HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: davis@bedlam.asd.sgi.com (Tom Davis)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Polarizing Filters
Date: 4 Sep 92 15:53:11 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.

In article <1992Sep4.113943.29715@bernina.ethz.ch>, stettbac@isibee5 (Juerg Stettbacher) writes:
|> ************************************************************
|> 
|> Linear or circular polarization has nothing to do with your
|> camera type.
|> 
|> Light is an electromagnetic wave, having an electric field
|> vector and a magnetic field vector. These vectors enclose an
|> angle of 90 degrees (and 90 degrees to the propagation axis).
|> 
|>   - The linear polarizer cuts off all waves, except the ones of
|>     the particular orientation. Electric and magnetic field have
|>     the same phase angle.
|> 
|>   - Light comming through the circular polarizer has the same
|>     orientation as with the linear filter, but the two field
|>     vectors do not have the same phase angle. The phase shift is
|>     90 degrees, so the sum vector seems to turn around the 
|>     propagation axis.
|> 
|> As far the physical facts (I hope it's true..).
|> For the effect on photos ask someone else..
|> 
I thought that a circular polarizer is simply a linear polarizer
followed by a quarter-wave plate.  Only light with its field parallel
to the polarizer makes it through the first element, but then the
quarter-wave plate converts the linearly-polarized light into
circularly-polarized light.

The reason you don't want linearly-polarized light bouncing around
through your prisms and mirrors on the way to the light meter is that
at certain orientations of the polarization, you'll get very different
amounts of self-cancellation, so the meter readings can be very
different from what actually hits the film (since that light arrives
there directly).  Read about Brewster's angle in a book on optics.

What I don't know is exactly what is used for the quarter-wave plate
-- a quarter of what?  I assume that it's a quarter of the wavelength
of some intermediate light frequency between red and violet, so the
light coming out is actually not circularly polarized, but is some
mixture of circularly, elliptically, and even some linearly polarized
light.  In any case, that's a lot better than all the light being
linearly polarized.  I guess that means that if you happen to be taking
a picture of something with exactly the wrong light wavelengths, the
stuff coming out of a "circular-polarized" might be linearly polarized.

  -- Tom Davis
|> 
|> juerg at ethz switzerland
|> 
|> **********************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson)
Subject: Re: Q: Minolta vs Nikon: Compatibility
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 15:42:51 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories

In article <1992Sep4.130053.27300@research.nj.nec.com> markl@research.nj.nec.com (Mark Lee) writes:
>Every Nikon camera made after 1978 has a small tab that sticks out on
>the upper right part of the lens mount.  A post-1978 lens (the A.I.
>and A.I.S. lenses, including all AF lenses), have a ridge on the f-
>stop collar that pushes this tab back a distance proportional to the
>max. aperture, hence mechanically telling the camera the max. aperture.

I believe that it actually tells the camera how much the lens is
stoped down from max aperture.

  -- David Jacobson
From: fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (steve hix)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Zone system with 35mm?
Date: 31 Aug 1992 23:01:38 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: concertina

In article <1992Aug30.062728.5801@sactoh0.sac.ca.us> jao@sactoh0.sac.ca.us (James A. Ollinger) writes:
>In article <14657@mindlink.bc.ca> John_Maxwell@mindlink.bc.ca (John
>Maxwell) writes:
>>Just discovered this group, so forgive me if this question is an old
>chestnut
>>or anything...
>>
>>Is there a practical way to use the zone system, by which I mean using varying
>>development times in conjunction with exposure calculations with 35mm film. 

You could get a Rolleiflex SL-2000, 3001, or 3003.  They have removable film
backs (like a Hasselblad).  Some models of the (discontinued) Contarex had
removable film backs, too.

Not cheap, though.
 
>I prefer using multiple camera bodies, each loaded with a particular kind
>of film.  You pick up the body that has the film you want to use.  If you
>don't have the bodies, of course, you have to get some.  But having spare
>bodies can be a good idea  anyway.

Spare 35mm bodies wouldn't be all that much heavier or more expensive than
Hasselblad backs.  ;}

Maybe an old Speed Graphic with a few film backs to see if you really
want to do this?


--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of making many books there is no end...  |  What's wrong with chasing 
                       -- Eccl. 12:12    |  nebulae till 3 am?  |-(
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: bilgic@phoenix.rose.utoronto.ca (Taner Bilgic)
Subject: Advice on a flash to Nikon FA?
Organization: University of Toronto, Department of Industrial Engineering
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 19:29:10 GMT

Hi there,

I need some advice about an afordable flash for my Nikon FA.
Any suggestions?


