HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: akc@research.att.com (abhijit kumar choudhury)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: advice needed on projectors
Date: 14 Aug 92 16:27:18 GMT
Distribution: rec.photo
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories


I'm in the market for a reasonably good yet inexpensive projector.
The Kodak 4600 seems to coem closest to what I woul like. However, it
seems there are a number of projectors like Reflecta, Leica etc. which
have got good reviews in Popular Photography etc. and cost much less.
Is there any distinct advantage in sticking to Kodak ? From what I
have seen of the Kodak carousel projectors - they are bulky, noisy and
in general not way above the competition !!!

So, could someone tell me whether it's still make sense to buy Kodak ?
Are gravity-feed carousel projectors much better in performance than
straight tray projectors like Reflecta ?

Also, if one does decide to go with a Kodak carousel, does it
make sense to go for a Vario-Schneider lens instead of the standard
Kodak lens ?

I'd appreciate it if you send your responses by email. Thanks !

abhijit choudhury

--
----------------------------------
Abhijit  K. Choudhury			Tel. # : (908) 582 5440 
Room No. 3C-440A			Fax. # : (908) 582 5809
AT&T Bell Laboratories			
600 Mountain Avenue			email : akc@allegra.att.com
Murray Hill  NJ 07974

----------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Photography in mountains.
From: Stafford@Vax2.Winona.MSUS.EDU (Stafford)
Date: 17 Aug 92 16:14:07 -0600
Followup-To: rec.photo
Distribution: world
Organization: msus

In article <f8zS02Y=1dHS01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com>, jyk50@quts.ccc.amdahl.com
(  242  J Kretschmann III) wrote:
> 
> In article <1992Aug11.194826.2515@cbnewsm.cb.att.com> ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins) writes:
> >. If
> >want to use a "UV" (1A, skylight) filter (other than to "protect" a lens). If
> >things still look too blue then an 81A would warm things up even more.
> >
> Is the 1A/Skylight filter the same as a Haze filter?  Do they give the
> same effect (removing blue haze/UV)?

	...btw -- watch your exposures up there.  With the absence of
the normal haze, color will be beautifully saturated.  Bracket.
And do yourself a favor, shoot some black and white with
_no_ filters whatsoever.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson)
Subject: Re: F4s, SB-24, what gives?
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 03:59:16 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories

In article <37923@unix.SRI.COM> madson@unix.SRI.COM (Carl Madson) writes:
>In article <1992Aug17.152351.28933@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih) writes:
>>
>>
>>Also, the TTL flash sensor is (probably) centre-weighted.  (Could someone
>>please confirm this?)  That means the camera only cares about the flash
>>exposure of the middle of the frame.  So, if your subject is off to the
>>side, it will not reflect enough light to the centre-weighted sensor to
>>cause a flash quench.
>
>That's a safe guess. The only info I've heard was from a Nikon Tech Rep, 
>who said that although the actual pattern was proprietary (? what a crock of
>BS--nice to know what your tools do), it was roughly keyhole-shaped, with the
>bottom of the keyhole at the bottom of the (horizontal) frame. Which, of 
>course, makes you wonder how differently it handles vertical shots.
>...
[suggestion of moving a white circle around on black background and
measuring flash output]
>You would probably want to shoot
>B&W film as you test, to verify the circle's position and to give the TTL OTF
>sensor something to bounce off of. (Assuming B&W is cheaper for you; it might
>not be.) Or you could just use a dummy roll as long as you were careful about
>recording where the circle was for each meter reading. (Get a black velvet
>cloth and a white circle with Velcro on the back and see  if that does the
>job.)
>...
>(I'll see if Goldberg ever mentions testing sensor patterns, esp. flash...)
>		--Carl Madson, SRI International, Menlo Park, CA

I don't know about the F4, or 8008s, but in the 8008(non-s), the flash
sensor is a little doodad in the floor of the mirror box.  It appears
to have maybe a couple of "blinders" to restrict the light to a
horizontal strip.  There does not appear to be a lens in it at all.
(There is film in my 8008 right now, so this is from memory.)  Anyway,
I'd guess from this construction that it is just a horizontal oval.

