HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rspeirs@javelin.sim.es.com (Ron Speirs)
Subject: Re: grain
Keywords: need a lot of grains
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Corp.
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 19:19:58 GMT

In article <Bz2nxH.Gyx@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> tjdoran@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca (DORAN TJ - BIOLOGY) writes:
>
>[Tips on using fast film or extreme blowup to achieve grainy results deleted]
>>
(details on developing Tech Pan in C-41 deleted)
>>
>Isn't the developer *much* more effective at these temperatures? Did you just
>work by trial and error or is there a ratio or formula you used to calculate
>effective developing times at high temperatures? (I have no experience with C-41developing outside of commercial labs; I'm assuming that 3 1/2 minutes is a 
>shorter-than normal developing time).
>
It's hard to compare developer effectiveness because C-41 developer's standard
time is 3:15.  I would guess that if one were developing C-41 film in C-41
developer at 20C, the time would be long (15-20 min??).  Now if you are
talking about conventional B&W developers designed to work at 20C, there are
graphs and relationships which show shorter development times at higher
temperatures.  You must be careful not to go too hot or you will soften the
emulsion.

There are B&W developers specifically designed to process at higher
temperatures.  They are referred to as "tropical developers" (Kodak DK-15
is one).  Average time is 9-12 minutes at 20C (68F) and 2-3 minutes at
32C (90F).  A characteristic of these developers is that they contain a
large dose of Sodium Sulfate which controls emulsion swelling.  There are
also tropical hardening baths (such as Kodak SB-4) which contains Chrome
Alum and Sodium Sulfate.

FWIW  :-)

Ron Speirs, Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp., Salt Lake City, Utah
From: sh09@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (STEVEN HIGGINS)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Dumb Photographers
Date: 15 Dec 92 17:43:38 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <1992Dec14.234157.24307@leland.Stanford.EDU>, prodger@leland.Stanford
.EDU (phillip prodger) writes:
>Can't resist telling my two favorite Yellowstone bear stories...  Actually
>true, no kiddin'.
>
>In the first, a "photographer" was hoping to get a cute shot of a bear kissing
>his baby boy...He took a jar of honey, and smeared it all over the boy's
>cheek, set the boy up on a picnic bench, and waited for a bear to come
>and perform his friendly duty.  Well, the bear approached, quietly, slowly,
>sniffing at the air and eyeing the boy's tasty cheek.  He walked over to
>the boy, set one paw on his shoulder, then bit his head off.  Yum!
>
>In another, a "photographer" decided to get a cute shot of a bear driving his
>4 x 4.  He set up a picnic basket in the driver's seat, and left the door
>open for a bear to visit.  Sure enough, a bear saw the basket and jumped in
>the cab.  The "photographer" shut the door, and waited for the bear to move
>into a position that looked like he was driving.  Well, the bear never did
>this, so he got the idea that if his wife was in the car too, the bear might
>be encouraged to sit up better and stick to the driver's side of the car, as
>if driving.  He opened the door, helped his wife in, and shut the door behind
>her.  Bear mauled the wife to tiny bits.  Neat!
>
>Dunno if it goes in the category of 'dumb photographers' or 'smart bears'.


    Somehow I don't think I'll be eating lunch today..... I seem to have lost
    my appetite.  Thanks a ton.


    
-- 

~Steve
sh09@lehigh.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih)
Subject: Re: Sigma and Canon 35-135 lenses
Date: 12 Dec 92 02:56:34 GMT

In <1992Dec10.224553.15153@donner.SanDiego.NCR.COM> ralandc@tara.SanDiego.NCR.COM (Raland Camara) writes:

>   Does anyone out there have any information/recommendations concerning
>these two lenses.  Aside from the obvious statistical information below,
>how do these two lenses compare?

>Lens         AF    Angle   Elem./  Min.   Close  Filter Length  Weight Price
>             Motor of view Groups  Aper.  Focus  diam.  x Diam.  (g)   Approx
>                   (deg,min)               (m)    (mm)   (mm)           ($)
>-----        ----- ------- ------  -----  -----  -----  ------  -----  ------

>Canon
>EF 35-135mm  USM   63-18   14/12   22-32  0.75   58     86.4x72   425   255
>f/4-5.6 USM

>Sigma
>AF 35-135mm  ???   63-18   15/10   22-27  0.75   55     68.58x94  561   155
>f/3.5-4.5

I don't know how they compare optically, but mechanically, Sigma AF lenses
have a bad reputation.  Their AF with the Canon EF mount has also been
criticized.

