HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mikec@spider.co.uk (Mike Coren)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Advice Needed on Photographing Fire
Date: 22 Jan 93 11:08:04 GMT
Organization: Spider Systems Limited, Edinburgh, UK.


Can anybody offer any pearls of wisdom in regards to photographing fire?
I'll be in York for the Jorvik Viking Festival next month, and the final
event is the burning of a Viking longboat on the river.  It will probably
be late twilight or night.

Thanks in advance,
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,misc.forsale,misc.wanted
From: ychen@hubcap.clemson.edu (User Chen)
Subject: Wanted: Lenses for Canon EOS
Organization: Clemson University, Clemson SC
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 15:39:00 GMT

I need a not expensive EOS lens: 
	prefer: 55mm macro 2.5
		35-70mm zoom

off-brand is OK.

Eric (803)6548817
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih)
Subject: Re: When does price beat out the best choice for you?
Date: 25 Jan 93 18:01:01 GMT


    [ Question of "to buy, or not to buy" a used
      Nikkor 80-200/2.8 ED from a friend deleted. ]

The store isn't too out of line with most other stores.  A used lens
is usually sellable for 60% of the original price (if it is in very
good condition).  So, for the store to make any profit on it, they
offer you 50% of the original selling price.

If your friend is determined, he can try to sell it himself and make a
bit more, or he can try to sell it on consignment.  In that case the
store takes 20% of the selling price.  (Pretty hefty and you're not
quite sure when the money will come in.)


Personally, I don't feel the "D" designation is worth the extra $$$ in
this case.  If I were your friend, I would try to compare "D" vs.
non-"D" by renting the "D" lens for a weekend and comparing it against
the non-"D" on an N-90 body.  I'm willing to bet that the exposures
won't be radically superior.  (Indeed, any exposure system that makes
radical adjustments makes it hellish to figure out when to use exposure
compensation.)


If your friend really, really wants the "D" lens (and again, I really
don't think it's necessary), we get to return to your original problem:
80-200/2.8 ED vs 75-300/4.5-5.6.

You obviously understand the differences between the two lenses:
speed, weight, length, etc.  So, you're on your own! (Just kidding! :-)

In my mind, the question would be:
    Can I get "good" results with the 80-200/2.8 ED and a TELECONVERTER.

With a 1.4x teleconverter, you get a 112-280/4.  It's faster than the
75-300 and it's MUCH more versatile.  With the Tamron AF TC, it will
even AF (though with much groaning, since the TC will be passing
mechanical energy to a heavy lens which is not IF).

Since I don't shoot professionally, I know that the 80-200/2.8 ED and
a good TC would be ideal for me.  (Anyone got an EF 80-200/2.8L they
want to sell for $450??? :-)  I'm confident (but by no means guarantee)
that the combination would be good for you too.

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______________________|
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: tonyp@cs.umr.edu (Tony Phillips)
Subject: film.zip.uue (1/1)
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 18:28:31 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri - Rolla
Originator: tonyp@mcs213e.cs.umr.edu

To decode this list, first UUDECODE it, then unzip it.  This is
a rather large sized chart, so you might have trouble printing it.  
Let me know if there are problems with it.

