HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: phr@soda.berkeley.edu (Paul Rubin)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Olympus XA ( was Re: Contax T2 )
Date: 23 Jul 92 19:48:55 GMT
	<1992Jul23.173417.8776@PA.dec.com>
Organization: CSUA/UCB
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: klee@wsl.dec.com's message of Thu, 23 Jul 92 17:34:17 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.173417.8776@PA.dec.com> klee@wsl.dec.com (Ken Lee) writes:
   |> Before everybody jumps on the flame war, just remember that
   |> there were many different models of the Olympus XA made.  I
   |> personally don't know much of anything about the line, but I do
   |> know that some of the models are considered to be top-notch,
   |> with really nice lens quality.  These models fetch several
   |> hundred dollars on the used market, i believe.  The other models
   |> were are considered to be of mediocre quality.  So, I imagine
   |> both the person who thought the lens quality was good, and the
   |> person who thought it wasn't so good were both right.

   The only model worth considering is the original Olympus XA, with
   its true rangefinder focusing.  The others (XA1, XA2, etc.) have
   much simpler and less accurate focusing systems.

One of my claims is that the XA rangefinder is technically cute
but not that good a focusing aid.  It is very fiddly to use partly
because the focusing lever does not have enough travel.  After
I lost my XA, I got a Minox 35 which was much easier to focus
precisely because it scale focused with a conventional focusing ring
around the lens.

Yes, I do know about the different XA models.
From: gsnow@clark.edu (Gary Snow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Amateur vs. Pro (was Re: International Photographer)
Date: 23 Jul 92 17:06:56 GMT
Article-I.D.: clark.1992Jul23.170656.4831
Organization: Clark College, Vancouver, Wa.  USA

In article <1992Jul22.180317.17955@talon.ucs.orst.edu> monson@caviar.ECE.ORST.EDU (Tyrus Monson) writes:
>
>  In my humble opinion, it would be a waste of money. I do not believe
>  real pro photographers participate in this organization.
>  I once received a complimentary issue of "International Photographer,"
>  too. The entire issue seemed to be a self-serving promo on IFPO.
>  And IFPO then tries to sell you "Press Credentials" so that you
>  can go places the general public can't. A neat looking badge might
>  work sometimes, but more often than not the officer is going to say
>  "Beat it!"

.....some stuff deleted....

>  Again, this is just my humble opinion, but I think IFPO is an
>  unprofessional organization that plays on the aspirations of
>  wanna-be-pro photographers.

I might start to get into a taboo subject here, but here goes.

Just what is the difference between a Pro Photographer, and an Amateur? My
definition is that a Pro has made money with his pictures, and an Amateur
is just a person that takes pictures for fun.

Getting in a little deeper, using my definition above, what does a Pro
need to have to prove that he is a Pro?  Not all Pros work for Newspapers
or Magazines you know, there are also Freelancers that sell to the highest
bidder.  What would he or she have to prove that he or she was a Pro?
What exactly are PRESS CREDENTIALS, and how does one obtain them?

Well, I think that will do it for now, I am sure that this will stir up
some kind of Hornets Nest around here.

Gary

-- 
-----
Gary Snow
uunet!clark!gsnow  or  gsnow@clark.edu
From: mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: E-6 push/pull processing
Summary: Interpolation
Date: 26 Jul 92 21:53:12 GMT
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens

In article <1992Jul21.144107.12426@sys.sweden.dg.com> robert@sys.sweden.dg.com (Robert Claeson) writes:
>The E-6 kit I typically use gives times for normal processing
>as well as one stop pull processing and one and two stops of
>push processing. Is there anyone who has the times for the in-
>between steps, like 1/3 and 2/3 stops?

You can easily calculate them in any of the following ways:

(a) Make a graph of time versus extent of push/pull; draw the curve;
then use it to locate points along the curve.

(b) Use the 'spline' program under UNIX to make a very detailed table
of one number (time) versus the other (speed).