>Raland

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: parsons1@applelink.apple.COM (Don Parsons)
Subject: Re: Vivitar 2x for Hasselblad
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 02:50:13 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.
Followup-To: rec.photo

In article <1gmishINN2bh@flop.ENGR.ORST.EDU>, monson@ece.orst.edu (Ty
Monson) wrote:
> 
> 
> I have noticed that B&H and a few other mail order places offer a 
> Vivitar 2x teleconverter for Hasselblad cameras. It is relatively cheap.
> Does anyone know anything about them? Like what range of lens focal lengths
> is the converter suitable to use on? I haven't run across any Vivitar
> advertisements in a long time (for Vivitar's address/phone number) or I
> would have asked them directly.
> Also, Vivitar made teleconverters with elements that could be removed so that
> it could double as an extension tube. Is the model for Hasselblad set up
> like that?

For those people who have a Hasselblad and a Vivitar 2x teleconverter, I am
curious about what sort of results you get with such a combo. Hasselblad is
well known for outstanding quality, Vivitar is not. Has Vivitar put special
effort (and optics) into this teleconverter to make it a worthwhile
accessory for a Hasselblad shooter? It seems to me that anyone who has gone
to the expense of getting a Hasselblad would not want to undo that by using
a Vivitar teleconverter. Am I underestimating this Vivitar product?

Don

PS: I do not have a Hasselblad, so I am not being a "Hasselblad Snoot". I
just have heard great things about Hasselblad, and their quality...
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: umeca80@ps.ic.ac.uk (Bruce Taylor)
Subject: Re: grain
Keywords: need a lot of grains
Organization: Imperial College Computer Centre
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 10:16:55 GMT


>>Hi,
>>    I am trying to get some ideas of how to get a lot of grains on my
>>picture or slide (for special mood). Any idea on how to get a lot
>>of grains on b&w , color and slide film is welcome.
>
>It seems like I remember something about getting an interesting grain
>effect by processing C-41 as E-6  (or was it vice versa?).  Anyone else
>heard this one?

You can process C-41 films in E-6 and vice versa but be prepared for some
*weird* colour shifts. E-6 in C-41 tends to go magenta (depending on film),
C-41 in E-6 tends to have a 'posterising' effect on the colours.

If you want massive grain on B&W try processing your film in Kodak Quick 
Finish. This is a developer intended for processing photo-finish pictures at 
races and gives a dev time of around 20 seconds! I'm not sure if it's still
available but i'm sure the formula for this or somthing similar will be in
the public domain.

===============================================================================
Bruce Taylor                                    Process Systems Engineering
umeca80@ps.ic.ac.uk                             Imperial College, London
===============================================================================
From: robertm@cres1.anu.edu.au (Robert McArthur)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Pentax 67 info. - archives of recent posts?
Date: 20 Dec 92 13:08:01 GMT
Organization: Centre for Resource and Environment Studies, Australian National University
NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.59.4


As the subject says, I am after any archives of recent posts concerning the
Pentax 67 since I have been away and the news server dosen't keep the
news for long enough (:-)

Thanks
Robert

-- 
Robert McArthur			Centre for Resource and Environment Studies
	     				     Australian National University
ACSNet                   rjm@arp.anu.oz.au	       ACT  Australia  2601
Pegasus|PeaceNet|EcoNet  peg:robert	     		      (06) 249 4760
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
	<PD.92Dec12030333@horus.sics.se> <1992Dec14.181229.3686@progress.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 01:04:09 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.181229.3686@progress.com> matth@progress.COM (Matthew J. Harper) writes:

>pd@sics.se (Per Danielsson) writes:

>>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.
>>>[...]
>>>If you're patient and willing to wait you can get
>>>deals like the 35-135 AF 4.5 for $250 like I did.  :-)

>>[...]
>>The only reason for there being more used Nikon AF lenses around
>>would be the fact that more have been manufactured and sold.