__________________ CUT HERE _______________________
begin 666 film.zip.uue
M4$L#!`H`!@`&`*%A-AHI5N7IC@4``!M"```,````1DE,341!5$$N5%A480I[
M!P8;!KL,2P,)!PL)"PD'%@<(!@4&!P8%-@<6%PL*!@@*"P4&%00&%P4*"`4&
M%08*)08(!Q@*!PH("P<+!"4$)00*!@0%%`4)-`<&%PD:*_S\_/O[^PP++`LL
M"SP++"NL#`$B(Q05-C=HB9K;/`4&$B,4Y?:6]V%/IP)'B)Q0G$U.O0XM<``N
M*@Z!T5XN[\?O/>7[?X$W!)*?8ZX]C3R*WPI74GF4_KEO/_4Y0P#I%GA3KK/\
MVZ7[KO_"0;M;@/EQ3@6N(B<49Y/3L$7'"`<(A6/^!UB)GX[P<S(1?E8NPL]$
M>&-D_1"8Y$K\"<P[B2'Q<SC>[!R$GR7QQL!ZB;["&X/FFON+BC$+H/R'*HRK
M<'5EVRWK46LJM$4>[&GGCG!O*V$]?,*=5[6R2+01#CX\S,$B'%.XT`]]RJ$?
M@$@T$.F'4G7:/^F<Z0=PX=4+#:1?MUV]T`V4"_U0)!8[B>>RF6_ZX5[V>;]W
M5]4+2(0#D7[H5.B=J"@+_0">N<!QG,(<HQ\ZU2TM5_FA'X""#R3]T*ZD?1./
M7_0#P.`NL.`1K6)V8?0#"(D&S>RB3Z7G^..DT.%7:Q^9&C,RJ0SM6F!Q372.
M?F5?F%TX_<"H%X#3#UU*$?:_[5?<L<A#/X`1MM&WE#F$+E)5Z2<BGU0%;"=%
MXCPT:7"=*/1#O\QCA_0#1"<E2>(RE+@0'1X%YKC';R?ET`]U"N,^(UP/_0`1
M!OC`,;MHF'HA6NH%OC4?U6DV*:NN!='R'V#IASJYZNG<S_E8^TA7'5"C-OW0
MN_9<NK<?A7X`VN,X<BQQ9G81HT3ZH4[>L5&BJA>`(AQL#_55+Y2+?FV#1P"Q
M'FW3^Z#HAS;I[EU49OKAFC+:23\41+U@X>F'$@W.VK[5?Y+\3J$A=!6YT`_P
MX5UU]`YZ.KS/!8UG^@&\'`<8\(A:04]3DK+,*_0#$#D6$.F'0D5)RJ0?.J!>
M@%-X_(<BA>[*_ZM'`.P_E"[,O2Z"$.&IR)L`R0,^S&3A86%VU`<=9I\^@N@_
ME$V3YRQ-'A9FDIS(X#;`^`^-<B/9OX!*\B]DDG]!)?D76O8F+/X18!`.]*M)
M`>\_E,X_.D>3`8Y^L)9_1-'\1Z*,_`M@7HG`[XBCP4H$W']HEK\/6(0CWJ0.
MPNO*P-XD_PCF?=O^0]W\(Z#>)/^(TOG+2?)W`?Q-(B4`Z3\T"PS*_A&@0D=X
M0T3G8/U]M*SE;Z,&]",AYE^HV,8K8/\AA$E@J'"8R25TDP9V%&+^0ZO(P-A_
M0$R*`BZ`\A=1.O^UM-WK^J/N)SSES;^`1#A4$@<?;%)2JO^024DC?P'*E&`_
M^T?`6!,`*&J*/P]M\I_ZT]1_`![5OY!1U8NCPDBXOXU."2,2-2G%P:M_H0"0
MK[^/GH5Q;\)PQ#^B$F$D\0%`^@^%&@P&_H42A)&$"P;*?ZA3ZVY4CJOQG.:(
M^!?"GP"&#P@P_D.]ILE/>'\5K#\.T*UD?Q5<*SDT_Z%9Z':GH?L/#;#5%4$"
MSK_0I^WB'^8_`(1PR)9)X_X(]*FL+_?YF;G^#.KAU=\%O#4,L/Z%=K7GTKW]
M=L>_</\!6J+!<)SZPZ%;[<XT*C\/]Q^`FB00_8=.R3+J/S3!/P(QO+^-$NWG
ML^V7`.A#_ZG(V7]$'0A@_"/P]$.#NL>=<IUE>IO0#\`1##@X"Z<?.I5D;G\?
MR[-<^_%'_*3IAZN36+T`!AP`!8->1^`P&/T`-W(5@*(?VF8-H_0#?)01N`"@
MZ8<V`?-4O:"9Y?+O/&L?L"-A.%#T0Z52SYD["OT0I_U,/SP5$@I3+]0OZO:4
M*MY1U0L`(1PR"BX)TE5%A1K[TJA`NT3D^@NSDUT!`"EL@X$YH;C0#X5JT0]L
M2Q1&K2.`HH_2#W7R)$6]8)H\-*.HN*@X4$L!`@L`"@`&``8`H6$V&BE6Y>F.
M!0``&T(```P``````````0`@`````````$9)3$U$051!+E185%!+!08`````
.`0`!`#H```"X!0``````
`
end
_____________________ CUT HERE ________________________