(c) Use your favorite numerical interpolation routine...
-- 
==========================================================================
Michael A. Covington, Ph.D. |  mcovingt@uga.cc.uga.edu  |  ham radio N4TMI
Artificial Intelligence Programs | U of Georgia | Athens, GA 30602  U.S.A.
==========================================================================
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 10:00:13 EDT
From: <SPW103@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Yashica T4

In article <5360764@hplsla.hp.com>, andyc@hplsla.hp.com (Andy Cassino) says:
>
>The Stylus has a sliding lens cover. The lens retracts when when sliding this
>cover closed. Apparently, many people are capable of closing the case fast
>enough that the lens doesn't retract soon enough and the case jams against
>the lens. If done with enough force, a service technician is required to
>un-jam the whole thing, at a cost approaching the cost of the camera.
>
>I learned this *after* I purchased my T4, after the transaction was complete
>and the camera was in the bag. The saleperson said, well, now I can show
>you this. He got out a Stylus and showed me just how easy they are to
>jam (though he did it with a light touch so no damage was done). He said
>they have taken back many Stylus' within the first couple of weeks due
>to this problem... and now they are very happy to have the T4 to recommend
>for people interested in a Stylus, because it cannot jam in this manner.
>
>(Having dealt with this shop for a number of years, I am personally satisfied
>that they are on the level and there's no reason to doubt what they had to
>say on this matter.)


I own a Stylus.  ...And if people would just READ THE INSTRUCTION MANUAL,
they'd find out that it warns them to close the lens cover _slowly_ to give
the lens time to retract.

                              -Stephen Walker
From: bclee@ocf.berkeley.edu (Bob C. Lee)
Newsgroups: ucb.general,ucb.wanted,rec.photo
Subject: For sale: Canon EF 35-135/4~5.6 USM, 50/1.8
Date: 27 Jul 1992 04:48:36 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
Distribution: ca
NNTP-Posting-Host: hailstorm.berkeley.edu
Keywords: w/ filters


Two Canon EF lenses for sale:

	Canon 35-135/4~5.6 Ultrasonic
	    (w/Hoya circular polarizer).....$230

	Canon 50/1.8
	    (w/ Hoya UV filter).............$ 40


Or $250 for both lenses + I pay the shipping if necessary


Both lenses are in EXCELLENT condition, check them out yourself!
(The 50mm was hardly used.)


I'd prefer to sell it to someone who will be able to check the lenses out
before making the deal, i.e. someone who lives in or near Berkeley.



Reply to bclee@ocf.berkeley.edu.

Or call me at (510) 233-6583 after 6:30pm
From: kkwwkk@mixcom.com (TA Shaw)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Copyrights For Printing Poster
Date: 28 Jul 92 22:14:34 GMT
Article-I.D.: mixcom.1992Jul28.221434.3256
Distribution: na
Organization: Milwaukee Internet Xchange BBS, Milwaukee, WI U.S.A.


The subject pretty well says it all.

I'm printing a poster from a photo I took of a tiger.  I want
to know what I need to do to retain my rights to publish/print
from the original photo.  Do I need to just have:
Copyright 1992 Thomas Shaw
or do I need to get this registered somewhere?

Any help would be appreciated.  E-mail to shaw@ct.med.ge.com would
be the fastest.  Or e-mail to this account I have on a public
access Unix system or last choice a post to rec.photo.

This poster is almost ready to print, so I'm kind in a bind.

Thanks.

Tom
-- 
   "Life is a highway, I want to drive it all night long" 
    Tom Cochrane 
    1983 750 Maximum
    kkwwkk@mixcom.com                 shaw@mixcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jake@bony1.bony.com (Jake Livni)
Subject: Re: Lens shading (Re: Schneider and Rodenstock lenses)
Keywords: lens quality
Organization: The Department of Redundancy Department
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 23:15:04 GMT

In article <1992Jul21.181954.3578@pmafire.inel.gov> geoff@pmafire.inel.gov (Geoff Allen) writes:

>Doesn't anybody wear *hats* any more?  They work quite nicely for
>shading that ol' lens.

In cool (and freezing) weather, I wear a beret, and have done so for 
years.  It's dark, fuzzy surface is useful for covering the lens for 
those B time exposures at night.  But I don't like being called
Frenchy by strangers.  I don't even speak French.

-- 
Jake Livni  jake@bony1.bony.com               Pat Paulsen for President
American-Occupied New York                    This year he has a real chance!
My opinions only - employer has no opinions.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: capskb@alliant.backbone.uoknor.edu (Keith Brewster)
Subject: Re: Amateur vs. Pro (was Re: International Photographer)
Organization: University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 04:03:31 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.222336.21769@talon.ucs.orst.edu> monson@humpback.ECE.ORST.EDU (Tyrus Monson) writes:
>In article <PHR.92Jul27114934@soda.berkeley.edu> phr@soda.berkeley.edu (Paul Rubin) writes:
>  (lots deleted)
>>union (though I think anyone can join ASMP).
>               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>	       Nope. In my experience, they
>	       are very picky about who is
>	       admitted to membership.
>	       Curious, because it costs them
>	       revenue.
>
>


To join ASMP (American Society of Magazine Publishers) you must be make 
a living as a photographer, become an associate member for a few years,
have your portfolio reviewed by a membership committee, etc.  The good
news is that they produce a number of publications that _anyone_ can buy
and get some good info on stock photography and running a photo business.
 