--
Taner Bilgic                      bilgic@phoenix.rose.utoronto.ca
Dept. of Industrial Engineering   bilgic@spring.rose.toronto.edu
University of Toronto             Tel:(416) 978-1280
Toronto, Ontario M5S 1A4 Canada   Fax:(416) 978-1279
From: gsnow@clark.edu (Gary Snow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Camera World
Date: 2 Sep 92 17:27:32 GMT
Article-I.D.: clark.1992Sep2.172732.11885
Organization: Clark College, Vancouver, Wa.  USA

In article <182rljINNg2l@seven-up.East.Sun.COM> gduna@snafu.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (George Duna) writes:
>
>Any one have any recommendations buying from Camera World of
>Oregon.

I have bought all of my Camera Equipment from them, and I recommend them.
They are knowledgeable, seem to know what they are talking about, and don't
screw you over. The ship when they say they will ship, it costs what they
say it will cost, and they don't try to get you to buy something you don't
want, or didn't ask for.

Gary

-- 
-----
Gary Snow
uunet!clark!gsnow  or  gsnow@clark.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: coyote@sti.com (Ron Lussier)
Subject: Re: 4x5 field camera recommendations
Organization: National Man-Smurf Love Association
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1992 03:50:33 GMT

In article <1992Aug20.204606.992@cirrus.com> marke@cirrus.com (Mark Edelman) writes:
>
>for all who have 4x5 field cameras:

Hey, that's ME!

>could you give me your impressions of your camera?
>could you summarize the movements it is capable of?
>what are the things you particularly like about your camera?
>what are the features you wish it had?

No, because I'm just now learning about my camera.  But I *do* believe that it
has all the bellows and movements *I'll* ever use.  I just (2 months now) got a
Wisner Technical Field 4x5, and I figure I have at least 10 months to go until
I am as comfortable with it as I was with my 35mm.  It's a beautiful camera,
and made in Marion, Massachusetts (one of four towns in Mass. with a woman's
name.)  Someone else here can give you more technical details... I'm not a
mechanic.  I *can* tell you that Ron Wisner loves his cameras, and builds them
to be loved.  Fine wood, brass, hand-rubbed finish, movements up the wazoo...

The only thing I'm missing with this camera is experience.  As I mentioned
above, it's *hard*.  Sort of like going from high school to college, I now find
myself having to work to get nice images.  In fact, I haven't gotten one yet
I'm happy with.  (But I do see improvement, which is important.)

I *strongly* suggest calculating a view-camera workshop into the cost of what
you buy.  I'm currently looking for one.

>if there is enough interest, i will generate a "4x5 feature" list ...

Obviously not from the information I've given you :-).

Regards,
Ron
-- 
Ron 'Coyote' Lussier            /|               Software Transformation
coyote@sti.com                 / |      1601 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rd, #100
(408) 973-8081 x315           /__\                   Cupertino, CA 95014
From: fernande@rec/photops.msu.edu (Jose Roberto Fernandez)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: What writes on Pakon slide mounts?
Date: 4 Sep 92 17:52:24 GMT
Reply-To: fernande@cps.msu.edu (Jose Roberto Fernandez)
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Michigan State University
Originator: fernande@atlantic.cps.msu.edu

Try using a permanent OHP (overhead projector) marker, available in
most bookstores.
-- 
Jose Roberto Fernandez
fernande@cps.msu.edu
From: ak873@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Michael Sapienza)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: K1000 outfit for sale
Date: 3 Sep 1992 01:40:00 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: ak873@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Michael Sapienza)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc4.ins.cwru.edu


I have the following outfit for sale: 

Pentax K-1000 body.
Pentax "A" 50mm f/2.0 lens
Pentax (Finex) 70-200mm f/4 lens
Tacumar AF14 hot shoe flash
Filters: Sky filter, polarizing filter, close-up lens (+4) and cross screen
Remote cable
Large and small width shoiulder straps
Large carrying case

All equipment in is near mint condition.  Used almost exclusively for
a high school photography class.  Used very sparingly since.  It is about 5 
years old.  Looking to get about $250 (or best offer) for the outfit.  I am
basing this on $100 for the body, $100 for the 2 lenses and $50 for the
rest, if that's not reasonable, let me know, I'm willing to deal.  If you 
are interested or would like more information, let me know.  The reason I am 
selling this outfit is that I am looking to buy an AF camera.  I am also
taking recommendations for the Canon EOS 10s, Elan, and Nikon 6006.