-- 
|  Tony Phillips-  University of Missouri CS Dept.  |  Programming: A noun   |
|                                                   |  meaning 'The Art of   |
|  Reply to:  tonyp@cs.umr.edu                      |  debugging a blank     |
|  Prefered Address:  S102066@UMRVMA.UMR.EDU        |  sheet of paper'       |
From: russa@ctron.com (Russell Arrowsmith)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Dedicated bounce flash for N6006
Date: 22 Jan 93 20:29:11 GMT
Reply-To: russa@ctron.com (Russell Arrowsmith)
Organization: Cabletron Systems Inc

I want to buy a dedicated bounce flash for my Nikon N6006 (601) and
none of the Nikon Speedlights seems suitable; The SB-20 and SB-22
only swivel vertically and not horizontally (so you can't bounce
the flash off the ceiling when taking photographs "vertically").
The SB-24 & SB-25 seem over the top since you can't even use many of
their features with the N6006.

So, I'm considering buying a non-Nikon dedicated bounce flash, such
as the Sunpak 433AF or the new Vivitar 736AF.  Does anyone have any
experience using these or any other non-Nikon dedicated flashes with
the N6006?  I'm particularly concerned with any ways in which these
flashes are not "as dedicated" as a Speedlight would be as I want to
be able to use all the flash capabilities of the N6006 (rear-curtain
sync, slow-sync, automatic balanced fill-flash, AF illumination for
low-light focusing etc.).

Also, I'm wondering what happens if you use a bounce flash (off the
ceiling, for example) in automatic balanced fill-flash mode as this
mode seems to assume that the flash is only going to illuminate the
foreground (i.e. direct flash). Or am I better off just using the
regular TTL flash metering mode for bounce flash?

Thanks,

Russ Arrowsmith
russa@ctron.com
From: russell@Apple.COM (Russell Williams)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Is there a new Minolta Camera?
Date: 28 Jan 93 15:55:43 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA

In article <1993Jan24.112036.4276@ira.uka.de> danisch@ira.uka.de writes:
>here in germany the price for the Minolta
>Dynax/Maxxum 9xi was constant DM 1995,- for long time.
>Now it is going down fast, i have seen DM 1600,- and
>DM 1400,- .
>
>Could this be an early sign for a new Minolta (higher
>than 9xi) ?

High-end cameras often drop in price after their first few months.
Sometimes it's just retailers and/or distributors, sometimes it's
the importer and/or the manufacturer, but the sellers like to get
those extra $$$ from folks who just can't wait and have to have
the latest thing. It could also be a competitive adjustment in the
European market. I have no knowledge about new Minolta cameras, but
the price changes aren't evidence one way or the other.
-- 
Russell Williams
Not speaking for Apple Computer
From: rkatos@hpunila.MSR.HP.COM (Ray Katos)
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 17:04:13 GMT
Subject: Re: Funky Leica Winder?
Organization: Hewlett Packard Sales, Naperville IL
Newsgroups: rec.photo

I've heard of a Leicavit, made by Leitz for at least screw mount 
cameras.  It replaced the baseplat and had a retractable lever.
One squeeze advanced one film frame.  They are collectable now, 
going from $600 to $1400.
From: TSOS@uni-duesseldorf.de (Detlef Lannert)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: What does ED glass really buy you?
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 17:28:14 GMT
Organization: Universitaetsrechenzentrum, Heinrich-Heine-Universitaet, Duesseldorf
NNTP-Posting-Host: lannert.rz.uni-duesseldorf.de
Keywords: telephoto, chromatic aberration, ED glass, distortion

In article <1993Jan21.173218.28028@cbnewsm.cb.att.com> ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins) writes:

>Some aberations are improved by stoping down a lens, but some are not.
>Stoping down won't help chromatic aberation or distortion (pincushion
>or barrel effects). 

