HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ajayshah@almaak.usc.edu (Ajay Shah)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Manual for Nikon F-1 Wanted
Date: 7 Sep 1992 14:05:26 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: almaak.usc.edu

bjones@weber.ucsd.edu (Bruce Jones) writes:
>I'd be happy to buy and prepay postage for either an original manual
>for this camera or a decent aftermarket book that covers it in
>depth.

I believe Nikon dishes these out (at a price?)
Call 800-nikonUS

        -ans
-- 
Ajay Shah, (213)749-8133, ajayshah@usc.edu
From: philg@zurich.ai.mit.edu (Philip Greenspun)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: How rugged is F601/6006 ?
Date: 6 Sep 92 21:49:56 GMT
Reply-To: philg@martigny.ai.mit.edu
Organization: M.I.T. Artificial Intelligence Lab.
In-reply-to: margulis@inf.ethz.ch's message of 5 Sep 92 16:09:44 GMT


In article <1992Sep5.160944.2235@neptune.inf.ethz.ch> margulis@inf.ethz.ch (Eugene Margulis) writes:

   What experiences do you have with ruggedness/reliability of F601?
   (or F801/8008, I guess they have very similar bodies)

My 8008's matrix metering went berzerk after 100 rolls of film and
several weeks of exposure to extreme dust (Arizona).  The center
weighted metering worked fine as did the whole rest of the camera.

My 6006 has shot only about 100 rolls of film, but has been knocked
around a bit and hasn't hiccuped yet.

I'd say both are dramatically more reliable than older consumer
Nikons.  I was never really that confident about FE2's or even the F3
in some respects.

Philip Greenspun
MIT Department of EECS
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: pd@sics.se (Per Danielsson)
Subject: Re: Nikon N90 technobabble
Organization: Swedish Institute of Computer Science
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 01:29:00 GMT

In article <5360792@hplsla.hp.com> andyc@hplsla.hp.com (Andy Cassino) writes:

>I even have given a few seconds' consideration to 
>the idea that the maybe the posts were fictional and intended to parody 
>the recent trend of over-complicated feature-bloated cameras! But, that was
>just my futile attempt to deny the reality, Nikon is unleashing this
>beast and is serious. I wish them luck, but to me the camera looks like a
>solution in search of a problem that nobody cares about.

Impressive as it may be, there is not one really new feature in the
N90. Everything can be found in cameras already on the market. The
difference being that the N90 is the first camera to combine all of
the stuff mentioned in the press-releases.
(Well, perhaps this 3D-matrix stuff is really new. I'm not quite sure
about that).
--
Per Danielsson				pd@sics.se
Swedish Institute of Computer Science, PO Box 1263, S-164 28 KISTA, SWEDEN
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: Robert Drongowski <Robert.Drongowski@cc.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Inrared Photog (was: ...+ Spider Webs)
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 11:55:59 EDT
Organization: Pediatric Surgery, U of Michigan
     <1992Sep8.011755.18812@ultb.isc.rit.edu>
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1b2

Subject: Re: Inrared Photog (was: ...+ Spider Webs)READ/NEW/FOLLOWUP

>In article <4872@daily-planet.concordia.ca>, honna@cs.concordia.ca
(SEGEL honna) writes:
>> non-chalantly popped open the cannister to show me that there was, in
fact,
>> a roll of film inside.  So, now I would like to know if there is any
chance
>> that the film has any useful life left in it.  Should I bother rolling
it 
>> through my camera?  How do I know what kind of infra-red film it is - 
>> assuming that there is more than one kind?  How will I know what
processing
>> it needs if I can't look at the cassette? etc.
>> 
I am not an expert on anything to do with photography, but I can relate
my personal experience, and the information I was told by an expert
photographer familiar with Infrared Film at the University of Michigan.
Regarding my original question of spider webs and infrared film, others
have correctly pointed out that the effect which I was looking for was
due to UV light.  I went back to the original article in Science, July
1990 and sure enough, the authors used UV light to document the unique 
patterns (bars, zigzags etc.) spiders create to entice insects to their
webs. (Thanks for the corrections; faulty memory on my part).  Infrared
film did not produce the results which I was looking for!!!
The Infrared Film which I subsequently used was still "good" after
sitting in my refrigerator for 2 years.  The people from which I
purchased the film said that it would last 'forever' if kept
refrigerated.  The UM expert indicated that exposing the film within the
cannister to light would likely produce streaks in the film and could
conceivably wreck the film.  I took extreme caution in loading/unloading
the film in the dark and taped the cannister shut with a note upon
delivery to the film processor.  Use only a film processing laboratory
familiar with processing Infrared Film or *they* will likely wreck your
prints.  It is expensive using Infrared Film (buying and developing).  I
did use a red filter (since IR has no color and thus is contrast is
highlighted with a RF).
You could try shooting the film, and ask the developing lab to print all
the resulting pictures as1x1's on one sheet of paper to preview the
results.  This was considerably cheaper than full development and allowed
me to choose which pictures I subsequently wanted.
Hope this helps, Bob Drongowski, Ann Arbor
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: tjwu@athena.mit.edu (Thomas J Wu)
Subject: Telephoto zoom lens recommendations wanted
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 07:08:59 GMT