Mike
-- 
+---------------------+-----------------------------+-------------------------+
| Michael A. Sapienza | ak873@cleveland.freenet.edu | AmericaOnline: Sapienza |
|                     | ac860@yfn.ysu.edu           | sapienza@aol.com        |
+---------------------+-----------------------------+-------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jchen@flash.bellcore.com (Jason Chen)
Subject: Color infidelity question (recommendation for Fuji processing needed)
Reply-To: jchen@flash.bellcore.com (Jason Chen)
Organization: Bellcore, Morristown NJ
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 05:15:17 GMT

I recently had a few Fuji print films developed in a few places. Often times
the pictures show different degrees of greenish skin tone. Is the problem due
to incorrect negative developing or non-optimal print paper? I would like to
enlarge some of the pictures. If the problem is with the negative, I may not
want to bother.

I also need some recommendation for a good place to develop Fuji films.
Fuji color labs is an obvious choice. But I don't know where to buy their
mailers locally. Any other good choices? The following is my own experience:

Acme (local supermarket): somewhat greenish, expensive, quick turn around.
Clark (PA): very greenish, inexpensive, quick turn around (<1 week)
Skrudland (TX): somewhat greenish, expensive, slow turn around (>2 weeks)

C. Jason Chen 
jchen@flash.bellcore.com
Xref: sparky rec.photo:15301 misc.forsale:25113
From: sasha@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (alexander.kostomaroff)
Newsgroups: rec.photo,misc.forsale
Subject: Re: Kodachrome 64-36 exp Film For Sale
Date: 1 Sep 92 17:28:54 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

In article <l9iga6INN91n@mizar.usc.edu> ciarlett@mizar.usc.edu (Joni 
Ciarletta) writes:
> These rolls were bought from Kodak, and
> have processing INCLUDED.  Therefore, all you need to do is
> shoot them, and send them in the envelope included, and you
> won't have to pay a penny more (except for postage to send them
> out).  They cam be processed at several Kodak labs located in
> California, Ohio, New York, New Jersey, Maryland, Illinois, Texas, 
Georgia 
> and Hawaii (addresses are available upon request).

>>Unfortunately, as of June 1 this year, Kodak no longer honors this 
>>"processing included" gray market film with red canister ends.  I have 12 
>>rolls that they just returned to me unprocessed.  They will still honor 
>>the prepaid processing in Europe or Canada, but they return the slides 
>>*unmounted*.  Sad, but true.  Of course, if the film has the black ends 
>>(no processing included) and the seller includes US mailer envelopes, 
>>Kodak will honor them in the US.

>>David Herberg, Herberg_David@tandem.com

I have just received several "process included" rolls of Kodachrome 200
back from Kodalux Fair Lawn labs processed free of charge.

Last spring, when rumors that "Kodak starts to charge for grey market
prepaid slides processing" reached yours truly, I called Fair Lawn and
was informed that they have no definite plans to drop the ax.

Alexander Kostomaroff
Observer Of Passing Events, Falling Empires, and Human Follies.
From: berry@ssd.kodak.com (Mike Berry)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Photo CD and Cropping
Date: 28 Aug 92 15:16:27 GMT
Organization: Eastman Kodak

In article <1992Aug28.112439.3727@linus.mitre.org> mgb@frieda.mitre.org (Michael Butler) writes:
>
>I wonder if photo CD images will be cropped to television aspect
>ratios.  If so, what will be done with vertical compositions?  
>
>-Mike Butler
>


If I remember correctly, the players allow a couple of 'mode' to viewon the
TV. the normal mode would be a cropped image, displaying only the center.
there is a full view mode which will dislay the entireimage (rathar small
though)  and there is a tele (zoom) mode where you can zoom in even further
that thenormal mode (2X).


rmember that this is with thge players which is what I assume you were
asking about.  

mike
berry@ssd.kodak.com
From: yankovic@hal.com (Steve Yankovich)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Nikon AF lenses
Keywords: Nikon
Date: 29 Aug 92 00:21:35 GMT
Organization: HaL Computer Systems
NNTP-Posting-Host: viper.hal.com

Looking for used Nikon AF lenses, or new ones you just decided 
you really don't need.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: mroosen@prl.philips.nl (Monique Roosen)
Subject: Nikon 601 camera; Experience anyone??
Reply-To: mroosen@prl.philips.nl
Organization: Information & Software Technology, Philips Eindhoven
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 09:26:34 GMT

A friend of mine is thinking of buying a Nikon 601 camera.
Does anybody out there have any experience with this camera ??
What are the pros and cons ??