Yes and no ;-). Chromatic aberration is caused by different focal lengths 
for different wave lengths (as other posters have pointed out in detail).
And this doesn't change when stopping down. But with a smaller aperture, 
the depth of field is larger -- or, accordingly, the cones of light that 
point from the exit pupil of the lens to a spot on the film have a smaller 
diameter. Thus for a white point of light in the subject range, some 
colours are still out of focus if you stop down, but the `coloured disc' 
it creates on the film is smaller.

So the chromatic aberration is still there when you stop down the lens, 
but its effect is smaller and maybe invisible. 

(Of course stopping down doesn't help against distortion. But the latter  
is easier to correct in slow lenses; as far as I remember it can, together 
with field curvature, occur as a result of a correction of astigmatism, and 
this in turn gets worse for large apertures.)

>                    ED and fluorite lenses do eliminate chromatic
>aberation, but their use is only really required for telephoto lenses,
>wher chromatic aberation can be very strong. Most landscape work is
>done with wide angle lenses (though certainly not all), which really
>don't need ED glass (but it certainly doesn't hurt). If you want to do
>landscape work with a stopped down telephoto, you still need ED glass.

I believe that chromatic aberration (and distortion) are reasonably easy 
to eliminate (for practical purposes) in slow telephoto lenses -- without 
ED glass. That's why you only find ED in fast lenses and why it makes 
these even more expensive.

[Any further corrections and additions are welcome. :-)]
--
Detlef Lannert      DC3EK      E-Mail: tsos@rz.uni-duesseldorf.de
"Gedanken sind nicht stets parat,
man schreibt auch, wenn man keine hat."             Wilhelm Busch
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au
Subject: Re: What does ED glass really buy you?
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 10:53:09 GMT

In article <1jmhnoINNqbr@cronkite.Central.Sun.COM>, dbernard@clesun.Central.Sun.COM (Dave Bernard) writes:
> My understanding is that the ultra-expensive telephoto and
> zoom lenses featuring ED-type elements allows colors in
> whatever wavelength to focus on a single plane.  My question
> is, if you take a non-ED lens of the same focal length, and
> stop it down several stops, would not the inherent depth of
> focus at the film plane have much the same effect, esp. with
> a subject focussed at infinity?  In other words, would the
> ED type lenses really come into their own when used at near
> fully open apertures... which kind of implies that the photographer
> wanted to either hand hold, or for some other reason wanted to
> maximize shutter speed (sports, nature)?  What it comes down to,
> for tripod-mounted landscape use, with small apertures, is there
> any advantage to ED?
> 

The ED or what ever it is called allows *CHEAPER* lenses of given quality of
chromatic aberations. A 'normal' correction is ~F/2000 for a simple, cheap
design. With 'ED' glasses, this can go to F/8000, or F/16000 for fluorite.

The axial colour errors effectivly subtract from depth of FOCUS, and are
highly corrorlated to the main image. This makes them very visible to the
brain. The stopping down does not reduce lateral-colour, or sphero-
chromatic errors.

~Paul

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond)
Subject: Re: renewing silica gel
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 04:28:55 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.

jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson) writes:


>I've come into possesion a quite large packet of silica gel, perhaps 6
>to 8 ounces, that once kept moisture out of an HP X-terminal during
>shipment.  I would like to use this for keeping my photo equipment
>dry, especially now that California has gotten confused with Seattle.
>(Ie its been raining for a several weeks straight.)  I understand that
>I can re-activitate the silica gel by putting it in the oven at x
>degrees for y hours.  What are the accepted values of x and y?


Nuke it in the microwave for 20 minutes or so. Lots faster and the 
silica gel quits heating when it gets dry.  This is standard fare
in industrial instrument maintenance shops.  Often times they will
modify an oven to improve the air flow in the cooking chamber but that's
about all.

John
-- 
John De Armond, WD4OQC               |Interested in high performance mobility?  
Performance Engineering Magazine(TM) | Interested in high tech and computers? 
Marietta, Ga                         | Send ur snail-mail address to 
jgd@dixie.com                        | perform@dixie.com for a free sample mag
Need Usenet public Access in Atlanta?  Write Me for info on Dixie.com.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: pictures@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Bill Wiegand)
Subject: Photography as a job
Summary: photography as a career
Keywords: photography as a career
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 16:35:05 GMT

I am thinking of pursuing photography as a career.  I've never really owned
a camera but think I would really like it.  Does anyone have any advice
for me?  HELP!