Also, if you did do the white target thing, I'd suggest putting a
piece of white paper in the film plane so you could make it quench
with a smaller target.  Also set a high ISO on the body. Measure flash
output with a flash meter.  Senstivity at the target point is
inversely proportional to flash output.  (I don't have a flash meter,
or I'd do it myself.)

  -- David Jacobson

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson)
Subject: Re: Nikon One-Touch questions
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 20:42:39 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories

In article <9208191802.AA08145@micro> chuang@micro (Michael Chuang) writes:
>I found a Nikon One-Touch on sale for $5 last night.  The camera looks
>perfect and appears to meter, but the rewind does not work.  

I have one of these and love it.  I use it in any circumstance where
my 8008 + SB24 is too big to carry around.  Sorry, but I don't know
anything about the internals.

>It seems like a nice little pocket camera.  Has a 35mm f/2.8 lens
>and takes two AA cells rather than lithiums.  The viewfinder shows
>little mountain, people, and torso icons to indicate the focusing
>distance.  This leads me to suspect that it's a singel-digit AF zone
>system.  

The really neat thing about this camera is that it has a needle in the
viewfinder that shows the focusing distance (in symbols).  With this
camera, if you pay attention, you never have to worry about the AF
focusing on the back wall and the subject being out of focus.  Just
look at the distance scale and see if the distance is reasonable.

I don't remember the number of focus zones, but 14 comes to mind.
That's not a lot, but not bad either.  

Here are a few minor complaints I have with it.

1.  Long delay between pressing shutter release and actual exposure.
2.  It is happy with longer exposures than I am.  In fact, in a
brightly lit kitchen with some sun filtering in, it won't turn on the
flash. 
3.  Flash won't work on NiCd batteries.  They have to be alkaline.

This model has a pop-up flash.  You can hold it down if you don't want
flash, or you can cover the front of the camera with your hand and
press the shutter release half way to force it to pop up so you can
get fill flash in daylight.

It runs forever on one set of AAs.  I still don't know why "they"
foisted lithiums on us when this camera works so well.

The lens is pretty good.  I  sometimes cannot tell just looking at a 4x6
print whether it was taken with this camera or my 8008.  (HP People in
Palo Alto, look near pillar L8 in Bldg 1U to see a bunch of pictures
taken with this camera.)

  -- David Jacobson
From: chuang@micro (Michael Chuang)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Nikon One-Touch questions
Date: 19 Aug 92 18:02:44 GMT
Article-I.D.: micro.9208191802.AA08145

I found a Nikon One-Touch on sale for $5 last night.  The camera looks
perfect and appears to meter, but the rewind does not work.  The
most obvious way of dealing with the problem is to manually rewind in
the dark, but I was wondering if anyone has had this camera apart
before.  It seems as though the contact under the rewind button is
faulty, since it responds not at all when this button is depressed.
This may be a reasonably easy fix, whereas if the rewind motor is
fried, then I'll just live with it.

It seems like a nice little pocket camera.  Has a 35mm f/2.8 lens
and takes two AA cells rather than lithiums.  The viewfinder shows
little mountain, people, and torso icons to indicate the focusing
distance.  This leads me to suspect that it's a singel-digit AF zone
system.  There are four DX contacts, so it looks like it accepts
50-3200 on full stops (rounded down) only.  Does anyone out there
have the facts, as opposed to these wild guesses, on this camera ?
Good or bad things to say about it in general ?  I even found an
accessory for mounting 46 mm filters in the store's junk bin for
fifty cents.  This doesn't nearly match the coup of finding an
SX70 for $5, but I'm pretty pleased with this little camera even as
it is.  (Okay, so I'm easily amused :)

thanks,
Mike
chuang@micro.ll.mit.edu
chuang@nmr-a.mgh.harvard.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jake@bony1.bony.com (Jake Livni)
Subject: Re: Cambridge.
Organization: The Department of Redundancy Department
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 92 21:30:31 GMT

In article <1992Aug17.183208.9259@cabezon.uucp> joee@cabezon.uucp (Joe Eckardt) writes:

>the last one we had so we can't allow an exchange."  After much arguing
>(long distance, at her expense) they agreed that they would allow her
>to return it but she would have to pay the return postage, they wouldn't
>refund their $20 shipping charge, and they charge a 25% restocking charge
>to boot!  And she couldn't return the flash or camera case since there
>wasn't anything wrong with them!  In the end she ended up keeping it
>and I ended up tearing it apart, scavenging a replacement exposure
>board (for another $10), and fixing it for her.