  I have a Canon EOS Elan with a 35-105mm USM lens (an excellent lens,
IMHO).  Right now, I am considering the following telephoto zooms:

  Sigma 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 APO, $300
  Sigma 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DL, $170
  Canon 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6, $180
  Canon 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM, $260

How much of a difference does an apochromatic lens actually make in
most pictures?  Is a 100-300 lens noticeably sharper than a 75-300 lens?
I'd like to know about any experiences, positive or negative, with these
lenses.  I'm not limiting my search to these lenses, but I don't want
to spend much more than $300.  E-mail or post is fine.  Thanks.

  Thomas Wu
  Internet:  tjwu@athena.mit.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: pd@sics.se (Per Danielsson)
Subject: Re: High speed useful ? (was Re: Nikon N90 technobabble)
Organization: Swedish Institute of Computer Science
	<PD.92Sep7164427@horus.sics.se> <1992Sep9.022940.26307@PacBell.COM>
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 02:29:40 GMT

In article <1992Sep9.022940.26307@PacBell.COM> jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria) writes:

>In article <PD.92Sep7164427@horus.sics.se> pd@sics.se (Per Danielsson) writes:
>>
>>Having a focal plane shutter with fast moving curtains is useful since
>>it allows you to have a high flash sync speed.

>Having fast moving curtains does not necessarily equate to faster flash
>sync speeds. It is true that the newer 35mm SLR cameras can flash sync
>up 1/250, but the typcial flash sync speed is between 1/60 to 1/125 on
>most cameras.

There are two ways to increase the top speed of a focal plane shutter.
1, You make the traveling slit smaller. 2, You increase the speed of
the curtains.
In the second case you obviously also get the possibility of
increasing the top flash sync speed (X-sync).
--
Per Danielsson				pd@sics.se
Swedish Institute of Computer Science, PO Box 1263, S-164 28 KISTA, SWEDEN
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: hamm@weejordy.physics.mun.ca (Craig Hamm)
Subject: Re: T-Max versus Grain-X/Tri-X
Organization: Ocean Sciences Centre
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 02:27:24 GMT

In article <68162@hydra.gatech.EDU>, gg10@prism.gatech.EDU (GALLOWAY) writes:
|> What is the advantage or disadvantage to T-Max 100/400 over Plus-X/Tri-X?
|> I am just starting B&W photography, and plan on processing myself.  Is T-Max
|> any harder to work with, or just better quality for more money?
|> 
|> Thanks
|> Greg Galloway
|> gg10@prism.gatech.edu

	I don't seem to have the *problems* I keep hearing about Tmax
	on the net.  I love the (lack of) grain.  

	I personally hate Plus-X in 35mm, unless I want grain.  I've got
	negs that I wish were on Tmax, but they're on Grain-X ; )

	However, I have got a wicked (i.e. good) neg of a drummer at
	a concert shot on Tri-X pushed 2 stops in Tmax developer, and it
	has wonderful gradations in the greys, and the grain is very
	respectable!

	I do have a roll shot of Tmax 400, pushed 2 stops, and there is
	lots of shadow detail in some of the negs.  I was quite happy
	with the grain on that roll.	

-- 
  Craig Hamm, Memorial University, | He's big, he's bad, and he's mad. If the
  Newfoundland,              ______| odds are stacked against you...if you 
  DoD #1500,                / have nowhere left to turn...he's your last
  1981 Maxim 650            | resort. A berserk one-man juggernaut of death
  __________________________| on the trail to hell and back. -The Liquidizer

From: andyc@hplsla.hp.com (Andy Cassino)
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 16:40:24 GMT
Subject: Re: High speed shutters and vibration
Organization: HP Lake Stevens, WA
Newsgroups: rec.photo

zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi) writes about high-speed
shutters:
> 
>The greatest source of shakes is the mirror. As regard
>shutters, the more modern FP shutters use much lighter curtains to get the
>higher speed, hence less energy to throw around. A good rule is the louder the
>noise, the greater the vibration. Not a big deal if you consider the vibration
>we worry about *IS* noise...
> ----------