The requirements ensure that the ASMP membership _means_ something--
revenue schmevenue.

kb
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: hamm@weejordy.physics.mun.ca (Craig Hamm)
Subject: What's your favourite slide viewer?
Organization: Ocean Sciences Centre
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 01:34:29 GMT


	I'm starting to shoot more slides, but can't afford a proper
	carousel projector (throws all those arguments out the window
	that slides are cheaper when you have to spend a zillion $).

	So, what is your favourite small viewer?

	Every one I've seen has shitty optics, and the rear light
	flickers depending on the pressure you apply to the slide!
	Drives me insane.  

	Ideas/comments welcome.

	Craig Hamm
From: kar@cs.rit.edu (Kenneth A Reek)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: PZ-1 over the EOS 10s, N8008s
Date: 29 Jul 92 02:19:00 GMT
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY

In article <1992Jul28.223651.28773@adobe.com> usenet@adobe.com (USENET NEWS) writes:
>| As I tell novices to more advanced customers, these 
>| features free you from having to waste time dealing with 
>| settings and focusing...
>|			 -Mark Newton-John
>
>If you're talking about basic exposure automation and
>autofocus, I quite agree. But there's some evidence that
>the addition of all these other "features" can cause
>the inexperienced photographer to waste alot of time
>just figuring out how to use the camera.

	Much worse IMHO is the plethora of glitzy photos that avid amateurs
will produce, ones that look just like the glitzy examples in the camera's
instruction manual, ones that the photographer will think are fantastic
solely because they exhibit the same glitzy effect as the one in the manual.
I hope that I am not forced to view too many of these in my lifetime.

	As manufacturers compete with each other for the "most features in
a camera" prize, the features that are added later tend to be less useful
than the features that were added earlier (obviously).  Some of these later
features have a legitimate purpose in specific situations, but the glitz
that hypes them in the advertising leads the unsuspecting consumer to think
that these features are indispensible in everyday photography (if I don't
use "hyper-zoom-trap-focus-MTF-preferred-auto-black-hole-fill-flash-stand-
up-sit-down-fight-fight-fight" mode, how can I justify to my spouse [or
myself, for that matter] paying all that money for the camera?).

	Oh hell, maybe I'm just getting old....
--
Kenneth A. Reek				kar@cs.rit.edu
Rochester Institute of Technology	rutgers!rochester!rit!kar
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: rbhank@wsl.dec.com (Ron Bhanukitsiri)
Subject: Re: Wide Angle Lens
Keywords: lens
Reply-To: rbhank@wsl.dec.com (Ron Bhanukitsiri)
Organization: DEC Western Software Lab
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 19:57:58 GMT


In article <1992Jul27.171532.19455@meaddata.com>, derrick@meaddata.com (Derrick Tatem) writes:

|> Hello rec.photo fans. I have a Canon AE-1 program camera and I'm thinking
|> about purchasing a wide angle lens. I've seen a lot of writing on the Sigma
|> 28mm. Is that a good one? Any suggestions? Thanks in advance.
|> 
|> -- 
|> Derrick M. Tatem

I think you meant you have seen a lot of writing on the Sigma 24mm lens.
If you want a 28mm f/2.8, why not go for a Canon (around $75 mailorder for).
Otherwise, the new Sigma 28mm f/1.8 aspheric might be interesting.

Ron B[ee]
The Pen(tax) Pal
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: gsnow@clark.edu (Gary Snow)
Subject: Re: 8008S and SB24: TTL Matrix-computed Flash photography..
Organization: Clark College, Vancouver, Wa.  USA
Distribution: rec
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 18:31:05 GMT

In article <BEN_WEN.92Jul21214904@e40-008-8.mit.edu> ben_wen@athena.mit.edu (Benson Wen) writes:
>In article <1992Jul20.203305.21873@microsoft.com> brianwi@microsoft.com (Brian Williamson) writes:
>
>   Also, I realize that it is not very helpful.  The short answer to the original
>   question is - "The center segment is the foreground, usually, but the camera
>   doesn't know for sure.".  An autofocus camera could use info from the focus
>   module to make a better guess, but as far as I know the Nikons don't do that.
>
>Hmm, what do you mean by "use info from the focus module to make a
>better guess?"  I've always wondered if, knowing the focal length of
>the lens, and the pitch of the helicoid, or design of the IF floaters,
>could the camera know the distance to the subject?  Does it even need
>that?  How does Canon's DePth program work?

