue.edu            School of Electrical Engineering       ]
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: topramen@garnet.berkeley.edu (Oliver Grillmeyer)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Omega enlarger for sale
Date: 27 Jul 1992 21:00:42 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Distribution: ba
NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.berkeley.edu
Originator: topramen@garnet.berkeley.edu

Omega D 4X5" enlarger with color and condenser heads and table: $225

Ask for Oliver at (510) 658-0564 or mail to topramen@garnet.berkeley.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: levay@stsci.edu (Zoltan Levay)
Subject: Re: ENLARGING 35mm/Med.format/other
Originator: levay@lithops.stsci.edu
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 18:30:51 GMT


In article <16832EFAD.VAAIRP@UKCC.UKY.EDU>, VAAIRP@UKCC.UKY.EDU writes:
|> I want to make really big blowups of pictures.  I believe it is my calling
|> in life.  After reading some people's opinions about 35mm, I would assume
|> that 35mm is not the way to go if I want nice looking pictures larger than
|> 8" by 10".

I'm afraid I have to rise to the bait, at great personal risk of
flame-attack, and speaking strictly as another non-"professional".

I must argue that it's not necessarily given that it's impossible to
make "really big blowups" from 35mm that are "nice looking."  Of
course, it depends on how you define really big and nice.  Now I will
concede that in almost every case, a larger film size *will* produce a
better looking enlargment, given a comparison under otherwise similar
conditions.

Nevertheless, I would like to dispell the currently fashionable notion
that it is *impossible* to make enlargements from small-format images.
As evidence, I suggest the photographs and writings of one Galen
Rowell, who uses exclusively 35mm (as far as I know).  I have seen
enlargements of Rowell's pictures that were at least 20x30 inches (I
know that's not big by some standards) that I would consider much
better than acceptable.  Film format *by itself* is not the only factor
in achieving acceptable prints.
-- 
                                       Zolt  levay@stsci.edu

..transformation into an esthetic object is achieved in the
act of seeing, not by manipulation.      Aaron Siskind, 1954
From: David.Dyer-Bennet@p0.f341.n282.z1.FIDONET.ORG (David Dyer-Bennet)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: PENTAX SPOTMATIC--Info wanted
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 11:20:12 cst
Organization: FidoNet node 1:282/341.0 - Terraboard, Minneapolis MN

 UN> Is anyone familiar with the old Pentax Spotmatic? I've come across
 UN> one at an auction that looks real nice, has a fitted case with
 UN> three lenses (50/1.4, 50/4 Macro and 135/3.5. Are the Pentax
 UN> screwmount lenses of good optical quality?

I had one as my second SLR, a companion to my Leica M3.  I remember
it very fondly.  The Pentax lenses for it are of top optical quality
for the era.  The only drawback as far as I'm concerned is the
stopped-down metering, and that wasn't that bad.

You probably won't see this until after you've done whatever; hope
you got it for a good price.  Have fun!

--  
David Dyer-Bennet -- Via FidoNet using ufgate at 1:282/341
INTERNET: David.Dyer-Bennet@p0.f341.n282.z1.FIDONET.ORG
UUCP: ...uunet!tcnet!lynxds!terrabit!341.0!David.Dyer-Bennet
From: john@newave.newave.mn.org (John A. Weeks III)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Small Flash For Minolta 7000i
Date: 24 Jul 92 05:01:06 GMT
Organization: Newave Communications, Ltd, Lake Wobegon, MN

I have a Minolta 7000i.  It does not have a built-in flash.
I am looking for a tiny flash that will work with this camera.
Does anyone have any suggestions?

I have a nice Minolta flash (the 5200i), but it is really big and
klunky to carry around when there is little chance that I will
need a powerful flash.  I hope to find a real small flash that
I could use in museums.

-john-

==============================================================================
John A. Weeks III		(612) 942-6969		    john@newave.mn.org
Newave Communications, Ltd.			    ..!uunet!tcnet!newave!john
From: goldberg@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Mark Goldberg)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: lens protection
Date: 30 Jul 92 19:24:53 GMT
Reply-To: goldberg@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Mark Goldberg)
Organization: Naval Surface Warfare Center, Annapolis, MD

I have skylight or UV filters on my collection of five 35mm lenses, 
two out of three 2-1/4 format lenses, and three video camera zooms.
One of the 2-1/4 format lenses is a 40mm wide angle with 93mm dia filter
thread.  It requires a half-height filter to avoid vignetting.  I simply
haven;t been able to find one.

In the collection for the 35mm Nikon system are 180mm f2.8 and 300mm
f4 EDIF lenses.  The 300mm has an internal haze filter; the optics were
designed assuming it in the path.  Removing the internal filter simply
shift the focus point somewhat, since it is physically behind the rear
element.  After some vasillation, I added a front filter, knowing how
expensive a front element replacement would be in event of damage.
The filter is on all the time, except for super-critical shots from
a tripod, etc.  I remove it just for the particular shot.  The slight
difference in edge definiton would not be visible, IMHO, im small prints.


   /|/| /||)|/  /~ /\| |\|)[~|)/~   |   Everyone's entitled to MY opinion.
  / | |/ ||\|\  \_|\/|_|/|)[_|\\_|  |      goldberg@oasys.dt.navy.mil
========Imagination is more important than knowledge. - Albert Einstein=======