Recently I have noticed a couple of comments in the photo-rags that indicate 
that the newer shutters DO have more vibration than their predecessors. The
reason is (supposedly) that these new shutters travel vertically, whereas the
older shutters travel horizontally. I don't know what difference that may
make, but I do know that the Nikon F3 shutter is horizontal-travelling and
exhibits very low vibration levels. One author said that the shutter-vibration 
in the Nikon F4 is on par with the mirror vibration, partially due to the
fact that Nikon has significantly reduced mirror vibration. If this is true,
one might not be very happy if they buy an F4 instead of a N8008 just 
to get mirror lock-up!

My own tests with a Nikon FM2n inidcate that the vertically-travelling 
shutter has lots of vibration, but by no means is it on par with the mirror 
vibration.

As to the idea that the louder the noise, the greater the vibration, I would
caution that it ain't necessarily so! Much of the shutter noise and vibration
occurs when the shutter closes, and that vibration doesn't matter! If one
puts the shutter on "bulb" one can distinguish the shutter opening and
closing and maybe come to some very subjective conclusions about the vibration 
levels. 

The old trick for testing vibration was to balance a nickel on edge
on top of the prism housing with the camera on a tripod. Any vibration could
easily be seen when the shutter was fired. It was a beautiful way to
demonstrate the difference mirror lock-up made! But, most cameras these
days have no good place to balance a nickel! Another traditional feature
down the tubes! :-)


    %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
    % Andy Cassino                                       %
    % Hewlett-Packard - Lake Stevens Instrument Division %
    %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: CCGM000 <CCGM@MUSICM.MCGILL.CA>
Subject: RE: Professional Labs in Montreal
Organization: McGill University Systems Inc (MUSIC/SP)
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 04:06:56 GMT

In article <05SEP92.13714494.0051@vmxa.polymtl.ca> DH02 <DH02@polytec1.polymtl.ca> writes:
>Hi folks!
>
>Would any kind reader from the city of Montreal (the one in Quebec)
>be able to recommend me to a professional photo-lab where I could
>get manually printed enlargements (8x10's etc.), preferably down-town
>(centre-ville) or around.  I'm kind of new to this (great ?) city!
>Merci beaucoup!  I would really appreciate any suggestions.

   There are two that I've used. One is CorLab down on the corner of
Peel and Wellington - very professional, large staff. Another (I
apologize for not having the name) is situated just below
Rene Levesque Blvd (formerly Dorchester) on St. Alexandre (opposite
the church). I've had good results and good advice from these guys.
A good thing is that you can talk to the guys in charge directly.
A drawback is that they want cash.
   If anyone wants complete names and/or phone numbers, send mail.
(However, with this info you could pick these labs out of the phone
book.)

Glen Matthews
MUSIC Product Group, McGill University
550 Sherbrooke St. West, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3A 3C5
Phone: (514) 398-4477 Fax: (514) 398-4488 BitNet: CCGM@MCGILLM
Internet: ccgm@musicm.mcgill.ca   Anonymous FTP: vm.mpg.mcgill.ca
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: robert@sys.sweden.dg.com (Robert Claeson)
Subject: Re: Fuji Slide Film or Pushing Kodachrome
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 07:53:27 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Data General AB, Akalla, Sweden

In article <1992Sep9.201432.28115@news.weeg.uiowa.edu>, goldis@news.weeg.uiowa.edu (Al Goldis) writes:

> I agree, except I also like Ektachrome 400X much better than
> Fujichrome 400.  IMHO regular Ektachrome 400 is really "icky" film,
> but 400X is clearly better than Fuji RHP in terms and grain and
> sharpness and pushes very well to 800.  I have not tried Ektachrome
> 400HC.

Note that Fuji is just about to release a new ISO 400 slide film
based on the Velvia technology. They claim that it has "natural"
colors with increased redness (like Velvia, I suppose). You may want
to try it when it becomes more widely available by the fall.

