HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tse@ra.nrl.navy.mil (Anthony Tse)
Subject: Re: Mac, of course (Was Re: IBM vs. Mac for stock business)
Keywords: image manipulation
Organization: Naval Research Lab, Washington, DC
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 17:50:48 GMT

In article <93Jan09.163301.18195@acs.ucalgary.ca> panlilio@acs.ucalgary.ca (Victor P. Panlilio) writes:
>In article <1993Jan08.181221.191081@zeus.calpoly.edu> glporter@zeus.calpoly.edu (Glen Porter) writes:
>>IBM's are true workhorses.  Macs are pretty, and "safe", which slows the 
>>Mac down to a crawl.  
>
>Oh, try a Quadra 700, at least. Better yet, try a Quadra 950. And
>then try a Quadra 950 stuffed full of Radius Rocket 33's running
>RocketShare, and you'll see one of the most practical real-world
>applications of asymmetric multiprocessing. (see PC Week Sep.27).
>
>Slow? Compared with? Which DTP/graphics PC did Byte endorse?

    Yeah, an officemate of mine kept saying how slow Macs are,
but of course, he was comparing a brand spanking new (at the time)
486 33 with a 10 yrs old Mac IIx.  I would invite anyone to
compare apples with apples (ok, oranges with oranges), compare
a Max IIx with a 68020 running at 16 MHz to a similar class PC
running window, a 80286 16 MHz PC running Window 3.1, and see
who's slow.  Or compare Quadra with 486s if you like.

    Someone also mention compatibility.  I have a Mac Plus runing
System 7.  Try Window 3.1 on a 8080 PC.  Beside, no two PCs are alike.
I put a Sun, PC, Mac network together, nowhere have I seen such pain
in the ass compatibility problem as in the PC world.  A packet driver
worked great on one PC, died on another.  New packet driver worked
great on the other PC, died on the first one.  And how many time
have I seen people struggling for days mucking around with IRQ and
memory management.  Not to mention the ungodly slow PC/AT bus,
try loading a multi-megabyte image file through a 8MHz bus then
you will understand the meaning of slow.

    No question Macs are expensive.  But you get what you pay for.
I can slip a card into a Mac chassie with ease.  Everytime I have
to put a full size card into a PC, I have to bend both the card
and chassie to get the stupid card in.

    Having said all that, I am neither a Mac person nor a PC person,
I like Unix boxes.

-Anthony
From: honna@cs.concordia.ca (SEGEL honna)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: What more to do with Lithiums
Date: 9 Jan 93 16:57:31 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Computer Science, Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec

In article <1992Dec30.124224.8921@eua.ericsson.se> Harald.Brandt@eua.ericsson.se (Harald Brandt) writes:
>................................................. so if a camera claims 
>battery is out at about 5V, it means that most of the capacity is still 
>left. 
So I now want to ask: Do you have any uses for the remaining capacity i.e.
using the battery all the way to the bitter end? Could I use it, with 
appropriate voltage-limiting component(s), to power a 2 AA cell slave?
(Ignoring the question of size-shape for the moment...)  I have a number
of just-barely-pooped 2CR5s and don`t want to pitch them out *just* because
they don`t do the job for which they were originally intended.  I'm sure,
given the traffic in this group on the subject of Lithiums, that there
a lot of netters with growing stockpiles of not-yet-exhausted Lithiums.
("And they've got a great shelf-life, you know!")  Anyway, I'd be interested
in reading about the kludges and other uses that people have come up with
for these marvels of technology. 

Thanks,
Michael



-- 
***************************************************************
honna segel
department of computer science
concordia university  *****************************************
From: ken@racerx.bridge.COM (Ken Hardy)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Bargains in Moscow?
Date: 11 Jan 93 19:56:33 GMT
Organization: Planet Earth

In article <122380050@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM> mic@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Marc Clarke) writes:
>The Kiev line of cameras are a vastly inferior knockoff of the famed
>Hasselblad cameras and Zeiss lenses.  They are amusing paper weights,

I've no personal experience with these "paper weights," but I seem to
recall an article in one of the photo mags within the past year or two
about a visit to photo shops in Moscow, which you might find very
interesting.

I don't recall which magazine; I'm most
likely to have read Peterson's Photographic, Pop. Photography, and
Shutterbug.  It actually seems to me now to have been in Shutterbug,
though I'm not sure.  You might try looking through the Readers Guide
to Periodical Literature at the library for a reference to the
article (unless someone else here recalls the same article.)


-- 

Ken Hardy
ken@bridge.com  (racerx!ken)
Xref: sparky rec.photo:23436 ba.general:5554
From: msc@ramoth.esd.sgi.com (Mark Callow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo,ba.general,sgi.general
Subject: Re: Where to process my color negative film
Date: 11 Jan 93 20:36:13 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA


In article <1992Dec31.195829.23958@kronos.arc.nasa.gov>, chucko@kronos.arc.nasa.gov writes:
> Most one-hour places don't want to know about slides.  Unfortunately,
> neither does Kodalux (formerly Kodak's processing arm). 
> 

Upon what do you base this statement?  I recently sent 26 rolls of
slides to Kodalux on Page Mill Road (via Long's Drugs) and they did
their usual fine processing job on them.

	-Mark
From: parsons1@applelink.apple.COM (Don Parsons)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Annie Leibovitz at Ansel Adams Galary
Date: 6 Jan 93 23:06:02 GMT
Followup-To: rec.photo
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.

For those of you who are in the San Francisco Bay Area, or will be there
between Jan. 27th and March 14th, the Ansel Adams Center at 250 4th Street
in San Francisco will have an Annie Leibovitz exhibit during those dates.
Also, on Jan 26th, from 6:00PM to 10:00PM, there will be a reception for
the exhibit, and Annie Leibovitz is scheduled to be there. I believe the
membership (The Friends of Photography) admission to the reception is $20,
and non-membership admission is about $30. If you want more details, call
(415)979-4888 for a recorded message.


Don Parsons

PS: 250 4th Street is right next door to the Moscone Convention Center,
where most of the large conventions are held in San Francisco. So... if you
are attending something like MacWorld, you WILL certainly be in the
neighborhood.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: panlilio@acs.ucalgary.ca (Victor P. Panlilio)
Subject: Re: Mac, of course (Was Re: IBM vs. Mac for stock business)
Summary: In which I puncture holes in the Intel 80x86 arguments
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 06:47:57 GMT
Expires: Sun, 31 Jan 1993 05:00:00 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta
Keywords: computers for photographers
Followup-To: rec.photo

In article <1993Jan11.200354.18657@afterlife.ncsc.mil> mssmith@afterlife.ncsc.mil (M. Scott Smith) writes:
>
>> To me, a highly portable computer is much more important than
>> image manipulation capability.  (Though my portable is not my ...

>Hmm..  Sounds like the Mac >PowerBook< would be the right choice then!  :)

For a while, I lugged around a PowerBook 100 with a FileMaker Pro
database showing head shots of models, plus their stats...it sure
caught the attention of some pros who'd never seen a GUI-based
database with the ability to easily show large picture fields.

Today, I'd carry the PowerBook 180, or even the Duo 230, and use
Aldus Fetch 1.0 or FileMaker Pro 2.0 or Kodak ShoeBox software.

>Let me struggle to get back to the point by posing a question.  Out of
>curiosity, how many of you photographers use Macs, and how many use PC's?

I use both Macs and PC's, and if I started getting into desktop
video I'd probably use a Video Toaster as well. No money for an
SGI box with Flame software and an Abekas digital disk recorder.