Actually, it's a good thing that you fixed it for your friend so 
that it didn't get returned.  Otherwise, they would've sold it to 
the next person, who would've returned minus the $20 and 25%
restocking fee until the next peson would buy it and return it 
minus ...

It's starting to sound like a good business.

(It reminds me of this guy who used to lose umbrellas often.  He
decided to write his name and address on his latest umbella together
with a message: "If you find this umbrella, please do NOT return it.
Instead, just send me $5 in the mail."  Sure enough, 2 weeks later,
he lost it.  A week later, he received $5 in the mail.  2 weeks after
that, he found another $5 in the mail.  2 weeks after that...)

-- 
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.
From: marc@minster.york.ac.uk
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Olympus Infinity (looks like an AF-1)
Date: 13 Aug 92 14:11:25 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of York, England


I have just bought a Olympus Infinity from a second-hand shop , there
were no instructions..but thats no hassle I can use it ok !. What I need
to know are 
1.  What speed films can the DX coding recognise
2.  Dont tell me you cant switch the damn flash off !
3.  A rough idea of shutter speed and aperture range would be
interesting.

	thanks for your help.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: sala8864@hgc.edu (gustavo salas)
Subject: Re: Cambridge.
Organization: The Hartford Graduate Center
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 16:35:59 GMT

In article <1992Aug13.211408.24283@en.ecn.purdue.edu> cmcdowel@en.ecn.purdue.edu (Charles E. McDowell) writes:
>I am posting this message as a warning to anyone who is considering ordering
>any photo supplies through a place called Cambridge Camera in New York.  
>Without going into detail, these guys are extreme sleazballs.  Their Ads appear
>in all the major photo mags, and their prices look good, but don't be fooled.
>As soon as they got my credit card number, they started treating me like
>shit.  My order is not arriving anywhere near the time they promised, and I
>can't even get them to tell me whether it's been sent out or not for sure.
>Stay clear of Cambridge Camera!   (This is my way of getting a little revenge,
>if I can get them to lose some sales through this newsgroup!)
>
>
>[ Charles McDowell                   Purdue University - Lafayette, Indiana ]
>[ cmcdowel@ecn.purdue.edu            School of Electrical Engineering       ]


Strange, I have had very similar experience with them. Yes, you are right,
Charles, they are sleazballs. In general, we should be causious when the
advertised price is ridiculously low. There must be something fishy....
From: jimc@tau-ceti.isc-br.com (Jim Cathey)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Nuclear Powered ANTI STATIC BRUSHES (was Re: View finder cleaning)
Date: 20 Aug 92 04:20:02 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: ISC - Bunker Ramo, Spokane, WA

In article <1992Aug19.145638.27228@pmafire.inel.gov> geoff@pmafire.inel.gov (Geoff Allen) writes:
>kjm@cnmss.tredydev.unisys.com (Ken J. McFadden) writes:
>>brushes from Adorama.  I was suprised to see all the radiation warnings, etc.
>>You can't throw it out.  You have to return the radioactive piece of the
>>brush to the company for recycling.  Don't remove the protective grill,
>>because touching the radioactive material isn't good for you. ...
>
>Just like the smoke detector in your house.  (You do have a smoke
>detector, don't you?)

Just like Coleman lantern mantles.  If you always wondered how come they
glow so brightly, now you know!  :-) <<for the humor impaired>>  I think
they're silk coated with Thorium oxide.  I stuffed one into my gamma
counter (doesn't everybody have one?), and it read nicely.