-- 
------------------------------ END OF MESSAGE ------------------------------
Robert Claeson                Internet: robert@sys.sweden.dg.com
Data General AB                         robert@sys.dg.se
Box 28                             CEO: robert@sys.sweden.dg.com:dg-smtp
S-164 93 KISTA                     Tel: +46 (0)8-92 55 00
Sweden                             Fax: +46 (0)8-751 36 22
From: bjs@uts.amdahl.com (Barry Sherman)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Lightworks and PMK Pyro (was Re: t-Max Films)
Date: 9 Sep 92 19:26:17 GMT
Reply-To: bjs@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com (Barry Sherman)
Followup-To: rec.photo
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

Yesterday I posted an item about Gordon Hutchings PMK Pyro formulation,
his book about it named _The Book of Pyro_ and posted a 1-800 number for the
Sacramento California company named Lightworks which sells both the
book and the formula.  I stated that I thought that the original poster
on the thread, who is in Australia, would be able to reach Lightworks
through the 1-800 toll-free number.  But Jack Campin wrote to me today 
and said:

> You can't do toll-free international calls from here, and I doubt if you can
from Australia.  Do you have an address for them?
>
> cheers - jack

> --  Jack Campin    room G092, Computing Science Department, Glasgow University,

Here's all the information:

   Lightworks
   712 57th Street
   Sacramento CA 95814

   1-916-451-9678   (toll number)


Barry

-- 


|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Barry Sherman, Amdahl Corp.       | "Any fool can face a crisis - it's     | 
| bjs@ruts.ccc.amdahl.com           |  this day-to-day living that wears you |
|                                   |  out." - Anton Chekhov                 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Amdahl, being a corporation, is a legal fiction.  Therefore it is incapable|
| of holding, let alone expressing, opinions.  Unfortunately, this has been  |
| said of me as well.                                                        |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
From: rivieres@parc.xerox.com (Jim des Rivieres)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Anyone own a Zone VI field camera?
Date: 14 Sep 92 17:35:30 GMT
Reply-To: desrivieres@parc.xerox.com
Organization: Xerox PARC, Palo Alto, CA


philg@zurich.ai.mit.edu (Philip Greenspun) writes:

> P.S.  I assume all of you have seen Fuji's ad for Readyload 4x5
> Velvia... has anyone managed to find any?

Yes. I bought some locally about a month ago.  I was a bit surprised to find
that Fuji "Quickload" is quite different internally from Kodak Readiload
(although Quickload works just fine in a Kodak Readiload holder).  Whereas a
Kodak Readyload contain two sheets of film attached at the top to a full
length opaque plastic backing, Quickload contains a single piece of film with
plastic extension tabs attached at the top and bottom.  The Quickload is
somewhat clumsier to extract the sheet of film from, especially the first time
you try it (hint: the tabs twist off).

---jim
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: koller@bolzano.math.ethz.ch (Michael Koller)
Subject: NEW CONTAX
Keywords: Contax S2, Contax ST
Organization: Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 08:43:25 GMT


Some Day ago I read in a German journal, that Contax will present two new models at the Photokina in Koeln (Germany) which will soon take place. In this journal they gave the following details:

Contax S2: Mechanical mf camera (like Leica R6 and Nikon FM2)
           Times 1 - 1/4000 s (Spot metering)
           X  1/250 (no TTL metering for flash)
           Top and bottom out of titan

Contax ST: Between 167 MT and RTSIII (mf camera)
           Times up to 1/8000 s (incl spot metering like RTSIII)
           X 1/250 s (with TTL)

Zeiss shall present a Distagon 21mm f=2.8  and a
                      Sonnar  200mm f=2.0

Who kowns more?

          


Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: ph@cs.uow.edu.au (Phillip Herring)
Subject: Re: High speed useful ? (was Re: Nikon N90 technobabble)
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Wollongong University, Australia
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 06:43:46 GMT

luong@naxos.inria.fr (Quang-Tuan Luong) writes:

>I don't understand the utility of high speed shutters. On my 8008, I think
>I have never shot beyond 1/1000s, and I cannot imagine any real situation 
>where 1/8000s would be useful. Using high speed means that you use also high
>sensibility film, and/or wide aperture, and this is known to reduce 
>significantly image quality.

For one example, try this combination: TMX film (100ASA), lens at f/2,
full sunlight.  You'll use 1/8000. (No, I don't want to use a ND 
filter - it makes it too hard to focus, which is a critical business 
at f/2.) My Nikkor lenses are all sharp enough at such apertures for
that not to be an issue, either.


-- Phil.
-- 

-- Phil.
==========================================================================
        These opinions (c) 1992 Phil Herring (ph@cs.uow.edu.au)
From: jay@intermec.com (Jay Schlegel x6878)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Resolution test as function of distance
Date: 15 Sep 92 16:07:17 GMT
Reply-To: jay@intermec.com (Jay Schlegel x6878)
Distribution: na
Organization: Intermec Corporation, Everett WA



>
>Most Rodenstock enlarging lenses do it at 20X.
>


  Oh Great!  Just what we need, another "do it"  bumper sticker.
  