On the PC: WordPerfect 5.1, Word 2.0 for Windows, and Excel 4.0

On the Mac: Word 5.1, Excel 4.0, Illustrator 3.2, Persuasion 2.1,
PageMaker 4.2, PhotoShop 2.0.1, Premiere 1.0, FileMaker Pro 1.02,
Pixar Typestry 1.0, and *soon*, I hope, Macromind Director 3.1,
Virtus Walkthrough, AuthorWare Professional, Electric Image, and
Fractal Design Painter (if only there were more hours in a day!).

With direct PhotoCD support in the Mac OS, and *now*, ColorSync,
you'd have to be a masochist to wrestle with color spaces and
color device profiles in the current Windows environment.

To run a stock photo business, roll your own image database using
FileMaker Pro 2.0 and the low-res FPO images on the PhotoCD, or
use Aldus Fetch 1.0 to catalog your best images...simple, no?

Um, gee, notice a trend here?

Just wait for Feb. 10th.

Victor 8^)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: katzung@i88.isc.com (Brian Katzung)
Subject: Re: LOVE MY NEW SB-25
Organization: Interactive Systems Corporation, Naperville, IL
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 00:47:07 GMT

In article <C0MGrt.L4z@jrd.dec.com> diamond@jit.dec.com (Norman Diamond) writes:
|In article <PD.93Jan9030535@horus.sics.se> pd@sics.se (Per Danielsson) writes:
|>In article <C0EvDH.Mw7@jrd.dec.com> diamond@jit533.jit.dec.com (Norman Diamond) writes:
|>>In article <1993Jan5.113425.29635@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih) asks about the Nikon SB-25:
|>>>How are the pictures different from those from an SB-24?
|>>Faster fill flash, if you use it with an F-90.  (Grrrrrrr.)
|>That's a function of the camera, not of the flashgun.
|
|You mean if I buy an F-90, it will give me fill flash at a shutter speed of
|1/4000, even with my SB-24 and I don't have to buy an SB-25?  Are you sure?

The SB-24 does NOT have the smarts to "sync" beyond the shutter full-open
speed.  You have to use the SB-25 for this.

  -- Brian Katzung  katzung@i88.isc.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Photo CD
Supersedes: <93008.183347LENBC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center
Date: Friday, 8 Jan 1993 18:35:32 EST
From: Spartacus/CUNY LC NY <LENBC@CUNYVM.BITNET>

In article <8JAN199313465827@tm0006.lerc.nasa.gov>, glk9533@tm0006.lerc.nasa.gov
(Greg L. Kimnach) says:
>
>In my house it's the VHS deck that gathers dust. :-)
>
>And I'm glad that I wasn't part of the herd of sheep that went with VHS....
>>
>Greg

ahem Greg, doesn't it bother you renting those same "2" beta movies?  :-)


------------------------------+             All The Best,
Reply To:                     |
     LenBC@CunyVM.Cuny.Edu    |             Edward Galarza
     LenBC@CunyVM.BitNet      |             Brooklyn College Of The
     IRC: Spartacus           |             City University Of New York
------------------------------+             "Que viva el OS/2!"
"MASOCHIST: Windows SDK programmer with a smile!"
From: robertson@pasadena-dc.bofa.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: "Pro" film vs. Kodacolor - que pasa?
Date: 5 Jan 93 17:50:14 PDT
Organization: Bank America Systems Engineering, Pasadena, CA

What do you get when you pay for "Professional" films?  What makes it worth
the hassle of keeping them in the fridge?

I usually shoot Kodacolor Gold or Fuji Reala in my old Bronica.  What
frustrates me is the results I get when I try to photograph sunsets or
twilight.  Seems like the film doesn't have the range of whatever they use in
those Nikon ads - sky is real light and stuff below the horizon is too dark.

Some, or maybe all, of my problem may be me, I know, but do the fridge films
give better tonal range?  (I know refrigeration will enhance the shelf life of
any film, but you know what I mean.)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: sch@unx.sas.com (Steve Holzworth)
Subject: Building Benders, Corrections (or not), and Stuff
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 22:54:04 GMT
Organization: SAS Institute Inc.