The 4 Spot focusing area on the 7xi is used by the metering system to figure
out where the subject is in the picture (the foreground).

>Old Canon FD cameras had an optional module you could buy to mount on
>the front of the lens that would measure distance to subject and relay
>that to the flash.

As far as I know, all autofocus cameras figure out the distance to a subject,
and this information is readily available to any flash you might have on
camera.

>In a similar vein, the Canon 10s uses the selected the focus mark
>to weight exposure.  I wonder if the Minolta xi's do a similar thang?

Yes, depending on where the subject is in the frame, a particular Hex
segment is weighted accordingly. (at least that the way it works on the
7xi).

Gary

-- 
-----
Gary Snow
uunet!clark!gsnow  or  gsnow@clark.edu
From: honna@concour.cs.concordia.ca (SEGEL honna)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Amateur vs. Pro (was Re: International Photographer)
Date: 27 Jul 92 20:39:52 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec

In article <1992Jul24.175754.25415@cbnewsm.cb.att.com> ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins) writes:
>In article <xxhmg_b.hchong@netcom.com>, hchong@netcom.com (Hoi Chong) writes:
>> From article <1992Jul24.041623.15860@PacBell.COM>, by jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria):
>> > Your second point has validity insofar that a press pass is

>Do any of these "want-to-be pros" give any thought to the fact that they may
>be interfering with the work of real pros - i.e. guys who are trying to make
>a living, not just having fun? If I were a photographer who's livelyhood
>depended on getting good shots I'd be very annoyed (to put it mildly) at these
>guys getting under my feet. 

It seems to me that a pro wouldn't sweat a few amateurs; how do you become a
professional anyway?  (f/8 and be...where else?)  It isn't amateurs, PER SE,
that are a problem...it's differently ignorant people.

HS/MT


--
***************************************************************
honna segel
department of computer science
concordia university  *****************************************
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: monson@caviar.ECE.ORST.EDU (Tyrus Monson)
Subject: Re: Schneider and Rodenstock lenses
Organization: Oregon State University, Corvallis
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 17:24:26 GMT

In article <1992Jul21.194629.739@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> swatko@airbag.enet.dec.com (Mike Swatko) writes:
>--
>I'd like to throw another lens into the pot...
>
>I've noticed the Caltar 90mm lenses seem to run a bit cheaper than
>Schneider, Nikon, and Rodenstock.  Anyone have opinions on these?
>Who makes them?
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I believe that Rodenstock has been Calumet's supplier
		 in recent years. Of course, the brand name "Caltar"
		 leaves the door open to switch manufacturers without
		 notice to the buyer.
		 I am of the opinion that they are high quality lenses
		 representing the lens technology of the era in which
		 they are sold. (i.e. old, used Caltars are not likely
		 to be identical to new, off-the-shelf lenses.)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: accwai@math.uwaterloo.ca (Andy Wai)
Subject: Re: E-6 Stabilizer
Keywords: Jobo, E-6, E6
Organization: Math Faculty Computing Facility, University of Waterloo
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 12:23:56 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.202613.15903@cs.cornell.edu> mh@cs.cornell.edu (Michael Hopcroft) writes:
>[...]  Currently, I'm using the Jobo chemistry that doesn't
>include the stabilizer.

The leaflet I got says the Jobo 5l size generic bleach fix already have
stabilizer in it.  It's probably true for those in smaller kits as well.

>I just bought some Kodak E-6 Final Rinse, but am
>hesitant to use it before I get better ventilation in my darkroom.  [...]

The E-6 final rinse is just a wetting agent to help even drying.  The
stabilizing is done by the prebleach.  I'm not sure whether the pre-
bleach will work with a combined bleach fix though.  Probably the safest
thing to do is to run the film through the stabilizer from the old E-6
process, after bleach fix.  The stabilizer is still available around
here, but I have a big bottle stashed away just in case.

Andy Wai
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: dranidis@informatik.uni-muenchen.de (Dimitris Dranidis)
Subject: Re: lens protection
Organization: Leibniz-Rechenzentrum, Muenchen (Germany)
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 11:05:55 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.205328.22023@news2.cis.umn.edu> weiss@epx.cis.umn.edu ()  
writes:
> A professional photographer has suggested that I NOT place a skylight filter
> onto my new APO 100-300mm f4 zoom.
> He contends that doing so will degrade the lens performance and that the
> coating already on the lens should be sufficiently resistant to damage.