Bill
pictures@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu   
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: ian@rats.demon.co.uk ("Ian A. Young")
Subject: Re: Kodak's Hypo Eliminator
Reply-To: ian@rats.demon.co.uk
Distribution: world
X-Mailer: cppnews $Revision: 1.30 $
Organization: not
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 21:57:30 +0000

In article <C1DDou.Lvv@CAM.ORG> renault@CAM.ORG (Pierre Renault) writes:

> 1) there are possible problems associated with using sodium sulfite as a
> hypo eliminater if the film isn't completely fixed.

I would not argue with this: it is obviously important to get film (or
paper) completely fixed whatever you plan to do with it next.  I don't
regard this as an argument against using a sulphite (spot the gratuitous
UK spelling :-) ) based hypo clear like the Kodak or Ilford ones.

> 2) Here is Kodak's formula Hypo Eliminator HE-1 (a much safer alternative)
> 
> [ Hydrogen Peroxide / Ammonia recipe deleted to save space ]
> 
> Treat prints with HE-1 or wash them for 30 minutes at 18-21 C (65-70 F) in running water.  Immerse prints about six minutes at 20 C (68 F) in HE-1. Finally wash 10 minutes.
> 
> Life: About 40 8x10 prints or equivalent per US gallon. (10 per litre).

I think it's worth pointing out to people that this is a Hypo
_Eliminator_ rather than a Hypo _Clear_, and its much stronger action is
not always regarded as A Good Thing.  I quote from "The Silverprint
Manual":

   "Hypo Eliminator [...] ammonia and hydrogen peroxide.
   Not now recommended.  It has the effect of breaking down
   all residual thiosulphates in the paper by oxidation, rendering
   them soluble as sodium or ammonium sulphates.  Firstly, total
   removal of all thiosulphate does not now seem to be desirable [...]
   Secondly, the aggresive alkalinity of the bath is likely to damage
   the base and emulsion, chemically by producing small gas bubbles
   (especially after an acid fixer) and physically through excessive
   swelling of the gelatine.  And thirdly, peroxide, as well as
   oxidising the thiosulphate can also oxidise silver, and may have
   a bleaching effect on the image."

The sentence just before the second ellipsis refers to the current
theory that completely removing thiosulphates from a print actually
leaves a print less archivally stable than almost entirely removing
them.

Adams' "The Print" also says of this formula "... I do not use or
recommend it." which is good enough for me on its own :-)

Summary: I don't think current thinking regards HE-1 as a "safer"
alternative to a hypo clear at all.  If you want to use HE-1, check out
some current literature first.

Oh, there is also a _specific_ injunction in The Silverprint Manual
against _ever_ using the HE-1 formula with film.  Just in passing.

   -- Ian  (who once got red stains on his prints by mixing up the Agfa
            _Carbonate_-based hypo clearing formula, but that has
            to be regarded as a different story.)
From: jsmith@unixg.ubc.ca (JR Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Help: Tamron 90-300
Date: 28 Jan 93 09:19:06 GMT
Organization: The University of British Columbia
NNTP-Posting-Host: unixg.ubc.ca

In <1993Jan26.184121.7270@bcars6a8.bnr.ca> keithh@bnr.ca (Keith Hanlan) writes:

>In article <93025.135111QXF1@psuvm.psu.edu> <QXF1@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>>Hi, everyone, Could any of you give me some advice on Tamron 90-300 for Maxxum?
>>It will be for my Maxxum 8000i if I get it. Thanks.

>I bought one for my 7000i and am using it now on my 7xi. I would
>recommend *against* the lens. While it is optically quite good and
>is very light, it is rather flimsy in construction. I just spent $120
>getting mine repaired after it bent sideways about 5 degrees. This
>happened while it was being transported securely in my motorcycle's
>tank bag. Also, the zoom and focus adjustment rings are quite rough.
>Recently there have been a number of similar lens released. If I were
>to replace the lens, I would pay the extra bucks for a Minolta
>100-300mm lens. I believe that Sigma has a 75-300 available. You might
>look at it too.