Thanks in advance for any info.

Monique Roosen


-- 
+-----								         -----+
| Monique Roosen          		"It's not that I'm afraid to die.     |
| Internet: mroosen@prl.philips.nl    	 I just don't want to be there when   |
+----- 					 it happens"     -- Woody Allen. -----+
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins)
Subject: Demand focus (was photographing whales, nikon AF problem)
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 17:09:08 GMT

In article <1992Sep1.053347.27068@cello.hpl.hp.com>, jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson) writes:
> 
> Secondly, and this is no help to you, I have often been wishing camera
> manufacturers would include what I call "demand focusing".  On the
> 8008s there is a little button just right of the lens near the bottom
> that serves as focus lock in S (single shot) and C (continuous).  Just
> add D (demand).  In this mode it AFs only when this button is pressed.
> 
> You use this when before the whale comes up to make it focus on the
> spot you want.  But at the moment of action, it can't go off hunting. 
> 
>   -- David Jacobson

David,
     What you need is a Canon EOS. With custom function (4?) you can transfer
AF initiation from the shutter release to a button just behind the display
panel -  "demand focusing". One downside is that if you forget what mode you
left the camera in it is quite possible to come to the conclusion that the AF
system has failed when you don't get AF on pushing the shutter release!!
Other than that, it works very well in the type of situation you describe.

===============================================================
Bob Atkins  AT&T Bell Labs  email (direct)  att!clockwise!rma
===============================================================
From: jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Photo-CD - THE FACTS
Date: 3 Sep 92 05:34:57 GMT
Organization: Metran Technology, Tampa, Florida

dougb@comm.mot.com (Doug Bank) writes:
: In article <257@metran.UUCP>, jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts) writes:
: 
:|>This is what gets me; not just Time and Newsweek, but many other professional
:|>consumers of photography (including advertisers, book publishers, ...) are
:|>now turning to photo stock agencies for their images.  And the stock agencies
:|>are enthusiastic about Photo CD as a medium of distribution (although right
:|>now, it's just for comp use).  I am very much looking forward to marketing
:|>my photographs through a stock agency.  What if my agency decides to switch
:|>exclusively to Photo CD?  
: 
: I don't believe that this is happening.  Stock agencies are interested in 
: PhotoCD because it will make it easier to distribute their catalogs.  Most 
: images (if not all) are still sold via the actual negative, slide, or dupe.
: PhotoCD is just easier than printing a book every couple of months.

Yes, I guess you are right.  Actually, I very much hope that it will not
go beyond this until the technology is considerably improved.  I am reminded
that although 300 dpi laserprinters are common, their output is generally
not considered to be up to the standards of quality of the publishing
industry.  It makes me feel much better to think about that.

: There are bigger problems with PhotoCD than image resolution.  Royalties
: for one...............

I remember reading a few remarks about this in Photo District News.  Are
you referring to the fact that it is much easier to dupe digital images
than film?  This is a lot like what happened to Digital Audio Tape a
while back.  I think the solution is not so much to inhibit unauthorized
copying, but to educate users concerning the importance of paying a fair
price for what they are using.

Jay Ts
From: jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Use Velvia at 32 or 40? (Was: Re: Fuji Sli
Date: 1 Sep 92 18:08:06 GMT
Organization: Metran Technology, Tampa, Florida

konkkola@jyu.fi (Markku Konkkola) writes:
: If you process Fuji Velvia according to Fuji standards then you should
: expose it as 50 ISO-film. But if you process it according to Kodak 
: standards (as we usually do) you should expose it as 40
: 
: E6-process standards are different: Fuji makes more shakes.

Can you please elaborate on that?  Do you mean that Fuji specifies greater
agitation?  If so, that would explain a lot...

Jay Ts
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: hotshot@wam.umd.edu (Target Ace)
Subject: MAMIYA-SEKOR 50mm LENSES FORSALE
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 16:36:27 GMT

 
 BRAND NEW MAMIYA-SEKOR CAMERA LENSES

 I bought 2 Mamiya lenses but they wont fit my old Mamiya SLR :(
 So got to sell em off or trade them for lenses that`ll fit the
 Mamiya 528 TL (yeah...this is ancient). These lenses that I bought
 are for newer SLR's and are brand new (still in box and wrapping).
 Send all enquiries to this account.
 