>  I didn't specify AF lenses on purpose.
Yes, you gave a specific AF lens as an example. See above.

--
Per Danielsson				pd@sics.se
Swedish Institute of Computer Science, PO Box 1263, S-164 28 KISTA, SWEDEN
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: kfitzsim@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Kevin Fitzsimons)
Subject: Re: Bayonet mount strength of Canon EOS10s and the rest
Keywords: Nikon
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 14:43:08 GMT

Hello Victor,
I must differ with your opinion of the EOS line. I also was a Nikon user. I've 
used the Nikons for 15 years until a friend of mine, the director of 
photography at a large newspaper talked me into trying the Canons.
My comments are aimed mainly at professional photographers who use their 
cameras daily and must work quickly. Canon really did a great job laying out 
the controls. The operations are controlled with two dials. For example, to 
under or overexpose while you're in program, all you have to do is move your 
thumb on the control dial on the camera back. You don't have to take your eye 
away from the viewfinder and find a button to adjust the exposure. That is 
just one example. It is very user friendly.
Another nice feature of the Canon is that it hase built in "custom functions".
For example, if one wants to leave the film leader out of the camera, you 
select a custom function and it's done. On my 8008's I had to send them back to
Nikon to be adjusted. On the new N90's you have to buy the SHARP Wizard 
computer to do the functions.
You mentioned the slowness of the 50mm f1 and the 85mm f1.2. It is very simple.
The mass that has to be moved (the front elements are huge!) is very large. 
Those lenses are LOW LIGHT lenses. They are very useful lenses - portraits, 
news, dance, etc. I used the 85 and it is super sharp wide open.
I also, last winter used both cameras in 21 degree weather to compare battery 
usage. The Canon EOS 1 with a new lithium performed much better than the 8008s 
with new aa's. The 8008 died within an hour. The EOS did not slow down.
That is a big issue in our office. I work in the publications / communications 
office at Ohio State. A common complaint from the other two photogs is that 
their 8008's do not work in cold weather.
The last comparison I'll make is the auto focus function. The Nikon has a 
tendency to "search" for focus (Go in and out until it finds focus). The canon 
is much more accurate. It is more positive.
I also must say the pros are switching in droves to the EOS system. Most of the
AP photogs in NY have switched, many Sports Illustrated shooters have switched,
and the list goes on. Nikon is trying to catch up - they are introducing a 
20-35 f2.8 soon. But their mistake was not switching their lens mount. Canon 
has a distinct design advantage over Nikon.
A little Canon tech rep info - Canon is a much more diverse company than Nikon.
Canon's R&D departments cooperate a great deal, so when a division comes up 
with a new developement, it effects cameras as well as copiers, optics, 
computers, etc..
Sorry to ramble on, but I did a great amount of research / thinking before 
switching. I'm not sorry at all that I switched. The shorter life of lithiums 
is a small price to pay for a system that is on the cutting edge.
Kevin Fitzsimons
From: kassover@rumsey.crd.ge.com (David Kassover)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Depth of Field preview - any 'cheap` SLRs?
Date: 17 Dec 92 15:34:06 GMT
Organization: nope

In article <1992Dec17.042603.17540@cello.hpl.hp.com> jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson) writes:
>In article <1992Dec17.030720.205@crd.ge.com> kassover@rumsey.crd.ge.com (David Kassover) writes:
>>I suspect that dof preview levers started disappearing in the mid
>>70's because they were holdovers from the days of stop-down
>>meters.  When did Pentax introduce the K-mount?
>
>No no no.  I have an ancient Pentax H-3, which I bought in 1962.  It
>has depth of field preview, but it doesn't even have a meter!

Yes.  When metering was introduced (Spotmatic in the Pentax line,
I believe) it was naturally stop down metering, which gives DOF
preview if one cares to look at it.  My point was that when open
aperture metering became de rigeur, a mechanical linkage could be
eliminated with only minor loss of functionality.  And apparently
was, in some lines.

Moving still further back, you can still find preset, as opposed
to auto aperture lenses, if you're so inclined.