  
	:-)

-- 
-*jay  Jay Schlegel --> Intermec Corp., Everett Wa.
						     fluke!
	jay@intermec.com      OR  -->	    uunet!pilchuck!intermec!jay
From: bc@Apple.COM (bill coderre)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Two 120 film in One Reel
Keywords: Development
Date: 9 Sep 92 19:43:25 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA

In article <1992Sep8.232835.13373@sj.nec.com> hisashi@neclpd.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Hisashi Naganuma) writes:
|I have been using Paterson 3 roll tank (5 roll tank is too heavy to handle)
|and trying to develop two 120 rolls per reel to save development efforts
|because:

Well, I shudder to suggest this, but have you considered doing
"back-to-back" development? That's where you roll two rolls onto the
same spool so that both emulsion surfaces face developer.
(Effectively, one roll is rolled on inside-out.)

Personally, I would never do this. Just too much chance for losing.

Are you sure you don't qualify for bulk discount at a local pro shop?

bill coderre
From: al@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Alan Peterman)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Nikon AF viewfinder clarity
Keywords: Nikon AF
Date: 15 Sep 92 16:37:02 GMT
Article-I.D.: qiclab.1992Sep15.163702.22198
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.

In article <bill.716496511@sarek> bill@sarek.Rational.COM (Bill Arnett) writes:
>I owned a Nikon FE for many years with good results.  A few years ago I decided
>to go the AutoFocus route and bought an N2020.  Not such good results.  Much to
>my chagrin, it was only yesterday that I discovered what may have been my
>problem:  the view thru the 2020's finder is much dimmer than the FE's. 

Are you using the same lens on both cameras?  I wouldn't be suprised if you
had a 50/1.4 for the FE, and either a AF 50/1.8 or some even dimmer zoom
for the N2020..

Just a thought.

-- 
Alan L. Peterman                                 (503)-684-1984 hm & work
                       al@qiclab.scn.rain.com
It's odd how as I get older, the days are longer, but the years are shorter!
From: jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: B&W darkroom question or how to increase contrast?
Date: 8 Sep 92 01:33:39 GMT
Organization: Metran Technology, Tampa, Florida

In article <HSp-JX@engin.umich.edu>
	bohus@math.lsa.umich.edu (Geza Bohus) writes:

> I have some very flat (if that's the word) negatives. Can I increase
> contrast more (when printing) by using two contrast filters together (as
> opposed to one)?

[note: I am not by any means an expert on this; I am posting because
no one else mentioned this option.  I have never tried it myself.]

You might try using a proportional intensifier on the negative.  A
proportional intensifier increases the density in proportion to the
amount of silver present, so it acts to increase the density range
("contrast") of the image.  Chromium intensifier is one example.
Here's how to make some:

(This comes from Camera & Darkroom magazine.)

Start with a 10% solution of potassium dichromate (10 grams in 100 ml water).
Now, pick one of the below:

	Chromium Intensifier #1
	-----------------------
	Potassium dichromate (10% soln.)	12.5 ml
	Hydrochloric acid			  .3 ml
	Water					up to 100ml

	Chromium Intensifier #2  (weaker than #1)
	-----------------------------------------
	Potassium dichromate (10% soln.)	12.5 ml
	Hydrochloric acid			 1.2 ml
	Water					up to 100ml

To use, bleach in the intensifier until the image is completely gone, and
wash until the yellow stain disappears (5 minutes).  Then redevelop in
Dektol 1:3 completely (a few minutes).  Fix in a *hardening* fixer, wash
and dry.  If this doesn't give you enough intensification, you can repeat
the process.

Jay Ts
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: hchong@netcom.com (Hoi Chong)
Subject: Re: Nikon Photo School: is it good?
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 92 21:31:45 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

From article <wefBU=C00WBL42orBE@andrew.cmu.edu>, by Luis Abdon Cifuentes <lc0v+@andrew.cmu.edu>:
> Hello netters, 
> 
>  I just received a brochure about the Nikon Photo School. It will be in
> town this weekend, so I wanted to know if somebody has attended it and
> has  comments about it. Being a graduate student, I have very good uses
> for $75, so I want to know if the thing is worth it before trying it.

If nothing else, all the snobbish F4s'ers (your truly included) can get
togather and compare their cameras and say bad things about Canon.
(of course, we can also thump our noses at the 8008s'ers and F3'ers...)

Feeling a bit cocky today...