-- 
+----------------+
! II      CCCCCC !  Jim Cathey
! II  SSSSCC     !  ISC-Bunker Ramo
! II      CC     !  TAF-C8;  Spokane, WA  99220
! IISSSS  CC     !  UUCP: uunet!isc-br!jimc (jimc@isc-br.isc-br.com)
! II      CCCCCC !  (509) 927-5757
+----------------+
			"PC's --- the junk bonds of the computer industry"
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: REPOST: AF Camera feature list
From: glporter@zeus.calpoly.edu (Glen Porter)
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 17:03:29 GMT
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo

In article <1992Aug20.162041.5311@walter.bellcore.com> jchen@flash.UUCP (Jason Chen) writes:
>One feature I wish the feature list has is the "metered manual" feature.
>My previous Pentax Super Program would tell me how many stops I was off
>in manual mode, while my current 630 doesn't provide any information other
>than the settings I choose. 
>
>I found "metered manual" to be a great convenience.
>
>C. Jason Chen 
>jchen@flash.bellcore.com

Jason, to my knowledge, all of the AF Interchangable lense 35 mm cameras have
"metered manual".  However "metered manual" in itself does not infer the 
presence of an indicator as to how far from exposure you are - I admit, that is
a nice feature.

I don't believe it is major enough to add to the feature list .

BTW, I am the poster of the Feature list (AF 35mm, Interchangable-lense ONLY)

take care, and please EVERYONE, If you want to make an UPDATE to the list,
then please e-mail me directly.  I scan VERY FAST through this newsgroup, and
am very liable to miss your post.

thank you for your input.

-glen 


glporter@hebe.calpoly.edu                  (Glen Porter)     *
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo     *
Network Administration - Technician        (805)756-1295     *
Electronic Engineering and Physics                  Gal 2:16 *
                                                                         / |
 <><                       o                                           /   |
                         o  o                                /-------/     |--
        <><             o  o o                             / 
<><                   o                                 /     O    \ \ 
   <><    <><       o    ______          ______        <            | | \
                  o _  _(_||___)________/___             v v v v\   | |  |
	 <><      O(_)(       o  ______/    \                    |  | | /
    <><             ^ `/------o-'            \           v v v v/  / /
               D|_|___/                                    \__________________
 
The Food Chain at work . . . . . .  Stay behind your bubbles  . .
From: mtoms@ems.cdc.com (Mark Toms)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Multiple exposure calculations - ATTN: David Jacobson
Date: 20 Aug 92 19:46:04 GMT
Reply-To: mtoms@ems.cdc.com
Distribution: na
Organization: Empros Systems International, a division of CDC

David,

  I saw your posting on calculating the second exposure f stop
on rec.photo and was interested in constructing a chart like the one
below.  I tried email, but was unsuccessful.  People might want to 
have a chart like this handy some times:



1st exposure      2nd exposure should
under by          be under by
---------------------------------------
              |
              |
              |
              |
              |
              |
---------------------------------------
All units in f stops


Alternatively, and preferably to me, I would like to show
the values expressed in EV (exposure value).

I wasn't sure how to do the lg(1-2^(-y)), where lg is base 2,
calculation.  I was planning on using 1-2-3 in order to simplify
my work.

Can you provide one or two example entries for my table?  Also,
is it possible to generalize your solution to handle 3, 4, 5, exposures?
Granted, more than 2 gets a little carried away, but why not
provide the data and let the individual make that decision.

Thanks,
Mark

--
==========================================================================
J. Mark Toms                                email: mtoms@ems.cdc.com
Baltimore Gas & Electric, Company
C/O Empros Systems International            Phone: (612) 553-4423
2300 Berkshire Lane North                     FAX: (612) 553-4018
Plymouth, Minnesota  55441-3694 USA      Mailstop: PLY060
==========================================================================
From: lihan@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Bruce G. Bostwick)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Ricoh KR-10 Super questions
Date: 12 Aug 92 17:38:55 GMT
Reply-To: lihan@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Bruce G. Bostwick)
Distribution: usa
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX
Originator: lihan@doc.cc.utexas.edu

OK, I have one for y'all.  I have a Ricoh KR-10 Super from ages ago --
well used and quite roughly treated but never broken -- that I need to
recalibrate some things on.

First of all, my flash sync is about 40-50 ms late, causing the bottom
1/4 frame or so to be clipped at sync speed which is 1/125. (OK, OK,
yes, I have a rather fast shutter! ;-)  Does anyone out there happen
to know how to adjust this sync so I can use sync speed for the flash?
It happens to be much more convenient due to the way the camera and
dedicated flash interact.