-- 
David Kassover             "Proper technique helps protect you against
uupsi!khazad!kassover	          sharp weapons and dull judges."
kassover@aule-tek.com                   F. Collins
kassover@ra.crd.ge.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins)
Subject: Re: Choice of Teleconverter
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 00:55:17 GMT

In article <zawada-141292175621@ottawa.eid.anl.gov>, zawada@athens.eid.anl.gov (Dave Zawada) writes:
> Hi,
> 
> I am thinking of buying a 2x teleconverter for my Eos 10s.
> I would use it with my 100-300 USM lens.
> 
> The salesman at my local camera shop has told me that
> I would be better off going with a Tamron converter, as
> opposed to one from Canon.  He claims that the Tamron is
> 100% compatible, has the same quality optics, and is
> around $100 cheaper.  Is there any truth in his statement?
> 

Yes. I would say the Tamron is nearly (but not quite) as good as the Canon
(from what I've read) and is about 1/2 the price. Please note that NEITHER
will give you autofocus with a 100-300 zoom. You need a starting aperture
of f2.8 to have any hope of autofocus. The 100-300 is just too slow. You
can use manual focus, and you will probably get the "green light" AF-OK
indicator in the viewfinder when you are in focus (and the beep if it is
enabled). Image quality with either the Canon or Tamron will suffer quite
a bit with the 2x. You might still get acceptable 8x10s if you are careful
and not too bothered about VERY sharp pictures. Probably the main advantage
of the Canon over the Tamron converter is that it will be better in the
corners and edges of the frame. In the center of the frame there is said to
be little difference (though I have not personally done any tests on these
converters). Whether or not you need edge sharpness depends a lot on what
kind of pictures you take.

===============================================================
Bob Atkins  AT&T Bell Labs  email (direct)  att!clockwise!rma
===============================================================

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: hargitai@acf3.nyu.edu (hargitai)
Subject: canon laser copies
Organization: New York University
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 19:43:48 GMT

I had a few good ones made of negatives. I was surprised by the 
quality. (I guess I wasn't expecting too much.)
Also, I had a few b/w prints made of the same color neg with nice
results, (nothing like Insignia but..)
both b/w and brown-tone.

I guess it all depends on how good your people are and what you
expect from the original. 

joseph

ps, there was a scratch on the neg, the guy used some kind of compound
to fix it, just rubbed it on. He wouldn't tell me what it was.

 
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 13:26:02 -0500 
From: Christophe Dumay <cd2t+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: N800*s, FM2 or EOS RT : advice needed

I am planning to buy a new camera (and some lenses too).
I have collected a lot of informations about the three camera bodies
quoted above but I need opinions to make a decision.

I think I will shoot most of the time landscapes and macro-photographs (and
perhaps some wildlife).


I don't think I really need an AF-camera but I would like to have an aperture
priority program (not available with the FM2) as well as a through-the-lense
spotmeter.

- What I am looking is a sturdy camera because I will have to carry it
when I am
hiking, trekking.

   I have heard that the mirror of the EOS RT may be a source of problems in
case of dust ? Why.

    By the way, is mirror lock up really very important ? I understand it is
necessary to obtain a very good sharpness when shooting through long focal
length telephotolense but as I cannot afford buying such big guns does
it matter to have MLU or not ?

  
   I think I will need a remote for macro work and maybe for wildlife. 
I have no idea of the prices and referencies of the different remotes available
for the N8008s, FM2 and EOS RT. If somebody could provide with informations
concerning these devices I will be very pleased.   


Finally, any opinion regarding the general sturdiness of these cameras will be
very welcome.


    Please E-mail me at : cd2t+@andrew.cmu.edu

    Thank you in advance.

                        Christophe DUMAY.
(recently settled in the US, hope my english is not too bad)
From: rkatos@hpunila.MSR.HP.COM (Ray Katos)
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 20:25:11 GMT
Subject: Re: Hasselblad Film Flatness
Organization: Hewlett Packard Sales, Naperville IL
Newsgroups: rec.photo

/ hpunila:rec.photo / bu890@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brian Segal) /  6:31 pm  Dec 12, 1992 /

Hasselblad Forum is available from a distributor by subscription.
Victor Hasselblad INc in the UIS should be able to get you a
subscription.  It is a beautiful magazine, and the older editions
are now collectors items.