He may be right about the performance. But about damages...a scratch on the  
filter will cost nothing compared to a scratch on the lens. I am not a  
professional, and therefore I only have one lens (not a bag of them). I feel  
better when I'm sure the lens is kept undamaged, while the quality of photos  
may be not optimal. If I had a lot of lenses, I might also not care.

Dimitris
--
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: hsong@ardour.bellcore.com (G. Hugh Song)
Subject: Puzzling with Rollei 35_S
Organization: /f6/hsong/.organization
Date: 28 Jul 92 01:46:54

Recently, I added this dwarf in my collection of cameras.  (BTW, I never 
buy things to increase the number of collections)   If you ever had
this camera before, you might remember that this camera is a little 
different from all the rest of 35 mm's.   I have figured out how to 
operate this camera for most of jobs except two things.

Attached to the shutter speed dial, there is a cicular knob on top of 
the speed dial.  On the surface of that circle, there are four positions 
to set.  They read as, 1) "NEG.", 2) "COLOR NEG.", 3) "COLOR and a 
figure of a bulb", 4) "COLOR and a figure of sun".   What are these?   
Is this knob present only to remind the user of the type of the film 
loaded?

On top of the camera, there are two needles (in a small window), one of
those is coupled with the f-stop setting.  Does this camera have a 
built-in exposure meter?  The other needle is not moving at all.

Thank you.

	Hugh

PS: Please email.  (Not many people will be interested in this old mini.)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: 749marenger@gw.wmich.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: B+W FILTERS FOR NEWSPAPER???
Date: 31 Jul 92 12:06:23 EST
Organization: Western Michigan University



I WILL BE TAKING PICTURES FOR OUR SCHOOL NEWS PAPER AND I WAS WONDERING WHAT

FILTER WOULD YOU ADVISE FOR BLACK AND WHITE FILM.(RED, YELLOW, ETC.)

ANY ADVISE WOULD BE APPRECIATED..... KEITH

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: clev@cisco.com (Robert Clevenger)
Subject: Re: Enlarger light sources
Organization: Cisco Systems
	<1992Jul23.224125.5816@u.washington.edu>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 01:45:49 GMT

I too am using a cold light head, from Zone VI, which they claim is
variable contrast compatible (apparently some earlier cold heads were
not).  I find that I am experiencing different results with the cold
head than with a condenser head.  They say that the cold light will
reduce contrast in the print.  This tells me that I should use a
higher grade filter to achieve the same results as a condenser print.
In actual practice however, I find that using a lower grade filter
yeilds comparable results, like the cold light head is "contrastier"
than the condenser light!?!  Am I mixed up here?  Any input would be
appreciated. 

;                       ..         ..              
; Rob Clevenger         ||         ||
; clev@cisco.com        ||         ||
; 415.688.4447         ||||       ||||
;                  ..:||||||:...:||||||:..
;                             cisco Systems
From: val@mitre.org (Colin Valentine)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: a question about Velvia
Date: 24 Jul 92 19:30:07 GMT
Organization: The MITRE Corporation

In article <3097@ra.nrl.navy.mil>, tse@ra.nrl.navy.mil (Anthony Tse) writes:

> Does Velvia come in bulk yet?  As nice as it is, $10 a roll is just
> a tad too much.

That's why I shoot mostly medium format.  A roll of 120 Velvia costs much less
than $10.  :-)


(at 8 shots per roll of 120, I figure total cost is about $1-$1.24 per shot)

Colin 
val@mitre.org
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: HO@kcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu (Francis Ho)
Subject: Electronic Flashes (Pentax, Olympus, and Chinon)
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 15:14:26 GMT

(1) CHINON AF-S120 electronic flash for CHINON AF cameras, fill-in flash,
    ultra compact uses camera batteries.

(2) RONKUNAR MX382T TTL dedicated for PENTAX or OLYMPUS (AF or manual focus
      TTL metering) cameras
    G/N 66 (ISO 100/FT)
    AF illumination to 16ft (auto focus in total darkness or dim cond.)
    Auto (TTL) range 3.3 ft to 22 ft
    TTL exposure control will work in Program mode and all other modes.
      including Manual Mode.
    Requires 4 AA alkaline batteries
    NEW, still in plastic wrap, manual and warranty card, box.
    $25+.

ho@kcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu