HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rspeirs@javelin.sim.es.com (Ron Speirs)
Subject: Re: color change w/exposure change: Why?
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Corp.
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 17:30:43 GMT

In article <1992Dec10.155126.1@pearl.tufts.edu> rsmith@pearl.tufts.edu writes:
>I've got a question about some photos I recently took.  It was a foggy night
>in Cambridge, and I went out to take some long-exposure shots in the fog.
>I used Eastman 5296 (this is an ISO 400 color print film, process ECN-2),
>fairly wide aperature (f 3.5 or 4) and exposures bracketed from 1/2 sec to
>16 seconds (on a tripod, of course).  I got the prints back and, as expected,
>the shorter exposures are underexposed, with a greenish-yellow sickly cast
>to the light.  The longer exposures are brighter, of course, but now the light
>(and especially the sky) has a reddish-orange cast to it.  Why should a change
>in exposure alter the color balance like that?  I'm not too good at judging
>color from the negatives, so I can't even be sure it's the film; it could
>be the print-making.  Any ideas out there?
>
The color differences in your prints are most certainly the result of the
way the prints were made.  Just for information, Eastman 5296 is a tungsten-
balanced motion picture film, rated EI 500 with Tungsten (3200 K) lights,
or rated EI 320 with a #85 filter.  I would presume that the lighting in 
your picture was a mix of tungsten, mercury vapor, sodium vapor, fluorescent
and who-knows-what.  Given that mix of film and lighting, it is hard to say
what a "correct" color balance is.  I would also presume that you got your
film and processing are from one of the MP-film labs (Seattle FW, RGP, Dale,
Signature, etc).  If so, communicating with them and getting prints redone by
long distance is frustrating.  These type films require a different 
enlarger color balance than the typical consumer films, and so a local lab
will probably have a difficult time with them.

My suggesting would be to find a friend with a color darkroom.  Plan on
spending an evening and play with the color balance until you get what you
want.  If you can find a cooperative local lab that will work with you, you
may be able to get good prints that way.

PS:  I'm not trying to denigrate the motion-picture films.  I've used them
successfully in certain applications.  However, you will have more success
if you do the entire job yourself:  film processing and printing.  Otherwise,
you would be better to stay with the C-41 films.

Ron Speirs, Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp., Salt Lake City, Utah

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: markt@cup.hp.com (Mark Thompson)
Subject: Re: Polorid/Land cameras
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 16:21:01 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1scd1 PL4

>But anyway, does B&W Polaroid film anymore need a wipe with a "hardening
>substance" as described in my camera's manual?

No.  You can buy either the 105C or 107C coaterless types.  I don't know about
the 6 (667 668 etc) series of films, but i would assume that they are 
coaterless also.

Mark
From: cj531@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ali Momeni)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Sigma 21-35AF or Tokin 20-35AF???
Date: 19 Dec 1992 05:27:10 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


Hi all,
	I'm trying to decide between the two lenses (Sigma 21-35 AF, and
Tokina 20-35 AF.)  The lowest prices I've found for the two are similar.
I have expirience with Sigma (35-80 AF and 75-300 AF,) and so far I'm happy.
I have an EOS 630, by the way.

	Any Suggestions?

thanks.  ali.     momeni@vu-vlsi.ee.vill.edu
Organization: Arizona State University
Date: Tuesday, 15 Dec 1992 12:39:51 MST
From: <KAGHV@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject:    Enlarger's for Color?

I would like to break into color printing.  I have the ingredients for a basic
b&w darkroom but my enlarger cannot be fitted with a color head.  Any
suggestions for 'low budget' color enlarger's and related equipment would be
appreciated.  Are those Daylab contraptions any good?  Thanks for any help.
From: jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Scratch on Front Element
Date: 15 Dec 92 00:31:43 GMT
Organization: Metran Technology, Tampa, Florida

mcovingt@aisun3.ai.uga.edu (Michael Covington) writes:
: In article <1992Dec14.181759.24827@cs.UAlberta.CA> rodney@cs.UAlberta.CA (Rodney Gitzel) writes:
: >
: >What effect will a small scratch on the front
: > element have on a lens?  The lens in question
: > is a Canon FD 135 f2 with a 72mm filter size,
: > and the scratch is about 1mm, right near the 
: > centre.
: 
: Apart from reducing the resale value of your lens, it will have very
: little effect.

That is true, assuming that "1mm" refers to the length, rather than
the width :-) :-)

Generally, the most harm scratches will do is increase flare.  One scratch
makes very little difference.  They also reduce the light transmission (in
the focussed part of the image, that is) and may show up as dark marks in
out of focus blurs of small light sources (but only if they are very big).

-- 
Jay Ts
uucp mail: uunet!myrddin!tscs!metran!jay
phone: (813) 979-9169
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih)
Subject: Re: Canon EF28-70/f3.5-? II vs. EF28-105/f3.5-? USM
Date: 21 Dec 92 02:31:30 GMT

In <1992Dec20.230735.16650@walter.bellcore.com> hsong@ardour.bellcore.com (G. Hugh Song) writes:

>It is pretty well-known that EF28-70mm/f3.5-4.5 II is an excellent 
>piece of glass.   I have also been told all the good things about the new
>EF28-105mm/f3.5-? USM.   Several questions for you:

>1. Is the front element of EF28-70mm/f3.5-4.5 II nonrotating?
>2. Just from a glance, it looks like that it can 
>   accommodate a filter with no problem.  Is there any problem with filters?
>3. Is it worth $260.00?

Here is the entry from the Canon EOS FAQ which should answer most of
your questions:

EF 28-70/3.5-4.5 II:
     This lens boasts an aspherical element to improve its performance when
     shooting wide open.  It is regarded as being one of the best lenses in
     its focal length and slightly better than the 28-80/3.5-5.6  USM  that
     replaces  it.  The factors against this lens are: a) the front element
     rotates, b) the filter size is 52mm rather than the  58mm  that  Canon
     seems to now favour.

The FAQ does not mention the EF 28-105 because, as you say, there aren't
any lens tests out on it yet.

You can ftp the FAQ from: moink.nmsu.edu.

(To whomever uploaded the file: Please include the copyright notice and
credits next time!!!)

>I know that it had been around $175.00, and that it was discontinued.  
>I found a store which has one.  But their price is just too high.  
>And the store is not a reputable one, either.   Additional $120 will let
>me buy the new EF28-105mm/f3.5-? USM.  However, there has been no
>lens test for this yet by lens testers in the net or in the magazine 
>publishing houses.
>So the final question is:

>4. Which is the better buy between the two?

It all depends.  (Doesn't it always.)

1. The 28-105 has a wider range, and is thus more convenient.
2. The filter threads are 58 mm, so if you buy another lens with the 58mm
   filter size, like the 70-210 USM or 100-300 USM, you only need one set
   of filters.
3. The front element doesn't rotate and retract.
4. It's USM.  Allows manual adjustment after focus without flipping a switch.

As for optical quality, it's rumoured to be quite good.  For most people,
other factors will affect the final quality of your shots more than the
quality of the glass (camera shake, etc.).

From the sounds of things you want to do some shooting with filters.
That being the case, you should probably go with the 28-105.

>Thanks a lot.

No problem.

>	Hugh

ACS
-- 
 ___ ___ ___ ______________________________________________________________
|   |   | __|      Democracy is not a way of getting better solutions.     |
| - | --|__ |           It's just a way to spread the blame.               |
|_|_|___|___|______________________________________________________________|
Alvin_C._Shih____________________acs@csri.utoronto.ca______________________|
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: phr@telebit.com (Paul Rubin)
Subject: Re: Outgrowing your gear 
Organization: Telebit Corporation; Sunnyvale, CA, USA
	<1992Dec10.062901.24048@colorado.edu>
	<1992Dec16.083419.3494@netcom.com> <PD.92Dec17103050@horus.sics.se>
Date: 17 Dec 92 21:53:54

   BTW: Nikon isn't the only manufacturer with backwards compatibility in
   the lens mount (and not complete compatibility either). Pentax has
   done it too, and better, with their K-mount.

Really.  Tell me how to put a 1960-vintage screw-mount Pentax
lens on a K-mount body.  Tell me how to get full-aperture metering
while you're at it.
From: mullins@media.mit.edu (Atty Mullins)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Leica book recommendations
Date: 16 Dec 92 18:38:01 GMT
Organization: M.I.T. Media Laboratory


Would any of you Leica aficionados recommend a good book on Leica
cameras ? I recently traded in my Nikon equipment (no flames, please)
for a Leica outfit and I'm interested in learning more about their
history and development.

Thanks, Atty
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: diamond@jit533.jit.dec.com (Norman Diamond)
Subject: Re: Dumb Photographers ... NOT!
Reply-To: diamond@jit.dec.com (Norman Diamond)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation Japan , Tokyo
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 04:25:12 GMT

Just for comparison, it bears pointing out what happens in Japan.
The Russian national Bolshoi Circus is visiting Tokyo.  Announcements
came over the loudspeaker, saying that it is forbidden to use flash
or video lights.  And the audience obeyed!  This is a country where
it isn't always legal to tell the truth, but people are sure obedient.
--
Norman Diamond       diamond@jit081.enet.dec.com
If this were the company's opinion, I wouldn't be allowed to post it.
"It's been a lovely recession."
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: kienwen@zoo.Princeton.EDU (Kien Wen Sun)
Subject: telephoto lens for sale
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Distribution: nj
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 19:43:27 GMT


I have one telephoto lens forsale:

Sigma 400mm/f5.6 APO, new in the box with warranty card

I don't think I will have any chance to use this lens(it's a gift)
I will sell it for $390 
I forgot to mention it is for Canon EOS mount.Anyone interest please
e-mail me.(ps. I pay the shipping)
From: jay@intermec.com (Jay Schlegel x6878)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Taking pictures in snow!!
Date: 14 Dec 92 16:43:39 GMT
Reply-To: jay@intermec.com (Jay Schlegel x6878)
Organization: Intermec Corporation, Everett WA


In article <PD.92Dec7022146@horus.sics.se> pd@sics.se (Per Danielsson) writes:
>In article <1992Dec3.231932.25759@infonode.ingr.com> sivesh@rebels.b23b.ingr.com (sivesh pradhaan) writes:
>
>>I would like to be able to take the camera with me while I am skiing!! But I am
>>a novice which means I'll be falling a lot. So is there something that'll keep
>>the camera attached closely to my body?
>
>When skiing I use a Tamrac model 517 bag with a special strap (I can't
>remember the model number) which attaches in place of the regular
>shoulder strap and lets you carry the bag securely on your chest.
>
>Practice falling a lot so you know how to protect the bag on your
>chest! :-)
>--
>Per Danielsson				pd@sics.se
>Swedish Institute of Computer Science, PO Box 1263, S-164 28 KISTA, SWEDEN


  I have a Tamrac Bag (don't recall the number and it's not marked on the bag)
  that has a tuck-away belt allowing it to be used as a fanny-pack.
  
  While CC-skiing (and lot's of other times) I wear it as a fanny pack but with
  the bag worn in front on the belly.   As it's most natural to fall to the side
  or back (given some degree of control, this is about as safe a place for the
  camera gear *and* my body as is possible.  It also makes the gear readily
  available for use.  I would think that carrying a bag at chest level would be
  unconfortable and make one (and one's camera) more prone to injury. 
  
  Unfortunately I've also taken to carrying the Bogen slung over my shoulder
  and the 500 in my backpack (I hate missed opportunities even more than the
  weight of carrying that stuff).  :-)

Merry Christmas,
-- 
-*jay  Jay Schlegel --> Intermec Corp., Everett Wa.
						     fluke!
	jay@intermec.com      OR  -->	    uunet!pilchuck!intermec!jay
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au
Subject: Re: 2475 != 2415; was: Re: grain
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 22:52:24 GMT

In article <1992Dec13.185149.3417@athena.cs.uga.edu>, mcovingt@aisun3.ai.uga.edu (Michael Covington) writes:
> In article <1992Dec14.005848.1@cc.curtin.edu.au> zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au writes:
>>In article <1992Dec13.023018.18617@athena.cs.uga.edu>, mcovingt@aisun3.ai.uga.edu (Michael Covington) writes:
>>> In article <1992Dec13.043828.1@cc.curtin.edu.au> zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au writes:
>>>>Ah, an easy one!! Kodak Recording 2475. Double the grain, or your money back.
>>> My understanding is that that film was discontinued in the USA something
>>the fridge. Maybe its become a SO in its twilite years... :-)
> Are you sure that wasn't Technical Pan Film 2415?  
Quite sure. I have 4-5 rolls of TP in my fridge, and will get 150' soon. If it
was HSR, I'm sure being cheated out of lots of grain...
The oither point, is that oz probably goes through as much in a year as US
uses in a day. We could still be running out the last 'days' worth.

~Paul

Newsgroups: rec.photo,misc.consumers
From: joe@montebello.soest.hawaii.edu (Joe Dellinger)
Subject: Re: Wanted: Experiences with Mail Order Film Processors
Reply-To: joe@montebello.soest.hawaii.edu
Organization: School of Ocean and Earth Science Technology
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 09:59:53 GMT

In article <1992Dec8.044727.8489@walter.bellcore.com>, jchen@wind.bellcore.com (Jason Chen) writes:
|> I *consistently* got good results from Skrudland (512-444-0958). Consistency
|> is the key word.

With a name like "skrud land" they have to be good! :-)

	I'd be particularly interested to hear about mail-order developing
places that:

1) Have reasonably good and consistent quality

2) Do slides

3) Send back a new roll of film with the developed result.

	Alternatively, if #3 is not possible with #1 and #2, where is a
good source of mail-order slide film?

[I had been using a place called "Film Shop" in Kansas City. They will
send you back a replacement roll if you send them a coupon --- but I've
finally exausted the cut-rate cache of coupons I bought back in 1983.]

     /\    /\    /\/\/\/\/\/\/\.-.-.-.-.......___________
    /  \  /  \  /Hawaii Institute of Geophysics, Honolulu\/\/\.-.-....__
___/    \/    \/Joe Dellinger, Internet: joe@montebello.soest.hawaii.edu\/\.-.__
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: feldman@hal9k.cxo.dec.com (james feldman)
Subject: Re: Dumb Photographers
Reply-To: feldman@hal9k.cxo.dec.com (james feldman)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 23:02:25 GMT

Place: Colorado Springs Zoo, bird section.  Photographer (with very expensive
nikon setup, manditory photo vest and military style khakis) decides all those
signs and fences that warn you NOT to get close to the eagle (Bald and BIG)
don't mean him.  He wants to get head shot of eagle, but no bars.  He climbs
over two fences, and sticks head and arm holding camera right against cage with
2-3" spaces between bars.  I kept waiting for blood and justice, but the eagle
decided not to give us a show.
--
Jim Feldman                         || This space for lease, contact your
Digital Equipment Corp              || Digital Sales Rep.
CSC/Colorado Springs                || 

My opinions are my own and in no way reflect Digital's POV (unless they're
charging somebody for me to give them).
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au
Subject: Re: Picture matting/framing
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 20:21:12 GMT

In article <2300082@hpgrla.gr.hp.com>, peterd@hpgrla.gr.hp.com (Peter Davidoff) writes:
> 
> Mounting of Photos
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> There is a book called "Matting & Hinging of Works of Art on Paper" 
> describing the Library of Congress methods of mounting.  It is 
> published by the National Preservation Program.  $10.  Available
> from University Products, 1-800-628-1912.
> 
Peter, could you please post their address and non-800 phone nuimber?

> I use their Mulberry Japanese Hinging Paper and Wheat Starch for
> mounting works as big as 11x14 -- Pladium and Carbon prints made
> on 140# d'Arches.
> 

Could you also mail to me the second of the Carbro articles you posted a year
or so ago? The net ate most of it!!

TNX, ~Paul


Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: slime@mits.mdata.fi (Sam Laur)
Subject: Re: Polorid/Land cameras
Organization: Microdata Oy, Helsinki, Finland
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 05:51:10 GMT

In article <Bz9u7u.44o@cup.hp.com> markt@cup.hp.com (Mark Thompson) writes:
>got at the flea market.  It turns out that what he found was a old polorid
>195/220/250/420 vintage camera.  I'm not sure which one he got, but he was

How old are they? I have a Polaroid Land 104 camera, and I have had
a hard time finding a battery for it (finally found it but it cost a lot :( )
and then I've not found color film for it yet. In theory, I could
shoot 4x5 sheet film with it, but in practice it would be awkward -
I'd have to go to the dark room after every shot to unload/load the camera.

--
/*    Sam Laur     slime@mits.mdata.fi     */
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: kram@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (kameswar.r.ati)
Subject: Canon 10s Vs Nikon N90, Which one?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 03:19:06 GMT

Hi folks

I currently own a Minolta X700 and about ready to upgrade to one of the
fancier niftier cameras. I am impressed with the Canon 10s and
in fact helped  my brother and a friend in England buy one
each. BTW, both were ordered from B&H, hassle free.

For myself, I have narrowed down my choice to the Canon
10s and the Nikon N90. However I cannot reconcile to the
2 to 1  price difference in the 10s and a N90. For example

Canon 10s  - Body + 28-105USM lens =  $570-590
Nikon N90  - Body + 28-105  lens   =  $1100

I do take a lot of pictures of a variety of subjects, and forsee
expanding my horizon into photography semi seriously. Obviously
I would like to buy the 10s because it is so much affordable
but then I do not mind spending the extra bucks if the N90 is
clearly superior in picture quality, len quality, overall
construction etc. Also am I comparing apples to oranges? 

Can any one knowledgeable steer me one way or the other.
Thank you very much.