Tacks are, of course, sharp at the POINTY end as any carpet layer who
has seen a hasselblad transparency can attest!!!!

brian
----------
From: laurap@neuro.duke.edu (Laura Poole)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: student organization?
Keywords: student
Date: 14 Dec 92 19:38:58 GMT
Distribution: usa

Is there any sort of national, regional, or local organizations for STUDENT
photographers? I don't necessarily mean students at photography schools or even
in classes...just students who happen to enjoy photography. Does anyone know
of one? 

If not, would anyone be interested in creating one to sponsor seminars, have
trips, create a database of facilities for use and "photography on a budget"
kind of publications?

email to laurap@neuro.duke.edu   or post here, i can post summary if interest
is high.

laura
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: mcovingt@aisun3.ai.uga.edu (Michael Covington)
Subject: Re: Scratch on Front Element
Organization: AI Programs, University of Georgia, Athens
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 19:55:10 GMT

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.

It may have slightly _less_ effect if you fill it with black stuff
of some sort, so it can only obstruct light and not scatter it.

Apart from reducing the resale value of your lens, it will have very
little effect.

-- 
:-  Michael A. Covington     internet mcovingt@uga.cc.uga.edu :   Verbum caro
:-  Artificial Intelligence Programs       phone 706 542-0358 :    factum est
:-  The University of Georgia                fax 706 542-0349 :  et habitavit
:-  Athens, Georgia 30602-7415 U.S.A.     amateur radio N4TMI :   in nobis...
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: blue@sequent.com (Gil Delavous)
Subject: EOS A2 flash => Great!
Followup-To: rec.photo
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems, Inc.
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 92 08:25:38 GMT

Hi all,

I owned a Nikon N8008/F801. Since everybody told that the couple N8008/SB24
was great, I decided to buy this flash. I must say that I'm far to be a 
flash guru, but I used it a lot in auto/TTL mode. I was *really* desapointed
with the results I got. Most of the pictures I took using it where burned
(portraits, groups, objects, etc...). It really surprised me because of the
TTL exposure. It seems that the flash light was always cut too late. I thought 
that maybe the matrix metering system was damaged, but I got great shots w/o 
using the flash.

Now I own an EOS A2 and the pictures I got using the little build-in flash
are wonderfull. It is really difficult to see that the flash was used, even
with portraits taken close to the subject. I just can't believe it. Of course
it becomes less powerfull when the subject if far from the camera, but for
portraits or fill-in it gives incredible results.

Not to say that the EOS A2 build-in flash is better than the SB24, but with
all auto/TTL mode the results I got are very differents.

Now bad news :-) After 4 rolls my 2CR5 battery is half empty :-( (I tooks
~40 pictures using the flash).

Gil Delavous
Sequent Computer Systems
blue@sequent.sequent.com
    _____
 =========== 
|   /////   |----------------------------------------------------------+
|  /////    | [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] |
| /////     | +------------+ +------------+ +------------+             |
|/////      | |    o       | | /\    /\ o | |      o     |              \
|////       | |            | |/  \/\/  \__| |    _/>     |               \
|///        | |~~~~~~~~~~~~| |    \____   | |  (*)>(*)   |                \
|//         | +------------+ +------------+ +------------+                 \
|/  ISO 100 | [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] []|
|   36 EXP. |---------------------------------------------------------------+
 ===========

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: erc@unislc.uucp (Ed Carp)
Subject: Re: Selenium Toner
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Organization: Unisys Corporation SLC
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 20:24:52 GMT

Roland Karlsson (roland@sics.se) wrote:

: Selenium toners give a strong toning for Warm tone papers and very
: little toning for Cold tone papers.  Both get deeper shadows and (in
: my opinion) more pleasing result.  Both also get much better archival
: properties.  Selenium toners are not made for bleaching and
: redevelopment.

Perhaps it is significant to note that Adams, Picker, Weston, and the other
photographer/printers considered to be famous for their work also used
selenium, and their results were always consistently superior.
-- 
Ed Carp			erc@apple.com, erc@saturn.upl.com	801/538-0177

Who and what would you be if you went beyond your deepest fears?
Newsgroups: rec.photo