 1) MAMIYA-SEKOR EF 50mm f/1.7 lens
    - New in box

 2) MAMIYA-SEKOR EF 50mm f/2 lens
    - New in box
       
 These are quality lenses that are made in Japan. 

 ASKING ONLY $35 each or $60 for both ! (buyer pays shipping)

 If you don't like the price, make me an offer. Thanks.

 Cheers

 Rick

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: feldman@hal9k.cxo.dec.com (james feldman)
Subject: Re: Photo chemicals and septic system??
Keywords: photo chemicals, septic system
Reply-To: feldman@hal9k.cxo.dec.com (james feldman)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 18:19:29 GMT

In article <1992Sep2.130454.24574@ncsu.edu>, bloomfld@stat.ncsu.edu (Peter Bloomfield) writes:
|>The subject line says it all: I'm considering moving to a house with a
|>septic system.  Will photo chemicals kill the critters?  If so, what's
|>the recommended way to get rid of them (yes, the chemicals)?
|>
Call the Kodak 800 number  and ask for the pamphlet on disposal of photo
chemicals.  There is one specific to getting rid of small volumes, but I can't
remember the name.  It will explain all.  A quick summation is that you mainly
need to watch out for ANY chromate disposal and limit your silver (it ties up
the oxygen that the good beasties need).  Also try and keep the effluent close
to neutral pH.
--
My opinions and ideas are, in fact, not mine at all, but the property of
Digital Equipment Corp. (provided they relate to computers).  Opinions I may
have concerning other subjects are not really mine either, but are the product
of the environment I have been exposed to.  Thus, I am totally without
responsibility for anything I may say or do. 
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: usenet@adobe.com (USENET NEWS)
Subject: Re: Teleconverter options
Originator: asanders@sparta
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 23:05:55 GMT

As far as I know, Nikon doesn't make a 1.7x converter.
Nor do they make a $70 converter. There IS an item in
the Adorama ads that says "1.7x converter for Nikon, $69.95."
This is exactly the kind of misleading advertising I was
thinking of in relation to the recent discussions about
Cambridge. The reader is easily misled into believing 
that the advertised item is made BY Nikon.

The Nikon TC-16A is a 1.6x teleconverter that provides 
"semi autofocus". If you manually adjust your lens til 
things are almost sharp, the TC-16A will criticially 
focus the lens when the shutter release is pressed half-way.
Actually, I believe this converter has been discontinued, 
but it can be found second-hand for around $125. The Nikon 
System Handbook says it's a good performer.

I'd suggest a knowledgeable dealer or the Nikon System
Handbook for an explanation of the other Nikon converters.
Each is designed to work best with a certain class of
lenses. All are reputedly quite good. I'd buy the least
expensive one that fit my lenses and met my needs.

					-Alan


From: feltman@hpscit.sc.hp.com (Robert Feltman)
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 20:05:12 GMT
Subject: Re: T-Max films
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Santa Clara, CA
Newsgroups: rec.photo

I have found T-Max 100 to be as forgiving in HC110 (B) as is Tri-X. The
major difference for me has been a rather short N-1 dev. time. Otherwise
I have found T-Max 100 to be very controllable.

I would like to hear the experiences of others who seem to have problems.

Also, I have not tried T-Max 400. Anybody out there with some experience?

Bob
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: swansond@nextnet.csus.edu (Dennis Swanson)
Subject: Re: Pushing Kodak Ectapress
Organization: California State University Sacramento
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 08:18:40 GMT

(Question on any gotchas to pushing Ektapress, and one netter's opinion of
atrocious grain resulting, deleted.)

In article <McDougald.6@mac@ur.utk.ed> McDougald@mac@ur.utk.ed (Mac McDougld) writes:

>I don't know 'bout pushing the stuff, but 400 shot normally looks like 100
>and hey, the Ektapress 1600 has less grain than say, Kodak Gold 400.

I understand your reference to Ektapress 400 _shot normally_, but you must've
changed gears here and really mean Ektapress 1600 has less grain than Gold
400 _pushed two stops_, no?

	Den

-- 
..................................................................
: Dennis M. Swanson : "No matter how long you live, remember that :
: swansond@csus.edu : you will be dead much longer."  Eccl. 11:8b :
:...................:.............................................:
Newsgroups: rec.photo