Second, what is the typical method used for checking shutter
calibration and how is it adjusted if it's off?

Background:  I am _intimately_ familiar with the internal workings of
the camera, having had to reconnect various and sundry tiny springs
after the body was bumped rather hard by accident one day.  The whole
top of the chassis is covered with an orange flexible-laminated
printed circuit and there are two TINY pots in the section right over
the viewfinder prism.  I have no manuals of any kind, so I have no
idea what these pots do and am a little hesitant to go fooling with
them until I do know.  (I also need to someday find a supply of the
microscopic metric screws this thing is put together with!)

If anyone knows, or can find manuals which tell, email me.  If I get
-- 
<BGB>
lihan@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu        /     "I can't complain,
(really Bruce Bostwick)        /   but sometimes I still do"
from the great state of TEXAS /         --Joe Walsh--
From: ehr@ecsvax.uncecs.edu (Ernest H. Robl)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Multiple SB-24 setups, your experiences
Summary: Quality evaluation
Date: 21 Aug 92 17:51:16 GMT
Organization: UNC Educational Computing Service

> >In article <1992Aug20.221613.2023@indetech.com>, alix@indetech.com (Alexandria North) writes:
> >> 
> >What about low power studio lights like the Novatron 240WS kit?
> >This kit is advertised by mail order places in the $425-$525 range,
> >with the higher prices even including the dedicated case.  %This is
> >about what you would pay for two SB-24 units.
> 
> I had thought about that, too, and I meant to add a note asking if 
> anyone had experiences with these kinds of kits. I was wondering about 
> the quality of the materials (not that I doubt it, per se). What I'm 
> thinking is that if I bought one of these kits, would it be worthwhile 
> for me to use the same equipment (umbrellas, barn doors, etc.) when I 
> later purchased an individual, more powerful studio flash, or would 
> I for some reason need to get larger or sturdier versions of the 
> paraphenelia?
> 
> Also, do you know anything about the Novatron competitors -- i.e., did 
> you have a reason you chose Novatron over the other manufacturers that 
> offer similar kits?
> 
> I think that, yes, a kit like this is definitely an alternative I'd 
> like to explore. Anyone elses comments on these kits are appreciated 
> (by me if no one else :-) ).
> 
> Alexandria
> 


Following up on my earlier comments:  The quality of the equipment
is quite good.  The light stands are a bit on the lightweight side,
and, since I already had plenty of those (Bogen), I sold the ones
that came with the Novatron kit.

The heads are rated at 500WS and will work with other Novatron power
packs, as long as the pack doesn't supply more than 500ws to any
single head.  In fact, I'm considering adding a 500 WS pack, which
then would let me send 500 to one head and use the other head off
the other pack at 240.

Head accessories for Novatron equipment is interchangable among
all Novatron heads, as far as I know.  Umbrellas and similar
reflectors are interchangable among equipment from most manufacturers.

The umbrellas in the kit are somewhat small.  I replaced these with
larger ones.

Hope this helps. -- Ernest

-- 

"My other computer is a Nikon N8008." -- Ernest H. Robl
Ernest H. Robl (ehr@ecsvax)  Durham, NC, USA   +1  919   286-3845
                                         FAX:  +1  919   286-1696
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi)
Subject: Re: Photography in low light?
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 16:20:23 GMT

In article <1992Aug19.150722.1@acad3.alaska.edu>, fsjfz@acad3.alaska.edu writes:
...
> it's been a while since i've looked at the insert that comes with P3200, but
> i believe that processing instructions from Kodak are included up to EI12500
> (i could well be mistaken here).  In any case, exposure wouldn't really be
> a problem to extrapolate from a more normal film speed such as 6400.  
> The development times would be the hard part to work out, but i'll bet that
> Kodak has all ready done that for us. (Any spies out there who regularly use
> this stuff at super-high speeds?)
> 
N need, its in the TMAX data sheet up to 64K. Don't forget that Murphy dictates
that in 'no-light' situations, all the illumination will come from one point,
hence high contrast to start with, then we push hell out of the film...

~Paul

Newsgroups: rec.photo