1) The follow-on parts to my "Building a Bender 4x5" series are forthcoming.
The holiday season was rather hectic, so something had to give :-). To date,
only the first part has been posted, so you haven't missed anything.

2) The January issue of Camera and Darkroom has an article on building a
4x5 enlarger from a Bender camera kit. It looks kindof kludgey, but may
be useful if you're on a really tight budget. I would rather buy an old,
used D2 for a few hundred bucks (and I did :-) ).

3) I responded to an article awhile back about enlargers and color filtration,
and the use of CC and CP filter sets. I stated, roughly, that one type
of filter went above the negative, and the other went below the negative/lens.
Someone followed up and said that I was wrong, or at least had it backwards
(hey, I use a dichroic head, what do I know? :-) ). Rising to the challenge,
I went to look up the definitive (at least referenced) answer, which is:

"... Filters designed to be positioned above the negative, called Color 
Printing Filters by Kodak (designated by the letters CP), are made of a
tough acetate film and come in yellow, magenta, and red...."

"... If you must place your filters below the enlarging lens, you will have
to use the more expensive Color Compensating Filters (designated by the
letters CC). These consist of thin layers of quite fragile gels..."

 pg. 336, "Basic Techniques of Photography" - an Ansel Adams Guide,
          by John P. Schaffer (an excellent book, by the way).

4) No doubt in response to my .sig/quote, someone Emailed me to say
(maybe facetiously), that my use of "lense" for the singular of those
expensive glass contraptions was incorrect, and should be "lens". My
Webster's Dictionary states that both usages are acceptable, and that
LENSE :-) is derived from lentil, because of the shape.


--
Steve Holzworth
sch@unx.sas.com                         "Do not attribute to poor spelling
x6872                                    That which is actually poor typing..."
SAS Institute - Open Systems R & D                      - me
Cary, N.C.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Tamron 90-300?
From: <QXF1@psuvm.psu.edu>
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 14:46:17 EST
Organization: Penn State University

Hi everyone, I have just got a Minolta 8000i. But when I ordered lens
(100-300i), the salesman told me it was optically not good, with strong
distortion and dark corners. He recommended Tamron 90-300 for $20 less. I have
never used Tamron lens before and have always thought that lenses are better
from the oringnal manufacture. I am not sure if I am right or not. Could anyone
kindly give me some suggestions? Thanks in advance.

Ching
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: alan@lancaster.nsc.com (The Hepburn)
Subject: Re: Blad vs Mamiya (Lenses, Weight, Other)
Organization: National Semiconductor Corporation
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 22:08:33 GMT

In article <1993Jan5.143831.29946@porthos.cc.bellcore.com>, stb@dasher.cc.bellcore.com (becker,sheldon t) writes:    
|> 
|> Also I have heard from my "pro" friends, that the Hassi is very prone to
|> being "serviced" because of its tight tolerances.  

I'm hardly a pro, but I do own an old Hassy 1000F.  It was built in 1957 and my 
Dad bought it in 1958.  It has been in the shop once, in 1975 after it got
caugt in flood waters (along with the rest of the stuff in the house!).  At that
time the technician said that it was in remarkable shape.  He said that the
only problem he could see was related to the shutter; he could optimise the
low end or the high end, but not both.  We opted to go for the high end since
we thought that we could put up with more slop on the low end.  I received
the camera when my Dad passed away in 1983 and have put many rolls of film
through it since, and it still works fine.  Mind you, I'm not even close to
being a "pro" and can't compare the results I get with it with anything except
my wife's Canon T50, but I'm very happy with it.