>It received very good reviews when it was released but these reviews
>do not seem to put much emphasis on durability.

Haven't had any trouble with mine which I bought for my 7000 and now use
with my 7xi. I've bounced it around a fair bit but try to be reasonable 
with it. I'd certainly look at the sigma lens but don't think I'd pay the 
premium for the Minolta version.
                                       JR
From: photo@cs.ubc.ca (Photo-swap central)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Photoswap 93-1 Theme announcement
Date: 27 Jan 1993 18:22:53 -0800
Organization: Computer Science, University of B.C., Vancouver, B.C., Canada
NNTP-Posting-Host: cheech.cs.ubc.ca
Keywords: potoswap, theme, Feb. 30/93, mail

mjg@nwu.edu (Michael J Graven) writes:
>Melanie Typaldos (melanie@cayman.amd.com) writes:

>> Here in Austin, Texas, it is practically *never* winter in the
>> sense of "winter scenes".

>Slip the surly bonds of literalism!  Interpret winter as it is in
>Texas.  To be sure, winter in Austin isn't winter in Aspen, but

>> [Are] the photos really supposed to be taken in the 1.5 month
>> period between when the theme is announced and the photos are due

>Don't see why not.  The photo-swap isn't a test, nor a competition:
>it's a swap, a chance to share your work.

I agree with both answers.  Although I think it's probably more
fun to create new images, whatever you consider suitable to submit
is what gets put into the portfolio.

As far as I'm concerned, the purpose of the theme "restriction" is to 
force people to be more creative.  If all the themes had to do with
what you were good at, there wouldn't be as much space to learn
things by participating. 

	Texan "winter scenes" sounds just fine to me. (Which reminds
me -- I have some great pictures from a Trinidad Christmas, that I 
might just look thru for a possible second photo).
~
-- 
Stephen Samuel          (604)822-9248           photo@cs.ubc.ca
                                        or,  alberta!ubc-cs!photo
Photo swap co-ordinator (with much support from Brian M. Godfrey)
The first prerequisite to enjoyment is playing the game.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: mfolivo@sactoh0.sac.ca.us (Mark Newton-John)
Subject: Re: Which 80-200mm/f2.8 lens to buy for EOS?
Organization: Sacramento Public Access Unix
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 09:32:32 GMT

In <1993Jan20.111339.25341@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih) writes:

>In <1993Jan20.094852.21862@sactoh0.sac.ca.us> mfolivo@sactoh0.sac.ca.us (Mark Newton-John) writes:


>>I've had a customer order the Canon 80-200 f/2.8 L lens. It took
>>about four weeks to get from Canon. I think the price was around
>>$1300... By the way, even though the lens was over $1000, she
>>bought a 10 year service contract for..... $19.99 (A quirk in our
>>system has only two prices- and $19.99 is the one for lenses over
>>$250- mostof the lenses we sell are under $500...)

>>A Hoya (glass, multicoated Skylight) filter, 72mm, $44.99

>Commercial postings are discouraged on the USENET.  Please take
>them to a more appropriate forum.

Whoaaa, who appointed you net.god? This was NOT a commercial
posting, I posted this as information for comparison, NOT NOT NOT
as an ad to order these things. Some people might want to know a
price to base things on, and as a retailer, I do this as a SERVICE
to the net.community, NOT as an ad to hook customers. As such, I
did not post shipping, handling, tax, or even a phone number or
address of my store. Maybe people get more cynical the further
east of Yuma you go, or something.



-- 
mfolivo@sactoh0.SAC.CA.US   SAC-UNIX (916) 649-0161
The Good Guys!		We know our stuff
Audi			The Alternate Route
Atari			Power without the Price
From: kbb0@harvey.gte.com (Kevin Burke)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Apartment Darkrooms
Date: 27 Jan 93 15:04:52 GMT

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. 

While it may sound too obvious, I started bringing a low chair into the
bathroom since I am set up exactly the same way. I tend to spend
considerable time at the enlarger *or* at the trays. Having the chair
really made a difference in lengthening the time of a typical printing
session before fatigue sets in.

Regards, Kevin