Raja ati
raja@homxb.att.com

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: pd@sics.se (Per Danielsson)
Subject: Re: was going to get 8008s but EOS 10s recommended
Organization: Swedish Institute of Computer Science, Kista
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 02:03:33 GMT

In article <1992Dec11.134623.13231@progress.com> matth@progress.COM (Matthew J. Harper) writes:

>  One other thing to consider is whether or not you are willing to
>purchase used lenses.  There are a hell of a lot more used Nikon lenses
>available than Canon lenses 'cause Cannon did everyone that favor a few years
>back and changed the mount.  If you're patient and willing to wait you can get
>deals like the 35-135 AF 4.5 for $250 like I did.  :-)

Since Canon and Nikon started making AF lenses at about the same time,
I don't see how the fact that Canon changed from FD mount to EF mount
could have any effect on the number of used AF lenses around for
sale.
The only reason for there being more used Nikon AF lenses around
would be the fact that more have been manufactured and sold.
--
Per Danielsson				pd@sics.se
Swedish Institute of Computer Science, PO Box 1263, S-164 28 KISTA, SWEDEN
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: robert@sys.sweden.dg.com (Robert Claeson)
Subject: Re: Bayonet mount strength of Canon EOS10s and the rest
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 09:51:29 GMT
Organization: Data General AB, Akalla, Sweden
Keywords: Nikon

Sorry, I couldn't resist...

In article <92Dec16.001139.28306@acs.ucalgary.ca>, panlilio@acs.ucalgary.ca (Victor P. Panlilio) writes:

> I should also add that the Nikons use AA cells, whereas the Canons
> use the 6V lithiums.

Yes?

> I'd hate to be using the EOS line in the jungle (yes, I've had to
> photograph in ultra-humid tropical conditions) or in subfreezing
> conditions (those 6V lithiums again).

I don't understand your point. I use my EOS 1 in subfreezing
conditions. It normally uses eight AA cells and I mostly use
alkalines in it. But ehwn I'm going to use it in subfreezing
temperatures, I usually put in lithium batteries or NiCd cells
instead. Lithium cells work much better under extreme conditions.

> I have a friend who bought
> both the EOS-1 and the EOS-10s, and is looking for a way to keep
> the batteries warm in the camera so he can shoot wildlife in the
> winter.

I'm actually thinking of gettint the NiCd pack for the EOS-1. They
load quickly and keep up well in low temperatures.

> There's a good reason why most working pros are still using Nikon
> equipment. Nikon sells *far more* pro-level equipment than Canon
> does, and that is not going to change anytime soon unless Nikon
> manages to alienate its loyal users by dumping the F lensmount.

MOST (i.e. from 50.1% and up) of the photographers I know that uses
35mm equipment uses EOS. Most of the rest uses Nikon and the others
swear by their Leica's or Contax'es. Many of the EOS users used to
use Nikon but has since went with the EOS stuff for the sake of the
lenses.

-- 
--------------------- This mass of gibberish came from ---------------------
         ____
        |    |               Robert Claeson
        |    |               Data General AB
 _______|____|_              Box 28
|    |    _    |_____        S-164 93 KISTA
|_/\ |   / \   |     |       Sweden
| \/ |   \_/   |   . |
|    |    |    |_____|       robert@sys.sweden.dg.com
|____|_________|-
From: jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Hasselblad Film Flatness
Date: 15 Dec 92 00:20:08 GMT
Organization: Metran Technology, Tampa, Florida

kfitzsim@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Kevin Fitzsimons) writes:
:First of all, I don't see how you could "see" the difference in sharpness of 
:different cameras/lenses in magazine photos.

Apparently, you are not a very critical viewer.  Or maybe you read the
wrong magazines :-)

: Second, the only way to really test the sharpness of a lens is on a test bed. 

This is obviously untrue.  Sure, you can get the "numbers" more accurately
this way, but for doing A/B comparisons, there are many usable methods, such
as photographing a lens resolution chart, or faraway building, or streetlights
at night.

: Third, It is my opinion that almost any lens from a name manufacturer can 
: render a very, very sharp image if used in ideal situations.

I guess it depends on what you mean by "very, very sharp" ;-).  I can easily
tell the difference (with an 8x magnifier), given A/B comparison slides
(Fujichrome Velvia or Tech Pan), between photos taken by my Nikon FG
(with Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 Series E) and Olympus OM-1 (with Zuiko 50mm f/1.8).

: By that I mean finding the ideal f
: stops which produce the sharpest images, and using a very stable tripod.

That is what I did, plus cable release and mirror lockup with the Olympus.
(My Nikon does NOT have mirror lockup, and STILL gives sharper pictures!)
-- 
Jay Ts
uucp mail: uunet!myrddin!tscs!metran!jay
phone: (813) 979-9169