-- 
Alan Hepburn           "An ignorant person is one who doesn't know
National Semiconductor       what you have just found out."
Santa Clara, Ca              
alan@berlioz.nsc.com                              Will Rogers
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: tse@ra.nrl.navy.mil (Anthony Tse)
Subject: Re: Cannon bar codes
Organization: Naval Research Lab, Washington, DC
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 04:49:55 GMT

In article <miyatake.14.726540434@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov> miyatake@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Carl Miyatake) writes:
>For example, Using the preprogrammed sports mode on snow requires
>a exposure compensation of about 2 stops.  Dial up sports and
>start programming exposure comp up.  Or worse, when I want to 
>use manual mode, ai servo focus, continous winding seems to be a
>button punching nightmare. Will the bar codes let me program it up
>so that I won't have to keep doing/undoing my favorite configuration
>for shooting x?

   Wouldn't it be eaiser if you just use an all manual camera? :)

-Anthony
From: dbernard@clesun.Central.Sun.COM (Dave Bernard)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Goretex camera case. (was Re: backpacking with medium format cameras)
Date: 12 Jan 1993 13:07:21 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems
Distribution: world
Reply-To: dbernard@clesun.Central.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: clesun.central.sun.com

In article 12532@cayman.COM, pgf@cayman.com (Paul Fox) writes:
>Per Danielsson (pd@sics.se) wrote:
>: If it doesn't have the Goretex label, I'm pretty sure it's not
>: Goretex. I can't see any advantage of putting a Goretex layer in a
>: camera bag. Goretex excels in clothes because of it's breathability,
>: but that's useless in a camera bag.
>
>Wouldn't it have the advantage of allowing a damp camera to dry more
>quickly?  Not that you'd _want_ your camera to be damp, but if it were
>to _become_ damp, you'd want it to dry fast, rather than putting it
>in the equivalent of a ziplock bag, and having it remain wet...  I suspect
>most camera bags aren't so waterproof though, so there's probably plenty
>of ventilation without being made of Goretex.
>

If you want it to dry quickly, just take it out of the camera bag- it will dry
quicker.  It's still raining outside?  Goretex will do you no good- there is no
way it can "breathe" while it is shedding water at the same time.

	Dave
>--
>		paul fox, pgf@cayman.com, (617)494-1999
>		Cayman Systems, Inc., 26 Landsdowne St., Cambridge, MA 02139




Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: kkwwkk@mixcom.com (TA Shaw)
Subject: Re: WANTED: carrying strap for bogen tripod
Organization: Milwaukee Internet Xchange BBS, Milwaukee, WI U.S.A.
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1993 19:53:22 GMT



Well I don't have the answer for you, but the straps I
have seen are not what I want either.  I basically want
a quick release strap, so when that one in a million
picture comes by, you know the one of the albino
crizzly bear, I can snap my tripod out, slap on the
600mm f2.0 lens and shoot away.

Tom

-- 
  May I walk in beauty.  Make my eyes      | TA Shaw          |        oOO 
  ever behold the red and purple sunset.   | shaw@mixcom.com  |  _____ OO 
  Make my hands respect the things you have+------------------| (_/-\_)..
  made, and my ears sharp to your voice - Chief Yellow Lark   | ==(0).
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson)
Subject: Re: Sample model release:
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 01:08:02 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories

In article <C0Jxzp.Gso@news.ucs.mun.ca> hamm@weejordy.physics.mun.ca (Craig Hamm (Evil Spock)) writes:
>In article <1993Jan8.182335.8144@cello.hpl.hp.com>, jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson) writes:
>|> In article <C0JovH.E9F@news.ucs.mun.ca> hamm@weejordy.physics.mun.ca
>|> (Craig Hamm (Evil Spock)) displays a sample model release.  It contains
>|> the clause
>|> >	I hereby release and discharge the above, its assigns, and all
>|> >	persons acting under its permission or authority or those for 
>|> >	whom it is acting, from and against any liability as a result 
>|> >	of any distortion, blurring, alteration, or optical illusion
>|>                                      ^^^^^^^^^^
>|> >	that may occur in the taking of the picture, or processing or
>|> >	reproduction of the finished product.
>|> 
>|> If somebody wanted me to sign a release with the "alteration" clause,
>|> I'd refuse.  There is just too much possibility for abuse, especially
>|> since a previous clause (I didn't include it above) waives the right
>|> to pre-publication approval.
>|> 
>|>   -- David Jacobson
>|> 
>|> 
>
>	I've actually never used it.  I didn't draft it.  If somebody
>	ELSE wants to sign it, it's their problem then.   I also requested
>	that somebody post a 'better' one.  Where is YOUR submission ?

I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not going to try to draft this stuff, but
I had hoped to spark discussion of this issue of alteration.  

Suppose I am a person on the street and you come up to me and say,
"I Just took your picture, and would like to use it in publication.
Could you please sign this release?"  Suppose I do.  Now suppose that
you go to you image processor, and put my image into an entirely
different background, etc., and my picture shows up on one the the
tabloids with a bunch of corpses and a caption about Cave Man Found
Eating Human Flesh.  Of course, I'm furious and get a lawyer and try
to sue, but the release says that I have agreed not to hold you liable
for any "alteration or optical illusion".  

You can easily manage a dozen other possible scenarios.

So the problem for you lawyer types is to figure out a wording that
allows dodging and contrast masking, and any other legitimate
manipultion, but doesn't allow this kind of abuse.  

And in addition, there seems to be an assumption in the reply "If
somebody ELSE wants to sign it, it's their problem then." that
subjects/models are potential suckers to be taken advantage of if we
can get away with it.  I think this brings disrepute/distust onto the
photographic community in general.  

  -- David Jacobson
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: hchong@netcom.com (Hoi Chong)
Subject: Re: Lecia camera features (Leica wannabe)
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 20:40:58 GMT

From article <1993Jan11.035411.26906@schunix.uucp>, by rwyble@schunix.uucp (Richard J. Wyble):
> yen@epcot.spdc.ti.com (Tony Yen) writes:
> :
> : Let there be no mystery about Leica cameras and lenses. Yes, they are well
> : made. However, Nikon and Canon lenses are every bit as good as Leica lenses
> : nowadays. As far as I'm concerned, the only cameras Leica needs to make are
> : the range-finder M6's and they should make them auto-focus.
> : Leica no longer holds the lead in optics design as it did before WWII. 
> : The Japanese do.
> : 
> 
> Impressionistic, but questionable for distribution. Please state your
> facts for the edification of all.

Huh?

First of all, Leica optics is still numero uno -- others will not beat
it because leica uses expensive (read better) glass raw material to
start with.

I had M4P and R4s and currently uses Nikon including some ED's.
They cannot match Leitz.  The edge-to-edge sharpness of Leitz, cannot
even found in ED's (and forget about Canon :} ) 

The trouble I have using Leica is that the lens, even common ones are
so expensive.  You better be rich enough to retire if you wanna long
lens.  I would have gotten a little Leica to keep around for fun trips,
but the focusing ring is turned the-other-way compared to Nikon (actually
Nikon is the odd one out) that I will not get used to.

Leica does make autofocus snapshot camera, called Leica MINI.  It is very
small and the photo enlargement I have seen in Shutterbug is still 
edge-to-edge sharp.  Now that is something I can use for fun trips. 
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: hpb@hpb.cis.pitt.edu (Harry Bloomberg)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Olympus XA/XA 2 Opinions Wanted
Date: 5 Jan 93 20:17:19 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <1993Jan5.192436.10551@bcrka451.bnr.ca> poole@bnr.ca (Thomas Poole) writes:
>
>Has anyone used the Olympus XA or XA 2?  Do you
>have any opinions?  How are the optics?  Can I 
>expect good 8x10s with it?  As I understand it
>is a coupled rangefinder, how is it at focusing?

   Mail sent to the return address in the header of your posting
(poole@bnr.ca) bounces.  Could you please post an email address that
does not bounce?

Harry Bloomberg
hpb@vms.cis.pitt.edu